Left Wing Discussion Thread IV: Oh Hai Marx

[Reutoa]

Im going to assume you (just like many others) can't see a joke when it's Infront of you?

Mmkay, sure.

The President is not a bad leader, he hasn't gotten us blown up yet has he?

I would hope people would be able to tell when someone is joking, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt cause we're on the Internet and it's hard to understand what people mean sometimes.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

Marxism is just a way of analyzing history and Capitalism. Socialism is when workers control the means of production, there is a planned economy, and people are paid according to their contribution. Under Communism, the law of value is abolished. That means that the contradiction between use value and exchange value is gone. People contribute when the can, and take what they need/want from the public stock. Communism depends on the elimination of scarcity, which would make currency irrelevant.

Marx and Engels used communism and socialism more-or-less interchangeably. The distinction was only later made by Lenin.

[Jelmatt]

Economics are a social study

Economics is just mathematics under sufficient layers of abstraction and metaphors about charts.
Besides, you don't need to understand economics to not be poor

Empiricism is philosophically invalid because it is dependent upon circular reasoning.

However, many humanities, like history, archeology, sociology, etc., are empirical to some degree.

Fair enough I suppose.

I'm a STEM major and I'm doing it because I really like the subject. Though I did choose it over linguistics because I'd earn more money, I like them equally.

Linguistics is a science.

I mean, yeah, but it's a social science which is closely tied to sociology, anthropology, and psychology. There's a bit of physics and anatomy in phonetics, but otherwise it's purely a social science. Although many organizations include social sciences in STEM, I don't think most who'd say "STEM is superior to humanities" would. You're a rare breed if you do.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

The President is not a bad leader, he hasn't gotten us blown up yet has he?

Not sure if that was meant in humor. However, if you are serious, that is just about the lowest bar imaginable.

[Reutoa]

The President is not a bad leader, he hasn't gotten us blown up yet has he?

Not sure if that was meant in humor. However, if you are serious, that is just about the lowest bar imaginable.

Already explained to Cekoviu that this was a joke.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

Already explained to Cekoviu that this was a joke.

Okay. Hard to tell without emojis.

[Reutoa]

Already explained to Cekoviu that this was a joke.

Okay. Hard to tell without emojis.

Sorry, I really don't like the emojis. So I just don't use them.

[Bloemensen]

Mmkay, sure.

The President is not a bad leader, he hasn't gotten us blown up yet has he?

I would hope people would be able to tell when someone is joking, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt cause we're on the Internet and it's hard to understand what people mean sometimes.

I mean, it's pretty misleading when your sig says that you support trump, and yet you are also ironically joking that trump is "not a bad president".

[Reutoa]

The President is not a bad leader, he hasn't gotten us blown up yet has he?

I would hope people would be able to tell when someone is joking, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt cause we're on the Internet and it's hard to understand what people mean sometimes.

I mean, it's pretty misleading when your sig says that you support trump, and yet you are also ironically joking that trump is "not a bad president".

I would hope my political beliefs wouldn't interfere on me telling a Joke.

[Cekoviu]

Mmkay, sure.

The President is not a bad leader, he hasn't gotten us blown up yet has he?

I would hope people would be able to tell when someone is joking, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt cause we're on the Internet and it's hard to understand what people mean sometimes.

I'm skeptical given that you responded in defense of your statement before saying this, but whatever.

[Reutoa]

The President is not a bad leader, he hasn't gotten us blown up yet has he?

I would hope people would be able to tell when someone is joking, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt cause we're on the Internet and it's hard to understand what people mean sometimes.

I'm skeptical given that you responded in defense of your statement before saying this, but whatever.

I responded cause of how you replied back. Anyway I'm sorry if I sounded rude, I didn't intend for it to sound that way.

[Trotskylvania]

TIL that gravity is an academic construct.

Our proof for it is based on our observations, so we assume that our observations are correct. Our proof for its universality is based on the assumption that the universe is homogeneous and isotropic. The laws of physics aren't constructs, but their proofs aren't absolute, and are based on circular reasoning.

Before anyone gets their hackles up, UMN here is just invoking the Munchausen trilemma, an enduring unsolved problem in epistemology (how we know what we know). All knowledge ultimately depends on three equally undesirable options: circular reasoning, where proof and theory support each other; infinite regression, where we have each proof requiring further proof ad infinitum; or axiomatic arguments, knowledge accepted without proof.

[MERIZoC]

Nah. Only retarded nutjobs that I'm sure exist in humanities academia will argue that there are more than two sexes and even so won't be able to base their argument on more than social """sciences""".
Everyone else in academia (especially in the actual science ones) is able to grasp that humans (and most other livings creatures apart from plants) indeed have two sexes and two sexes only; which isn't that surprising since that's what their reproductive system are built upon.
Now, some species are indeed able to "shift" from one sex to another and mutations and other genetic errors do cause fuck-ups like hermaphrodites even among humans but they all exist within the binary of Sex.

Don't attack the humanities, they're superior to STEM in every way.

“Ah but have you considered that I may or may not make more money than you in a field that is increasingly over saturated and will easily be replaced by computers in the next 20 years? Checkmate, people who read”

It is very fun to think about how computer engineers are designing their own unemployment

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Nah. Only retarded nutjobs that I'm sure exist in humanities academia will argue that there are more than two sexes and even so won't be able to base their argument on more than social """sciences""".
Everyone else in academia (especially in the actual science ones) is able to grasp that humans (and most other livings creatures apart from plants) indeed have two sexes and two sexes only; which isn't that surprising since that's what their reproductive system are built upon.
Now, some species are indeed able to "shift" from one sex to another and mutations and other genetic errors do cause fuck-ups like hermaphrodites even among humans but they all exist within the binary of Sex.

Don't attack the humanities, they're superior to STEM in every way.

Have you ever typed anything that I haven't vehemently disagreed with?

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Don't attack the humanities, they're superior to STEM in every way.

“Ah but have you considered that I may or may not make more money than you in a field that is increasingly over saturated and will easily be replaced by computers in the next 20 years? Checkmate, people who read”

It is very fun to think about how computer engineers are designing their own unemployment

So STEM will be replaced by robots? I still don't see how that makes STEM worse than the humanities.

[Irona]

“Ah but have you considered that I may or may not make more money than you in a field that is increasingly over saturated and will easily be replaced by computers in the next 20 years? Checkmate, people who read”

It is very fun to think about how computer engineers are designing their own unemployment

So STEM will be replaced by robots? I still don't see how that makes STEM worse than the humanities.

low-mid level STEM jobs will probably go first, but really anything based on analysing patterns is in danger.

[Republican Corentia]

You implied he was not a bad leader because he hasn't gotten us blown up (yet). Once again, if you think not getting their citizens blown up is what makes a good leader, you're endorsing leaders throughout history. If you think he's a good president because he triggers liberals or doesn't like Muslims, or better yet, a combination of multiple factors that make him seem good to you, that's one thing. Setting the bar that low or implying that you do so is another.

Im going to assume you (just like many others) can't see a joke when it's Infront of you?

It's a shitty joke and no one likes shitty memers.

[Cuprum]

What does it matter if it was a foreigner or not? He was a man who inspired people internationally in his time and beyond, including a major contributor to world history in a way that will never be forgot.

As a nationalist, I think people should look to their own history for that sort of inspiration. Why not a statue of Nehru, India's first prime minister? He was a socialist, and a great man who loved his people.

Nehru was a disaster as a Prime Minister... He allowed the destruction of the Indian empire into two nations (India - Pakistan) and his pseudo socialist policies slowed India's economy. His daughter was more efficient (She got Sikkim as an Indian province).

Most of leftist ruled nations have ended mutilated, destroyed or evolved into new ones (URSS, Yugoslavia, The Indian Empire, China, Egypt, Venezuela, Syria, Libya, Sudan, etc) while capitalist ones were always expansionist or into imperialism (The USA and the former European empires which were destroyed by the U.S pressure to obtain the plan Marshall's money)

[Ostroeuropa]

Fox news manages to become more legitimate on gender issues than alternative outlets.
https://youtu.be/QfuOtGLfg04

This is excellent news, Tucker Carlson has said this will be a regular segment from now on, and that has profound effects on the overton window.
The US-MRM strategy of targeting the republican party seems to be paying off.

This also has effects on the left-right debate, and may give the republicans a base of issues to undermine democratic monopoly on demography issues.

It also provides another issue to drive republican turnout and triangulation, as most republicans believe men are disadvantaged in modern society, most democrats do not, but independents lean toward thinking they are as well (While also leaning toward believing women are disadvantaged.)

The broader consequences of the Democrats insisting on retaining their party line on these issues will be ceding more offices and victories to the republican party, and only for a short period of time. Eventually, institutions and funds will go to mens issues due to republican backing, and at that point corruption in politics will force the democrats to capitulate.

Further, it provides the republicans the opportunity to stuff those initial mens institutions with republican leaning officials, and some of those institutions will involve "Get out the vote" type activities. This will lead to a partisan lean on those institutions for a while, as their officials have the side-project of making the democrats look bad by searching for misandry in ways that align with their views.

The consequences of the left falling behind the public view on gender issues will be felt in future elections, as they were during the Trump election. With a razor thin margin, the feminist rhetoric of Clinton VS Trump at least acknowledging male disadvantage could have swung it. MRAs working with the republican party also caused some states senate republicans to repeal campus kangaroo courts in their state, and betsy davos has looked into the boys crisis in education.
(For the record, around the time of the election, MRM campaigners contacted Bernie, Trump, and Clinton about setting up a whitehouse council for men and boys. The first two agreed to look into it, clinton didn't. When clinton won the primary, a substantial section of the MRM swung hard into campaigning for Trump on this basis, and on the basis of accusations of Clinton being a domestic abuser, and her misandrist public statements, despite Bernie being the more popular choice prior to the primary loss.)

These kind of actions will secure the vote of those for who mens issues are a red line for the republicans, even though the republicans have largely botched some of their initiatives, because the alternative is Democrats and outright hostility.

Eventually, as time marches on, the democrats might have another 1948 convention, where they snatch this voting bloc by expelling the misandrists from their party structure and offering a large swathe of concessions and promises to the MRM voting bloc, much like they did with minorities. The sooner the better, as many MRM issues can only be fixed with government funds, which the left is a more natural ally for.

Fox news drifting into MRM leanings will mean republican politicians begin to take up the rhetoric and perhaps even some policies in order to appeal to their base vote. That also has profound effects on the overton window, and I suspect exposing the dishonest reaction feminist media will have to those politicians will likewise do damage to the democrats by making people sympathetic to the republicans and distrusting of democrat pundits.

Further, I fully expect, given the routine spinelessness and capitulations of the democrat politicians to the republicans on a wide range of issues, that when republican politicians take up the torch, the democrats will fall in line in terms of funding and votes, while still pushing feminist rhetoric on the campaign, much like they have on economics, gun control, etc.

So how about it. Does anyone here think Democrat politicians will stick to a feminist agenda when/if the republicans adopt an MRM one? Or will they capitulate while keeping the rhetoric?

Beyond that, these kind of policies and rhetoric will help the republicans retain the "Trump democrat" 2016 swing voter, as they appeal to that constituency and to the rust belt males and their families, allowing them to sidestep or dismiss criticism on lack of economic success for these voters by covering that up with demography issues and identity politics.

[Jackania yugo]

What do you think of the outcome of the recent Italian elections.

I think it might be the very thing that Italy need's. After reading this https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/ ... mmigration I found out they only want to get rid of the illegal immigrants which, I say they should. They shouldn't be coming over and dying in the process. They need to come over legally. It would be safer.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Don't attack the humanities, they're superior to STEM in every way.

“Ah but have you considered that I may or may not make more money than you in a field that is increasingly over saturated and will easily be replaced by computers in the next 20 years? Checkmate, people who read”

It is very fun to think about how computer engineers are designing their own unemployment

Pretty much. Engineers are the worst about overestimating their income though. If you want to make 90K out of college, get a Ph.D in Entomology or Plant Pathology.

[Aillyria]

As a nationalist, I think people should look to their own history for that sort of inspiration. Why not a statue of Nehru, India's first prime minister? He was a socialist, and a great man who loved his people.

Nehru was a disaster as a Prime Minister... He allowed the destruction of the Indian empire into two nations (India - Pakistan) and his pseudo socialist policies slowed India's economy. His daughter was more efficient (She got Sikkim as an Indian province).

Most of leftist ruled nations have ended mutilated, destroyed or evolved into new ones (URSS, Yugoslavia, The Indian Empire, China, Egypt, Venezuela, Syria, Libya, Sudan, etc) while capitalist ones were always expansionist or into imperialism (The USA and the former European empires which were destroyed by the U.S pressure to obtain the plan Marshall's money)

The Partition of India was underway years before the actual creation of the Dominions of India and Pakistan, it was a near certainty by the WW2 era, tbh. That wasn't Nehru's fault.

[Cekoviu]

What do you think of the outcome of the recent Italian elections.

I think it might be the very thing that Italy need's. After reading this https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/ ... mmigration I found out they only want to get rid of the illegal immigrants which, I say they should. They shouldn't be coming over and dying in the process. They need to come over legally. It would be safer.

It scares me that M5S performed as well as it did. Also, that senator is pretty clearly their token black guy, and definitely doesn't mean Lega Nord likes immigration and doesn't have a racism problem.

[Cekoviu]

“Ah but have you considered that I may or may not make more money than you in a field that is increasingly over saturated and will easily be replaced by computers in the next 20 years? Checkmate, people who read”

It is very fun to think about how computer engineers are designing their own unemployment

Pretty much. Engineers are the worst about overestimating their income though. If you want to make 90K out of college, get a Ph.D in Entomology or Plant Pathology.

Really? I didn't realize entomology performed that well.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Pretty much. Engineers are the worst about overestimating their income though. If you want to make 90K out of college, get a Ph.D in Entomology or Plant Pathology.

Really? I didn't realize entomology performed that well.

It's very lucrative right now because there's both a shortage of entomologists and it's very critical to agriculture.