Do we need an Alt-Left to distinguish ourselves from SJWs?

justice is a spook

Honestly, we just need an actual left, as opposed to liberals at worst and social democrats at best being purely representative of the "left", and being infested with SJW sentiment.

Dirtbag left is pretty good, anyone else embracing it?

i know but personally i quite like fairness

no, the last thing we need is to sound even more on-the-fringe than we already do

No. We are the left. They are the aberration.

"Fairness" is distinct from "justice", though.

Take, for instance, the whole trend of agrarian populism in pre-WW2 America running through Jefferson and Jackson, the Greenback and Populist parties, William Jennings Bryan, and Huey Long. Most of those people (some elements of Greenback/Populist and Long weren't but most were) were somewhere between willing to tolerate white supremacy and actually wanting it. Were we to want justice, that would mean we would have wanted these people to "suffer" in some way for having done so; they certainly were responsible for a great deal of suffering on the backs of people of color. But that's not our position, which is that every man ought to be freed from debt and property, even if they might have been excellent or whatever the fuck.

...

Let's stick to good old brocialism.

Fuck off, shill.

no it sounds gay

No. We should call ourselves the Real Left instead

No this is retarded

SJWs are the alt-left. We need to start labeling them as such.

Justice is vengeance in a uniform.

Fuck off.

It already exists but split into 3 factions. Enjoy
robertlindsay.wordpress.com/
altleft.com/
thealternativeleft.blogspot.com/2017/05/what-hell-happened-to-samizdat.html?m=1 (formerly Samizdat chronicles)

It was coined by a catholic reactionary, there's way too much religious baggage, even ostensibly secular advocates of social justice are obsessed with sin and control of behavior. Social justice is inherently anti-materialistic.

It was coined by

Where do you think you are?

He's referring to "social justice" and the "catholic reactionary" being Father Coughlin.

How about "post liberalism" or something to that effect? neo-marxism?

… I'd rather be called "alt left" than dumped in with SJWs.

dirtbag left is ok

No because we’re the Original left. the SJWs are the alt-left.

how about just "Communism"?

our opponents already lump SJWs in with communists. we need to distance ourselves from them.

Fuck off Holla Forums

I don't really think it's so serious an issue that we should create yet another label

this

The left is already full of jargon the average person doesn't understand. Let alone concepts and nuances of tendencies. This would only further confuse those learning about left politics.

No.
Let these spooked retards call us names or just generalize us into "the left" thats perfect.
But where not alt anything, we're not retards on their exact level. That implies we don't read and we do.

honestly I agree with most SJWs, I just wish they would accept that class muh privilege is like a billion times more important than any other

I keep saying that rebranding could work a miracle for the left, but alt-left is already poisoned.

ahahahahah

This post is hilarious as it means you're abandoning your own kind

There is nothing more funny than seeing leftards eating each others

>>>/facebook/

SJWs are the ALT-LEFT

This.

0/10 Bait

...

...

"anti-SJW" leftists are the worst thing to happen to this board, it brought nothing but a horde of Holla Forumstard NazBol posters who managed to use their brain on economics but still wanted a place that validates their spooks.

This sounds like the hot take of someone who wasn't even there for what he describes.

quality > quantity.
(though being actively "anti-SJW" is generally a signifier of low quality, as opposed to passively telling them to fuck off but not really pushing onto their turf.)

I think you mean "liberal"
or if you wanna be really specific "dino nuggie liberal"

Why? We already are liberals.

liberal != left

Liberals are all on the left, so are we. Therefor we are liberals too.

We ARE the left, there is no alt-left, just idpol and liberals.

liberals support capitalism, bourgeois democracy and class society. that's the opposite of left

...

act-left it is then

Liberals don't. Otherwise they wouldn't be on the street protesting like we do. We too are liberals.

I voted for Bernie though.

I disagree with the 'privilege' framing in general. Reminds me of when my mom used to tell me to eat my vegetables because black children in Africa are starving. It has turned into a perverse way of enforcing conformity and middle class values.

what's the value of 'fairness' within a system that is absurd as a whole?

social democrats and leftcoms are both on the left, therefore i am a leftcom.

howling.

A Skeleton Key to the Alt Left
hipcrimevocab.com/2017/04/30/a-skeleton-key-to-the-alt-left/

Yes, I understand completely. But he is crap and you're a stupid burger, so I can see how you'd be confused and bewildered.

>>>Holla Forums
There's literally nothing wrong with feminism and social liberalism.

Stay mad barneybro.

SJW isn't the same as feminism or social liberalism you carefag retard.

next you'll say "u brocialists are wrong to attack tumblrinas because TUMBLRS IS JUST A BLOGS WEBSITE, and NOT ALL TUMBLRS PPL ARE F*CKED IN THE HEAD"

nigga you a liberal

Well, tumblr does get a lot of undeserved shit. One minute you assholes are there ogling women, the next you're accusing everyone there of being opposed to hatred of women or some shit.

Meant to reply to
Not sure how to delete.

yeah

'feminism' is not an unitary thing, but a multiplicity of ideas, some of them opposed to each other. We have to look at those ideas critically historically, instead of as a monolithic movement of continuous progress culminating in the present, which is the mistake lots of liberals make. The ideas of 60s-70s radical feminists may seem downright strange or politically incorrect by today's standards, but they are part of a genealogy that continues to the present day.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_feminism

please go back to whatever reddit shithole you came from. 'It' brought nothing, it has been a part of the board since before it even had 50 members, and rightfully so since these faggots derail online discussion and bleed out into actual organization, which they also poison.

protesting what, how much they hate trump because he talked about groping cunt?

support for private property is the foundation of modern liberalism. that is the direct opposite of communism

I just woke up so you're not getting the pharmacist analogy again

...

At least 99% of feminist theory is good. Honestly even the "kill all men" extreme radfem stereotype is better than the average chanbro.

such as?

Liberals are only "left" on some social issues, but even those they grossly misinterpret.
Please lurk before posting if you are genuine.

...

Oh, I see, now. You're not taking this seriously. Good to know.

Is this a good place to start with feminism?

it's a good place to start with throwing things into the trash

...

...

Fuckin' is as far as I can see at the moment. I'm sure you can present me with a few edge cases who aren't doing fucking mental shit and I'll likely agree with you, they're doing good stuff. I'm still going to claim to be anti-feminist, though. The overwhelming majority are insane idpol cancer and the tumour is best resected.

Not that poster, but my thoughts:
Promoting equality or better conditions/rights for women around the world is a good thing. Not too much work is needed in the West in that regard, as for the typical female, if compared to other females' conditions elsewhere in the world.
You can be anti-third wave feminist(for the most part, the eccentric & extreme feminists) in the West, yet still be pro-feminist in general.

The main thing is just to promote anti-exploitation of anyone, period. But these rightist idpolers have tainted the words social justice & feminism for the average youth. Fighting for justice is never a bad thing. Identity politics just splinters people & brings out the selfishness/ego of people, which always destroys movements.

No, I will not be doing this. The womens movement is not "promote anti-exploitation of anyone". That's what feminism is, the womens movement. Look at the way you frame things in your initial line.

That's okay, too. It's just not an appropriate place for a man such as myself. It's transparently obvious to anyone with even half a brain that the only reason that there has been any attempt to actively induct men into feminism has been the arrival of the MRAs on the scene.

You should also face the fact that the words "social justice and feminism" have been tainted not by the right but by their proponents. It's all very well to do things like scream "Kill all men" on twitter, but it takes the piss to then expect all but the silly of men to stand in solidarity with your movement.

I'm still quite happy to support feminists where I think a persuasive, evidence based case has been made.

You seem pretty spooked, my man.
Of course, feminism is specifically a women's issue. My saying
is obviously a different issue in itself - mainly economic exploitation.

I'm saying you can fight for both. Most of us here believe that once the economic system is sorted out - becomes grounded & more equal -
that these issues will be solved easier. But until then, fight for all in the mean time - men, women, everyone. But don't let those specific movements overshadow class politics, because as I said, these issues will be much easier to tackle once it is reformed/replaced.

I'm sure someone else here can explain this better.

Of course, I never stated otherwise. In fact, I specifically said in my last paragraph that idpol in general taints it - meaning the idpol right & liberals. That's even the main theme of this thread…

I take it you're very new here.

How about look at countries with oppressive treatment of women? Are you saying there's no evidence that women are oppressed in certain parts of the world? I already said that in the West there's not much more to be done. Our focus in the West should be dismantling the oppressive economic system that burdens us all. That should be the focus in other countries as well, but in some places women aren't allowed to participate in the reforming, which needs to be tackled if encountered.

While this is a nice sentiment in practice it ignores the simple fact that most of us have 24 hours in a day.
Time spent fighting to ensure better social mobility for women is time not spent fighting class division. I mean, as a simple practical matter for each individual involved. I mean, what am I to do about the poor treatment of women in Saudi Arabia anyway?

Yes, time spent fighting for Social Democracy is also time not spent fighting capitalism, but this emphasises my time-division point. Since there will always be feminists - or social democrats for that matter - socialists can broadly speaking ignore fighting on those issues while acting in loose alliance when mutually beneficial, rather than spending valuable time arguing about female CEOs and railway nationalisation.

Yes, but these idiots are actually sjw's so don't expect any reasoning in here.

I think there's more feminist threads on leftypol than twitter

...

...

that poster looks like ass

Every. time. ;)
Fair enough, it's all relative. Do what you're able.

But don't at the same time say that women aren't oppressed socially in parts of the world, is my main point. That poster used the term "anti-feminist" which rubbed me the wrong way, lmao.

tbh this just reads like "feminism is communism but we're not gonna call it that."
class domination in particular is not an ideological problem, it is a material problem. ideology merely mediates the conditions of material domination.

Old Left.

Shift-left? Del-left? Insert-left? Home-left? End-left?

I really should start writing down the names of all the kulaks who unironically used used "alt-left".

On the other hand, I'd gladly adopt the label if we somehow managed to equate it with a more libertarian, democratic socialism that still includes Marxists.

wat

hooks is an embarrassing fraud and idiot

the alt-left and alt-right are basically the same

dont forget to sage this thread

You don't you're one in the same, in all your policy, in all your responses, even when you digress its always a case of, "I disagree, but basically I agree". There's a shit ton of Id-pol everywhere, and people complain about it, but those threads are always the most popular with several serious contributors feeding the autistic flame. Even if this board wasn't populated by reddit, its just inevitable that leftism attracts the lowest common denominator of humanity, because it feeds into two ideas; that they're equal to superior people, and that in the 'new order' they'll be higher up in the food chain. Coincidentally these fringe ideas are not only the basis for leftist politics, but for all leftism in general. The majority of interest in having leftist political discussions will be from people overlapping but tied together through the general ideas of marxist egalitarianism. People like me who've become interested from a point of total disregard for egalitarianism or the 'justice' of it are put off. This is why leftism fails. Leftism will never come from leftist people or leftist states. It is an end-game response to an economy in which work is unnecessary, the people are limited in number, and resources are so plentiful that they might as well be limitless. Leftists hate the truth that the only state which can support Marxism is one in which there is no diversity in the people, state mandated eugenics, and a state which is perpetually at war or has killed off the rest of humanity. All these things are the opposite of what a leftist believe, but this is the truth. You cannot kill the fear of scarcity without killing first the idea of it. And you cannot afford to support genetic duds in a limited population society.

This response is an simply irritating sermon.

I already stated I was not interested in doing so and do not feel it appropriate. To persistence in attempting to proselytize is insulting.

Oh?

This is clearly an attempt to attribute blame to opponents.

If you think that, you must be a reasonably recent migrant to the site yourself.

Being against, say, the prevalence of rape in India does not require me condone an ideology I have a deep antipathy for and who's followers have a bad habit of behaving like Jehovah's Witnesses…

hooks writings are utter drivel.

Ironically your entire response is

Maybe this is why I have to keep repeating myself, because you don't understand the first time. I am clearly trying to show you the difference between third wave/liberal feminism & actual feminist causes.
Christ. You're definitely a burger.
Oh &
I've been here for years, which is why I can tell you're new. No one here takes those liberal talking points seriously as you are.

Yet you then go on to respond to section that is otherwise, as well as ignoring my statement that I am not interested and will not.

You keep repeating yourself because you're unable to accept, like the Jehovahs Witness, that I understand your argument and reject it. I do not care how many variants of the "not my feminism" argument you make. Go back to my initial post and read it again.

Wrong.

It is a single example that springs easily to mind in a years-long litany of encounters. I am not new. You sound like a plebbit migrant.

Regardless, this discussion is at an end. I am an anti-feminist. Goodbye.

Why even apply that label? Are you not first & foremost just a leftist? That's what mainly got my attention in the first place; your caring so much about that liberal nonsense idpol. I was simply trying to let you know that fighting against female oppression, like other social justice causes in general is not automatically a bad thing.

I'd also like to point out that the close mindedness shown here is pretty ironic, given your post subject.