NATION

PASSWORD

Left-Wing Discussion Thread III

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Remove ads

What type of leftist are you?

Left-leaning Centrist
102
14%
Left/Social Liberal
66
9%
Social Democrat
102
14%
Democratic Socialist
125
17%
Marxist Communist
132
18%
Social Anarchist
48
7%
Individualist Anarchist
34
5%
Revolutionary Syndicalist
38
5%
Communalist
26
4%
Other (Please Post)
65
9%
 
Total votes : 738

User avatar
Sanctissima
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8425
Founded: Jul 16, 2014
Democratic Socialists

Postby Sanctissima » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:51 pm

The Parkus Empire wrote:
Sanctissima wrote:
I... can't really disagree since I'm both Canadian and nationalist as all hell, but at least from the American perspective, I can't rightly condemn a nation for seeing what appears to be low-hanging fruit and attempting to snatch it, only to get mauled by a passive-aggressive beaver.

As for supposed Republican passivity prior to the 70's, remind me which party was running the show when these events happened:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish%E2%80%93American_War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_Panama_from_Colombia

Nevermind the events of the American Civil War or the handling of the Cold War during Eisenhower's presidency.

I don't really see how the party could rightly be considered pacifistic pre-1970's.

Fortunaty I never said they were pacifists.

No doubt Roosevelt was a very abnormal Republican, which is why he broke with the party.


You said they were anti-imperialist, when clearly they were nothing of the sort.

More "anti-European imperialist, pro-American imperialism" than anything.

As for Teddy, he broke with the Republican Party because it was straying from progressivism, and he had a bit of a grudge with Taft, not because of imperialism, foreign intervention or anything of the sort.

User avatar
The Parkus Empire
Post Czar
 
Posts: 34389
Founded: Sep 12, 2005
Left-Leaning College State

Postby The Parkus Empire » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:52 pm

Genivaria wrote:
The Parkus Empire wrote:
You think the Jacksonians were the party of peace?

Considering how broad your definition of 'imperialism' is.

In this context it means actually annexing land. I use it often in the broader sense to mean using force or threat to establish political or economic hegemony.

User avatar
Sanctissima
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8425
Founded: Jul 16, 2014
Democratic Socialists

Postby Sanctissima » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:53 pm

Genivaria wrote:
Sanctissima wrote:
A maple leaf, the most glorious of all the leaves.

And at any rate, we make up for the lackluster patriotic symbolism with our wildlife:

Image


Sort of...

Image


In terms of your political orientation, I figure it's your economic beliefs that more or less peg you liberal rather than moderately conservative. At any rate, liberals historically have tended to be fairly patriotic, even nationalist. It's just the modern socialized crap that's neutered the entire ideology.

Yes shame that.
If not for the damn Red Scare we might have a decent Social Market Economy.


To be honest you should have adopted a modified form of French dirigisme, albeit without the indicative planning model that De Gaulle tried to force down France's throat; opting moreso for a less regulatory market model.

They didn't call it the "Thirty Glorious Years" for nothing.

User avatar
The Parkus Empire
Post Czar
 
Posts: 34389
Founded: Sep 12, 2005
Left-Leaning College State

Postby The Parkus Empire » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:54 pm

Sanctissima wrote:
The Parkus Empire wrote:Fortunaty I never said they were pacifists.

No doubt Roosevelt was a very abnormal Republican, which is why he broke with the party.


You said they were anti-imperialist, when clearly they were nothing of the sort.

More "anti-European imperialist, pro-American imperialism" than anything.

As for Teddy, he broke with the Republican Party because it was straying from progressivism, and he had a bit of a grudge with Taft, not because of imperialism, foreign intervention or anything of the sort.

The United States Navy armoured cruiser Maine had mysteriously sunk in Havana Harbor; political pressures from the Democratic Party pushed the administration of Republican President William McKinley into a war that he had wished to avoid.

User avatar
Estonian Republic of Uzumakistan
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 42
Founded: Dec 13, 2017
Ex-Nation

Postby Estonian Republic of Uzumakistan » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:55 pm

The Parkus Empire wrote:
Sanctissima wrote:You said they were anti-imperialist, when clearly they were nothing of the sort.

More "anti-European imperialist, pro-American imperialism" than anything.

As for Teddy, he broke with the Republican Party because it was straying from progressivism, and he had a bit of a grudge with Taft, not because of imperialism, foreign intervention or anything of the sort.

The United States Navy armoured cruiser Maine had mysteriously sunk in Havana Harbor; political pressures from the Democratic Party pushed the administration of Republican President William McKinley into a war that he had wished to avoid.

Are you trying to be Sarcastic?
Last edited by Estonian Republic of Uzumakistan on Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54432
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Genivaria » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:56 pm

United Muscovite Nations wrote:
Genivaria wrote:Not imperialism just not opposed to intervention.
If you want to use those terms synonymously then we're of course going to differ.
And besides if the big names behind neo-liberalism are Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan, and Alan Greenspan then it is a serious stretch to try and put me under that label.

Where do you differ on them besides economics?

Ugh your gonna make me look them up aren't you?
Thatcherism represented a systematic, decisive rejection and reversal of the post-war consensus, whereby the major political parties largely agreed on the central themes of Keynesianism, the welfare state, nationalised industry, and close regulation of the economy.

Her political philosophy and economic policies emphasised deregulation (particularly of the financial sector), flexible labour markets, the privatisation of state-owned companies, and reducing the power and influence of trade unions.

Uh well for Thatcher that seems to kind of be her Shtick.
For Reagan I don't believe that he has the right to shut down protests or strikes, nor do I support capital punishment or 'state's rights'.
And I certainly don't support his contributions to the Red Scare.
Last edited by Genivaria on Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Some days I support Liberal Social Democracy, other days I support De-centralized Syndicalist Direct Democracy.

Favorite RvB quote.
Director: Dear Chairman,

I don't give a damn about your committee and its opinions of my work! Have you forgotten sir, we were at war? A fight with an alien race for the very survival of our species. I feel I must remind you that it is an undeniable, and may I say a fundamental quality of man, that when faced with extinction, every alternative is preferable.

User avatar
Sanctissima
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8425
Founded: Jul 16, 2014
Democratic Socialists

Postby Sanctissima » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:56 pm

The Parkus Empire wrote:
Sanctissima wrote:
You said they were anti-imperialist, when clearly they were nothing of the sort.

More "anti-European imperialist, pro-American imperialism" than anything.

As for Teddy, he broke with the Republican Party because it was straying from progressivism, and he had a bit of a grudge with Taft, not because of imperialism, foreign intervention or anything of the sort.

The United States Navy armoured cruiser Maine had mysteriously sunk in Havana Harbor; political pressures from the Democratic Party pushed the administration of Republican President William McKinley into a war that he had wished to avoid.


Yes, "mysteriously".

Funny how convenient casus bellis just magically pop up every now and then. :p

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54432
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Genivaria » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:58 pm

The Parkus Empire wrote:
Genivaria wrote:Considering how broad your definition of 'imperialism' is.

In this context it means actually annexing land. I use it often in the broader sense to mean using force or threat to establish political or economic hegemony.

Then you mean expansionism which is different.
Some days I support Liberal Social Democracy, other days I support De-centralized Syndicalist Direct Democracy.

Favorite RvB quote.
Director: Dear Chairman,

I don't give a damn about your committee and its opinions of my work! Have you forgotten sir, we were at war? A fight with an alien race for the very survival of our species. I feel I must remind you that it is an undeniable, and may I say a fundamental quality of man, that when faced with extinction, every alternative is preferable.

User avatar
The Parkus Empire
Post Czar
 
Posts: 34389
Founded: Sep 12, 2005
Left-Leaning College State

Postby The Parkus Empire » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:58 pm

Estonian Republic of Uzumakistan wrote:
The Parkus Empire wrote:The United States Navy armoured cruiser Maine had mysteriously sunk in Havana Harbor; political pressures from the Democratic Party pushed the administration of Republican President William McKinley into a war that he had wished to avoid.

Are you trying to be Sarcastic?

No, I am quoting the article he linked

User avatar
United Muscovite Nations
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8859
Founded: Feb 01, 2017
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby United Muscovite Nations » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:59 pm

Genivaria wrote:
United Muscovite Nations wrote:Where do you differ on them besides economics?

Ugh your gonna make me look them up aren't you?
Thatcherism represented a systematic, decisive rejection and reversal of the post-war consensus, whereby the major political parties largely agreed on the central themes of Keynesianism, the welfare state, nationalised industry, and close regulation of the economy.

Her political philosophy and economic policies emphasised deregulation (particularly of the financial sector), flexible labour markets, the privatisation of state-owned companies, and reducing the power and influence of trade unions.

Uh well for Thatcher that seems to kind of be her Shtick.
For Reagan I don't believe that he has the right to shut down protests or strikes, nor do I support capital punishment or 'state's rights'.
And I certainly don't support his contributions to the Red Scare.

Then, it is true you aren't a neoliberal, but you have strong influences from Neoliberal and Neocon ideas on foreign policy.
Eastern Orthodox Christian Traditionalist. Byzantinist and Tsarist (unironically). Maoist Third Worldist (ironically). Thermidorian Bonapartist. Armchair Legitimist. Free-Range Irredentist. Potable Blanquist.
Seventh Ecumenical Council at Constantinople wrote:The greatest gifts God has given to mankind are the priesthood and the Imperial authority

Formerly United Marxist Nations, Dec 02, 2011- Feb 01, 2017. +33,837 posts
St. John Chrysostom, Archbishop of Constantinople wrote:A comprehended God is no God.
>tfw no one thinks you're serious anymore

Hemos pasado

User avatar
The Parkus Empire
Post Czar
 
Posts: 34389
Founded: Sep 12, 2005
Left-Leaning College State

Postby The Parkus Empire » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:59 pm

Genivaria wrote:
The Parkus Empire wrote:In this context it means actually annexing land. I use it often in the broader sense to mean using force or threat to establish political or economic hegemony.

Then you mean expansionism which is different.

Not for federations.

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54432
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Genivaria » Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:00 pm

United Muscovite Nations wrote:
Genivaria wrote:Ugh your gonna make me look them up aren't you?


Uh well for Thatcher that seems to kind of be her Shtick.
For Reagan I don't believe that he has the right to shut down protests or strikes, nor do I support capital punishment or 'state's rights'.
And I certainly don't support his contributions to the Red Scare.

Then, it is true you aren't a neoliberal, but you have strong influences from Neoliberal and Neocon ideas on foreign policy.

I'm okay with being influenced a little from other fields, the proponent of the idea does not automatically make the idea bad.
Some days I support Liberal Social Democracy, other days I support De-centralized Syndicalist Direct Democracy.

Favorite RvB quote.
Director: Dear Chairman,

I don't give a damn about your committee and its opinions of my work! Have you forgotten sir, we were at war? A fight with an alien race for the very survival of our species. I feel I must remind you that it is an undeniable, and may I say a fundamental quality of man, that when faced with extinction, every alternative is preferable.

User avatar
The Parkus Empire
Post Czar
 
Posts: 34389
Founded: Sep 12, 2005
Left-Leaning College State

Postby The Parkus Empire » Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:00 pm

United Muscovite Nations wrote:
Genivaria wrote:Ugh your gonna make me look them up aren't you?


Uh well for Thatcher that seems to kind of be her Shtick.
For Reagan I don't believe that he has the right to shut down protests or strikes, nor do I support capital punishment or 'state's rights'.
And I certainly don't support his contributions to the Red Scare.

Then, it is true you aren't a neoliberal, but you have strong influences from Neoliberal and Neocon ideas on foreign policy.

More Wilsonian

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54432
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Genivaria » Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:02 pm

The Parkus Empire wrote:
United Muscovite Nations wrote:Then, it is true you aren't a neoliberal, but you have strong influences from Neoliberal and Neocon ideas on foreign policy.

More Wilsonian

I'll take that as a compliment.

Anyway BRB ya'll I'm gonna run down the street and grab a pizza.
Mmmmm.
Some days I support Liberal Social Democracy, other days I support De-centralized Syndicalist Direct Democracy.

Favorite RvB quote.
Director: Dear Chairman,

I don't give a damn about your committee and its opinions of my work! Have you forgotten sir, we were at war? A fight with an alien race for the very survival of our species. I feel I must remind you that it is an undeniable, and may I say a fundamental quality of man, that when faced with extinction, every alternative is preferable.

User avatar
Al Hashka
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 108
Founded: Jan 08, 2017
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Al Hashka » Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:03 pm

Image
Image
Image
Image

User avatar
The Parkus Empire
Post Czar
 
Posts: 34389
Founded: Sep 12, 2005
Left-Leaning College State

Postby The Parkus Empire » Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:07 pm

Al Hashka wrote:

He is an evil dictator, but no, we shouldn't. The rebels would be worse

User avatar
United Muscovite Nations
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8859
Founded: Feb 01, 2017
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby United Muscovite Nations » Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:10 pm

Eastern Orthodox Christian Traditionalist. Byzantinist and Tsarist (unironically). Maoist Third Worldist (ironically). Thermidorian Bonapartist. Armchair Legitimist. Free-Range Irredentist. Potable Blanquist.
Seventh Ecumenical Council at Constantinople wrote:The greatest gifts God has given to mankind are the priesthood and the Imperial authority

Formerly United Marxist Nations, Dec 02, 2011- Feb 01, 2017. +33,837 posts
St. John Chrysostom, Archbishop of Constantinople wrote:A comprehended God is no God.
>tfw no one thinks you're serious anymore

Hemos pasado

User avatar
The Parkus Empire
Post Czar
 
Posts: 34389
Founded: Sep 12, 2005
Left-Leaning College State

Postby The Parkus Empire » Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:18 pm

United Muscovite Nations wrote:https://www.marxistsfr.org/archive/broue/1980/01/bloc.html

Thoughts?

The only serious argument against Stalin is petty beourgeois morality, as Althusser showed.
Last edited by The Parkus Empire on Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Al Hashka
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 108
Founded: Jan 08, 2017
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Al Hashka » Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:19 pm

The Parkus Empire wrote:
Al Hashka wrote:

He is an evil dictator.

Image

User avatar
United Muscovite Nations
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8859
Founded: Feb 01, 2017
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby United Muscovite Nations » Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:23 pm

The Parkus Empire wrote:
United Muscovite Nations wrote:https://www.marxistsfr.org/archive/broue/1980/01/bloc.html

Thoughts?

The only serious argument against Stalin is petty beourgeois morality, as Althusser showed.

I tend to agree that only moral arguments are really good against Stalin. If I were still an atheist, I have to imagine I'd still be a Marxist-Leninist. Stalin's measures were extreme, but he accomplished probably the most that any socialist revolutionary ever accomplished, in terms of having created an entire bloc of states in opposition to bourgeois capitalism and liberal democracy. He was also an extremely capable statesman, and, had his foreign policy approach remained, it's hard to imagine that the Soviets would have lost the Cold War.
Eastern Orthodox Christian Traditionalist. Byzantinist and Tsarist (unironically). Maoist Third Worldist (ironically). Thermidorian Bonapartist. Armchair Legitimist. Free-Range Irredentist. Potable Blanquist.
Seventh Ecumenical Council at Constantinople wrote:The greatest gifts God has given to mankind are the priesthood and the Imperial authority

Formerly United Marxist Nations, Dec 02, 2011- Feb 01, 2017. +33,837 posts
St. John Chrysostom, Archbishop of Constantinople wrote:A comprehended God is no God.
>tfw no one thinks you're serious anymore

Hemos pasado

User avatar
The Parkus Empire
Post Czar
 
Posts: 34389
Founded: Sep 12, 2005
Left-Leaning College State

Postby The Parkus Empire » Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:26 pm

United Muscovite Nations wrote:
The Parkus Empire wrote:The only serious argument against Stalin is petty beourgeois morality, as Althusser showed.

I tend to agree that only moral arguments are really good against Stalin. If I were still an atheist, I have to imagine I'd still be a Marxist-Leninist. Stalin's measures were extreme, but he accomplished probably the most that any socialist revolutionary ever accomplished, in terms of having created an entire bloc of states in opposition to bourgeois capitalism and liberal democracy. He was also an extremely capable statesman, and, had his foreign policy approach remained, it's hard to imagine that the Soviets would have lost the Cold War.

Stalin killed a lot of innocent people, but under the extremely precarius situation, "better safe than sorry" and "preventative death" were entirely pragmatic. It wasn't crazy or psychotic.
Last edited by The Parkus Empire on Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Sanctissima
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8425
Founded: Jul 16, 2014
Democratic Socialists

Postby Sanctissima » Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:29 pm

United Muscovite Nations wrote:
The Parkus Empire wrote:The only serious argument against Stalin is petty beourgeois morality, as Althusser showed.

I tend to agree that only moral arguments are really good against Stalin. If I were still an atheist, I have to imagine I'd still be a Marxist-Leninist. Stalin's measures were extreme, but he accomplished probably the most that any socialist revolutionary ever accomplished, in terms of having created an entire bloc of states in opposition to bourgeois capitalism and liberal democracy. He was also an extremely capable statesman, and, had his foreign policy approach remained, it's hard to imagine that the Soviets would have lost the Cold War.


To be honest, even if we view him purely as a statesman with no moral strings attached, he had a pretty mixed record.

Especially in his early years after seizing power, he more or less starved 10 million people to death before he figured out how agriculture works.

Let alone his hamstringing of the military that ultimately led to the Red Army getting its ass kicked by little Finland, of all countries. Or the major successes the Nazis had in Operation Barbarossa.

He was quite the resounding failure of a statesman in several regards.
Last edited by Sanctissima on Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
The Parkus Empire
Post Czar
 
Posts: 34389
Founded: Sep 12, 2005
Left-Leaning College State

Postby The Parkus Empire » Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:32 pm

Sanctissima wrote:
United Muscovite Nations wrote:I tend to agree that only moral arguments are really good against Stalin. If I were still an atheist, I have to imagine I'd still be a Marxist-Leninist. Stalin's measures were extreme, but he accomplished probably the most that any socialist revolutionary ever accomplished, in terms of having created an entire bloc of states in opposition to bourgeois capitalism and liberal democracy. He was also an extremely capable statesman, and, had his foreign policy approach remained, it's hard to imagine that the Soviets would have lost the Cold War.


To be honest, even if we view him purely as a statesman with no moral strings attached, he had a pretty mixed record.

Especially in his early years after seizing power, he more or less starved 10 million people to death before he figured out how agriculture works.

Let alone his hamstringing of the military that ultimately led to the Red Army getting its ass kicked by little Finland, of all countries. Or the major successes the Nazis had in Operation Barbarossa.

He was quite the resounding failure of a statesman in several regards.

Killing off exceptional officers can be pragmatic. Look at all Rome went through. And the French Revolution might have been preserved if Napoleon were murdered.
Last edited by The Parkus Empire on Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54432
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Genivaria » Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:33 pm

Sanctissima wrote:
United Muscovite Nations wrote:I tend to agree that only moral arguments are really good against Stalin. If I were still an atheist, I have to imagine I'd still be a Marxist-Leninist. Stalin's measures were extreme, but he accomplished probably the most that any socialist revolutionary ever accomplished, in terms of having created an entire bloc of states in opposition to bourgeois capitalism and liberal democracy. He was also an extremely capable statesman, and, had his foreign policy approach remained, it's hard to imagine that the Soviets would have lost the Cold War.


To be honest, even if we view him purely as a statesman with no moral strings attached, he had a pretty mixed record.

Especially in his early years after seizing power, he more or less starved 10 million people to death before he figured out how agriculture works.

Let alone his hamstringing of the military that ultimately led to the Red Army getting its ass kicked by little Finland, of all countries. Or the major successes the Nazis had in Operation Barbarossa.

He was quite the resounding failure of a statesman in several regards.

The Bolsheviks as a whole doomed Russia, the October Revolution was a tragedy and was a betrayal against all of Russia.
Some days I support Liberal Social Democracy, other days I support De-centralized Syndicalist Direct Democracy.

Favorite RvB quote.
Director: Dear Chairman,

I don't give a damn about your committee and its opinions of my work! Have you forgotten sir, we were at war? A fight with an alien race for the very survival of our species. I feel I must remind you that it is an undeniable, and may I say a fundamental quality of man, that when faced with extinction, every alternative is preferable.

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54432
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Genivaria » Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:35 pm

United Muscovite Nations wrote:
The Parkus Empire wrote:The only serious argument against Stalin is petty beourgeois morality, as Althusser showed.

I tend to agree that only moral arguments are really good against Stalin. If I were still an atheist, I have to imagine I'd still be a Marxist-Leninist. Stalin's measures were extreme, but he accomplished probably the most that any socialist revolutionary ever accomplished, in terms of having created an entire bloc of states in opposition to bourgeois capitalism and liberal democracy. He was also an extremely capable statesman, and, had his foreign policy approach remained, it's hard to imagine that the Soviets would have lost the Cold War.

Being a Christian doesn't stop many Russians from lauding Stalin, and being atheist doesn't prevent many from condemning him as not just as a mass-murdering psychopath who practically helped the Germans invade his country after wrecking it.
Some days I support Liberal Social Democracy, other days I support De-centralized Syndicalist Direct Democracy.

Favorite RvB quote.
Director: Dear Chairman,

I don't give a damn about your committee and its opinions of my work! Have you forgotten sir, we were at war? A fight with an alien race for the very survival of our species. I feel I must remind you that it is an undeniable, and may I say a fundamental quality of man, that when faced with extinction, every alternative is preferable.

PreviousNext

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alvecia, Aureumterra, Bakery Hill, Cedoria, Cybus1, Fartsniffage, Hayo, Ifreann, Italios, Kenmoria, Kubumba Tribe, Paddy O Fernature, Pimps Inc, Proctopeo, Republic of the Cristo, Saiwania, Struberria, Telconi, The Greater Ohio Valley, The Grene Knyght, The Liberated Territories, The Parkus Empire, Torrocca

Remove ads