/lit/ - Literature

>>16903186
Liberalism devours everything. Fortunately, it eventually devours itself.

The technological system has subverted them and they now champion that system, unknowingly.

>>16903186
Two things. First, a criticism of your premise - the brand of leftism which did most for the world already and was most influential in the West was Fabianism, especially with intellectuals. All our social reforms stem from this essentially post-Marxist thought. Its mission is already over and it was a success. This is why I attack your premise. Bolshevism was a reactionary strand of orthodoxy which gained traction due to social devastation, ignoring everything anyone said after Marx, with the notable exception of their own selves, which extended to purging dissidents. A great-grandfather of mine was purged similarly, for example.

I am not sure how much we can ignore the preceding remark. Essentially, with workers conditions improved by the strivings of many men and women of note and high caliber, revolutionary sentiment in the West has been mostly defused. What remains is essentially the crux of the matter: the ones who want a revolution are invariably middle class intelligentsia. I understand that this is very much a Schumpeterian view. However, from the analysis of materialist dialectics itself, the material conditions for a revolution are lacking. Do we need less of ridiculous wealth inequality? Yes, but we don't need a civil war for this. The ones that are left are the generals with no army.

The second point can be discussed once we dismiss the previous one. That is, suppose we grant there are goals of leftism which are still relevant. Let's take climate change as an example, even though I resent this being a "Left" issue. Further, let's take this to be an actual anti-establishment position, by which I mean de-growth as an example and by no means subsidies for wind power, a vastly destructive "solution". As such, as it presents a threat to the establishment, it is being subverted and derailed by identity politics. Idpol is completely incompatible with the homogenous, classless, cohesive societies historically every leftist government strived to bring about. However, it is for this or that reason, about a "human right". This has already been bastardised a plenty, some even say the Internet is a human right, while we have actual homeless people on the streets.

>>16903186
The left has always been about freedom. Statism, stalinism and such aren't left but right. Any politics that boils down to austerity and promoting virtue or whatever for some theoretical future social benefit that never materializes is conservative

Why do people automatically assume every radical liberal is a marxist

>>16903351
Short continuation, as really I need to go shit: I've been involved with several "radical" groups, and not all of them newspaper-selling Trotskyists, and invariably what happens is that people who are, how to say, feeling quite oppressed, that these people come and actually very quickly challenge the control structure of the group to make it more focused on themselves. After a while, many people just leave, people don't like to waste their time on in-party bickering in politics. I am not going to go schizo and say this is an orchestrated effort. It's just that the two groups, leftist activists and idpol activists, tend to overlap and draw from a similar pool of talents. But once they intersect, one of them always loses.

>>16903351
>Do we need less of ridiculous wealth inequality? Yes, but we don't need a civil war for this.

you will get one if you try to change a single thing

look at how the entire media, big tech, corrupt government, and the military industrial complex magically aligned with eachother, as if they all knew the script beforehand, to oust trump? why? on the face of things, trump wasn't even a major threat to their plans. but he wasn't approved by them, so even something as inoffensive as a mild populist resurgence has to be humiliated, gaslighted, and crushed out of existence

imagine what they will do to any politician who has a serious hope of imposing reforms. oh wait we already know that too, they fucked bernie out of the nomination and probably bribed him to cuck out (he bought a million dollar house at nearly the exact same time and started saying "all hail joe biden" on every front)

civil war doesn't have to be violent but it does have to be zero-sum, don't make the mistake of thinking that the embedded interests you're fighting are willing to cede even an inch of ground to you. they are looking to take all your ground, and they know all they have to do for this to happen is to wait.

i honestly don't see the correlation anymore
most serious marxists i've met with hate the idpol types, and vice-versa

>>16903386
because marxists have done an astoundingly poor job of telling tag-along liberal pussies to get the fuck out of their movement and stop identifying as marxists

now when someone says they are "marxist" it means "i am transgender" or "i think gays should be allowed to get married or something i guess", at a ratio of 500:1 vs. meaning "i read marx"

>>16903351
lol what a gay post

>>16903393
>is that people who are, how to say, feeling quite oppressed, that these people come and actually very quickly challenge the control structure of the group to make it more focused on themselves.

Kaczynski talked about this. Leftists, inevitably, change the original purpose of groups into something else.

>>16903370
Imagine going into debt at college to get a degree where you unironically about shit like this. "Everything I don't like gets label of thing I don't like".

This is why at Starbucks my wife and I will often pick some debt addled humanities major and target him for a series of complaints to get him fired. We think its funny to mess with the help, but it also keeps such types on their toes.

>>16903420
>The political left is technological society’s first line of defense against revolution. In fact, the left today serves as a kind of fire extinguisher that douses and quenches any nascent revolutionary movement. What do I mean by “the left”? If you think that racism, sexism, gay rights, animal rights, indigenous people’s rights, and “social justice” in general are among the most important issues that the world currently faces, then you are a leftist as I use that term. If you don’t like this application of the world “leftist,” then you are free to designate the people I’m referring to by some other term. But, whatever you call them, the people who extinguish revolutionary movements are the people who are drawn indiscriminately to causes: racism, sexism, gay rights, animal rights, the environment, poverty, sweatshops, neocolonialism…it’s all the same to them. These people constitute a subculture that has been labeled “the adversary culture.” Whenever a movement of resistance begins to emerge, these leftists (or whatever you choose to call them) come swarming to it like flies to honey until they outnumber the original members of the movement, take it over, and turn it into just another leftist faction, thereby emasculating it. The history of “Earth First!” provides an elegant example of this process.

>>16903186
Leftism is based on the premise of Equality, and Equality is a lie. Corrupt foundation, flimsy structure.

>>16903395
Hi, I'm back. I am not so sure how to incorporate Trump into any of this as I'm not so acquainted with American politics and I feel as I was talking about a different point. I feel like the establishment countering a direct threat is different than the left just eating itself by suffering the consequences of its shaky ideological foundations. The first is a political battle which may well lead to a war, the second is an ideological one. Incidentally, if any one of these is winnable, it is absolutely not the latter.

>>16903395

the sooner the better

>>16903351
All the big think tanks are actually conservative, "Fabianism", as a method, is just how normal politics work. Note even "populist" politicians like Trump after they get elected get all their work done by hiring people trained in those institutions. All the judges came from the federalist society and everyone else the hoover institute or something. A society without those middle class intellectuals simply wouldn't function. Also if you seriously believe the only politics is class based and you successfully "win" that fight you wouldn't really kill politics but get hit harder by the fact people care and will fight over stupider shit than you can believe.

>>16903455
Liberalism is based on the premise of political equality as essentially existing today. This all goes back to Jews/Christians thinking everyone is created in gods image. Literally every Christcuck has to accept equality unless you're getting at Evola or something with warrior pagan monks or whatever. Marxism is based on the idea society is actually class segmented but people can be made equal. The only political movement to directly attack equality as a goal was fascism.

>>16903421
What a pathetic larp.

>>16903186
Marxism is a Jewish ideology. It was never about the working class, it was about subverting and destroying gentile, particularly white societies. As the working class proved incapable of that and even supported nationalism, they turned to immigrants, etc. Gayshit and feminism in particular helps to lower their birth rates and women in the work force to decrease wages and living standards for white working class people.

>>16903370

>>16903386
they have a symbiotic relationship those two

>>16903399
they´re still mad about trump and vote in elections for the democratic party, marxists in a nutshell

>>16903186
Historical materialism and dialectical materialism got thrown out the window with the advent of postmodernism, so in order to salvage marxism in some way, any way, people doubled down on the "critical" aspects and that's how intersectional marxism became the norm and orthodox marxism died out.

>>16903439
It surprises me that was still around in its exact current form 25 years ago.

>populist right is anti-corporate, pro-worker right now
>liberal middle is collapsing and making a fool of itself
>left is not seizing on this to create a red-brown alliance

Once in a lifetime opportunity lads.

>>16903186
>when
From the 60s and onwards
>why
People saw leftism for what it was and decided they didn't want to be a part of it. What do you do when your core constituency is gone? You create a new one.

>>16903195
Surprisingly good and concise post.
/thread.

>>16903186
All political isms are about power and control. I don't think the left-right distinction is particularly useful. Conservatives want to maintain existing power hierarchy. Progressives want to change the hierarchy. Both are for or against things depending on if they help them with their aims. The early 20th century Progressive pietists in the USA were anti-immigration because of the growing number of Catholics in the country. Present day Progressives are not concerned with the same goals, so they are now pro-immigration. If the country was getting flooded with foreign libertarians to the point that the big government was in danger of being dismantled, the Progressives would get real tough of immigration real fast.

The little people think that their opinion leaders have sincere beliefs and die-hard values, but they don't. Blind obedience to a value system is reserved for the cattle. The elite are elite first, and everything else second.

>>16903421
>This is why at Starbucks my wife
fondles my dick while you order me and her an extra large faggachino or whatever they call their gay ass coffee there.

>>16903837
>Marxism is antisemitic because Marx said bad things about Jews! The leftists are the REAL racists!!!
*five minutes later*
>Marxism is a Jewish ideology. It was never about the working class, it was about subverting and destroying gentile, particularly white societies.

>>16903455
Equality of opportunity is good.
Equality of outcome is bad.

>>16905224
Kek legendary post.

>>16905235
Say a man succeeds in some business venture and amasses a great fortune and joins a network of other wealthy people. How do you ensure his children's opportunity is equal to the opportunity of the children of the school custodian? Do you abolish private schools? Do you enact a very high inheritance tax?

You can't have equality of opportunity when the difference in outcome is too great.

>>16905301
>Say a man succeeds in some business venture and amasses a great fortune
If the man didn't have rich parents yet managed to do this, doesn't it kind of demolish the argument?

>>16905224
what word is being reflected in the glasses?
CA_ _ _ NG ?

>>16903395
>look at how the entire media, big tech, corrupt government, and the military industrial complex magically aligned with eachother, as if they all knew the script beforehand, to oust trump? why? on the face of things, trump wasn't even a major threat to their plans.
I'm still perplexed by this. He has not done a single thing that actually threatens the power structures. There must be stuff behind the scenes we don't know about.

>>16903195
>Fortunately, it eventually devours itself.
says increasingly worried man

>>16903195
Around 2011 when I started my undergrad I had a few conversations with the campus marxist noise makers. The thing that turned me completely off them was their insistence im getting involved in a gay pride parade and handing out their Marxist materials there.
I asked why and the leader of the group told me that in a marxist world there would be no discrimination against homosexuals or indeed discrimination of any kind and therefore it was in the interests of gay rights and marxists to band together.
But then I asked him why he thought that and he couldn't actually explain it. I asked what material conditions of capitalism, and the systems prior, were responsible for the need for society to oppress homosexuals and how marxism could change that material condition. When I realised he had no idea at all why he thought that I knew it was time to bail.

I didn't give much thought to marxism after that, but I guss they got what they wanted.

>>16905370
Then he would have been one of the lucky few who succeeded despite being at a huge disadvantage. Most likely, though, his parents were also well off.

>>16903195
with no collateral damage?

>>16903186
The red scare kinda cleaned all class interest out of American left wing discourse

>>16905370
It was the man's insight into the system and his impeccable work ethic that allowed him to achieve this position.
Why would you want to take this mans earned privilege away from him except as a means to discourage people to be productive members of society?

>>16903195
>Fortunately, it eventually devours itself.
Not even close :)

>>16906396
If I was a communist, especially a hip new progressive one, I would argue that monogamous couples are most likely to produce children and therefore literally perpetuate demand for capitalist systems. I would go further to say that gay people are less vulnerable to consumerism because they are autonomous and do not live in fear of want for their children. I would, however, separately argue that religion is responsible for gay repression and that religious families have more children, which is bad for the environment (this is a specific kind of Marxist, but you likely know who I'm talking about). It would not come into my mind that religion has suffered as the effects of capitalism have gone into overdrive and therefore gay people have been more accepted into society even as monogamous family couples have slowly declined. It would certainly not come into my mind that every existing communist state except for the Khmer Rouge has carefully manipulated family policy and outlawed all of gaydom because it harms population growth, which is typically the only way to keep their antiquated industrial economies afloat (see China, Soviet Union, Vietnam, Cuba, etc.).

>tl;dr commies don't see that capitalism is directly responsible for eliminating the real cause for gay suppression, religion, while communist countries routinely suppress gay people and promote traditional family structures in order to keep the labor force high

>>16906951
u mean the podcast with those ugly women? since when did anyone listen or care about women? and podcasters no less

>>16908636
*listen to

>>16908636
The 'Red Scare' with regard to the rise of the Bolsheviks post WWI, perhaps post WWII with the brewing of the Cold War, anon.

>>16906396
Engels was homophobic. He literally wrote, in the origin of family, that sodomy is disgusting.
Marx also said, but it was in the Marx-engels letters (need source), not in a book, that the future of Capitalism would be to promote a gay culture.

Will Greta Thunberg have an anti-idpol turn, realizing that this strand of philosophy doesn't help the climate cause?
What's her official take on that?

>>16909315
the first gay mag was named after Stirners concept

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Der_Eigene