Left Wing Discussion Thread IV: Oh Hai Marx

[Liriena]

So...why is the EU allowing all these third world immigrants and should they be stopped?

1. My main two hypothesis are a sense of humanitarian obligation and a need for new young workers as native European population ages.
2. No.

[Liriena]

so...most youtube "skeptics" are classic liberals.

What are those?

Is it a bad thing?

I mean, if you ask a socialist they are certainly going to tell you that liberalism in general is bad because it's kind of the root of all modern problems. That being said, my beef with the "classical liberals" of today is that their "classical liberalism" is often kind of what was described in Voltaire's bastards, or just reactionary politics with an Enlightenment thought sticker slapped on.

[Pilarcraft]

So...why is the EU allowing all these third world immigrants and should they be stopped?

1. My main two hypothesis are a sense of humanitarian obligation and a need for new young workers as native European population ages.
2. No.

My main problem with the "All these foreign immigrants are genociding the whites" is that... the birth/death ratio in many countries in Europe is subzero. Whites dying out has nothing to do with the number of Immigrants. if anything, immigrants are here because the whites aren't breeding enough. like, what.

[Proctopeo]

so...most youtube "skeptics" are classic liberals.

What are those?

Is it a bad thing?

I mean, if you ask a socialist they are certainly going to tell you that liberalism in general is bad because it's kind of the root of all modern problems. That being said, my beef with the "classical liberals" of today is that their "classical liberalism" is often kind of what was described in Voltaire's bastards, or just reactionary politics with an Enlightenment thought sticker slapped on.

That's one hell of a hot take.

[Liriena]

I mean, if you ask a socialist they are certainly going to tell you that liberalism in general is bad because it's kind of the root of all modern problems. That being said, my beef with the "classical liberals" of today is that their "classical liberalism" is often kind of what was described in Voltaire's bastards, or just reactionary politics with an Enlightenment thought sticker slapped on.

That's one hell of a hot take.

Like the surface of the sun, yo.

[Proctopeo]

That's one hell of a hot take.

Like the surface of the sun, yo.

What's the next flamin' hot take from this guy? It's gotta be incredible.

[Liriena]

Like the surface of the sun, yo.

What's the next flamin' hot take from this guy? It's gotta be incredible.

Rogue One was a bad film with good fanservice.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

so...most youtube "skeptics" are classic liberals.

What are those?

Is it a bad thing?

I mean, if you ask a socialist they are certainly going to tell you that liberalism in general is bad because it's kind of the root of all modern problems. That being said, my beef with the "classical liberals" of today is that their "classical liberalism" is often kind of what was described in Voltaire's bastards, or just reactionary politics with an Enlightenment thought sticker slapped on.

Like I said Yugo.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

What does reactionary mean?

"reactionary
/rɪˈakʃ(ə)n(ə)ri/
adjective
1.
opposing political or social progress or reform."

Why are you arguing about whether or not this guy is a reactionary of you don't know what the term means?

When I hear reactionary, I hear "far-right," not "opposing progress or reform." "Reactionary" is a very charged word, but your definition could mean anything.

[Jelmatt]

I mean, if you ask a socialist they are certainly going to tell you that liberalism in general is bad because it's kind of the root of all modern problems. That being said, my beef with the "classical liberals" of today is that their "classical liberalism" is often kind of what was described in Voltaire's bastards, or just reactionary politics with an Enlightenment thought sticker slapped on.

That's one hell of a hot take.

Maybe not quite as extreme as what he was saying, but I do think many classical liberals forget about (or ignore) a lot of the diversity of the historical classical liberal tradition, and tend to focus mainly on the policies recommended by historical liberals instead of their reasons for those policies and values.

[Reikoku]

Can't help you there. Not a Marxist.

Jean-Paul Sartre adopted Marxism in the last part of his career. He argued that his existentialism, and his notion of an existential crisis, was fulfilled by revolutionary Marxism. For Sartre, Marxism gave him a life purpose. However, existential Marxism did not survive for long after Sartre's death.

Although I am not personally an existentialist, I think that there is much in Sartre's Marxist turn which some original thinker could draw upon and revise.

Honestly I have no idea who you're talking to at this point, because it's certainly not me.

He argued that his existentialism, and his notion of an existential crisis, was fulfilled by revolutionary Marxism.

His. Existentialism has the beauty that it's different for each person. Existence before essence.

[Victoriala II]

I mean, if you ask a socialist they are certainly going to tell you that liberalism in general is bad because it's kind of the root of all modern problems. That being said, my beef with the "classical liberals" of today is that their "classical liberalism" is often kind of what was described in Voltaire's bastards, or just reactionary politics with an Enlightenment thought sticker slapped on.

That's one hell of a hot take.

I mean I see where they come from but imo its more that society has developed so far they look almost conservative in comparison. The enlightenment was absolutely #woke for its time.

[The Multiversal Communist Collective]

What does reactionary mean?

In modern U.S. parlance, Make America Great Again (MAGA).

[The Multiversal Communist Collective]

Honestly I have no idea who you're talking to at this point, because it's certainly not me.

Existentialism is not my thing either. However, I have studied it. There is a minor branch of my field called existential sociology. The basic idea is that life has no inherent meaning, so we need to create meaning intentionally.

Existentialism has the beauty that it's different for each person. Existence before essence.

Yes, to Sartre, who we are in essence is a product of our individual existence.

[Reikoku]

Honestly I have no idea who you're talking to at this point, because it's certainly not me.

Existentialism is not my thing either. However, I have studied it. There is a minor branch of my field called existential sociology. The basic idea is that life has no inherent meaning, so we need to create meaning intentionally.

It's not about whether or not it's my philosophy, but the fact it has absolutely nothing to do with my post.

[The Grene Knyght]

"reactionary
/rɪˈakʃ(ə)n(ə)ri/
adjective
1.
opposing political or social progress or reform."

Why are you arguing about whether or not this guy is a reactionary of you don't know what the term means?

When I hear reactionary, I hear "far-right," not "opposing progress or reform." "Reactionary" is a very charged word, but your definition could mean anything.

Fair. I just copy/pasted the definition from google, which admittedly was lazy. But then, if someone isn't going to effort to look up the meaning of a term that they don't know before they start arguing about it, I'm not gonna make the effort to construct a nuanced definition for them after the fact.

[Reikoku]

That's one hell of a hot take.

I mean I see where they come from but imo its more that society has developed so far they look almost conservative in comparison. The enlightenment was absolutely #woke for its time.

It had it's positive qualities, but I much prefer romanticism and the counter-enlightenment in general. De Maistre, in spite of the awfulness of his own worldview, makes some pretty good points against it.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

It's not about whether or not it's my philosophy, but the fact it has absolutely nothing to do with my post.

Sorry, I thought you were asking about existentialism.

[Reikoku]

so...most youtube "skeptics" are classic liberals.

What are those?

Is it a bad thing?

I mean, if you ask a socialist they are certainly going to tell you that liberalism in general is bad because it's kind of the root of all modern problems. That being said, my beef with the "classical liberals" of today is that their "classical liberalism" is often kind of what was described in Voltaire's bastards, or just reactionary politics with an Enlightenment thought sticker slapped on.

Well, if socialism becomes the dominant ideology, it'll be the root of all modern problems.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Honestly I have no idea who you're talking to at this point, because it's certainly not me.

Existentialism is not my thing either. However, I have studied it. There is a minor branch of my field called existential sociology. The basic idea is that life has no inherent meaning, so we need to create meaning intentionally.

Existentialism has the beauty that it's different for each person. Existence before essence.

Yes, to Sartre, who we are in essence is a product of our individual existence.

So we're a product of our existence? No shit tbh.

[New Emeline]

I mean, if you ask a socialist they are certainly going to tell you that liberalism in general is bad because it's kind of the root of all modern problems. That being said, my beef with the "classical liberals" of today is that their "classical liberalism" is often kind of what was described in Voltaire's bastards, or just reactionary politics with an Enlightenment thought sticker slapped on.

Well, if socialism becomes the dominant ideology, it'll be the root of all modern problems.

Fair enough.

[The Multiversal Communist Collective]

So we're a product of our existence? No shit tbh.

Well, that is where Sartre's philosophy begins, not where it ends. He rejects moral realism and concludes that each of us is alone to construct our own moralities.

[Liriena]

I mean, if you ask a socialist they are certainly going to tell you that liberalism in general is bad because it's kind of the root of all modern problems. That being said, my beef with the "classical liberals" of today is that their "classical liberalism" is often kind of what was described in Voltaire's bastards, or just reactionary politics with an Enlightenment thought sticker slapped on.

Well, if socialism becomes the dominant ideology, it'll be the root of all modern problems.

Yes.

[Aillyria]

So...why is the EU allowing all these third world immigrants and should they be stopped?

1.) The EU elites want to destroy the separate cultures of the member states by flooding them with culturally alien immigrants so they can create a "European identity". Plus, they want the votes.
2.) Immigration should be stopped ASAP, and the Europeans should incentivize native population growth.

[Reikoku]

So...why is the EU allowing all these third world immigrants and should they be stopped?

1.) The EU elites want to destroy the separate cultures of the member states by flooding them with culturally alien immigrants so they can create a "European identity". Plus, they want the votes.
2.) Immigration should be stopped ASAP, and the Europeans should incentivize native population growth.

The "elites" want to create a monolithic European identity by... importing people from various different cultural regions in the Middle East.

I'm not a fan of the Europe's immigration policy, but please be realistic. This comes across like Elders of Zion conspiracy theories.