Where is left-wing conservativism?

[Kubra]

What is economic class struggle if not a form of changing social custom?

Krasny-Volny: my point exactly.

Necroghastia:

...exploitation is a social custom for you? The fundamental order of the distribution of wealth and the means of production? The principle of accumulation of capital? Well, if you want to call it that...

Still, I think there is merit in a specially defined "conservativism" within the left of politics. After all - for over 200 years we have fought and worked for our ideals.

consider reading Marx, instead

I did. Marx is the basis after all, but we cannot forget or ignore the refinements and the ideas of his successors. This is the problem of this new... twitter-marxism. No more actual study, sentences like "It's not my job to educate you" - tell that to our ancestors who founded the first workers libraries and schools, who founded things like their own workers red cross (dunno what that's called in your country though).

Why is "refinement" never say, revisions or additions to prevailing and countervailing tendencies in the rate of profit?
Instead, the fellas who say it always seem to have a greater interest in spectres of SJW's.

[Galiantus III]

Left-wing conservatism is inherently an oxymoron. "Left" refers to progressive policies, and "right" refers to conservative policies, relative to the traditional systems of a society. Since what is traditional varies wildly from nation to nation, which policies are left and which are right will also vary. But regardless, "left" = progressive, and is therefore not conservative.

I feel like a good generalization of what the OP is asking is why we see specific pairings of positions and not others. Like why is it that we would tend to associate LGBT advocacy with environmentalism? On the surface these two issues appear totally independent of each other, and someone could easily construct a logically consistent value system which dictates a reverse correlation: For example, it is not difficult to imagine a set of religious doctrines which both prioritizes harmony with nature and treats homosexuality as a serious sin (in fact, many world religions do hold this combination of values). And if this is the traditional conservative position, progressives of such a society might see the traditional environmental protections and limits on marriage as economically and socially repressive.

I personally don't like measuring things by left and right, except to express general feelings on the speed of sociopolitical change. I think is far more important to focus on general values or axioms and use those as measurements. And I'd say the social, economic, and political freedom ratings here on NS are a great example of that.

[The free romanians]

Left-wing conservatism doesn't really exist because conservatism and leftism are opposed. Leftism is about reducing or outright abolishing hierarchies and power-dynamics, whereas conservatism is about maintaining, or sometimes expanding, those hierarchies and power-dynamics. Christian and Islamic socialism do exist, and they are somewhat influential in left-wing spaces.

Thats is false
How can't a leftist support the traditional family religious morals etc?

[Kubra]

Left-wing conservatism doesn't really exist because conservatism and leftism are opposed. Leftism is about reducing or outright abolishing hierarchies and power-dynamics, whereas conservatism is about maintaining, or sometimes expanding, those hierarchies and power-dynamics. Christian and Islamic socialism do exist, and they are somewhat influential in left-wing spaces.

Thats is false
How can't a leftist support the traditional family religious morals etc?

why on earth would they do that

[The free romanians]

Thats is false
How can't a leftist support the traditional family religious morals etc?

why on earth would they do that

Why wouldn't they?

[The Alma Mater]

Thats is false
How can't a leftist support the traditional family religious morals etc?

why on earth would they do that

Ask them ? While Americans were busy doing drugs and orgies at woodstock, Russians were teaching their kids to play chess and starting nuclear families.

[Kubra]

why on earth would they do that

Ask them ? While Americans were busy doing drugs and orgies at woodstock, Russians were teaching their kids to play chess and starting nuclear families.

Buddy them kids was smuggling in records and going to discos dressed in some crazy shit.

why on earth would they do that

Why wouldn't they?

I dunno man, for the same reasons that anticlericalism went pretty much hand in hand with revolutionary politics from the french revolution onward.
It just ain't part of the milieu.

[The free romanians]

Ask them ? While Americans were busy doing drugs and orgies at woodstock, Russians were teaching their kids to play chess and starting nuclear families.

Buddy them kids was smuggling in records and going to discos dressed in some crazy shit.

Why wouldn't they?

I dunno man, for the same reasons that anticlericalism went pretty much hand in hand with revolutionary politics from the french revolution onward.
It just ain't part of the milieu.

Sure it could
But it can also work hand in hand with laissez-faire economics.....

[GENSOC]

I see y'all had to get in a Nazbol thread before the end of '21.

[The free romanians]

I see y'all had to get in a Nazbol thread before the end of '21.

Lw conservatism is not nazbol smh

[Lanoraie II]

Yes. I think it’s possible to be culturally conservative with leftist economics.

Add politically liberal into the mix

This might sound strange but hear me out; I actually have a character who fits this perfectly. She's young and naive so she doesn't have all the nuances of politics, but she finds corporations treacherous and undignified, and strongly believes nature should be protected, as she's a subsistence farmer. Due to her being deeply religious, she believes men and women have their own place in society, but also thinks personal freedom trumps that to an extent, and even more so follows the belief that just because she has an opinion doesn't mean it's necessary to say.

I guess in a strange way it can make sense? In the sense of, "I see how you arrived at where you are". Now whether every argument is valid or not is another story, but there are a few people I've met who are very conservative but heavily dislike capitalism--usually because of the destruction of nature.

It's like how I'm a socialist who tentatively is pro-gun and pro-cops-when-done-right. People act like it's incompatible but it truly isn't. It's called nuance. And putting more emphasis on proper training and access to mental health care.

[GENSOC]

I see y'all had to get in a Nazbol thread before the end of '21.

Lw conservatism is not nazbol smh

It is functionally though not aesthetically the same. At least in the form of Limonov's National Bolshevism.

[Kubra]

Buddy them kids was smuggling in records and going to discos dressed in some crazy shit.
I dunno man, for the same reasons that anticlericalism went pretty much hand in hand with revolutionary politics from the french revolution onward.
It just ain't part of the milieu.

Sure it could
But it can also work hand in hand with laissez-faire economics.....

Nah not really, unless you mean in the hands of englishmen fearing papish plots from across the channel(s).

[Teshmir]

Ask them ? While Americans were busy doing drugs and orgies at woodstock, Russians were teaching their kids to play chess and starting nuclear families.

Buddy them kids was smuggling in records and going to discos dressed in some crazy shit.

The kids were not the ones running the country nor where they the theorists justifying its policies.

[Messianic State]

Lw conservatism is not nazbol smh

It is functionally though not aesthetically the same. At least in the form of Limonov's National Bolshevism.

If you think about it Israel is perhaps the most successful implementation of Nazbolism in history. Labor Zionism and Kibbutz and Judaism and the Promised Land and all.

[Kubra]

Buddy them kids was smuggling in records and going to discos dressed in some crazy shit.

The kids were not the ones running the country nor where they the theorists justifying its policies.

Yeah, and neither were the kids at woodstock

[The Alma Mater]

The kids were not the ones running the country nor where they the theorists justifying its policies.

Yeah, and neither were the kids at woodstock

True. Fact remains that the Soviets were vastly more socially conservative than the west.

[HISPIDA]

Left-wing conservatism doesn't really exist because conservatism and leftism are opposed. Leftism is about reducing or outright abolishing hierarchies and power-dynamics, whereas conservatism is about maintaining, or sometimes expanding, those hierarchies and power-dynamics. Christian and Islamic socialism do exist, and they are somewhat influential in left-wing spaces.

Thats is false
How can't a leftist support the traditional family religious morals etc?

because communism rejects both organized religion and the idea of the family lol

[Kubra]

Yeah, and neither were the kids at woodstock

True. Fact remains that the Soviets were vastly more socially conservative than the west.

Yes and no. Compared to the the continental west, this is absolutely the case but is not a comparison between equals. No one is expected to match em in terms of socially progressive attitudes. Now compared to the US of the time (stalin years notwithstanding of course) we find the USSR to have been more socially progressive in more ways than it was socially conservative in comparison. In some cases it was worse, but often less because of attitude to the behaviour but to the draconian nature of the soviet legal system in general. Homosexuality was for instance punished harshly, but in the context of most legal violations being in general punished harshly. Not so socially progressive, but relates more to its political structure than a social desire.
We can of course make the argument that they were vastly more conservative, in every way, compared to the average leftist in the west at a given point. Folks can say what they will about bourgeois democracy and reformism, but it has resulted in those voice being heard and real reforms being made, and is a good reason why we're not nearly as socially (or politically) conservative as we are and why we generally moved in that sort of direction, as opposed to the Soviet Union and present Russia where attitudes had and have been rather stagnant in those regards.

[Teshmir]

True. Fact remains that the Soviets were vastly more socially conservative than the west.

Yes and no. Compared to the the continental west, this is absolutely the case but is not a comparison between equals. No one is expected to match em in terms of socially progressive attitudes. Now compared to the US of the time (stalin years notwithstanding of course) we find the USSR to have been more socially progressive in more ways than it was socially conservative in comparison. In some cases it was worse, but often less because of attitude to the behaviour but to the draconian nature of the soviet legal system in general. Homosexuality was for instance punished harshly, but in the context of most legal violations being in general punished harshly. Not so socially progressive, but relates more to its political structure than a social desire.
We can of course make the argument that they were vastly more conservative, in every way, compared to the average leftist in the west at a given point. Folks can say what they will about bourgeois democracy and reformism, but it has resulted in those voice being heard and real reforms being made, and is a good reason why we're not nearly as socially (or politically) conservative as we are and why we generally moved in that sort of direction, as opposed to the Soviet Union and present Russia where attitudes had and have been rather stagnant in those regards.

Homosexuality in the Soviet Union was repressed by the stte for it’s political structure and not by objection to the phenomenon of homosexuality itself? I thought that there was a Marxist reason they opposed it in line with Engels view on the subject.

[The free romanians]

Sure it could
But it can also work hand in hand with laissez-faire economics.....

Nah not really, unless you mean in the hands of englishmen fearing papish plots from across the channel(s).

Wfym
businessmen will do anyhing for profit
Even destroy tradition and religion and its not to uncommon

Thats is false
How can't a leftist support the traditional family religious morals etc?

because communism rejects both organized religion and the idea of the family lol

He asked about LEFTWING CONSERVATISM
NOT MARXIST CONSERVATISM
Marxism=/leftism
I was lasy to bold btw so im not shouting

[Kubra]

Yes and no. Compared to the the continental west, this is absolutely the case but is not a comparison between equals. No one is expected to match em in terms of socially progressive attitudes. Now compared to the US of the time (stalin years notwithstanding of course) we find the USSR to have been more socially progressive in more ways than it was socially conservative in comparison. In some cases it was worse, but often less because of attitude to the behaviour but to the draconian nature of the soviet legal system in general. Homosexuality was for instance punished harshly, but in the context of most legal violations being in general punished harshly. Not so socially progressive, but relates more to its political structure than a social desire.
We can of course make the argument that they were vastly more conservative, in every way, compared to the average leftist in the west at a given point. Folks can say what they will about bourgeois democracy and reformism, but it has resulted in those voice being heard and real reforms being made, and is a good reason why we're not nearly as socially (or politically) conservative as we are and why we generally moved in that sort of direction, as opposed to the Soviet Union and present Russia where attitudes had and have been rather stagnant in those regards.

Homosexuality in the Soviet Union was repressed by the stte for it’s political structure and not by objection to the phenomenon of homosexuality itself? I thought that there was a Marxist reason they opposed it in line with Engels view on the subject.

As in it was more repressed because that was the nature of repression in the soviet union, not that it was especially hated compared to in the US of the time.
In the US something could be associated with the devil himself, but that doesn't necessarily mean being shipped off to prison, while in the soviet union well you could be sent to one for much less, such as translating poetry without a loicense.
It's unclear how well known the social attitudes of M&E would be known amongst the general populace or even party apparatchik's themselves, insofar as it's only been with the advent of the internet us folks have been able to pour over their marginal notes and personal correspondence. Back then you'd have to go to a library and find that shit, you know? A *university* library.

[The Imperium man]

I'm thinking about the Soviet union. The creation of Soviet Union is merely based on defender of the working class people which it isn't. I really don't care about political ideology in Soviet Union , because it's politically or ideologically incoherent. It doesn't matter it's conservatism or progressivism. These people who criticized the Soviet regime and ended up as Gulag. Pure totalitarianism , am I right?

Plot twist: my English is bad.

[HISPIDA]

Nah not really, unless you mean in the hands of englishmen fearing papish plots from across the channel(s).

Wfym
businessmen will do anyhing for profit
Even destroy tradition and religion and its not to uncommon

because communism rejects both organized religion and the idea of the family lol

He asked about LEFTWING CONSERVATISM
NOT MARXIST CONSERVATISM
Marxism=/leftism
I was lasy to bold btw so im not shouting

leftism is rooted in marxism tho
the only leftist ideology which isn't explicitly socialist is social democracy

[Teshmir]

Homosexuality in the Soviet Union was repressed by the stte for it’s political structure and not by objection to the phenomenon of homosexuality itself? I thought that there was a Marxist reason they opposed it in line with Engels view on the subject.

As in it was more repressed because that was the nature of repression in the soviet union, not that it was especially hated compared to in the US of the time.
In the US something could be associated with the devil himself, but that doesn't necessarily mean being shipped off to prison, while in the soviet union well you could be sent to one for much less, such as translating poetry without a loicense.
It's unclear how well known the social attitudes of M&E would be known amongst the general populace or even party apparatchik's themselves, insofar as it's only been with the advent of the internet us folks have been able to pour over their marginal notes and personal correspondence. Back then you'd have to go to a library and find that shit, you know? A *university* library.

“They sent homosexuals to work camps because they sent everyone to work camps, we don’t know for sure if that’s indicative of state or societal disapproval of homosexuality per se”

Wat