How do we make the left more accessible?

And yet despite all of this, he still thinks socialism=gibsmedats and communism=total government control. You have here an intelligent and - at least relatively - well read man that believes the Nordic states are socialist and anarchism equates to privatizing everything. In fact, it's so bad that when I corrected him if he means Anarcho-Capitalism he was completely unfamiliar with the term. You could say that despite that he manages to see through ideology, he could never see past his own. And this isn't a unique case, except the part where he's well read and has a bright mind, he still falls for the capitalist memes that were intertwined in the hegemony of the USA. He even believes the USSR under Stalin was fascist - you know, horseshoe and all that - "going too far left gonna get you on the right" etc.

The reason for his deradicalization, he said, is that he "realized" Marx's ideas are outdated and Capital (which he admittedly never read) is more of a historical document for reference, that Communism is utopian and so on. Putting what they feed them in American schools aside, I think this stems from ignorance on the fundamentals that give rise to Marx's ideas and consequently the different streams of leftism. We can't just tell everyone to "read an extremely difficult 500 pages with +20 supplementary material book" every time we try to argue for Communism or leftism in general. Reactionaries have the upper hand in this one, both as a status quo because of spooks that run in society and in attracting normies with the bite-size infographs, simplistic flowcharts and memes.

Other urls found in this thread:

libgen.io/book/index.php?md5=B03874AFE263C79C006393BA2605BA96
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Now, the solution I propose, and only propose since I'm far from being qualified or knowledgeable for it, is to make a fairly short but concise introductory book. The manifesto is complete garbage as a standalone introduction and would only scare and confirm previously held beliefs without the proper theoretical context. This book needs to be in three (or more, if you think there should be) parts and to the point:
1. The foundations and historical conditions for Communism as a mode of production; we have to present it as an inevitable historical process, introduction to historical materialism and possibly Dialectical Materialism depending on how "deep" you want to go. In this part it just has to be a simplified and logical process that would demonstrate how it happens, we have to use rhetoric in the same way lolberts use when talking about "basic economics", e.g. demand creates supply therefore the invisible hand of the market is supreme; capitalism creates contradictions in the system therefore capitalism isn't eternal and we can predict a following mode of production using such-and-such method.
2. Now that we've established that Communism is inevitable, and arguing against a historical process is as much as arguing against the weather, and the reader is comfortable talking about it in realistic terms as a conceivable future, we can introduce the benefits that will come along with it to themselves, their loved ones and society as a whole. This creates an incentive for the reader. In this part we also introduce the different streams of Marxism and leftism in general and how they pan out, that anarchy is in fact the opposite of privatization, and that we don't have to submit to the government or have a Soviet style dictatorship if we're talking about communism. I think the best case here is to brand the book as LeftCom or at least vouch for Left Communism the most. It would further make the reader comfortable knowing that the most left of leftists are actually, at least as popularly known, inactive theoreticians that analyze the historical process - not violent thugs hungry for state control. The best part is that even if the reader is unconvinced by these arguments or what is presented, he will still become more nuanced and would have to form an actual argument instead of citing Solzhenitsyn or bringing up the 400 trillion.
3. And lastly, as a cherry on top, we dedicate several pages to short biographies of respectable historical figures who were either socialists, communists or anarchists and their reasons for it in order to dispel the image of leftists just being jealous, lazy stoners wanting others' money. This is actually something the left has an advantage at than reactionaries, but we never use it. Who could they bring as their representatives? An obscure Atlantean SSex wizard from Italy? The most despised man in the West since 1945? A picture of a Roman bust? The left has Einstein, Orwell, Oscar Wilde, we could and should include less known leftists who are less known in the West to at least pique their interest, like Kropotkin for example who was as humble as he was brilliant. Don't forget the power of myth, Holla Forums.

It doesn't sound like the problem is accessibility

I'd suggest to abandon Lacan and other continental charlatans, for starters.

Absolutely disagree.

By accessibility I mean to materials and basic concepts after years of indoctrination in the educational system. Do you really think anyone from the general population is going to bother with Capital or any books that base themselves on Marxism after hearing about the 600 gorillion? Absolutely not. What we need is a basic and concise book that gives the reader nuance and justification for Communism as a future.

Not OP, but the Manifesto is important purely as a historical document.

Virtually nothing it says is politically relevant anymore; most of the demands have already been widely achieved for Christ's sake.

Right here.

But it doesn't demonstrate the historical movement of Communism, its benefits that could be vouched for today and it's full of big scary passages like
will vanish with the vanishing of capital.
It only confirms previously held beliefs by right wingers.

Even many leftoids have hard time knowing what do they mean by saying socialism/communism, instead we should consider the descriptive method of talking about wage-labour/value and stuff like that.

The book that made me completely turn away from "status quo is just fine guys! :^)" is not a super complicated title but just good old Manufacturing Consent.

Seriously dude, Chomsky is great for this. Manufacturing Consent is extremely easy to read. You don't need background knowledge, because it's all handed out to you. You don't need to understand complex theory. You don't even need to read the entire thing front to cover to be persuaded. At around 50% you're already throwing up about what happened in El Salvador alone.

If your audience is still daunted by long books then I guess you have to start spoonfeeding them documentaries and podcasts. I managed to convince a neckbeard that Ayn Rand is stupid bullshit simply because I had him listen to the episode of The Partially Examined Life where Rand's "philosophy" gets torn to shreds.

pdf where?

Follow in the footsteps of based Doug Lain and open up spaces where you lead by example: critically examine the left today, attack it where it is abrasive and try to reform it.

Honestly, you just need to boil it down to killing the rich. If they aren't sympathetic based on their life experience already, there's nothing you can do.

You guys are severely underestimating just how classcucked the average american is. It's way worse than any meme.

You're mistaken. It explains clearly what is meant by communism, what its aims are, and why it says what it says. In clear terms the reader is taught who the proletariat is and the bourgeoisie are. It even explains why mere social reform is insufficient and unlikely to make meaningful changes regards to the primary. The reforms that the manifesto makes might be outdated, but not the overall message of the need for an active and revolutionary proletariat.


Regardless. The manifesto might have its faults but as an introduction to communism it is in my opinion unparalleled.

Actually, I take that back. Engels' Principles of Communism is also a powerful document in its simplicity and plain language.

wew lad.

and he is not totally wrong here. there were many parallels between stalinist russia and the "actual" fascist regimes: leader cult, death camps, soviet system being de facto state capitalism, jongoism (wwII = great patriotic war), etc.

tankies will deny this of course.

Wolff is a fucking capitalist himself, what does he know?

There are tons of accessible materials out there, they don't matter. Nobody is going to be a leftist as long as anti-capitalist means "communism" and "communism" means red fascism. The best we can hope for is very strongly denouncing the USSR, Mao and every other counter-revolutionary pretending to be revolutionaries.

If the left has a future, it is necessarily anarchist.

==OH GOD! THAT POOR FASCIST! HE WENT TO CHURCH AND DINDINIFFIN!!!!!!=

tankies get upset and start screeching autistically, but have no arguments. just as expected, nothing to see here.

Except the point was that the man OP is talking about believes it because of horeseshoe theory which is extremely flawed due to the fact it only focuses on authoritarianism which of course will leave similarities instead of actually looking at the many ideologies on the left and right which shows that there are actually pretty big differences between extremes on both ends.

NO UR A FASCIST EPIC WIN OTP KEK

hey man i just wanted to take the opportunity to harvest some (you)'s from wound up tankies searching for arguments and finding none, resorting to whining in ALL CAPS. you're ruining my fun with your serious interjection.

ahh thanks. now that's much better ^^ can i have another triggered reply?

Nigger how are you on leftypol for more than a day and think allcaps actually means anger beside coming from outsiders?

you got me. i found this place today. i came from reddit btw XD

Read Parenti you imbecile. libgen.io/book/index.php?md5=B03874AFE263C79C006393BA2605BA96

What makes him wrong, and you correct?

Sup fam where did you hear about our board? Do you fancy not posting again until you've lurked a bit?
You want to post here but the problem is we have a lot of people like you, but the problem we have is that you're not funny, witty, or intelligent, so we don't want you to post right now. We want you to watch the locals talk. Do you think you could go back to where you came from and spread the word, that we just want you to watch? You're like a bumbling American charging his way through a thriving Swahili market knocking over all the fruit because his fat ankles can't handle the 1ft walkway.
You should watch out because someone could take you away and steal your kidneys doing that.

holy shit this is developing much better than i thought. and still no arguments.

My friend don't try and criticize anyone else for poor social skills when you thought
Was serious.

LEL THE IRONING TOPKEK AIMIRITE?? xd

ahh thanks. now that's much better ^^ can i have another triggered reply?

ill be sure to post this to my tumblr: epictriggermagabros.tumblr.com - all the xirls on there will think it's total epic win and pwnage beyond belief XDDDD

totally fnxs for showing me how mad u r lmao i will show it to stacy and she will LAFF absolutely LAFF amirite? rofl

XDXDXDXDXDXDXDXDXD

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ DESU TBH NANI AMIRITE HAHA ITS LIKE ADVICE DOG ALL OVER AGAIN!

WE ARE FUNNY WOMYN!

this thread is officially derailed. arguments by tankies ITT: zero. my work is done. thank you and goodbye.

Can I also get it so it shows AnCaps are a massive oxymoron and how capitalism produces a state. No matter what.
And how Anarchism is a viable alternative for communism and not a bunch of smashies. We can use Orwell in cases of Anarchism being produced and showcase Rojava as a viable form.

We need this to be the Proudhon for new people, opening up the idea of the left (as Proudhon did for Anarchism unlike Stirner who is a massive meme)

>i got so triggered i leave the thread
We need to purge the SJWs pronto.

Please stop shoehorning me into your "we". I do not wish to be a part of the identity you constructed for yourself around you and the other misers on this board.

love me a mad tankie. is fun.

It wasn't.

What a pity then, for we do believe you should be humored.

But you're humoring me right now.

Are you trying to bang me or something, is this your thing?

Stop shitting up the thread you fucking retards

a-are you a grill

Maybe I'm naive, I just think grumpy people will do a little better when given the opportunity to laugh.

if you have a feminine benis we'd like to see it. i think i can speak for all of leftypol in this matter.

...

Yeah of course I am.

I'm not grumpy I just want to throatfuck you dead you annoying bitch.

now this is just rude. you do seem a teeny weeny upset.

Looks like someone is being tsundere =^-^=

Because the tankie pic is bullshit.

I will bully you.

a-are you a dark handsome stranger

It doesn't matter because you're simply not good enough. You're beneath me. You're trash kiddo.

...

Bullies are fashies and so are you.

Post ass and email.

Post ass and email.

ass and email

Yes, I assume you have at least one to access the internet.

you assume i have at least one ass to access the internet? o.O

Now you're just being silly. If the quality of these replies doesn't improve you'll be on your own, again.

it's ok, i harvested much more replies form you than i expected tbh.

Good job, but you've only harvested mine, and since I'm quicker than you in both wit and speed you've probably wasted more of your own time than anyone else's

She's on fire!

No, op. The way you do it is with supercapitalism. If you cared about communism you'd care about its content and form rather than its stupid name.

What the fuck happened to this thread-

Fuck it, just spam links to Jimmy Dore on your normie social media accounts.

I own Manufacturing Consent, among other Chomsky/leftist works, I also deradicalized from being AnCom, and reradicalized into far right. I now feel Socialism and Communism can only really work small scale, with groups of people who all share the same worldview. At best you'd wind up with ethnic enclaves, at worst you'd wind up dead because that's what happens anytime "not REAL socialism" is tried, which it will inevitably devolve into because people are imperfect.

Once we get past the rebellious teen phase we crave leadership, whether it's to be a leader or to be led. We need strong leadership to help steer us through the myriad catastrophes at the door.

Destroying western civilization to usher in a new utopian socialist state will just leave us with a destroyed civilization, with everyone too hedonistic and self-involved to actually form a new society.