Was the New Left a Mistake?

[The New California Republic]

My view only seems insane to you because of bias. I have Bias, so does everyone that commented.

Where did I say that your view seems "insane"? Seriously man, stop trying to strawman me.

An Left-Libertarian like you ...

Oh ho ho. Swing and a miss.

An Left-Libertarian like you thinks that those like me are evil(and is also the anti-christ).

Why would I call you the anti-Christ when I'm an atheist?

[Soviet-American Combine]

My view only seems insane to you because of bias. I have Bias, so does everyone that commented.

You defend subjectivism instead of studying materialism.

[Communal concils]

My view only seems insane to you because of bias. I have Bias, so does everyone that commented.

You defend subjectivism instead of studying materialism.

I'm okay with Revisionism. Why should the "Science" of Marxism be so static. I believe that Dialectical Materialism is incorrect. Instead of waiting for stages, one must force their way to socialism( with human will).

[Soviet Computocracy]

I'm okay with Revisionism. Why should the "Science" of Marxism be so static. I believe that Dialectical Materialism is incorrect. Instead of waiting for stages, one must force their way to socialism( with human will).

Social forms are dependent upon material conditions. You can't "force your way" to material conditions, you have to establish them.

[Communal concils]

This argument is used against those that are against various things.

Oh dear, watch out for moving goalposts, everybody!

Apparently to have a focus on something means to exactly be this thing.

No, I did not say that. It is the tone, the choice of words, and the incessant onesidedness that turns the focus into an obsession. Focus is fine. But then focus is usually nuanced. Your contention is that sex in the western world is rife with all manner of evil. It should be noted that rape is found all over the world. Sometimes it is "justified" by religion, sometimes by proliferent war, sometimes by alcohol, sometimes by totalitarianism (included communism). But it has never been "justified" by consenting adults. Personally, I applaud the western culture for its emphasis on consent. And I rather take exception to your wanton disregard for that achievement.

So to call a racist a bigot is bigotry, to call anybody against crimes a true criminal.

No on both counts. When you move goalposts, you might want to do it yourself. Strawmen can't carry that far...

Aren't we all obsessive with something. Why is it bad to focus on something you reject.

I refer you to the earlier parts of my reply. Focus is fine, obsession is not. Your onesidedness and lack of nuance speaks of obsession. And no: we are not all obsessed about one thing or another. Most of us are focused, few are obsessed. You are projecting again.

I guest you should tolerate anybody against homosexuality, because you are focusing on them. You are some how obsessive over them.

Where in this entire thread have I focused on being gay? That goalpost just sped over the horizon while still accelerating. I don't obsess about being gay. It's just part of life.
Why are you so obsessed about reducing sex to procreation only? Are you aware that apes and giraffes - to name just two species - have sex for non-procreational reasons? Why would you want to impose on humanity an unnatural concept? A man is not a machine. A woman is not a machine. A child is not a project.

1.I'm not actually obsesses with the issue.However, NCR wants to talk about it. He talks mentions it every time I criticize Left-Libertarianism. Rape is a universal problem, and I'm aware of it. However, i think western society fails at limiting assaults. Consent is just the start of trying to end the situation.

2. Obsession comes from focusing on something. Isn't a monk obsessive about God.? isn't a politician obsessive of keeping power, and isn't a dedicated married couple obsessed with retaining their marriage. I believe that it's linked to obsession, that focusing extremely on one thing does lead to that.

3. That wasn't the point of that sentence. It's purpose was to show that the argument of rejecting something means that you do it. " If you reject this behavior, you must be doing it yourself" seems to make little sense. As for why I believe this, I think that people misuse their existence. I believe that a large amount of people are flawed , and they must be corrected and fixed. I'm tired of the excuse of sexual liberation, but what's the liberation of being another's tool. You may enjoy it, but it hurts you. People accept their own abuse, they accept their own deaths, and they accept their own behaviors. To limit libertine behavior is like how someone views usually views food consumption. People eat abnormal things all the time( like plastic), shouldn't they be teach not to do it. I couldn't care if the suppose system is unnatural to nature anymore, as I embrace anthropomorphism

[Communal concils]

I'm okay with Revisionism. Why should the "Science" of Marxism be so static. I believe that Dialectical Materialism is incorrect. Instead of waiting for stages, one must force their way to socialism( with human will).

Social forms are dependent upon material conditions. You can't "force your way" to material conditions, you have to establish them.

Revolution can establish conditions.Doesn't a undeveloped nation need to force it's way to industrialize( I know the Chinese and Soviets did that).
Revolution happens due to the social conditions, but it's the will of citizens to actually do it, they have a limited free will.

[Communal concils]

My view only seems insane to you because of bias. I have Bias, so does everyone that commented.

Where did I say that your view seems "insane"? Seriously man, stop trying to strawman me.

An Left-Libertarian like you ...

Oh ho ho. Swing and a miss.

An Left-Libertarian like you thinks that those like me are evil(and is also the anti-christ).

Why would I call you the anti-Christ when I'm an atheist?

1.I didn't strawmen, you actually think that.

2.Anti-christ not in a religious sense, But as a metaphor to describe something that seeks to destroy.

[Bombadil]

The old left, if such a thing exists, was a reaction to the gradual breaking down of landed gentry and the rise of the middle class that led to a clash of ideologies; hard right, hard left and centrist democracy. This was mostly resolved by WW2 albeit with the Soviet Union holding out.

In that sense the original left, as a reaction to established landed gentry in most countries, was focused on unions, workers rights and equality of representation.

The left within a democracy surely has different if not extended aims, where equality is extended through further and further minority interests to establish equal representation and rights for all.

So I don't really think there's a defined line, the context has changed and evolved.

[Communal concils]

The old left, if such a thing exists, was a reaction to the gradual breaking down of landed gentry and the rise of the middle class that led to a clash of ideologies; hard right, hard left and centrist democracy. This was mostly resolved by WW2 albeit with the Soviet Union holding out.

In that sense the original left, as a reaction to established landed gentry in most countries, was focused on unions, workers rights and equality of representation.

The left within a democracy surely has different if not extended aims, where equality is extended through further and further minority interests to establish equal representation and rights for all.

So I don't really think there's a defined line, the context has changed and evolved.

Interesting.

[Soviet-American Combine]

Revolution can establish conditions.Doesn't a undeveloped nation need to force it's way to industrialize( I know the Chinese and Soviets did that).
Revolution happens due to the social conditions, but it's the will of citizens to actually do it, they have a limited free will.

Revolutions can establish how we relate to material conditions, actual conditions are material. "Forcing your way to industrialize" is Mao's bungle with people smelting pig iron in their backyards and the informational inefficiencies in the USSRs plans. Industrialization is logistical. You acquire materials and organize the production of machine tools. What does force and will have to do with anything? Getting up in the morning to work the shift?

[LiberNovusAmericae]

It doesn't take a genius to state that Jim Crow was wrong. That's hardly an accomplishment. I care about the important stuff, like the fact that he was a mass murderer.

So was abaraham Lincoln.

Lincoln didn't operate gulag slave labor camps, while Lenin did. Who they targeted were also different.

[Communal concils]

Revolution can establish conditions.Doesn't a undeveloped nation need to force it's way to industrialize( I know the Chinese and Soviets did that).
Revolution happens due to the social conditions, but it's the will of citizens to actually do it, they have a limited free will.

Revolutions can establish how we relate to material conditions, actual conditions are material. "Forcing your way to industrialize" is Mao's bungle with people smelting pig iron in their backyards and the informational inefficiencies in the USSRs plans. Industrialization is logistical. You acquire materials and organize the production of machine tools. What does force and will have to do with anything? Getting up in the morning to work the shift?

Force is simply how societies change.That's how laws are maintained. A revolution needs to force it's way into society, destroying the old order. Most Marxist states required the will of citizens to force change. Why has Marxism not establish it's self in the west? I think that despite social conditions the citizens weren't filled with the mindset. The conditions are there, but phases haven't happen.

I don't totally think that revolution is base completely on free will, but there is not a single way to socialism.

[Yusseria]

Lenin was a scumbag.

Yes but he was still correct

No, he wasn't.

[Neanderthaland]

There are no mistakes. Only happy accidents.

[Confederate Ameriwyr Leagues]

A mistake for people who were old/economic leftists? Yes.

A mistake for the New Leftists and their capitalist benefactors? Nope, it went exactly as planned.

[Duhon]

Lenin was a scumbag.

Yes but he was still correct

To the tune of millions of corpses, a destroyed country, and an enduring tradition of authoritarianism without end.

[Kubra]

what is the "bourgeois lifestyle"

[Kubra]

Yes but he was still correct

To the tune of millions of corpses, a destroyed country, and an enduring tradition of authoritarianism without end.

Well lenin can hardly be blamed for eastern european authoritarianism

[Neanderthaland]

Yes but he was still correct

To the tune of millions of corpses, a destroyed country, and an enduring tradition of authoritarianism without end.

To be fair, that's par for the course for Russia.

[NeoOasis]

what is the "bourgeois lifestyle"

It's a lot like the American Dream, but with more oppression of the working class.

[Soviet-American Combine]

To the tune of millions of corpses, a destroyed country, and an enduring tradition of authoritarianism without end.

It’s not his fault the whites invaded. And w/e I don’t defend the Soviet legacy unqualified.

[Nolo gap]

i am tempted to say the only mistake, is the hatred of logic, consideration, imagination and honesty.

the hatred of logic kept europe ignorant and impoverished for more then a thousand years.
the middle ages never HAD to happen. lets not return to them, for ANY ideology.

(nor any powerfully placed person's narcissism either)

i am unaware of any 'left', 'new' or otherwise, demonstrating this hatred,
while much which identifies itself as so called 'right', doing so commonly and with great abandon.

[Page]

I favor a synthesis of old and new, I believe we ought to include intersectionality (pay attention NSG, that is the correct term, there is no such thing as 'intersectionalism', it's a framework, not an ideology if I see 'intersectionalism' one more time my eyes are going to roll hard enough to break my fucking skull) as an important piece of a broader theory rooted in class warfare.

I view white supremacy, misogyny, homophobia, and transphobia as weapons of the ruling class to maintain their power. The class war is the essence of the struggle but the aforementioned forms of bigotry have to be dismantled because they keep us divided.

[Liriena]

No, it wasn't. As an LGBT+ person, I owe a whole damn lot to that New Left and I'm proud of what they accomplished.

[Liriena]

There are no mistakes. Only happy accidents.

The best take