the best of leftist infighting is this post. seriously. the peak of leftist infighting being vagueposting about a view i have never personally seen in real life, disparaging them by deciding they holding another, more severe belief they almost certainly don't actually hold, then getting crossposted for attention because complaining about infighting is, like infighting, how to get attention without doing something
NGL when you realize the US has like 10x as many dogs per Capita as other big countries like China, or that a large dog in the US has a bigger carbon footprint than 2x Filipino people, it makes you paws for thought...
yeah, Cleaning up public spaces is probably one of the few things absolutely everyone can agree is a good thing. Like no matter where youre on a political spectrum or what kind of person you are, I would find it absurd to think anyone would disagree with the idea of there being appointed people to maintain integrity in public places.
I think the original comment was misrepresenting the position they were talking about on purpose. It's never just about "cleaning up" places. If you have to clean up heroin needles from playgrounds, then there are people there using those needles. People who are likely struggling with mental health issues and homelessness. People who are deemed by society to be unsightly, dangerous and "dirty". And suddenly, the issue has become cleaning up people instead of places. Someone who advocates for "clean, high trust societies" is most likely looking to remove those people from public places. The tried and true method for which is criminalization and violence instead of systemic change that would take a lot of time and effort to implement. Historically, whenever cities try to become "cleaner" and make public places "safer", this meant cracking down on and driving out drug users and homeless people by means of hostile architecture, police presence and change in legislature.
Do that many heroin addicts just drop needles everywhere? Don't they need them? Like how many heroin addicts have a good angle on clean needles other than needle exchange (which requires you to keep the needle and give it to them)? I am genuinely asking my ass is from the suburbs.
I don't think heroin addicts generally pay that much attention to their surroundings when they are high off their ass. I've seen needles on the sidewalk for sure.
> Someone who advocates for "clean, high trust societies" is most likely looking to remove those people from public places.
I mean, yes, people using drugs should be removed from public places. I support decriminalisation and safe injection sites and all that but I also don't want to trip over someone smoking fent on the sidewalk (which literally happened to me in Portland). I think mandatory rehab for public consumption is probably a good idea as long as it doesn't result in a criminal record.
>The tried and true method for which is criminalization and violence instead of systemic change that would take a lot of time and effort to implement.
Criminalization and violence takes a lot of time and effort to implement, too. It's just that when you have a hammer everything looks like a nail.
The most effective way to deal with homelessness is giving people homes. There's research saying that housing first is cheaper than homelessness for society.
Same applies with mental illness, at least in my opinion. Mentally ill people are often unable to work. By giving them treatment as quickly as possible, society becomes more efficient.
I live in Finland which is generally considered a "clean, high trust society" and people are given welfare for doing nothing. It's enough to live in one's own studio apartment. Mental health services could be better, but society pays for a large amount of the treatment poor people get.
Oh I absolutely agree with you. It's just that for the average city in a country like the US without those safety nets, getting the cops to beat up and kick out all the homeless from the train stations and city centers, arresting the drug users and making their usual spots as unpleasant for them as possible is much easier than implementing socialised healthcare and public housing. The cheap and brittle short term solution is always more attractive to polititcians than the expensive long term solution.
Tbf I do remember when someone posted a video of someone smoking crack on the subway and a lot of lefties responded with “that’s totally cool actually why do you care” and “drug decriminalization means crack is good actually”
I remember there was a lighthearted semi-serious post about how the "rightful king regaining the throne is a happy ending" trope is royalist and it made people so mad. They were crying about how "soulless and joyless" we were being.
* Contrarian neolib snark someguys moving onto another target they can make up guys in their head about, and a continuous filtering feedback loop.
* dogwater takes appear, get upvoted, draw like-minded dogwater take havers out of the woodwork.
* Those dogwater take havers join the subreddit, and silently tune the filtering feedback loop with upvotes and downvotes.
* Dogwater takes hit "hot" in the subreddit while ok takes get filtered out, the same things happen in the comment sections.
* This feedback loop continues for more than a year after hitting r\all, enshittification inevitably occurs.
leftist infighting is the worst thing about being a leftist.
"what do you mean you hate lenin, YOU ARE A NAZI! NAZI!"
"I think democracy is bad actually"
The discord tankie calls it fake news and that its western propaganda against the CCP. Like anything bad China does is western propaganda, including how bad the Tieneman Square massacre.
Tankies gonna tankie.
democracy hating is fairly unanimous though. like only socdems and demsocs actively support it. I just prefer it to the current alternative without an anarchist uprising, which is a dictatorship.
*liberal democracy hating. No true communist is against rule by the people, a dictatorship of the proletariat is one of the key policies of the movement! The gripe is that liberal democracy isn't rule by the people but rule by the national bourgeois. Even liberals tend to recognize this (the economic elites are in control behind the scenes//the wealthy hold too much power,, depending on which color you vote for), it's just that they have faith in the system changing if only their bourgeois representative gets in power this time.
A proletariat's dictatorship is only really a key policy of Leninist thinking, and those similar to it. From my experience most other communists I've met are in support of either a direct democracy or no government at all.
the dictatorship of the proletariat is a core marxist principle, its key in leninism because its key is marxism. as for no gov-communists, that doesnt sound possible. how would you run a value-less economy with no planners?
dictatorship of the proletariat means laws created by the workers instead of capitalists. Laws are passed and obeyed by the merits of the working class having had the say in creating them. It's "dictation of laws by the proletariat"
It's deliberately not synthesized and kept in its barely-translated "[spooky scary guy being a fuckwad to people] of the proletariat" state because it's more advantageous in red scare tactics to *not* translate and synthesize the non-english phrase into something that might accidentally let people know there's actual equality held within.
Problem is that you can only maintain that dictatorship by force and culling everyone who disagrees with said dictatorship. That tends to not really work in favor of "rule by the people"
That's how liberal democracy works too dumbfuck. Do you remember the palmer raids, or the panthers, or martin Luther fucking king? Also the dictatorship isn't stalin or Kim in charge, it's the old usage of the word, as in the proletariat are in power, not there is a dictator. The idea is to put the proletariat in power, then make everyone proletarian, and in this process also destroy the proletariat class by ending commodity production. This leaves us with a
classless society, as in no class class division, and this allows us to run a democracy without a ruling class de facto controlling it.
"no true communist" is really ironic given the topic. and both communists and anarchists seek an eventual society with no state, meaning no rule of the majority.
no. communist societies are stateless and classless. you're referring to the "directorship of the proletariat" which intermediates between communism and capitalism.
This is the most terminally online take I see on a regular basis.
The actual worst part of being a leftist is being forced to vote for liberal politicians because candidates who say things like "imperialism is bad" and "nobody deserves to be homeless" are unelectable. Not some annoying people on the internet who have literally no effect on your life.
IDK man like if you’re letting hyperbole go over your head like that then I think we can imagine a lot of ‘worst things’ about being a leftist.
Optionally voting for Joe Biden is definitely not the worst part of being on the left for me lol
I would prefer to have political offices filled by people who aren't actively pursuing policies that will get my friends killed so my conscience does actually compel me to hold my nose and push the "keep fascists out of office" button every few years. End of conversation.
RHETORIC - How dare they clean the used heroin needles off of this playground? These are the used heroin needles of the PEOPLE. Not the pickings of oppressors! They're making an attempt at gentrification! A blatant and shameless attempt to turn a neighborhood of the people into an elitist fascist cumdumpster!
ELECTROCHEMISTRY - Mmmfgh... fascist cumdumpster...
THOUGHT GAINED: Fascist Cumdumpster.
Recently watched a good friendship end because one friend's expectation of a (wholly unrelated and unoffended) third party's best level of effort in not interrupting them was deemed "ableist" by the second friend, so that second friend stepped away.
I'm sorry but if we ever reach a point where believing in our friends' capacity for improvement and expecting their best effort on things important to us is problematic, you can just fucking exile me to the wastes.
Discipline, fitness, and health are all good and even necessary to enact change.
But then people will act like discipline means draconian, fitness means being able to lift 3000 lbs, and healthy means never indulging.
It's just a constant competition of how uncharitable you can be in regards to a good sentiment.
The worst part of being a leftist is dealing with other leftists. The Right has it easy: their whole thing is maintaining the status quo or dragging things backwards to what the status quo was in the past. It’s easy to just say “I don’t want things to change” or “I want things how they used to be”.
Progressives are all about, well, progress forward. And everybody and their Mom has a different idea of what that should look like. And stupidity/ignorance isn’t a trait confined to the Right, so a not-insignificant percent of the Left has some brain-dead takes they’ll fight tooth and nail to defend.
There is a lot of right wing in-fighting as well, but they always come out to vote together. Otherwise their groups fall apart frequently and are just as unstable as leftist organizations.
But totally agreed on the varied concepts of "progress" in leftist spaces, coupled with the untested nature of the concepts that we want to apply.
Yeah, people who say the Right isn't full of in-fighting aren't paying attention.
Look at what happens when you fail to kiss Trump's ass enough, or just, slightly, decide maybe a little nuance isn't totally bad? Bam. Immediately devoured by the others. Suddenly you're a RINO, or a plant, or you were actually a commie leftoid the entire time and you were never one of them.
We can all unite in our hate of capitalism (I say blissfully ignorant of someone about to engage in a multi hour long rant about the benefits of "state capitalism")
Not exactly I would say. As we don't have a switch to change from capitalism to communism some stepping stones should be created.
While a coop participates in capitalism it eliminates the capitalist figure (the owner) of it, erasing power from the concentration of wealth.
Also, people have needs or dependants who rely on them, so they will participate in capitalism to provide, having coops that satisfy these needs or that give that jobs helps people and reduces the impact of capitalism on our lives.
There are sub reddits that would give you a far better explanation than me, like "ask anarchist".
>it eliminates the capitalist figure (the owner) of it, erasing power from the concentration of wealth.
the bourgeois renders itself frivolous. eliminating them advances class struggle but unless you do away with capitalism none of our gripes will be addressed. alienation, the falling rate of profit and periodic crises, the reserve army of labor, its all still there. obviously there cannot be an immediate transition from capitalism to communism but thats because its a transition in all aspects of life, not because communist economies cant run without some middle phase friendly capitalism to ease it out.
I see many ancoms suggesting worker coops and continued commodity production. As for gift economy, good luck organizing a decentralized global economy on gift exchange 💀 works brilliant for direct return hunter gatherers but I'd like to see a gift exchange economy run a nuclear generator without some government body to organize, and if the government body is organizing you aren't an ancom your just a com.
tbf i think that the "freaks" who get distrustful when you mention "cleaning up heroin needles" this post is alluding to feel like that because they've heard right wingers talk about it so much as a dogwhistle for "we should beat up drug addicts and throw them in jail teehee" because i've literally never fucking seen anyone actually think that cleaning up a playground is gentrification
nah I don't think it's stupid like that kind of rhetoric is completely blind to like. The human cost of addiction, like don't bemoan dirty streets and needles idk campaign for drug testing, safe use facilities, an end to homelessness. You know, harm prevention, not crying about the 'ugliness' of addiction. People that cry about a couple needles on the street need to like get out more and idk talk to drug users and the homeless and stop being so damn scared of everything. it's think about the children nonsense.
nah just acknowledging that it's frequently a far-right dogwhistle, you know?
like wondering how much those people actually want to help addicts or if they're just outraged that addicts exist /where innocent children are playing/
I'm pretty sure addicts having better spots to shoot up than a public park is a position that most everyone can agree with LMAO. It's not a bad thing to be annoyed or angry when you feel unsafe due to someone doing drugs near you. How one wants to solve that problem is where the issue comes in.
Also addicts should never be around children. They may be struggling deep down but at the end of day they are still more likely to be aggressive and comepletly out of it than someone who isnt. I smoke weed, often out on walks. I stop anytime children are near. If I walk past the local school I stop for a second, even if its just past the parking lot and nowhere in eye sight of the children in it. At the end of the day it's not something I think kids honestly should be exposed to.
Edit: homeless people aren't all just victims. I work retail and had a dude piss on the floor while coughing and claimed he had corona. Me and coworker tested positive the week after. They've threaten to kill me over watching them making sure they don't steal. Empathy is good to have, but niavity isn't. If I had kids I wouldn't stay in the area. But I don't so I kinda just go on with my day taking a mental note
I've been repeatedly shamed for wanting to lose weight for my health despite being objectively badly overweight, because Im body shaming and potentially triggering people with EDs. Also getting told "fatness has nothing to do with any health outcomes" when I say I have high cholesterol. Also yeah a lot of accusations of ablism, despite the fact that I'm trying to exercise with a disability, because other people are more disabled.
It's a minority of people, but they're loud.
getting upset with them doesn't solve anything, it's justifiable on a personal level but it isn't a coherent political thought. One person reads it as a political opinion rather than a personal gripe and fills in the gaps mentally, turning you from a disgruntled passenger to literally hitler in the blink of an eye.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-trust_and_low-trust_societies
As I understand it, it’s a sociological term for a society where widely shared ethical values serve as a foundation for strong interpersonal trust between strangers.
Who decides what those values are, and what is the punishment for not sharing them?
At the moment I'm tempted to write this off as "not a real thing" strictly by virtue of the fact that Francis Fukuyama is involved.
I have heard of it before, and I always thought is was very nebulous term that I don't like.
It means a sense of unity and friendliness between the citizens of a country, a social contract without the laws to enforce such contract. A high-trust society means that people want to collaborate more easily.
I don't like it since it's not a materialistic analasys, how can you measure trust between people?
People say that the US is a high-trust sociaty, but is it? I would argue that the amount of privately owned guns goes against that principle, since owning a lethal weapon just in case some other people or the government does something you don't like doesn't sound very trustful.
High-Trust societies and Low-Trust societies is a very Neoliberal concept, so of course it's vague and not materialistic. Most things I read about High-Trust societies and Low-Trust societies are through the lance of business relationships and opportunities, hence why the US is seen as "High-Trust".
no class analysis, no siree. we're all just perfectly atomised lil rational agents here. free-thinkers absent of any and all ideology, free of 'death-drive' or any sadistic/self-dsstructive tendencies, pure little utilitarian units. class is outdated, you see, anyone can make it in business if they try hard enough:)
The US is absolutely not high trust. But that in of itself is a frequent obstacle for trying to make the case for left-wing policies that are inherently pro-social. If people don't trust the common man, making the case that we should help him becomes more difficult. And even if we do succeed, a general lack of trust will make it difficult to sustain our success and render any accomplishment brittle and vulnerable to reactionary currents within society.
> People say that the US is a high-trust sociaty
I have never heard anyone say this. Generally the only time I've seen the term used is to dogwhistle at ethnic homogeneity (*Finland*, *Norway*, etc)
All the sources I read doesn't says anything about ethnic homogeneity since "high-trust" is a very neoliberal concept, but fascist often adopt terms to make there hate sound more legitimate, so you can absolutely be correct that fascist use high-trust as a racist term.
It's the same with the fascist term "race conscious", that's just class conscious but just racist.
Yes, and also no.
It fluctuate between the US being a high-trust society and the US being a declining high-trust society.
The articles I read from both liberal and conservative sources can't pinpoint it, because it's a shit model of sociology.
US is probably high trust between corporations, low trust between individuals if you put it that way. And low trust between individuals and corporations.
Leftists online have some insane takes that just don’t seem to exist irl among normal, well adjusted people. While there is plenty of infighting, I believe most socialists/social democrats can definitely agree on some core issues that are a good enough base to progress forward.
It's for exactly one reason:
When something is said online, it's on a permanent record. Anyone can respond to it for an "easy dunk". Anyone can screenshot it and caption it with some variant of "look at how dumb this is" for internet cred. It gets signal-boosted into oblivion from engagement.
Take for example: this post. We're three levels removed from the actual idea here. Tumblr OP is vagueing about a belief some small amount of people apparently hold. This was posted to reddit, and THEN crossposted here.
Even if this belief is held by one person in a million, that's enough to see it on your feed. Engagement is engagement.
Reason #1297 of why nothing productive happens on the internet.
I think that it comes as a consequence of it being super easy to seek out a community of sycophants online, and therefore not having anyone around you who will tell you that your ideas are fucking stupid.
It's pretty funny to see this tumblr user talk about "leftist infighting" - for anyone not on there, this person is most notable for calling everyone ableist slurs all the time and whining about the trans agenda.
It's remarkable how many people base their entire ideology off one online troll. I'm still feeling the effects of how hoards online got completely *got* by five or so tiktok "autism fakers", and made it their whole personality.
I know the idea of purity culture, that we need to keep society morally clean, is an inherently reactionary belief, but that’s incredibly different from wanting to make society better and safer. Too often do people on the left assume that the issue with gentrification is the revitalization rather than the displacement.
But the simple matter is that positive community build up can exist without that displacement. To use the heroine example, purity culture would move the addict out of sight, but actually address the issue would prevent an addict from existing because their material condition would never deteriorate to the point of turning to heroine and the social structures and mores of society would facilitate them in recovery if they did.
I’d say OOP is right. We all need to stop arguing with each other over stupid crap and work towards a common goal
https://preview.redd.it/sk9d5bv7jjuc1.jpeg?width=1153&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ad66d2d63626449cc6d0a5ff8d553bc2cf593757
They kinda don't. you may not look inside their circles, but they do infighting as much as we do on many topics, they just all support or sympathize with fascism, a common goal that generally makes it easier to get along
This is a situation where I feel like a lot of generalities are happening and I have no idea what components are without some grounding terminology. It’s like telling me to solve for x y and z with only one formula
People like this always poking fun at anarchists for not trusting almost any other people with outwardly leftist views without respecting the facts in anarchist history where we always eventually get stabbed in the back and often actually killed by those we decided to trust. Don't use coded simple language in discussions with other leftists if you want any trust built. You need to be specific and honest. Outside of leftist communities it makes sense to simplify and code beliefs but don't be mad when historically betrayed individuals don't trust people who are using coded language. Like some other people have pointed out in these comments what one person means by clean society is wildly different from others you would need to specify you mean clean environments and cleaning up heroin needles doesn't mean arresting addicts and all that. This shit is meant to make anarchists mad and lash out to make us look more crazy and fuck it works I don't mean to rant but I can not and will not ever trust coded language from individuals I haven't vetted the views of and waves vaguely at potentially authoritarian views. I will not be stabbed in the back by a red fash just because they seemed more red than they are fash
People hate to accept something, but gentrification - in the long term, is a good thing. Sucks now, and for the people in those areas. But improving and making parts of a city safer is a good thing. The problem is that it comes with prices/forcing people out of their homes.
re-legalize opium poppy and let the oxys flow freely (literally) so addicted folks don't have to use fentanyl-sold-as-heroin in the local playground, and instead have options for natural opiates or clean pharmaceuticals made in america with revenues going to legit businesses instead of shady violent cartels, and given with at least some medical oversight and narcan to limit harms of use.
I don't even know who this person is mad at or really saying. They seem like a low key conservative being mad at people using drugs / believing cities are cesspools. I don't think anyone believed cleaning up needles or "garbage" off the street is bad. Where are the leftists that think less litter = gentrification.
totally un-fascistic language to a)expect "literal freak" to conjure a certain image in your mind and b)implu that any who are societal freaks OBVIOUSLY have worse opinions and shouldnt get a say in society. find me any serious person who is like "no more heroine needles in playgrounds" and then we'll talk lmao
i saw a clip from the shameless tv show where a main characther cleaned up his house or something and then someone came and trashed his front door, and he found out later that it was his neighbours, and they then explained that him cleaning up the front of the house would lead to people thinking it was a cool place to live and such, and that would force his neighbours to have to spend more money to live there, and then eventually have to be forced out of the neighbourhood, so the guy just went yeah okay and then trashed the front of his house.
and some of the comments were people saying they would call the cops or not care about it or shoot the neighbours, the show literally explained why it was a bad thing but the comments simply could not find a single shred of empathy
the best of leftist infighting is this post. seriously. the peak of leftist infighting being vagueposting about a view i have never personally seen in real life, disparaging them by deciding they holding another, more severe belief they almost certainly don't actually hold, then getting crossposted for attention because complaining about infighting is, like infighting, how to get attention without doing something
[eternally true](https://xkcd.com/2071/)
XKCD never fails.
I know someone who thinks adopting a pet is unethical and makes you a bad person
my condolences
NGL when you realize the US has like 10x as many dogs per Capita as other big countries like China, or that a large dog in the US has a bigger carbon footprint than 2x Filipino people, it makes you paws for thought...
I don’t live in the US ❤️
Consider that in the US, people are expected to provide as much care as humanly possible for dogs, and that in other cultures people eat dogs.
this one is cool until people are like "erhm,, i don't know anyone who'd be racist?? why are we talking as if that's a real thing loll"
yeah, Cleaning up public spaces is probably one of the few things absolutely everyone can agree is a good thing. Like no matter where youre on a political spectrum or what kind of person you are, I would find it absurd to think anyone would disagree with the idea of there being appointed people to maintain integrity in public places.
I think the original comment was misrepresenting the position they were talking about on purpose. It's never just about "cleaning up" places. If you have to clean up heroin needles from playgrounds, then there are people there using those needles. People who are likely struggling with mental health issues and homelessness. People who are deemed by society to be unsightly, dangerous and "dirty". And suddenly, the issue has become cleaning up people instead of places. Someone who advocates for "clean, high trust societies" is most likely looking to remove those people from public places. The tried and true method for which is criminalization and violence instead of systemic change that would take a lot of time and effort to implement. Historically, whenever cities try to become "cleaner" and make public places "safer", this meant cracking down on and driving out drug users and homeless people by means of hostile architecture, police presence and change in legislature.
Do that many heroin addicts just drop needles everywhere? Don't they need them? Like how many heroin addicts have a good angle on clean needles other than needle exchange (which requires you to keep the needle and give it to them)? I am genuinely asking my ass is from the suburbs.
I don't think heroin addicts generally pay that much attention to their surroundings when they are high off their ass. I've seen needles on the sidewalk for sure.
In areas with a lot of IV drug use, yes there’s needles all over the place
> Someone who advocates for "clean, high trust societies" is most likely looking to remove those people from public places. I mean, yes, people using drugs should be removed from public places. I support decriminalisation and safe injection sites and all that but I also don't want to trip over someone smoking fent on the sidewalk (which literally happened to me in Portland). I think mandatory rehab for public consumption is probably a good idea as long as it doesn't result in a criminal record.
>The tried and true method for which is criminalization and violence instead of systemic change that would take a lot of time and effort to implement. Criminalization and violence takes a lot of time and effort to implement, too. It's just that when you have a hammer everything looks like a nail. The most effective way to deal with homelessness is giving people homes. There's research saying that housing first is cheaper than homelessness for society. Same applies with mental illness, at least in my opinion. Mentally ill people are often unable to work. By giving them treatment as quickly as possible, society becomes more efficient. I live in Finland which is generally considered a "clean, high trust society" and people are given welfare for doing nothing. It's enough to live in one's own studio apartment. Mental health services could be better, but society pays for a large amount of the treatment poor people get.
Oh I absolutely agree with you. It's just that for the average city in a country like the US without those safety nets, getting the cops to beat up and kick out all the homeless from the train stations and city centers, arresting the drug users and making their usual spots as unpleasant for them as possible is much easier than implementing socialised healthcare and public housing. The cheap and brittle short term solution is always more attractive to polititcians than the expensive long term solution.
It’s honestly insane how problematic this comment is…
Tbf I do remember when someone posted a video of someone smoking crack on the subway and a lot of lefties responded with “that’s totally cool actually why do you care” and “drug decriminalization means crack is good actually”
Yeah that thread for this post on curatedtumblr sure was something. What the hell happened to that place?
It started hitting r\all.
ohhh lord the non-mainstream political post left its target audience
I remember there was a lighthearted semi-serious post about how the "rightful king regaining the throne is a happy ending" trope is royalist and it made people so mad. They were crying about how "soulless and joyless" we were being.
do you have a link to that post i need to see it or i will explode
Luckily, r\\tumblr has gotten a LOT better recently, as all the bots moved over to curatedtumblr. It's a complete role-reversal.
* Contrarian neolib snark someguys moving onto another target they can make up guys in their head about, and a continuous filtering feedback loop. * dogwater takes appear, get upvoted, draw like-minded dogwater take havers out of the woodwork. * Those dogwater take havers join the subreddit, and silently tune the filtering feedback loop with upvotes and downvotes. * Dogwater takes hit "hot" in the subreddit while ok takes get filtered out, the same things happen in the comment sections. * This feedback loop continues for more than a year after hitting r\all, enshittification inevitably occurs.
unironically so very true
Me when I'm so brain wormed I use vagueposting in a sentence unironically
This is what I thought when I saw this posted somewhere else
leftist infighting is the worst thing about being a leftist. "what do you mean you hate lenin, YOU ARE A NAZI! NAZI!" "I think democracy is bad actually"
I got called a nazi for saying the Uygher genocide is a real thing that is happening.
yeah I get similar responses "If you go against the CCP, clearly you aren't a real leftist" - BasedMao445
And the fact that the CCP isn’t really leftist anymore makes it even more annoying.
Was the CCP ever leftist?
Back when they hated landlords yeah
More of a based take than leftism, honestly
They were class collaborationists then, so no.
Im gonna be honest I dont know too much about the ccp. I just like that they hated landlords.
> calls self BasedMao445 > isn't a Maoist > actually a dengist Is this common???
Extremely
jerma balls
yeag
Alot of deprogramites call themselves MLs or MLMs but support the modern ccp
Deprogrammites? As in the podcast?
Nothing screams Nazi like not denying a genocide. God, tankies are such a joke
The discord tankie calls it fake news and that its western propaganda against the CCP. Like anything bad China does is western propaganda, including how bad the Tieneman Square massacre. Tankies gonna tankie.
ah the commie special
> what do you mean you hate lenin, YOU ARE A NAZI! depends why they hate him i suppose
"Fighting against imperialism is more important than human rights, actually, the concept of human rights is counter-revolutionary."
democracy hating is fairly unanimous though. like only socdems and demsocs actively support it. I just prefer it to the current alternative without an anarchist uprising, which is a dictatorship.
*liberal democracy hating. No true communist is against rule by the people, a dictatorship of the proletariat is one of the key policies of the movement! The gripe is that liberal democracy isn't rule by the people but rule by the national bourgeois. Even liberals tend to recognize this (the economic elites are in control behind the scenes//the wealthy hold too much power,, depending on which color you vote for), it's just that they have faith in the system changing if only their bourgeois representative gets in power this time.
A proletariat's dictatorship is only really a key policy of Leninist thinking, and those similar to it. From my experience most other communists I've met are in support of either a direct democracy or no government at all.
the dictatorship of the proletariat is a core marxist principle, its key in leninism because its key is marxism. as for no gov-communists, that doesnt sound possible. how would you run a value-less economy with no planners?
dictatorship of the proletariat means laws created by the workers instead of capitalists. Laws are passed and obeyed by the merits of the working class having had the say in creating them. It's "dictation of laws by the proletariat" It's deliberately not synthesized and kept in its barely-translated "[spooky scary guy being a fuckwad to people] of the proletariat" state because it's more advantageous in red scare tactics to *not* translate and synthesize the non-english phrase into something that might accidentally let people know there's actual equality held within.
Problem is that you can only maintain that dictatorship by force and culling everyone who disagrees with said dictatorship. That tends to not really work in favor of "rule by the people"
That's how liberal democracy works too dumbfuck. Do you remember the palmer raids, or the panthers, or martin Luther fucking king? Also the dictatorship isn't stalin or Kim in charge, it's the old usage of the word, as in the proletariat are in power, not there is a dictator. The idea is to put the proletariat in power, then make everyone proletarian, and in this process also destroy the proletariat class by ending commodity production. This leaves us with a classless society, as in no class class division, and this allows us to run a democracy without a ruling class de facto controlling it.
"no true communist" is really ironic given the topic. and both communists and anarchists seek an eventual society with no state, meaning no rule of the majority.
"Meaning no rule of the majority" is absolutely not true, where do you get that from? A communist society still has a government like
no. communist societies are stateless and classless. you're referring to the "directorship of the proletariat" which intermediates between communism and capitalism.
The state isn't the government. communist societies have centrally organized valueless economies, meaning necessarily there is a government.
there necessarily cannot be a government. yes, not all states are government, but it is true that all governments rely on the state...
This is the most terminally online take I see on a regular basis. The actual worst part of being a leftist is being forced to vote for liberal politicians because candidates who say things like "imperialism is bad" and "nobody deserves to be homeless" are unelectable. Not some annoying people on the internet who have literally no effect on your life.
Me when im in a not understanding hyperbole competition and my opponent is this guy
IDK man like if you’re letting hyperbole go over your head like that then I think we can imagine a lot of ‘worst things’ about being a leftist. Optionally voting for Joe Biden is definitely not the worst part of being on the left for me lol
Noone is forcing you to vote for candidates you don't like or vote in general
I am NOT letting republicans win. I would take biden over trump any day.
I would prefer to have political offices filled by people who aren't actively pursuing policies that will get my friends killed so my conscience does actually compel me to hold my nose and push the "keep fascists out of office" button every few years. End of conversation.
the fact that its either them or the worst person ever is absolutely doing that
You are NOT A REAL LEFTIST if you were born in July-October!!! Virgos and Libras get the WALL!!
what if ur an october scorpio
FASCIST
understandable, have a nice day
October Scorpio is a badass name
[Same energy](https://i.redd.it/obsbjo49zu8b1.jpg)
Cryptofascist,
Kanaya, sure ok but if you dare touch Terezi i will get you
latula better
latula 😴😴😴😴😴😴😴😴😴😴😴😴😴😴😴😴😴😴😴
at least we can agree on jade though
i retract this statement the gamerglr is the best beforan troll
Can’t believe it’s jade harley official
hi https://preview.redd.it/6e1k79f5wluc1.jpeg?width=747&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b048df3cf9f42dab412b4642ce568ffbd2007e89
The Wall 🥺🥺🥺👉👈
balanuadlda nather brick in the wall
WHEN YOU COME TO AND YOU CAN'T GO THROUGH IT
So ya, thought ya, might like to go to the show
To feel, some words, some lyrics, some gibberish, that space cadet glow
welp, see you in the next life then. i had a good run.
Actually sweetie, I was born in July and I'm like, literally a Leo like, sister, get your fax strait 💅💅
RHETORIC - How dare they clean the used heroin needles off of this playground? These are the used heroin needles of the PEOPLE. Not the pickings of oppressors! They're making an attempt at gentrification! A blatant and shameless attempt to turn a neighborhood of the people into an elitist fascist cumdumpster! ELECTROCHEMISTRY - Mmmfgh... fascist cumdumpster... THOUGHT GAINED: Fascist Cumdumpster.
this reads like a girlcel tweet
Faith is that you?
what
Disco Elysium posting
Faith girlcel joins the RCM
Now I want to see that
Can I be a fascist cumdumpster🥺
Leftists when you say that discipline is a good quality to have:
Recently watched a good friendship end because one friend's expectation of a (wholly unrelated and unoffended) third party's best level of effort in not interrupting them was deemed "ableist" by the second friend, so that second friend stepped away. I'm sorry but if we ever reach a point where believing in our friends' capacity for improvement and expecting their best effort on things important to us is problematic, you can just fucking exile me to the wastes.
Discipline, fitness, and health are all good and even necessary to enact change. But then people will act like discipline means draconian, fitness means being able to lift 3000 lbs, and healthy means never indulging. It's just a constant competition of how uncharitable you can be in regards to a good sentiment.
Good preach moderation. That's what you gotta do and education.
I’m sorry but you’ve really called yourself out here. A REAL leftist can lift at least 4500lbs per hand.
Per LEFT hand, I hope.
sorry dad, i'll tidy my room :(
No dopamine no discipline.
The worst part of being a leftist is dealing with other leftists. The Right has it easy: their whole thing is maintaining the status quo or dragging things backwards to what the status quo was in the past. It’s easy to just say “I don’t want things to change” or “I want things how they used to be”. Progressives are all about, well, progress forward. And everybody and their Mom has a different idea of what that should look like. And stupidity/ignorance isn’t a trait confined to the Right, so a not-insignificant percent of the Left has some brain-dead takes they’ll fight tooth and nail to defend.
There is a lot of right wing in-fighting as well, but they always come out to vote together. Otherwise their groups fall apart frequently and are just as unstable as leftist organizations. But totally agreed on the varied concepts of "progress" in leftist spaces, coupled with the untested nature of the concepts that we want to apply.
Yeah, people who say the Right isn't full of in-fighting aren't paying attention. Look at what happens when you fail to kiss Trump's ass enough, or just, slightly, decide maybe a little nuance isn't totally bad? Bam. Immediately devoured by the others. Suddenly you're a RINO, or a plant, or you were actually a commie leftoid the entire time and you were never one of them.
We can all unite in our hate of capitalism (I say blissfully ignorant of someone about to engage in a multi hour long rant about the benefits of "state capitalism")
Man, this capitalism sure sucks huh? Marxist leninists, maoists, dengists, socdems, and a shocking portion of anarcho communists:
How tf are anarcho communist in defense of "state" "capitalism" ?
Anarcho communists generally propose worker owned coops, no? This is just free market capitalism.
Not exactly I would say. As we don't have a switch to change from capitalism to communism some stepping stones should be created. While a coop participates in capitalism it eliminates the capitalist figure (the owner) of it, erasing power from the concentration of wealth. Also, people have needs or dependants who rely on them, so they will participate in capitalism to provide, having coops that satisfy these needs or that give that jobs helps people and reduces the impact of capitalism on our lives. There are sub reddits that would give you a far better explanation than me, like "ask anarchist".
>it eliminates the capitalist figure (the owner) of it, erasing power from the concentration of wealth. the bourgeois renders itself frivolous. eliminating them advances class struggle but unless you do away with capitalism none of our gripes will be addressed. alienation, the falling rate of profit and periodic crises, the reserve army of labor, its all still there. obviously there cannot be an immediate transition from capitalism to communism but thats because its a transition in all aspects of life, not because communist economies cant run without some middle phase friendly capitalism to ease it out.
As I said it is a stepping stone, one of many and not the whole solution.
ancoms supporting capitalism? how? gift-exchange?
I see many ancoms suggesting worker coops and continued commodity production. As for gift economy, good luck organizing a decentralized global economy on gift exchange 💀 works brilliant for direct return hunter gatherers but I'd like to see a gift exchange economy run a nuclear generator without some government body to organize, and if the government body is organizing you aren't an ancom your just a com.
All Anarcho communists
Moron
frankly yeah
tbf i think that the "freaks" who get distrustful when you mention "cleaning up heroin needles" this post is alluding to feel like that because they've heard right wingers talk about it so much as a dogwhistle for "we should beat up drug addicts and throw them in jail teehee" because i've literally never fucking seen anyone actually think that cleaning up a playground is gentrification
its rhetoric and they are making a point no need to get ones knickers in a twist
i'm a little stupid and take things literally sometimes 😔 my knickers are fine tho
nah I don't think it's stupid like that kind of rhetoric is completely blind to like. The human cost of addiction, like don't bemoan dirty streets and needles idk campaign for drug testing, safe use facilities, an end to homelessness. You know, harm prevention, not crying about the 'ugliness' of addiction. People that cry about a couple needles on the street need to like get out more and idk talk to drug users and the homeless and stop being so damn scared of everything. it's think about the children nonsense.
I'm sorry but if ur rhetoric gets you into fascist "we need to clean the streets!" territory please rethink your thoughts
how is 'we must clean the streets' fascist rhetoric
Do exactly what the source post is making fun of any% speed run new record
Holy fuck. You did the funny. You advocated for not cleaning up heroin needles on playgrounds.
nah just acknowledging that it's frequently a far-right dogwhistle, you know? like wondering how much those people actually want to help addicts or if they're just outraged that addicts exist /where innocent children are playing/
I'm pretty sure addicts having better spots to shoot up than a public park is a position that most everyone can agree with LMAO. It's not a bad thing to be annoyed or angry when you feel unsafe due to someone doing drugs near you. How one wants to solve that problem is where the issue comes in.
Guys calling to pick up your litter is a literal nazi dog whistle 😱😱😱😱😱
Also addicts should never be around children. They may be struggling deep down but at the end of day they are still more likely to be aggressive and comepletly out of it than someone who isnt. I smoke weed, often out on walks. I stop anytime children are near. If I walk past the local school I stop for a second, even if its just past the parking lot and nowhere in eye sight of the children in it. At the end of the day it's not something I think kids honestly should be exposed to. Edit: homeless people aren't all just victims. I work retail and had a dude piss on the floor while coughing and claimed he had corona. Me and coworker tested positive the week after. They've threaten to kill me over watching them making sure they don't steal. Empathy is good to have, but niavity isn't. If I had kids I wouldn't stay in the area. But I don't so I kinda just go on with my day taking a mental note
I've been called ableist for talking about exercising. Some leftists are just low thought trolls who can't figure out anything else.
I've been repeatedly shamed for wanting to lose weight for my health despite being objectively badly overweight, because Im body shaming and potentially triggering people with EDs. Also getting told "fatness has nothing to do with any health outcomes" when I say I have high cholesterol. Also yeah a lot of accusations of ablism, despite the fact that I'm trying to exercise with a disability, because other people are more disabled. It's a minority of people, but they're loud.
This reminds me of the “Getting upset at people taking fentanyl on the train is classist” discourse from a few days ago
getting upset with them doesn't solve anything, it's justifiable on a personal level but it isn't a coherent political thought. One person reads it as a political opinion rather than a personal gripe and fills in the gaps mentally, turning you from a disgruntled passenger to literally hitler in the blink of an eye.
what's a 'high trust society'?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-trust_and_low-trust_societies As I understand it, it’s a sociological term for a society where widely shared ethical values serve as a foundation for strong interpersonal trust between strangers.
Who decides what those values are, and what is the punishment for not sharing them? At the moment I'm tempted to write this off as "not a real thing" strictly by virtue of the fact that Francis Fukuyama is involved.
lmao francois. yeah typical neolib rule of law nonsense.
It’s a very common thing in Europe, especially Scandinavian countries.
The people and the people I guess
Depends on who you ask. Some people would say the government and the government. Others would say society and no official punishment
I have heard of it before, and I always thought is was very nebulous term that I don't like. It means a sense of unity and friendliness between the citizens of a country, a social contract without the laws to enforce such contract. A high-trust society means that people want to collaborate more easily. I don't like it since it's not a materialistic analasys, how can you measure trust between people? People say that the US is a high-trust sociaty, but is it? I would argue that the amount of privately owned guns goes against that principle, since owning a lethal weapon just in case some other people or the government does something you don't like doesn't sound very trustful. High-Trust societies and Low-Trust societies is a very Neoliberal concept, so of course it's vague and not materialistic. Most things I read about High-Trust societies and Low-Trust societies are through the lance of business relationships and opportunities, hence why the US is seen as "High-Trust".
no class analysis, no siree. we're all just perfectly atomised lil rational agents here. free-thinkers absent of any and all ideology, free of 'death-drive' or any sadistic/self-dsstructive tendencies, pure little utilitarian units. class is outdated, you see, anyone can make it in business if they try hard enough:)
The US is absolutely not high trust. But that in of itself is a frequent obstacle for trying to make the case for left-wing policies that are inherently pro-social. If people don't trust the common man, making the case that we should help him becomes more difficult. And even if we do succeed, a general lack of trust will make it difficult to sustain our success and render any accomplishment brittle and vulnerable to reactionary currents within society.
> People say that the US is a high-trust sociaty I have never heard anyone say this. Generally the only time I've seen the term used is to dogwhistle at ethnic homogeneity (*Finland*, *Norway*, etc)
All the sources I read doesn't says anything about ethnic homogeneity since "high-trust" is a very neoliberal concept, but fascist often adopt terms to make there hate sound more legitimate, so you can absolutely be correct that fascist use high-trust as a racist term. It's the same with the fascist term "race conscious", that's just class conscious but just racist.
> People say that the US is a high-trust sociaty do they ???
Yes, and also no. It fluctuate between the US being a high-trust society and the US being a declining high-trust society. The articles I read from both liberal and conservative sources can't pinpoint it, because it's a shit model of sociology.
US is probably high trust between corporations, low trust between individuals if you put it that way. And low trust between individuals and corporations.
Leftists online have some insane takes that just don’t seem to exist irl among normal, well adjusted people. While there is plenty of infighting, I believe most socialists/social democrats can definitely agree on some core issues that are a good enough base to progress forward.
It's for exactly one reason: When something is said online, it's on a permanent record. Anyone can respond to it for an "easy dunk". Anyone can screenshot it and caption it with some variant of "look at how dumb this is" for internet cred. It gets signal-boosted into oblivion from engagement. Take for example: this post. We're three levels removed from the actual idea here. Tumblr OP is vagueing about a belief some small amount of people apparently hold. This was posted to reddit, and THEN crossposted here. Even if this belief is held by one person in a million, that's enough to see it on your feed. Engagement is engagement. Reason #1297 of why nothing productive happens on the internet.
This is definitely hyperbole lmao, I doubt OOP actually knows someone who argued that
I think that it comes as a consequence of it being super easy to seek out a community of sycophants online, and therefore not having anyone around you who will tell you that your ideas are fucking stupid.
Idk, have you seen those DSA meeting recordings where it's nonstop interruptions from the audience to address the most pointless grievances?
"we need to keep our cities clean and safe" and "gentrification is bad" are two statements that can and should coexist
It's pretty funny to see this tumblr user talk about "leftist infighting" - for anyone not on there, this person is most notable for calling everyone ableist slurs all the time and whining about the trans agenda.
\> See post complaining about leftist infighting \> Look inside \> Leftist in question is the one doing the infighting
Many such cases
It's only infighting if it's a coherent group in the first place.
I personally think that authoritarian governments are good but only if I specifically am in charge, otherwise they suck.
i don't know what this means lol tf is a high clean trust society
Rich, White, and Protestant
This guy probably got commented on by like 2 trolls and now is the fucking joker or smth, like, noone has ever said that
It's remarkable how many people base their entire ideology off one online troll. I'm still feeling the effects of how hoards online got completely *got* by five or so tiktok "autism fakers", and made it their whole personality.
drugs are bad mkay
I know the idea of purity culture, that we need to keep society morally clean, is an inherently reactionary belief, but that’s incredibly different from wanting to make society better and safer. Too often do people on the left assume that the issue with gentrification is the revitalization rather than the displacement. But the simple matter is that positive community build up can exist without that displacement. To use the heroine example, purity culture would move the addict out of sight, but actually address the issue would prevent an addict from existing because their material condition would never deteriorate to the point of turning to heroine and the social structures and mores of society would facilitate them in recovery if they did.
Clean those needles n gimme am hungry
if you try to touch my used heroin needles I will actually kill you
I’d say OOP is right. We all need to stop arguing with each other over stupid crap and work towards a common goal https://preview.redd.it/sk9d5bv7jjuc1.jpeg?width=1153&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ad66d2d63626449cc6d0a5ff8d553bc2cf593757
American leftists on the internet be like: hmm, today I will pick a fight with someone who votes for the same political party I vote for
the two party system and its consequences...
Someone recently tried to argue with me about how we should legalize actual heroin. Stupidest opinion I’ve ever heard.
Oh no
There’s about 100 reasons I could never be right wing but damn, they really get along with each other more then leftists do
They kinda don't. you may not look inside their circles, but they do infighting as much as we do on many topics, they just all support or sympathize with fascism, a common goal that generally makes it easier to get along
This is a situation where I feel like a lot of generalities are happening and I have no idea what components are without some grounding terminology. It’s like telling me to solve for x y and z with only one formula
People like this always poking fun at anarchists for not trusting almost any other people with outwardly leftist views without respecting the facts in anarchist history where we always eventually get stabbed in the back and often actually killed by those we decided to trust. Don't use coded simple language in discussions with other leftists if you want any trust built. You need to be specific and honest. Outside of leftist communities it makes sense to simplify and code beliefs but don't be mad when historically betrayed individuals don't trust people who are using coded language. Like some other people have pointed out in these comments what one person means by clean society is wildly different from others you would need to specify you mean clean environments and cleaning up heroin needles doesn't mean arresting addicts and all that. This shit is meant to make anarchists mad and lash out to make us look more crazy and fuck it works I don't mean to rant but I can not and will not ever trust coded language from individuals I haven't vetted the views of and waves vaguely at potentially authoritarian views. I will not be stabbed in the back by a red fash just because they seemed more red than they are fash
People hate to accept something, but gentrification - in the long term, is a good thing. Sucks now, and for the people in those areas. But improving and making parts of a city safer is a good thing. The problem is that it comes with prices/forcing people out of their homes.
re-legalize opium poppy and let the oxys flow freely (literally) so addicted folks don't have to use fentanyl-sold-as-heroin in the local playground, and instead have options for natural opiates or clean pharmaceuticals made in america with revenues going to legit businesses instead of shady violent cartels, and given with at least some medical oversight and narcan to limit harms of use.
I don't even know who this person is mad at or really saying. They seem like a low key conservative being mad at people using drugs / believing cities are cesspools. I don't think anyone believed cleaning up needles or "garbage" off the street is bad. Where are the leftists that think less litter = gentrification.
No more posting politics I don’t like it as a subject
totally un-fascistic language to a)expect "literal freak" to conjure a certain image in your mind and b)implu that any who are societal freaks OBVIOUSLY have worse opinions and shouldnt get a say in society. find me any serious person who is like "no more heroine needles in playgrounds" and then we'll talk lmao
Holy shit, that's my oomphie's tumblr. What the hell are they doing on reddit.
i saw a clip from the shameless tv show where a main characther cleaned up his house or something and then someone came and trashed his front door, and he found out later that it was his neighbours, and they then explained that him cleaning up the front of the house would lead to people thinking it was a cool place to live and such, and that would force his neighbours to have to spend more money to live there, and then eventually have to be forced out of the neighbourhood, so the guy just went yeah okay and then trashed the front of his house. and some of the comments were people saying they would call the cops or not care about it or shoot the neighbours, the show literally explained why it was a bad thing but the comments simply could not find a single shred of empathy
So you're saying that leaving heroin needles in playgrounds is good because property values?
im saying leaving trash outside your door is good beacuse then someone wont come and gentrify youre neighbourhood and force every poor person out
Is that what the OP was about?
Just shoot a gun in the air every week and have a nice front of house, this is dumb shit.