The main problem with pretty much any ideology: nazism, marxism-leninism, communism, anarchism, ancap, radical atheism...

The main problem with pretty much any ideology: nazism, marxism-leninism, communism, anarchism, ancap, radical atheism, left idpol e.t.c. are the lack of philosophy and pragmatism in them, none of the listed ideologies give reasons to follow them except an utopia in the sky, but instead they just point at the problem (jews, black people, bourgeoisie, government, muh privilege e.t.c.) or give the person new information and the person just consumes that and he's obsessed about jews/porkies/cis white males/laws/e.t.c. being bad. This is the crucial moment, all of the above is enough to make someone a member of an ideological movement. They don't provide any information on how or why they are helping/fighting and how do they benefit from it, they are just presented with new information and apply their hollywood hero philosophy to it, "If such bad things exist then why should I allow them to exist? Why should I tolerate this?".

Now ask a nazi why he's a nazi, he'll tell you about the good times during Hitler, will shower you with redpills and infographics, you'll say that some of his conspiracies and ideas are true, but then you'll ask him again, why are you a nazi? He'd be shocked, he'll ask how are you not a nazi if you think that the stuff he presented to you is true. This is the big moment, now he'll stop for a minute and start questioning why he himself is a nazi.
If you have an ideology flag right now then think about this, you're not immune if your ideology is the bestest and not as primitive as fascism, in fact you're rendered even more vulnerable.

If you disagree then try to prove me wrong, but remember, you need to think for a minute before doing so, just like the nazi.

Other urls found in this thread:

theconjurehouse.com/2016/11/18/the-stirner-wasnt-a-capitalist-you-fucking-idiot-cheat-sheet/>>2046263
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

you haven't even read the Manifesto

brainlet idealists gtfo

We're on the same page then, why would you sage?
So, what exactly in the manifesto contradicts my statements? I'm legitimately interested

the problem with capitalism is the system itself, not the bourgeoisie, government, muh privilege, or jews.

That's actually true, I think it would've been better if I wrote capitalism instead of bourgeoisie, jewish supremacy instead of jews e.t.c. in the OP
Now with that in mind try to make a post from scratch and maybe even defend your ideology

How did your affliation with an ideology contribute anything good to yourself or the world?
Ideologies are slacktivism at best and destructive at worst

Since this guy obviously left the thread I'll ask for someone to play devils advocate for him
I genuinely didn't understand the point he was making

Okay.

because unlike what most rightists try to do, we have book upon book about why our system is better using the most amount of logic, theory, and mathematics we can provide since we don't really have actual existing communism we can provide evidence with.
rightists, on the other hand, take things at face value and say things like
which is a statement made purely based on affirming the consequent, a logical fallacy.

we are not working towards a utopia in the sky, we see communism as a historical inevitability, unlike the one-hit wonder that is fascism. communists don't have a scapegoat, we don't have or expect a utopia, nor do we really actually want a utopia.

Not an argument, faggot.

This is retarded. And it took me no time to realize that.

Also Communism is a movement. The bourgeois aren't the problem, my personal exploitation and sense of alienation are.
This is something I'm trying to understand and end.

Who cares what you "want"? There is no way you'll be free anyway, regardless of you wanting or not wanting. At least with defeatism you're concerned about more important things and have realistic expectations

I'm not only concerned with the contradiction but by the first statement too, communism is not inevitable, it's a propaganda statement backed by nothing that is specifically designed to fool people into becoming communists in the first place.

Just paraphrase my words to reflect that, the point I made still remains
How are you ending capitalism exactly?

whatever you want to believe. how you can keep calling us the ideological ones while spewing bullshit like this?

He-he-hey stop there you misinterpreted Stirner hardcore holy shit.

When Stirner says that you should submit to a despot for free. Never.

Let me rephrase this "I can't explain why I think communism is inevitable, it's just a thing I dogmatically believe in"
Not all ideologies are dumb to follow. Some, such as defeatism have place to be. I'm not attacking all ideologies at once, just a huge portion of them.

Or, you know, maybe I have my own opinion on things and don't dogmatically follow the ideas of Stirner

it's been explained in book after book of equations, logic, and mathematics, and followed up by theory. I'm not going to explain it all to you right now. it's a complicated proof that men more intelligent than I am have already done.

Imma just leave this here for the morons since this thread won't go anywhere:

theconjurehouse.com/2016/11/18/the-stirner-wasnt-a-capitalist-you-fucking-idiot-cheat-sheet/>>2046263


Well your opinions are very stupid man.

lack thereof
Everyone who made the inevitable communism claim was simply bad at futurism
Come on, even Marxian criticizm of capitalism is outdated, he just couldn't predict what would happen, there are so many variables that we don't even know about, it's just pathetic to claim that you know what'll happen in the future
.
You're shouting primitivist reductionist determinist makebelieves

Like which ones?

How do you expect me to know about variables that nobody even knows about? It's the premise
300 years ago people didn't even imagine the possibilty of instantly connecting with anyone on the globe. Nor did they imagine that reality itself could be a video game (solipsism+)
How is communism inevitable if the video game we're living in is specifically programmed to never transition into communism?

I do.

Recognizing my own desires is not feelz>reelz. I am not arguing that my desires indication of how this world should be run. Just that they are a reflection of my self-interest.

I'm not arguing that "perfect freedom", but there are degrees of freedom. I am not floating in a perfect vacuum, I won't even pretend that's either possible or desirable.
But recognizing how others may or are taking advantage of me, or how that affects my desires or my ability to satisfy them, is not the same as trying to be a philosophical island.

From what I understand defeatism is relishing in hopelessness, a sort of masochistic self-flagellation. I don't see how any of that has to do with realistic expectations. Analysis is one thing, fatalism is another.

By counteracting what I understand to be capitalism. By acting in opposition to the law of value.

Federal Reserve
Bretton Woods system abandonment
Resource starvation
IMF reforms
Keynes
Soon to be: one world government (a.k.a. no more countries for imperialism)
Fascism
Nat Socialism
Socialism itself, Marx never saw what it would be like

So you're a slacktivist that wants things to be better but doesn't make them better at all?

How do you even reach that interpretation? You don't just go about abolishing capitalism. You need to understand what you're actually opposing.
And acting in opposition of the law of value is not "slacktivism".
It's about minimizing your interaction with the capitalist mode of production, or undermining it. By not engaging in, or subjecting yourself to wage labor for example.
Now you can deride that that too as 'lifestylism' as some do, but it will take the concerted effort of the working class, and the cumulation of society's labor to end the capitalist mode of production and supersede it.

How would you know what he is. He is unique.

umm so what?

do you know from which logic "the communism is the future" comes from? It's from the realization that autonomy with progress, it's becoming more accessible.

Marx never wrote a step by step guide on how to build an utopian vision of communism nor did he have the ability to perdict specific features of the global economy. What he WAS able to do however was based on data, and observation pin point certain activities and contradictions of capital that are true NO MATTER the circumstances of whether or not a Keynesian capitalist system was in place or a neoliberal one (reserve army of labor, crisis of overproduction, etc). This is what distinguished him from Utopian socialists like Fourier. His worldview was based on materialism that applies to science and history to be as grounded and realistic in conclusions as possible. His perdictions on whether "communism is inevitable" is not an axiom held by him or his supporters. The way he sees it is that either socialism (and as a result communism wins) or we lose and capitalism eats the world up and we all die.

What I am sure that poster is saying is that you haven't even read the MANIFESTO and clearly know nothing of the subject of scientific socialism if you are claiming the Marx is somehow Utopian.

I'm not sure what you're talking about, OP.
I mean, I could perfectly understand your post if it was aimed at utopians, but if you're talking about marxism a utopia is the last thing you can talk about.
There's this quote from the German Ideology: "Communism is for us not a state of affairs which is to be established, an ideal to which reality [will] have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things. The conditions of this movement result from the premises now in existence.". Marx and Engels didn't seek to form the basis for a future society based on their moral values, they examined the current and past material conditions and grounded in their research came to the conclusion that due to its problems, its contradictions, capitalism would eventually be overthrown, and then something different would arise.
There's no boogeyman, there's only the development of humankind and its current state, which is today being held up by the efforts of the ruling class acting in its interest. There's no cabal, no patriarchy.
About the part of the new information and that, Engels writes in Anti-Dühring that after sciences had been for millenia finding individual data, they finally had accumulated enough of it to start skeching systems of how eveything is interconnected. We can see this today in the science of ecology, of how nature works in systems, and in energetics. He was right, systems of how everything works interconnectedly have been researched, and the idea that things can exist in a vacuum is mostly gone (I may be wrong on this one). What Marx did was take Hegel's dialectical system and modify it, took the idealism, the belief that things exist apart from how we see them and that at some point we would reach the absolute idea (something like that, I don't quite understand this part), and form a coherent system of how capitalism and other forms of production before it functioned based on his research, as I've said in the first paragraph, and that's why they called it scientific socialism.
And your second paragraph is just drawing a parallel between takies and nazis, that's fucking faggotry and you can do better than that.

Rude sage because you should read a book.