ITT you post shit that is so shitty you don't even mind to argue against

ITT you post shit that is so shitty you don't even mind to argue against

Other urls found in this thread:

spiritofcontradiction.eu/rowan-duffy/2014/03/19/working-class-hero
youtu.be/PWHaHgSWU0w?t=256
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Why isn't Socialism identity politics?
Proles may identify as proles (especially if they are Socialists) and blacks may identify as blacks. However both have existing physical reality and exist as identities.

Socialism is literally idpol, as much as black idpol or feminism is idpol.

Are you saying this as a capitalist or as an SJW? Because knowing where you're coming from is important for forming a dialog

Class is not innate and unchanging.

Being a boss makes you inherently oppressive, being white does not. Being black might make certain forms of injustice more likely but it's not literally defined by being controlled by someone else like being working class.

being a prole is more of an enforced identity that is maintained by status quo. We call Communism the movement of the proles because it explicitly wants to better their conditions and make them non-proles. We don't want to make some kind of "worker and proud!!11!!" identity (though we are grateful for our workers), we want to abolish workers and class as a whole.

This is in opposition to what we on the left would call "idpol", where the given identitarian movement itself is based off excepting and trying to forward ones identity as a substitute for meaningful socioeconomic action to try to improve the world.

To summarize, to be idpol is to wallow in your identity as if it has any political significance, to be Communist is to recognize that, whether you like it or not, you are a prole, and being a prole is god awful, their for you wish to eliminate capitalism and the existing power structure in order to no longer have to be a prole. You can identify as an identity (woman, black, trans, etc) and you can "identify" as a prole, however the Communist movement approaches this "identity" very different to that of the idpolers

neither, I'd call myself a Socialist but I'm more devil's advocateing, I can't see why it's not idpol.


neither are some other things which people form identities around


to give credit to particularly race identitarians, many would also prefer to erase race as it exists as a social construct
but then it would seem that the only difference between Communism and black nationalist/power/whatever ideologies is their target; black idpol wishes to dismantle what they see as an oppressive system (by killing those who contribute to it, or destroying the social relation of race in the Charles Mills sense), and socialists wish to dismantle what they see as an oppressive system by imprisoning bourgies and doing away with private property

I feel like I'm missing something or being dense, in which case, please correct me

Race isn't an existing reality, it has no biological or physical basis aside from a bunch of arbitrary bullshit. Class isn't socially constructed, it's a material reality.

...

One thing idpol and communism share is a constitutive victim complex. Both can only see people come to by means of oppression, I suffer, therefor I am, goes the credo of this slave ideology.

...

are you even going to try to sound like you know shit?

that thread will not be soon forgotten

Explain to me how wishing to relegate the entirety of politics to a master-slave dichotomy isn't defining social being as coming to being through being a slave.

what?

I take that as a no?

...

Let me provide the illiterati with a more concrete example to illustrate my point; marxist lit crit. Its practice is "exposing" the ideology in literature and media, the class relationships, the symbolism, the reification.. those being positioned as their actuality. To the marxist, something is actual when it is instrumental in the master-slave dichotomy which they see as constitutive of humanity and history, in this epic paranoia, the marxist can imagine himself as nothing other than a slave, thus his criticism of idpol is that it doesn't envision identity in the order of this dichotomy; for in this world there is neither Jew nor Gentile, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in your submission to Capital.

So which youtuber mentioned master-slave morality over the last week because I've seen a few of you post about it and attempt to inject it into any conversation you can.

Ah, I see Jordan Peterson has added it to his recent shtick.

Vegan Gains

Peterson's cult really is one of the most infuriating things I've ever witnessed. Does he not realize that postmodernism and Marxism are wholly incompatible philosophies, or he just that arrogant an academic?

healthcare is private, and tobacco tax barely decreases consumption
1/10 try again

Except the entire point of rooting out the master-slave relationship is to destroy it. Who is more of a slave, the person who wants to put an end to their domination by others or the person who simply pretends that they aren't being dominated by others when they clearly are?

It can not be destroyed because it is an ideological need. This is why SJW's always find ever smaller patriachies, why marxists always find new forms of capitalist oppressions and why stirnerites have completed this need into its absolute expression of self-collapsing paranoia (read the stirnerite essay/psychotic super-ego breakdown life in the cracks to see what I mean)

Ideologies can't have needs user. They're immaterial concepts without physical requirements.

But user, you are the ideology.

spiritofcontradiction.eu/rowan-duffy/2014/03/19/working-class-hero
youtu.be/PWHaHgSWU0w?t=256
nope

i refuse to identify

Anons, he's posting retarded stuff that he wouldn't even bother arguing with. You know, like the thread says.

cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822%2815%2900671-5

Ideological need my ass. If capitalism died tomorrow I wouldn't go looking for a new capitalist boogeyman. I only fight relations of domination/subjugation where they appear.

Literally every ideology has its enemies and bogeymen, by that logic all ideology is slave ideology. AnCaps and lolberts are in constant fear of the state, SJWs the patriarchy, Nazis the Jews, etc. Just identifying a problem in society that needs to be overcome does not constitute slave morality. Actively embracing your slavery on the other hand, does.

He's truly got a nice, shiny ideology!

But that analysis is precisely correct. They have latched onto the socialist struggle as parasites, commodifying it so that the bourgeois could use it as yet another outlet for their blotting out proletarian activism with a flood of meaningless drivel.

...