Left-Wing Discussion Thread III

[Irona]

When someone claims that global institutions are being systematically taken over by a group, and then that group is systematically using their power to oppress another group and are also involved in a global plan to cover up this takeover it's pretty legitimate to call conspiracy. Especially when no proof is ever provided.

[Jackania yugo]

So...Immigration into Europe is really good and perfect and has no downsides what so ever and we should all get culturally enriched?

[Ostroeuropa]

Aww. It's the conspiracy meme again.
"To call feminism a conspiracy implies a competence and clarity of purpose I don't wish to attribute to anyone involved."
Once again we see a feminist not willing or able to consider that maybe they are just wrong, and it's an indication of a worldviews veracity if they've never bothered to consider that, and a grim indication of the type of people it attracts that this widespread flaw in thinking is so common a meme among feminists.

Does that mean you yourself do at least sometimes consider that you could be just plain wrong? 'cause it doesn't look like it.

I do consider it. Anyone able to offer an alternative explanation or model that covers all the bases i'm talking about would have my attention, even if it seemed less likely to me.

"What's in the box?"
"it's a live cat!"
"The box has been sealed shut for a month, and we've shaken it vigorously as well as shot it into space a few times. However, it is also attracted to magnets. So i'm betting it's some kind of metal in there."
"You just hate cats! What if you're wrong huh!? Never considered it Look! The box even says "Cat" on it!!!"
"You literally wrote that yourself and slapped the label on when you up and decided one day it had to be a cat, we all saw you do it, and you can't force us to ignore that fact."

What if i'm wrong?
I consider it.
I just don't think that's an excuse to believe in what is patently bullshit.
Show me an alternative model that isn't an incoherent mess reliant on ignoring evidence to uphold itself.
Something that explains what we're seeing on this topic. Doesn't even have to explain it "Better."
Just explain all the evidence and not be reliant on ignoring evidence that goes against the theory like feminist theory does.

I'm prepared to abandon my model for understanding sexism in society when a better one comes along. Feminists aren't, or they wouldn't still be feminists after meeting an MRA and having it exhaustively explained to them how applying feminist theory hasn't worked.

"My theory on how to build planes is right and correct."
"Every time we do it according to your specifications, it crashes. You don't know what the fuck you are doing."

I am absolutely confident that MRM theory is more accurate than feminist theory and represents an improvement on it in the tradition of empirical inquiry, research, and the scientific method.
No doubt in some decades flaws in the MRM model will reveal themselves, and we will once again be forced to hone our approach and get our accuracy down to the next decimal point.

But refusing to move on from feminist theory despite it's clear flaws and proven inadequacy means refusing to advance as a species on this topic.

Newton gives way to Einstein, who gives way to modern theories.
So it goes with feminism and the MRM. The difference here being that continuing to adamantly insist on a provably inadequate theory that disadvantages a section of society and entrenches bigotry against them is prejudicial, and ethically wrong, as opposed to merely being bullheaded obstinance and an anti-intellectual mindset.

"Purge feminists from academia" should be viewed in this context.
Math teachers who still taught Newtons theories as absolute and correct and anyone who said otherwise was by definition shit at maths, would be unfit for their position.
Feminist professors are no different, obstinately braying about their ideological assertions and ignoring the ever increasing amount of evidence those theories are wrong, and when applied, cause project failures.

[The Multiversal Communist Collective]

Why do you people hate centrism?

You people is an over-generalization. There are some centrists in this thread. However, as a libertarian communist or Luxemburgist, I view centrism as a type of what Rosa Luxemburg called social reform. She instead advocated for revolution. To me, centrism is false consciousness (accepting the ideology of the oppressor).

[Liriena]

So...Immigration into Europe is really good and perfect and has no downsides what so ever and we should all get culturally enriched?

Loaded questions are bad, mmkay?

[Dumb Ideologies]

Why do you people hate centrism?

You people is an over-generalization. There are some centrists in this thread. However, as a libertarian communist or Luxemburgist, I view centrism as a type of what Rosa Luxemburg called social reform. She instead advocated for revolution. To me, centrism is false consciousness (accepting the ideology of the oppressor).

Trying to sneak back with a different nation a week after "permanently" leaving the thread is very bad form. Even I usually make it to a month after rage-quitting before I come back.

Tut tut!

[Jackania yugo]

So...Immigration into Europe is really good and perfect and has no downsides what so ever and we should all get culturally enriched?

Loaded questions are bad, mmkay?

Is the Immigration from the middle east and north Africa actually harming Europe, or is it just an alt-right lie?

[Liriena]

Loaded questions are bad, mmkay?

Is the Immigration from the middle east and north Africa actually harming Europe, or is it just an alt-right lie?

I think it's a lot more complicated than how you are framing it. There are downsides to mass immigration no matter the country of origin or the country of destination, because there's the statistical inevitability that at least some of the immigrants will go on to do terrible things, and that's without taking into account structural, socioeconomic factors that will affect how immigrants integrate themselves into their new societies.

Immigration into Europe has certainly been problematic, but I think it's nevertheless been a positive phenomenon.

[Aillyria]

Why do you people hate centrism?

Centrism has never solved anything, and never will.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

Loaded questions are bad, mmkay?

Is the Immigration from the middle east and north Africa actually harming Europe, or is it just an alt-right lie?

Man it's almost as if
there are good things and bad things

[Aillyria]

Is the Immigration from the middle east and north Africa actually harming Europe, or is it just an alt-right lie?

I think it's a lot more complicated than how you are framing it. There are downsides to mass immigration no matter the country of origin or the country of destination, because there's the statistical inevitability that at least some of the immigrants will go on to do terrible things, and that's without taking into account structural, socioeconomic factors that will affect how immigrants integrate themselves into their new societies.

Immigration into Europe has certainly been problematic, but I think it's nevertheless been a positive phenomenon.

Yeah, a positive phenomenon, for the EU elites.

[Jackania yugo]

Is the Immigration from the middle east and north Africa actually harming Europe, or is it just an alt-right lie?

Man it's almost as if
there are good things and bad things

Ok, sorry for being a bit black and white.

So...it's a mixed bag.

Is it worth stopping the immigration into Europe from those places. Or should we just slow it down and filter it.

Remember when we said about quizzing them about their ideals.

[Jackania yugo]

I think it's a lot more complicated than how you are framing it. There are downsides to mass immigration no matter the country of origin or the country of destination, because there's the statistical inevitability that at least some of the immigrants will go on to do terrible things, and that's without taking into account structural, socioeconomic factors that will affect how immigrants integrate themselves into their new societies.

Immigration into Europe has certainly been problematic, but I think it's nevertheless been a positive phenomenon.

Yeah, a positive phenomenon, for the EU elites.

Let's show them true leftism.

WORKERS UNITE!!!

[Liriena]

I think it's a lot more complicated than how you are framing it. There are downsides to mass immigration no matter the country of origin or the country of destination, because there's the statistical inevitability that at least some of the immigrants will go on to do terrible things, and that's without taking into account structural, socioeconomic factors that will affect how immigrants integrate themselves into their new societies.

Immigration into Europe has certainly been problematic, but I think it's nevertheless been a positive phenomenon.

Yeah, a positive phenomenon, for the EU elites.

Not exclusively for them, and even then the blame shouldn't fall on immigrants or the common folk who support them.

[Liriena]

Yeah, a positive phenomenon, for the EU elites.

Let's show them true leftism.

WORKERS UNITE!!!

True leftism would be internationalist and show solidarity towards workers from abroad, tho

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

Man it's almost as if
there are good things and bad things

Ok, sorry for being a bit black and white.

So...it's a mixed bag.

Is it worth stopping the immigration into Europe from those places. Or should we just slow it down and filter it.

Remember when we said about quizzing them about their ideals.

The answer to all of that is no.
The problem lies in the fact that we are bringing them into a safe country, then essentially abandoning them. No food, no shelter, no job, no money, aid is very sparse. So now, they're scared, hungry, AND in a foreign country where no one speaks their language.
Change the way we bring them in. THAT will be the best move.

[Jackania yugo]

Ok, sorry for being a bit black and white.

So...it's a mixed bag.

Is it worth stopping the immigration into Europe from those places. Or should we just slow it down and filter it.

Remember when we said about quizzing them about their ideals.

The answer to all of that is no.
The problem lies in the fact that we are bringing them into a safe country, then essentially abandoning them. No food, no shelter, no job, no money, aid is very sparse. So now, they're scared, hungry, AND in a foreign country where no one speaks their language.
Change the way we bring them in. THAT will be the best move.

Then what do you suppose is the "right way"?

[Ostroeuropa]

Let's show them true leftism.

WORKERS UNITE!!!

True leftism would be internationalist and show solidarity towards workers from abroad, tho

Leftism is collective interests being represented.
We do not have the same interests as foreign workers.
We would under a global government or anarchistic system, which may be why some leftists shill so hard for those things, but so long as nations exist, solidarity is only useful in terms of fighting the capitalist classes influence, not uplifting foreign areas to our standards or its own sake.

Ideally they will be kept advanced enough to prevent major outsourcing, and behind enough for us to retain technological and military dominance.

Further, resources should be spent here if it outweighs our own interests of spending them abroad.

"We have many hospitals and they have few, let's give them 10 billion dollars, because equality."
"No, because we need more solar paneling. Equality with foreign workers is not a virtue. How will it benefit us to give them that money, and can we obtain more benefit from spending it elsewhere? This is a wildly inappropriate use of state funds. Go donate to charity."

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

The answer to all of that is no.
The problem lies in the fact that we are bringing them into a safe country, then essentially abandoning them. No food, no shelter, no job, no money, aid is very sparse. So now, they're scared, hungry, AND in a foreign country where no one speaks their language.
Change the way we bring them in. THAT will be the best move.

Then what do you suppose is the "right way"?

Help them get established. Job placement. Some sort of basic housing. Medical care. Food, even if it's community meals. Language courses to learn the common language of the country.

[Bakery Hill]

Ok, sorry for being a bit black and white.

So...it's a mixed bag.

Is it worth stopping the immigration into Europe from those places. Or should we just slow it down and filter it.

Remember when we said about quizzing them about their ideals.

The answer to all of that is no.
The problem lies in the fact that we are bringing them into a safe country, then essentially abandoning them. No food, no shelter, no job, no money, aid is very sparse. So now, they're scared, hungry, AND in a foreign country where no one speaks their language.
Change the way we bring them in. THAT will be the best move.

To a degree I think you're right. The problem is one of integration and of a society and ruling class that have no idea what they are doing. But in Europe refugees or legal economic migrants (which are what most of them are) tend to have jobs or be given money by the welfare state. They aren't starving to death in their thousands on the streets of Berlin and Paris.

[Aillyria]

Let's show them true leftism.

WORKERS UNITE!!!

True leftism would be internationalist and show solidarity towards workers from abroad, tho

Screw that, my sympathy is with the workers of my homeland first. Foreigners are of secondary importance.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

The answer to all of that is no.
The problem lies in the fact that we are bringing them into a safe country, then essentially abandoning them. No food, no shelter, no job, no money, aid is very sparse. So now, they're scared, hungry, AND in a foreign country where no one speaks their language.
Change the way we bring them in. THAT will be the best move.

To a degree I think you're right. The problem is one of integration and of a society and ruling class that have no idea what they are doing. But in Europe refugees or legal economic migrants (which are what most of them are) tend to have jobs or be given money by the welfare state. They aren't starving to death in their thousands on the streets of Berlin and Paris.

I didn't say that they were, however for a lot of them, they don't have an easy transition.

[Bakery Hill]

Let's show them true leftism.

WORKERS UNITE!!!

True leftism would be internationalist and show solidarity towards workers from abroad, tho

I believe in a national focus and an international reach on these matters really. You don't have to choose.

[Bakery Hill]

To a degree I think you're right. The problem is one of integration and of a society and ruling class that have no idea what they are doing. But in Europe refugees or legal economic migrants (which are what most of them are) tend to have jobs or be given money by the welfare state. They aren't starving to death in their thousands on the streets of Berlin and Paris.

I didn't say that they were, however for a lot of them, they don't have an easy transition.

You said they have no food, shelter, money or job. The overwhelming majority have all of these. The problem with transition is more social than material.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

I didn't say that they were, however for a lot of them, they don't have an easy transition.

You said they have no food, shelter, money or job. The overwhelming majority have all of these. The problem with transition is more social than material.

Don't disagree that there's a lot of social issues as well, but stating that they are well-fed, all employed, and all in adequate housing is not in any way true.