I'm not a leftist but I'm genuinely curious

I'm not a leftist but I'm genuinely curious.

What sort of leftism do you subscribe to, and why?

Other urls found in this thread:


I can smell you COINTELPRO

I'm a communist. I don't think I fall under the banner of "leftism."

How do you figure?

I'm basically a socially-liberal ML

Anarcho Syndicalism

Workers unions and co-ops are objectively better than privately run companies. That and I want more direct democracy.

I think we need to ascend past capitalism and our current primitive ideas concerning social relations and governance. Workers need control over their own lives and the memes of production. Environmental issues take precedent, followed shortly by economic issues.

I'm more friendly to left id-pol than this site, but I absolutely hate representation and muh privilege ranking as a political ideal/way to form/judge social movements.

i smell a fed

Seems like this strategy has divided more people no? So why does the left continue screaming and hollering it when it continues to harm your cause?

Elaborate on this if possible, specifically worker unions being a superior option.

Libertarian Socialism and Mutualism.

Sure, here's an article


Posadism, as it allows me to hope something good will come out of the upcoming end of civilization.


I'm under the impression that the co-op option would only succeed in more rural areas, rather than major cities.

I'm a Leninist but I have doubts about giving the state control directly after the revolution. Also I want a democracy. Some times I lean more towards council communism.

There is a lot of reasons why, but none of them pan out in my opinion.

The main reason is and I assume this is also true for people doing extreme IDPOL on the reactionary side is they think it is the best way to achieve what they want socially out of society. In some sense you can see the good intentions, people who have less muh privilege generally have less say in society, so giving them a voice seems like a logical/good way to hear concerns about society and allow them to have their day in the sun. The problem is of course that in a given group or governmental system the least muh privileged person in the room might not be the most charismatic, smart or generally equipped to fronting a political movement. So we end up with situations like the Colbert interview of occupy.

There is also the problem of IDPOL being used cynically to represent the economic status quo's interests this is true of both sides in fact I'd say the last election gave us two extremely egregious examples of deep idpol ideology on both sides. Hillary was the peak of "representational" idpol at it's worst. Race and gender wedge issues are usually a bulwark for capitalism.

Which is another reason why people from the top encourage it, it's divisive and breaks up a burgeoning movement to entertain these ideas. It also makes people who are against the gains in representation at the expense of actually addressing real political issues look mean, backward, regressive, reactionary etc.

State socialism with extensive worker's control, and then FALC.

Ancom. Mostly for the autonomy, partly for the environmentalism, partly because I just like humans and don't want them to be exploited.


I'm less well-read on political theory than most posters here, so I'm just sort of naive blanket socialist at the moment.


Because I don't want to make money for one individual's profit.

My man

I don't have a clue.