Objective scientific movement

Marxism is specifically about material conditions and observable facts. I don't know where you're getting idpol from. It's science, plain and simple. Most of Marxist theory is just economics. Read, nigger.

Marxism is already scientific, you aren't starting anything new, tripfag. And no, you can't use this to increase the size of your e-peen.

so much astroturfing

not an argument

i don't care about your ideology, dumbass.
thats not the point.
if you're not interested, you can fuck off, no one is holding you back.

sure, go ahed, but i must warn you from now that using statistics on individuals is a fallacy.

Yea, and lets not forget the fact that g**mans are the shittiest race in europe.

go back to reddit

WAT. How do you even intend to do this when, short of starvation, conflict, and war, wellbeing is a highly abstract and ideologically motivated thing?

the whole point is to stop idpoler from using pseudo scientific bullshit
its not about arguning which ideology is better because like already said, there is allot of subjective in ideology.

But you haven't posted any pictures of Anglos there.

I mean they even managed to ruin their own empire by virtue of stabbing Rhodesia in the back so hard, and sanctioning it so hard that they were the only nation to be as harshly sanctioned as Germany was.

Then Africa collapsed in a cascade and they gave away land to the nogs as if it was clearance sale candy.

There is no people on this planet that has such a penchant of shooting itself in the foot as anglos.
At least from that generation.

Man is always more driven by ideology than by fact. You can't change that. The only ideologist here is you. The reality is that man does not live in your books. Objective science is just as a spook at puritanical moralism.

sounds g-
oooh.

The issue is what is an objective fact?

I got banned by some vol for NINE WEEKS for bringing up the fact that climate change models are funded by porky and cannot be trusted. Not to mention that environmental laws are rarely respected by the big porkies and are another method porky uses to extract money from the working class.

Count me in!

This. The earth is flat.

Well lucky for you, this already exists. Let me introduce you to RATIONALIA

Zizek's explaining of the European triad through toilets sounds a bit absurd, but he is pretty much right. There is no such thing as post-ideological pragmatism: what we perceive as pragmatic is colored through ideological lenses.
Nonetheless, we try to come as close as possible to ideology based on facts of reasoning. Marx and Kropotkin are way more scientific than "feels over reals" fascism.

If you just wanna make cool science stuff why are you proposing this here on leftypol?

the purest ideology of them all

so i was thinking, since most alt-cucks "arguments" are based off memes (pictures with various charts of questionable origin)

wouldn't it be wise to make counter memes ?, take their pic, debunk it and frame it back ?

attempting to transcend ideology is the purest form of ideology

A science-based movement would involve breaking down America's ridiculous puritan bullshit that says it's bad to be attracted to teen girls that biology says are attractive just because some jealous feminists decided it's bad so they could get laid by stopping guys from going after superior girls. Unfortunately most of the American left believes this retarded unscientific bullshit, mostly because roasties are in control of it, including the moderators of this board. They won't allow their dogma to be publicly questioned. They'll ban you for disagreeing with them.

This isn't the only thing, though. Having a rationalist movement would necessitate the advocacy of many, many positions which are currently unpopular in the US. You want a rationalist movement? Try moving to another country, because Americans are hopelessly retarded. TBH the rest of the world should just cut off relations with America immediately. Even the "progressives" and socialists here are fucking insane. America is the most cancerous fucking country in the world.

they only care about data that reinforces their opinion

That's not limited to the alt-right. You can see it with anyone.

never implied otherwise

so what ? we just sit back and watch them spread lies ? till one day they start burning books and rewrite history because it doesn't fit their narrative

You are not going to find much support here.
Holla Forums is just as anti-science and against objective reality as Holla Forums.
I honestly do not know of a place that one can escape such silly romanticists.

t. Eternal Anglo

sounds like sam harris style nonsense
pure ideologues who pretend to be neutral

You deserve to be permabanned for that frankly

"Radical Centrist" cuck detected. Get out, brainlet.

.t Cleric of Technology

We've been through this, we're anti scientism/positivism, not science. You already failed to argue for in the last positivism thread, and it's still a bad argument.

Hell I would say I'm generally for positivism but that's not the same as supporting autistic technofascism Howard.

define "science and facts"

you sound like you're 13

...

I'd recommend reading Horkheimer's "Eclipse of Reason"

I continue to maintain that I was not him.
I do not post on this board without my trip and as such any of that posters view do not necessarily reflect my own.

I do love the double think.

I only made a small number of posts in that thread.
I never advanced such an argument in it.

Please do feel free to explain how exactly my views are a form of Fascism.
Given that I reject corporatism and as such not a proponent of fascism by definition; I would be interested in what asinine and objectively incorrect definition of Fascism you hold.

I have two main objections.
Firstly, it is Legalism, not neo-confucianism that is the Chinese philosophy integrated into my ideology.
Secondly, an army is not the same as a stratocratic state.

I will give you points for the term 'tech-temples' however.
I may just assimilate that term myself.

it's almost as tripfags act retarded for attention…

You sympathised with the villains in the movies while growing up and never grew out of the aesthetic which has now made up the entirety of your politics.
"I want the government to make everyone be happy and to look cool the way I imagine it" is the extent of political thought I had when I was ten.
I appreciate the attempts to single-handedly revive a dead political movement from the 30s, I feel the same way about the aesthetic and approach of the Kibbo Kift Kindred and the Social Credit party in the UK.
But your fantasy is childish and ahistorical. When I describe it as 'autistic' I mean it sincerely and not a s a term of abuse, its an unhealthy fetishisation, obsession and lack of empathy.

...

t. post-anarcho-deleonist

Sure.
Plenty of people do, that does not make them autistic.

Please feel free to expound upon this.
What aesthetic are you referring to?
Military uniforms? - Common enough in Prussia and Imperial Germany.
Brutalism? - A common architectural style for decades.

Just because something is old or not currently popular, does not make it bad or incorrect.
I could name several dead ideologies on this board alone that have one or some small number of people attempting to revive it.

I do not want to repeat another poster.
But please do try and remember your own advertised ideology.

Do you know what just about every new Chinese dynasty did?
They counted the year that they came to power as either 'year 0' or 'year 1' with all of Chinese history before that being dated in the negatives.
One does not need to have much concern for history, when they intend to fundamentally break from how things have been in the past.

you can't make this shit up

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

A proposition that's true whether you believe it or not.

TBH there are a lot of people here who are completely fucking useless, mostly Reddit immigrants. You can always pick them out because they unironically advocate feminism, hate anime and use terms like STEMlord. They're invariably the most spooked among us in virtually every respect. The world would be better if they didn't exist.

t. scientist

...

Ok here's my issue with this:
If you plan on utilizing science to form an ideology, then whatever science seems to point to for the time being will become the ideological dogma. When new facts which contradict the ideological dogma come up, it must either be suppressed or the ideology must be reconstructed. However, you will always find stragglers of any ideology who will deny new facts in favor of the old. Essentially, the golem of ideology formed by current scientific understanding will inevitably become a hostile force should new scientific findings contradict the ideology. One of the two must be destroyed and the conflict will always see casualties.

Ideology should ALWAYS seek to separate itself from science. It's the only way to keep science honest.
The perfect ideology should be one which stands independent of what scientific understanding says.

Yep.
The sky is purple.
The earth is a cube
Gravity doesn't exist.

What even is the logic behind this hatred of attempting to understand the world objectively?
Yes, we can't tell what we SHOULD do from objective facts, that's the purpose of philosophy, but they're still extremely useful.

...

Oh, a planned on posting this image along side this post:

the fact that you believe "facts" are "propositions that are true whether you believe it are not" is laughable. science is ever-changing, not ahistorical, and facts do not exist within a vacuum. read Thomas Khun's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.

t. an actual scientist

LYSENKOISM IS REEL

Reddit's scientific knowledge is the equivalent of someone who calls themselves "such a nerd" because they beat the Deku Tree in Ocarina of Time and stopped there. Their idea of science is whatever the media tells them it is.

It fucking is. I was not aware this was in dispute.
In fact, this entire thread can be seen as an attempt at solving the problem of modern day Lysenkoism. I, however, am positing that a science based ideology would make the problem worse.

Let me guess, you're a social "scientist."

Yes our understanding is ever expanding, but it's pragmatic to base our actions off of the best available information.
Just because the scientific method is a way to ever expand knowledge doesn't mean that it's current results are useless.

lysenko was basically the predecessor to epigenetics
he doesn't deserve half the slander he gets

I'm a clinician working in neurorehab. Try again.

Never stated that. The quasi-rhetoric the dude I quoted is spouting is bordering on scientism, which is still idpol/an ideology-driven pursuit. Dogmatic reverence to "objectivism" in scientific terms, is, again, an ideology-driven pursuit.

Being the janitor who cleans up after a neurosurgeon doesn't count.

It's really easy to fetishise science and to appropriate it as a mask for technocratic domination. Worshipping science in itself is stupid as fuck because you are idolising the means in themselves while forgetting completely about the end. That's what Adorno meant with 'instrumental rationality. Most of the science worshippers in here are either power trippers who see themselves as an objective technocratic elite or bugman who can't wait to be enslaved to muh objective AI overlord. I can't understand that desire to snuff out every subjectivity but your own.

1: Lesenko didn't come up with the idea of the heritability of acquired traits.
2: that's not even what epigenetics is.
3: he's not criticized for being wrong, he's criticized for not accepting that he was wrong despite his wrongness being demonstrated before him.

Uh, right. So what's your point, again?

I think the main reason behind people wanting to snuff out all subjectivity is because it's a reaction to people claiming their subjective opinions, preferences and feelings are fact and attempting to force others to submit and conform to them.
Whereas I think the real solution would be to remove such people from positions of power.
Reinforce the idea that objectivity does exist, but then so does subjectivity.

But should it be global facts averaged out or facts for specific regions to more accurately represent a region?

Depends on what scale you're looking at.
If you're trying to find something out globally use global scale.

That I know your type. I've seen how the anti-logic faggot brigade has tried to insinuate themselves into the STEM community. People who fundamentally hate the practice of science and logic know that the label of "scientist" can be politically useful. That's how we get this new generation of "electrical engineers" who can't fucking solder and "programmers" who know nothing about optimization, don't know any language besides Java and can't even use an array in the rare instance that they've even heard of C++, but they can talk up a storm about diversity and how class-blind liberal politics is the best because it's against all those woman hating gamergoobers, and don't forget that if you even look at a girl who's 17 years, 364 days, 23 hours, 59 minutes and 59 seconds old you're literally worse than the KKK, ebola and ISIS combined. These people need to be driven out of the science and tech communities, because not only are they actively making these communities unpleasant and stifling to be a part of, they're fucking incompetent little shits who make unnecessary work for the people who actually know what the fuck they're doing by forcing them to spend all their time fixing the diversity tards' fuckups.

Someone is mad as fuck at his pet strawman.

kek

Elaborate?
Is this a quip about science being ever-changing or are you talking demographics here (ie. crime stats or whatever)?
If the latter, this is an interesting point:
Stricter gun controls might be preferable in an area where gun violence is high whereas clamping down on gun ownership in low crime areas would just piss everyone off. However this may result in immigration to the less strict areas by those who wish to acquire guns and they may be liable to bring their crime with them.

This is embarrassing, dude. It isn't me, and you don't know my or probably anyone's 'type'. I really have no interest in diversity for the sake of diversity, etc., whatever your autistic rant was about. I'm just wary of scientific dogmatism. Like mentioned earlier in the thread, that has consistently led to fascistic or [xxxxxx]cratic impulses.

I've met people exactly like what I described. It's no strawman. I fucking wish it was. There's some shit you just can't make up.

btw, don't read this post specifically as a gun control one, but in the broader context of legislation in certain areas.

Maybe if people would stop acting like utter faggots there wouldn't be a need to use militaristic means to suppress them.

If you work with C++ daily then you are probably a shitty code monkey who works for pennies at an even shittier game development company. You aren't a scientist. You are no better than a fucking barista. Use C or go away.

...

C/C++ is the most worthless "language" ever invented. It was cool back during the 80s when it was the only game in town but now we have all these meme languages that do the same shit (i.e. allow brainlets to program) and are even better in many areas. C/C++ is only used by gaymez companies nowadays and if you work for one you should be embarrassed about it.

One of the largest elevator companies in my area programs its microcontrollers in C++ you ingrate.

...

I can only speak for SmartRise Elevators because they're the only one that I know for a fact which language they use. Though there is a competitor, Elevator Controls, which I believe use PLC's.

...

Are you equating scientism/positivism and science?

I take it that you support positivism? Explain the process by which an objective truth by scientific consensus becomes a falsehood when that consensus changes? Did the truthfulness of Newtonian physics change in the 20th century?

You've already entered ideology.

...

Only if you're a postmodernist.

Science is full of subjective interpretations.

Science has 3 main assumptions:
ie, stuff exists
ie, we can record data about said stuff
ie, the rules that stuff follows are always fundamentally the same
These are the same assumptions that any individual needs in order to function in reality.

Not to be confused with Science! (TM) which is basically a trendy buzzword for pseudo-intellectual liberals.

Marxism-Leninism-Cockshottism

From Hegel's Encyclopedia Logic:

Science isn't a purely "subjective seesaw system," but it moves beyond such subjective, one-sided determinations toward a further underlying truth due to the the contradictions currently present to us in the finite.

Here's a thread about porky autistically screeching about some based tech worker taking revenge. It provides an example of the problems we'd need to solve to construct a science-oriented movement free of "I Fucking Love Science LOL!" liberal hangers-on. The science and tech communities have a lot of classcucks. We'd need something to get them to abandon the life they have now and participate in something radical, which would be no easy task.

It's called Marxism Leninism.

/Thread

This fetishism over TANS is already getting old, Cockshott was not the first person to suggest the use of computers to efficiently plan an economy. All he did was endorse the idea as an expert.

Why?

Not 100% sure tbh. If I had to guess it's probly because C++ supports encapsulation.