Left-Wing Discussion Thread III

[Bakery Hill]

So is the regressive left technically...far right?

The regressive left is technically revolutionary communist - which is precisely why people like Sam Harris and Bill Maher don't like it.

Regressive left almost always refers to social attitudes of people, namely what they see as naive identity politics. Not advocacy of revolution or socialising the means of production.

[Crazed Pirates]

Liberty Prime speaks the truth!

>made to invade china
>can't take a few autists LARPing as the American government

Some liberator

On one hand, you have the guys who are basically what's left of US military in DC. On the other hand, there are some unknowns in power army which is definetly not something that was fielded by US, running around with stolen vertibirds and occupying parts of the city.

You don't have to be a huge robot to understand who's the good guys here.

[The Parkus Empire]

Why doesn't the left more widely grasp this?

"When you have 36-percent of Hispanic kids in this country who can't find jobs and you bring a lot of unskilled workers in the country what do you think happens to that 36-percent of kids of today who are unemployed? 51% of African-American kids [are unemployed]," Sanders said.

"I frankly do not believe we should be bringing in significant numbers of unskilled workers to compete with those kids," Sanders made clear.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video ... untry.html

[Trotskylvania]

Seeing socialists attack feminism is, to be honest, something I never expected to see. However, one learns new things all the time.

The rise of the far-right in the modern day is primarily due to the excesses and failures of progressive politics in the context of a capitalist society. The Trump phemonanae is a major expression of it and how socialist economics is a principle held by a sizable amount of the population.

In the UK, most conservatives want railway nationalization, etc. It is only progressive politics that prevents economic progress, which is precisely why the media and elites utilize it and force it down everyones throats.

As a member of the white working class, lol no.

[The Multiversal Communist Collective]

You must have been asleep at the wheel through the 60s, 70s and 80s then.

Have you heard of socialist feminism, Marxist feminism, material feminism, and anarchafeminism?

No, I have not been asleep at the wheel. I am just an academic communist, not a left-wing populist.

Being on this forum has made me realize that there is a massive rift on the left. As an academic communist, and a New Leftist beginning in 1968, I was somehow previously unaware of it. NationStates has proved to be an awakening for me and, to be honest, a quite difficult, but necessary, one.

No academic communists I know, and I literally know hundreds, would ever dream of attacking feminism. We view feminists as our allies or potential allies. Seeing feminists as anything less betrays every principle I have lived by since 1968.

[The Multiversal Communist Collective]

Regressive left almost always refers to social attitudes of people, namely what they see as naive identity politics. Not advocacy of revolution or socialising the means of production.

Identity politics is only one part of Maajid Nawaz's definition of the regressive left. Another part is his opposition to Islamism (right-wing political Islam), which fails to recognize it as a direct product of Western imperialism. The focus should be on the cause, not the effect.

[Dumb Ideologies]

You must have been asleep at the wheel through the 60s, 70s and 80s then.

Have you heard of socialist feminism, Marxist feminism, material feminism, and anarchafeminism?

No, I have not been asleep at the wheel. I am just an academic communist, not a left-wing populist.

Being on this forum has made me realize that there is a massive rift on the left. As an academic communist, and a New Leftist beginning in 1968, I was somehow previously unaware of it. NationStates has proved to be an awakening for me and, to be honest, a quite difficult, but necessary, one.

No academic communists I know, and I literally know hundreds, would ever dream of attacking feminism. We view feminists as our allies or potential allies. Seeing feminists as anything less betrays every principle I have lived by since 1968.

You haven't been asleep at the wheel and you're not in any way naive. You just didn't know about any opinions outside of those held by small circles of academics.

Right, glad we've got that sorted out(!)

[Ostroeuropa]

You must have been asleep at the wheel through the 60s, 70s and 80s then.

Have you heard of socialist feminism, Marxist feminism, material feminism, and anarchafeminism?

No, I have not been asleep at the wheel. I am just an academic communist, not a left-wing populist.

Being on this forum has made me realize that there is a massive rift on the left. As an academic communist, and a New Leftist beginning in 1968, I was somehow previously unaware of it. NationStates has proved to be an awakening for me and, to be honest, a quite difficult, but necessary, one.

No academic communists I know, and I literally know hundreds, would ever dream of attacking feminism. We view feminists as our allies or potential allies. Seeing feminists as anything less betrays every principle I have lived by since 1968.

Feminism is a supremacist movement in historical practice, and has been since at least the schism with the mens rights movement when NOW, the largest feminist organization in the world, opposed joint custody and demanded presumed custody for women should they request it, and they did this based on duluthesque interpreteations of domestic violence, which i've called feminist blood libel (One of them, at least.).

Its activism is based on dogmatic assertions and a fundamentally flawed and gynocentric interpretation of sexism, the field of gender studies is the most well funded, and also the least objective and most riddled with bias out of all the humanities. It is this fundamental impulse toward female supremacy that the feminist worldview inculcates that leads to things like suppressing evidence of parity in domestic violence and rape perpetration, etc.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5502066/

Feminism is the sociological equivalent of biological racism.
It should be purged out of academic institutions.

This "Rift on the left" you talk about isn't a rift. The majority of the public is left wing on economics. But only a small and shrinking minority are feminists.
Feminist merely occupy institutions due to being highly biased in eachothers favor and hostile to any non-feminists having institutional authority.
The consequence of feminists taking over an institution is usually negative.

The public is aware of that. The "Rift" doesn't exist. What exists is an elitist and supremacist ideology and its adherents that are antithetical to socialism, democracy, and egalitarianism, and those who oppose it and its appropriation of the left wing and its institutions.

if you were to go around saying Goldman Sachs clearly represents the interests of international jewry and so jews shouldn't have a movement to protect their rights because Goldman Sachs is powerful enough already and they must secretly want it to be even more powerful and are merely lying about their intentions, how would you sound?
Like A feminist, exactly.

The modern backpeddling on that by members of the grassroots movement (Notably, the institutions are not backpedaling, but doubling down on the misandry) and contortions to try and fit mens rights issues into a feminist framework is not native to the feminist movement and its thought, but is sourced in adherents being unable to admit the MRMs criticism is entirely apt and trying to salvage a hate movement with good PR and make it live up to the PR that they cannot bare to admit was a lie. Many feminists claim to "care" about mens issues too, but are entirely ignorant of them, showing that the care is superficial, and merely a means of adherents being able to willfully ignore their movements failure and shortcomings. Those that aren't are only so through exposure to the MRM and its advocates, but don't admit it usually. That none of their peers, publications, or institutions informed them of mens issues is for some reason not enough for them to make the reasonable conclusion that the institutions and culture feminism has created is supremacist in nature.

Suppose there were widespread ignorance, hostility, and denial of racism, and institutions kept this as a norm, but people waffled that they "Weren't racists." and the status quo was fine.
Exactly.

[Aillyria]

You must have been asleep at the wheel through the 60s, 70s and 80s then.

Have you heard of socialist feminism, Marxist feminism, material feminism, and anarchafeminism?

No, I have not been asleep at the wheel. I am just an academic communist, not a left-wing populist.

Being on this forum has made me realize that there is a massive rift on the left. As an academic communist, and a New Leftist beginning in 1968, I was somehow previously unaware of it. NationStates has proved to be an awakening for me and, to be honest, a quite difficult, but necessary, one.

No academic communists I know, and I literally know hundreds, would ever dream of attacking feminism. We view feminists as our allies or potential allies. Seeing feminists as anything less betrays every principle I have lived by since 1968.

Tbh, it may also be a generational rift too. Perhaps the fact you were around in the 60s, 70s, and 80s when feminism had at least some relevance and productivity to it gave you your positive outlook on them as allies. In my generation 90s, 2000s, and 2010s alot of us have been raised with this irritatingly emotionally oversensitive, unproductive, and unnecessary feminism that give a great deal of us a healthy dislike and skepticism of all things "feminist".

[Ostroeuropa]

Have you heard of socialist feminism, Marxist feminism, material feminism, and anarchafeminism?

No, I have not been asleep at the wheel. I am just an academic communist, not a left-wing populist.

Being on this forum has made me realize that there is a massive rift on the left. As an academic communist, and a New Leftist beginning in 1968, I was somehow previously unaware of it. NationStates has proved to be an awakening for me and, to be honest, a quite difficult, but necessary, one.

No academic communists I know, and I literally know hundreds, would ever dream of attacking feminism. We view feminists as our allies or potential allies. Seeing feminists as anything less betrays every principle I have lived by since 1968.

Tbh, it may also be a generational rift too. Perhaps the fact you were around in the 60s, 70s, and 80s when feminism had at least some relevance and productivity to it gave you your positive outlook on them as allies. In my generation 90s, 2000s, and 2010s alot of us have been raised with this irritatingly emotionally oversensitive, unproductive, and unnecessary feminism that give a great deal of us a healthy dislike and skepticism of all things "feminist".

This isn't the case.
Feminism back then is when the most egregious violations of mens rights occured. The constant positive press and suppression of criticism and mens rights talk we see in the modern day was also there back then, and this gives a more positive view than is warranted.
The 80s especially were when feminists escalated in terms of supremacism.

[Aillyria]

Regressive left almost always refers to social attitudes of people, namely what they see as naive identity politics. Not advocacy of revolution or socialising the means of production.

Identity politics is only one part of Maajid Nawaz's definition of the regressive left. Another part is his opposition to Islamism (right-wing political Islam), which fails to recognize it as a direct product of Western imperialism. The focus should be on the cause, not the effect.

I disagree with that. That's just like blaming blacks' issues on whites alone, it's BS. The Islamic worlds has done most of this on their own, they're sovereign nations and they have brought shame to Islam all on their own. Sure, the West played a part, but political Islamist radicals are doing what their corrupted hadith fairytales wanted them to do all along.

[Sovaal]

Seeing socialists attack feminism is, to be honest, something I never expected to see. However, one learns new things all the time.

I thought the whole point of socialism was to support the working class, which is often pretty socially conservative.

[Kubumba Tribe]

Identity politics is only one part of Maajid Nawaz's definition of the regressive left. Another part is his opposition to Islamism (right-wing political Islam), which fails to recognize it as a direct product of Western imperialism. The focus should be on the cause, not the effect.

I disagree with that. That's just like blaming blacks' issues on whites alone, it's BS. The Islamic worlds has done most of this on their own, they're sovereign nations and they have brought shame to Islam all on their own. Sure, the West played a part, but political Islamist radicals are doing what their corrupted hadith fairytales wanted them to do all along.

Muslims aren't supposed to follow corrupted aHadith. Besides, which aHadith would be referring to that Islamist did to screw up the Middle East?

[Aillyria]

Tbh, it may also be a generational rift too. Perhaps the fact you were around in the 60s, 70s, and 80s when feminism had at least some relevance and productivity to it gave you your positive outlook on them as allies. In my generation 90s, 2000s, and 2010s alot of us have been raised with this irritatingly emotionally oversensitive, unproductive, and unnecessary feminism that give a great deal of us a healthy dislike and skepticism of all things "feminist".

This isn't the case.
Feminism back then is when the most egregious violations of mens rights occured. The constant positive press and suppression of criticism and mens rights talk we see in the modern day was also there back then, and this gives a more positive view than is warranted.
The 80s especially were when feminists escalated in terms of supremacism.

I'll take you word for it, I haven't done as much research on the topic as you have.

That the thing though, what purpose is there to be a feminist now other that to be a supremacist? They already have their fucked up divorce laws, legal abortion, can cry rape and be believed with no proof, etc.....but they want more than equal rights, which they aleady have, they want that pedestal, they want privilege for women.

[Ostroeuropa]

This isn't the case.
Feminism back then is when the most egregious violations of mens rights occured. The constant positive press and suppression of criticism and mens rights talk we see in the modern day was also there back then, and this gives a more positive view than is warranted.
The 80s especially were when feminists escalated in terms of supremacism.

I'll take you word for it, I haven't done as much research on the topic as you have.

That the thing though, what purpose is there to be a feminist now other that to be a supremacist? They already have their fucked up divorce laws, legal abortion, can cry rape and be believed with no proof, etc.....but they want more than equal rights, which they aleady have, they want that pedestal, they want privilege for women.

Modern feminist activity seems based around erasing male victims to pretend things are womens issues, a continuation of the violations of mens rights the second wave did with its sexist work on domestic violence.

[Aillyria]

I disagree with that. That's just like blaming blacks' issues on whites alone, it's BS. The Islamic worlds has done most of this on their own, they're sovereign nations and they have brought shame to Islam all on their own. Sure, the West played a part, but political Islamist radicals are doing what their corrupted hadith fairytales wanted them to do all along.

Muslims aren't supposed to follow corrupted aHadith. Besides, which aHadith would be referring to that Islamist did to screw up the Middle East?

All of them.

Seeing socialists attack feminism is, to be honest, something I never expected to see. However, one learns new things all the time.

I thought the whole point of socialism was to support the working class, which is often pretty socially conservative.

Modern "leftists" would have us thinking were supposed to be supporting their quest to be special little snowflakes with safe spaces and gender that switches every five minutes....they make racial minorities and trans folk look like fools with no grounding in reality. I cannot possibly convey how deep my utter hatred of feminism runs. It and the alt-right should just metaphorically fuck already, they're both movements run off infantile emotionalism and ignorance.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Regressive left almost always refers to social attitudes of people, namely what they see as naive identity politics. Not advocacy of revolution or socialising the means of production.

Identity politics is only one part of Maajid Nawaz's definition of the regressive left. Another part is his opposition to Islamism (right-wing political Islam), which fails to recognize it as a direct product of Western imperialism. The focus should be on the cause, not the effect.

To say that Islamism is exclusively because of Western interventionism is laughable. In an ISIS pamphlet they state their reasons for hating the west, and anything that could be labelled "imperialism" is a fair way down the list and explicitly labelled as a secondary cause, the main cause being the west's failure to keep to Allah's rules. Islamists hold many savage, authoritarian and fundamentalist beliefs that they would hold with or without western interventionism.

[Ostroeuropa]

Identity politics is only one part of Maajid Nawaz's definition of the regressive left. Another part is his opposition to Islamism (right-wing political Islam), which fails to recognize it as a direct product of Western imperialism. The focus should be on the cause, not the effect.

To say that Islamism is exclusively because of Western interventionism is laughable. In an ISIS pamphlet they state their reasons for hating the west, and anything that could be labelled "imperialism" is a fair way down the list and explicitly labelled as a secondary cause, the main cause being the west's failure to keep to Allah's rules. Islamists hold many savage, authoritarian and fundamentalist beliefs that they would hold with or without western interventionism.

It's the same bullshit appeasement attitude we used for Hitlerite fascism, saying he's only redressing grievances from Versailles.

Spain was not a beneficiary of Versailles.

Likewise, Islamists have routinely attacked countries that aren't western, aren't imperialist, etc. The taliban, for instance, attacked hindus in Indonesia.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

The rise of the far-right in the modern day is primarily due to the excesses and failures of progressive politics in the context of a capitalist society. The Trump phemonanae is a major expression of it and how socialist economics is a principle held by a sizable amount of the population.

In the UK, most conservatives want railway nationalization, etc. It is only progressive politics that prevents economic progress, which is precisely why the media and elites utilize it and force it down everyones throats.

As a member of the white working class, lol no.

To what? Saying "lol, no" with no explanation or elaboration to a post that makes several points is not very helpful.

[The Multiversal Communist Collective]

Feminism is the sociological equivalent of biological racism.
It should be purged out of academic institutions.

What a shame. Well, you and I share no common ground on this issue.

[Ostroeuropa]

Feminism is the sociological equivalent of biological racism.
It should be purged out of academic institutions.

What a shame. Well, you and I share no common ground on this issue.

You deny that feminist politics has resulted in policies and practices sexist against men, has failed to adequately address mens issues, etc?
If you do, i'll provide evidence to that effect.
If you don't deny it, then you should look for the root cause, and that root cause is a fundamentally malformed understanding of sexism at the root of the worldview.

[The Multiversal Communist Collective]

Tbh, it may also be a generational rift too. Perhaps the fact you were around in the 60s, 70s, and 80s when feminism had at least some relevance and productivity to it gave you your positive outlook on them as allies. In my generation 90s, 2000s, and 2010s alot of us have been raised with this irritatingly emotionally oversensitive, unproductive, and unnecessary feminism that give a great deal of us a healthy dislike and skepticism of all things "feminist".

I don't think it is generational. Feminism is a growing, not a dying, movement.

[Ostroeuropa]

Tbh, it may also be a generational rift too. Perhaps the fact you were around in the 60s, 70s, and 80s when feminism had at least some relevance and productivity to it gave you your positive outlook on them as allies. In my generation 90s, 2000s, and 2010s alot of us have been raised with this irritatingly emotionally oversensitive, unproductive, and unnecessary feminism that give a great deal of us a healthy dislike and skepticism of all things "feminist".

I don't think it is generational. Feminism is a growing, not a dying, movement.

Feminism is in decline in terms of number of adherents. Its "ascension" is merely a period of institutional capture by activists. Notably, the things they've done with these institutions include violations of due process among other sexist and inhumane actions against males. I can't see a modern large scale action by feminists or feminist institutions that is positive.

[The Multiversal Communist Collective]

I disagree with that. That's just like blaming blacks' issues on whites alone, it's BS. The Islamic worlds has done most of this on their own, they're sovereign nations and they have brought shame to Islam all on their own. Sure, the West played a part, but political Islamist radicals are doing what their corrupted hadith fairytales wanted them to do all along.

As a libertarian communist, influenced by autonomist Marxists Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri's Empire, I beg to disagree. The problem is America.

[The Multiversal Communist Collective]

I thought the whole point of socialism was to support the working class, which is often pretty socially conservative.

And there are no women in the working class?