Can a Socialist be Social Conservative ?

[Czechoslovakia and Zakarpattia]

bernie is kinda anti-immigration, so yeah, you can.

Bernie Is Not A Socialist

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This. The only reason why anyone calls Bernie Sanders a "socialist" is due to decades of systematic bipartisan brainwashing by McCarthyite wingnuttery teaching Americans to obediently reject and persecute any movement even remotely further left (AKA social democracy) than the Democratic Party (Which is centre-right economically ever since Clinton's neoliberalism became the norm in the 90s), even if it would be considered centre-left in Nordic and European countries. Bernie Sanders is a capitalist social democrat who endorses the Nordic Model. Nothing more, nothing less. And anyone who seriously thinks he is a "socialist vanguard" is deluding himself.

[Czechoslovakia and Zakarpattia]

"Realities". You simply don't know the complexity of such a historical event. Cambodia was a monarchy supported by the United States. The monarchy allowed the America to bomb the Ho chi Minh trail, which also served as an area to spread Marxism-Leninism( Vietminh and eventually the Vietcong used other countries as a trail for their supplies). The Bombing campaign bomb the countryside, killing people. This increased ant-American views in Cambodia, and this encourage many people to join the Kampuchean Communist Party. Refugees flooded the cities, and starvation started to happen. Po pot, simply offered the Peasantry to end the suffering. It is important to know that Pol Pot continued the progorms of the Military Junta.

My reason for supposing this views is because there was hatred for the rich in Cambodia, How isn't the poor of the country side not jealously of the laziness of the middle and upper class. Phom Penh was a cultural center, and had more privilege than the rural areas. So at first, there was a will for the people to kill them brutally.

Calling yourself complex every 5 minutes and in an attempt to mask the fact you're trying to downplay one of the most evil and wretched regimes in world history doesnt make you complex or mean you're not downplaying one of the most evil and wretched regimes in world history.

Which was, ironically (At least for CC) funded by none other than the Central Intelligence Agency and Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge was later helped by the Conservative British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, to wage an armed insurgency against the pro-Vietnam Cambodian government. Jesus fucking christ, not only is CC unironically justifying a primitivist dystopia that starved its entire country and stunted their progress for several decades, but is also forgetting who filled its coffers (The same western capitalists he so hates).

[Dumb Ideologies]

You're on a interesting path there DI

DI's on a path to embody their nation's name.

Your feedback is important to us.

[distant shredder sounds]

[Soviet Tankistan]

bernie is kinda anti-immigration, so yeah, you can.

Bernie Is Not A Socialist

Not only that, but being 'anti-immigration' isn't enough in its own to be a conservative.

[The New California Republic]

"Realities". You simply don't know the complexity of such a historical event. Cambodia was a monarchy supported by the United States. The monarchy allowed the America to bomb the Ho chi Minh trail, which also served as an area to spread Marxism-Leninism( Vietminh and eventually the Vietcong used other countries as a trail for their supplies). The Bombing campaign bomb the countryside, killing people. This increased ant-American views in Cambodia, and this encourage many people to join the Kampuchean Communist Party. Refugees flooded the cities, and starvation started to happen. Po pot, simply offered the Peasantry to end the suffering. It is important to know that Pol Pot continued the progorms of the Military Junta.

My reason for supposing this views is because there was hatred for the rich in Cambodia, How isn't the poor of the country side not jealously of the laziness of the middle and upper class. Phom Penh was a cultural center, and had more privilege than the rural areas. So at first, there was a will for the people to kill them brutally.

I never thought that I'd see non-ironic and non-trolling Khmer Rouge apologism on NSGeneral, but there it is. There it is, in all its ugliness.

[Diopolis]

So, we just gonna pretend that Stalin didn't exist?

Stalin was kinda inconsistent on social issues and doesn't prove any particular point about socialism, except maybe that socialists are theoretically capable of being pragmatic on select issues.

[Hammer Britannia]

I honestly Think that it's better for a group to run a society rather than a single leader. I want the leadership to be part of the masses, and I want the masses to be the nation.

So you somehow want the masses to suppress their own rights.

What the fuck kinda loopy-world contradictory logic are you using for this bullshit ideology of yours, exactly?

Obviously, the people liked being run over by tanks in China and having their voices suppressed.

Actually, I have heard tankies say that the Chinese actually dislike Freedom of Speech and would happily get arrested to stop dissenting opinions in some sort of loopy tankie logic. Yeah, they're that delusional.

"Realities". You simply don't know the complexity of such a historical event. Cambodia was a monarchy supported by the United States. The monarchy allowed the America to bomb the Ho chi Minh trail, which also served as an area to spread Marxism-Leninism( Vietminh and eventually the Vietcong used other countries as a trail for their supplies). The Bombing campaign bomb the countryside, killing people. This increased ant-American views in Cambodia, and this encourage many people to join the Kampuchean Communist Party. Refugees flooded the cities, and starvation started to happen. Po pot, simply offered the Peasantry to end the suffering. It is important to know that Pol Pot continued the progorms of the Military Junta.

My reason for supposing this views is because there was hatred for the rich in Cambodia, How isn't the poor of the country side not jealously of the laziness of the middle and upper class. Phom Penh was a cultural center, and had more privilege than the rural areas. So at first, there was a will for the people to kill them brutally.

I never thought that I'd see non-ironic and non-trolling Khmer Rouge apologism on NSGeneral, but there it is. There it is, in all its ugliness.

Welcome to NS Summer, we got fun and games.*
We got everything you want honey, we know the names
We are the people that can find whatever poster you may need
If you got the money, honey we got your disease**

*Mostly games, very disturbing and mind-numbing games
**Headaches are a disease, right?

[Diopolis]

Bernie Is Not A Socialist

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This. The only reason why anyone calls Bernie Sanders a "socialist" is due to decades of systematic bipartisan brainwashing by McCarthyite wingnuttery teaching Americans to obediently reject and persecute any movement even remotely further left (AKA social democracy) than the Democratic Party (Which is centre-right economically ever since Clinton's neoliberalism became the norm in the 90s), even if it would be considered centre-left in Nordic and European countries. Bernie Sanders is a capitalist social democrat who endorses the Nordic Model. Nothing more, nothing less. And anyone who seriously thinks he is a "socialist vanguard" is deluding himself.

In fairness, he does call himself a socialist, so can you blame people who don't know any better for thinking he is one?

[Anglomir]

"Can a Socialist be Social Conservative ?"

Yes. Take the origins of the Australian labour party, the disgruntled white men of the unions. I for one am more of a social conservative, which I am just discovering about myself, but a whole hearted far-leftist economically. It is easily possible - egalitarianism and wealth redistribution are not in any way contradicted by your views on abortion, etc. For this reason, I prefer to hear classifications of people's economic and social ideologies separately. It is a fallacy to assume that all socialists are SJWs, and begrudgingly, a fallacy to assume that all capitalists are conservatives.

[Torrocca]

So you somehow want the masses to suppress their own rights.

What the fuck kinda loopy-world contradictory logic are you using for this bullshit ideology of yours, exactly?

Obviously, the people liked being run over by tanks in China and having their voices suppressed.

Actually, I have heard tankies say that the Chinese actually dislike Freedom of Speech and would happily get arrested to stop dissenting opinions in some sort of loopy tankie logic. Yeah, they're that delusional.

Clearly the One True Path^TM to the Eternal Revolution^TM is to let the all-knowing members of The Party^TM suppress all of your rights and order military personnel to run your family and friends over with tanks.

[Ors Might]

Well obviously they can.

They’d just be lamer for it.

So you somehow want the masses to suppress their own rights.

What the fuck kinda loopy-world contradictory logic are you using for this bullshit ideology of yours, exactly?

It's called a Social Contract.

Which holds a lot of similarities to Original Sin, stockholm syndrome, and a hostage situation.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

"Can a Socialist be Social Conservative ?"

Yes. Take the origins of the Australian labour party, the disgruntled white men of the unions. I for one am more of a social conservative, which I am just discovering about myself, but a whole hearted far-leftist economically. It is easily possible - egalitarianism and wealth redistribution are not in any way contradicted by your views on abortion, etc. For this reason, I prefer to hear classifications of people's economic and social ideologies separately. It is a fallacy to assume that all socialists are SJWs, and begrudgingly, a fallacy to assume that all capitalists are conservatives.

Begrudgingly?

[Highever]

"Can a Socialist be Social Conservative ?"

Yes. Take the origins of the Australian labour party, the disgruntled white men of the unions. I for one am more of a social conservative, which I am just discovering about myself, but a whole hearted far-leftist economically. It is easily possible - egalitarianism and wealth redistribution are not in any way contradicted by your views on abortion, etc. For this reason, I prefer to hear classifications of people's economic and social ideologies separately. It is a fallacy to assume that all socialists are SJWs, and begrudgingly, a fallacy to assume that all capitalists are conservatives.

Begrudgingly?

Quite an odd statement considering socially liberal capitalists (like myself) are....hardly a rarity.

[The Emerald Legion]

Bernie Is Not A Socialist

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This. The only reason why anyone calls Bernie Sanders a "socialist" is due to decades of systematic bipartisan brainwashing by McCarthyite wingnuttery teaching Americans to obediently reject and persecute any movement even remotely further left (AKA social democracy) than the Democratic Party (Which is centre-right economically ever since Clinton's neoliberalism became the norm in the 90s), even if it would be considered centre-left in Nordic and European countries. Bernie Sanders is a capitalist social democrat who endorses the Nordic Model. Nothing more, nothing less. And anyone who seriously thinks he is a "socialist vanguard" is deluding himself.

Bernie Sanders is a socialist who is attempting to sell that to a hostile audience.

The fact that Europe is a socialist hellhole where such ideas are brainwashed into the people doesn't mean he's not a socialist.

[Hammer Britannia]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This. The only reason why anyone calls Bernie Sanders a "socialist" is due to decades of systematic bipartisan brainwashing by McCarthyite wingnuttery teaching Americans to obediently reject and persecute any movement even remotely further left (AKA social democracy) than the Democratic Party (Which is centre-right economically ever since Clinton's neoliberalism became the norm in the 90s), even if it would be considered centre-left in Nordic and European countries. Bernie Sanders is a capitalist social democrat who endorses the Nordic Model. Nothing more, nothing less. And anyone who seriously thinks he is a "socialist vanguard" is deluding himself.

Bernie Sanders is a socialist who is attempting to sell that to a hostile audience.

The fact that Europe is a socialist hellhole where such ideas are brainwashed into the people doesn't mean he's not a socialist.

Europe is not Socialist, Bernie is not Socialist

Bernie and Europe are both Social Democrats. They are not bloody socialists. The workers do not own the means of production, businesses do. Socialism is not any and all big government.

Europe (Especially the UK/Sweden/France) is a shithole, I can agree with that. But they are not socialist in any sense of the word.

[The New California Republic]

Europe (Especially the UK [...] ) is a shithole.

Hey!

---

[Hammer Britannia]

Europe (Especially the UK [...] ) is a shithole.

Hey!

---

It's OK, not like we're doing any better

[United Muscovite Nations]

I'll do you one better and be a socially conservative anarchist.

[Tobleste]

In western Society and after the collapse of the Old Leftism of the 1960's, there is a trend in Left-wing thought.

Intellectuals begin questioning the ideals of leftism in western society. There was the rejection of the Nuclear Family, the rejection of certain sexual views, and the ideal of a leftism "Free" from" the ideals of only focusing on issues related to class struggle. As a result, we have a left that is more liberal.

Has anybody found it weird that people said that you can't be a socialist if you:

1.are Pro-Life

2.Support controlled immigration and borders

3.reject prostitution

4.rejects the ideals of "Free" love or libertine ideals


5.Support Militarism

6.reject Non-medical use of drugs

7.value Police enforcement

8.believe in Distinctions between sexes

9.reject environmentalism

10.or some kind of Hierarchy

If you examine most socialist state or movements in history, they support many or all these things. for example, East Germany built the Berlin wall, many non-western socialist movements reject Homosexuality, and the Chinese Government since Mao would arrest people for bring Drugs like Opium. If you ignore the dogmatic people that call all these societies "Not Real Socialism", then there seems to be a contradiction for those that think leftism must reject all these things.

Now my second Question, Has any body been accuse of Social Conservativism, any leftist. I don't consider myself one, but I do share many opinions for a completely different reason. The Russian Communist Party and the Greek Party known as KKE, support many of these views. We also have a groups of western leftist that also support many of these things.

Now let's look at definitions of Leftism:
1. the portion of the political spectrum associated in general with egalitarianism and popular or state control of the major institutions of political and economic life. - Encyclopedia Britannica

2.supports social equality and egalitarianism, often in opposition to social hierarchy. It typically involves a concern for those in society whom its adherents perceive as disadvantaged relative to others as well as a belief that there are unjustified inequalities that need to be reduced or abolished (by advocating for social justice).

Definitely. Socialism can be a purely economic issue.

In practice though socialists (in the west) are normally critics of capitalism, young and supportive of serious changes meaning they're also usually socially liberal.

[Telconi]

Bernie Sanders is a socialist who is attempting to sell that to a hostile audience.

The fact that Europe is a socialist hellhole where such ideas are brainwashed into the people doesn't mean he's not a socialist.

Europe is not Socialist, Bernie is not Socialist

Bernie and Europe are both Social Democrats. They are not bloody socialists. The workers do not own the means of production, businesses do. Socialism is not any and all big government.

Europe (Especially the UK/Sweden/France) is a shithole, I can agree with that. But they are not socialist in any sense of the word.

Wasn't there just a thing about Bernie proposing that corporations disperse a certain amount of shares to their workforce?

[Zordennox]

I'll do you one better and be a socially conservative anarchist.

They're called National Anarchists or Anarcho-Fascists.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

I'll do you one better and be a socially conservative anarchist.

They're called National Anarchists or Anarcho-Fascists.

UMN is not an Anarcho-Fascist.

[Wallenburg]

They're called National Anarchists or Anarcho-Fascists.

UMN is not an Anarcho-Fascist.

Indeed, they are monarchist anarcho-primitivist. Which contradicts itself, but since when did that stop any conservative?

[Tupolite]

A socialist can be socially conservative, especially if that particular socialist supports class collaboration instead of class warfare. Socialism is a broad term with many different forms and theories. I disagree with Lenin that socialism leads to communism, because there is no one particular definition or form of socialism. Traditionalists and feudalists could be considered socialist in a way, but they would certainly be opposed to Marxian socialism and dialectical materialism.

I see no point in really having a Bourgeoisie collaborate with The Proletariat. They are lazy, and they tend to use wealth for decadence. Class Warfare can simply be use to create a new Hierarchy, and a new Proletariat that isn't base on poverty.

When one looks at class warfare from an internationalist Marxist lens, the idea is tired out. However, rejection of class warfare within a nation is not to say that nations cannot be consolidated into having their own type of class-character, per se. For instance, one must look at the United States, where even many of the poor, though still miserable, consume to excess and develop health problems from the low quality of the food, whereas in a place like Venezuela, even the upper-classes must suffer the pinch of the Chavistas' despicable Bolshevization policies. The solution to class warfare within a nation is class collaboration. However, this does not simply imply an alliance of a still-decadent bourgeoisie with a still-oppressed proletariat so much as it indicates the collaboration of a great many occupational classes whose productive functions, in being genuinely productive through labor and effort, as opposed to mere investment and profiteering, can all be seen as "proletarian" in a sense. Contrary to the Marxist paradigm which claims that any economic organization founded on private property is necessarily a work of theft of labor value and classifies the owners of the enterprise as "bourgeois," we can see the small businessman and the entrepreneur, who struggle and put their personal energies into their professions, as true producers and actually proletarian, just as the entire category of the so-called "petit-bourgeoisie" may very well be more proletarian than bourgeois. The fight against bourgeois entitlements does not necessarily rest in opposing the pillar upon which the bourgeoisie rests as a class physically, but to use the corporate state to level the field between employer and laborer and circumscribe all economic activity on the part of both to genuinely productive and therefore, broadly speaking, proletarian, functions.

But to answer the question, yes, a socialist can theoretically be a social conservative, but the way the term has been used has been to totally devalue it for the sake of social conservatives who actually are some type of socialist. So therefore, some other term must be used, the best one perhaps being "fascist." I do not identify as a socialist for that reason in spite of my veneration of the original French national-syndicalists, who did use the word "socialist" to describe themselves.

[Tokora]

I think I'm mostly a Socially conservative communist but on the other hand I believe in completely open borders, believe that the military budget is bloated, believe that we need control of the behavior of law enforcement, and am an environmentalist. So maybe I'm really a Socially centrist Communist instead.