How can we discuss Left-wing politics with normies without sounding like teenagers or role-players?
How can we discuss Left-wing politics with normies without sounding like teenagers or role-players?
Other urls found in this thread:
Talking about left-wing politics in the 21st century is pretty much on par with LARPing, considering how little power the left has and considering all its failures in the 20th century.
Quite simple.
They tell you a problem and you tell them why it is because capitalism and how to fix it without capitalism.
the more I look at western left, the more I see third worldism as a logical and consistent ideology
...
And germany and france and spain and maybe scandinavia and so on.
They have more will to actually do something more than protesting and throwing a vote in the ballot box. Do you imagine sandernistas rising up and trying to create USSA?
ACTUALLY, I think it is a possible future.
Though, the "third world" today is not the "third world" of the 80s.
No, I don't see Nigeria rising up anytime soon.
And even when they do, it ends up in warlords fighting each other.
If that's your definition of "not the ballot box", you can have it!
No, they are shitty socdems instead.
What makes you even say that?
Of course not, especially since it's preoccupied with islamist reactionaries but left in places like le rojava or nepal has succeeded to a certain degree.
KEK!
Well… Trump gets elected and start's enforcing his programm… people revolt.
Hillary gets and starts cencoring everything, same.
Rojava is Kekalonia without USSR back up. (though they might succeed for that exact reason).
They are not revolting and so on, because they are "Third world". There were decades of preperation, information for the people, a leader and so on.
It's not "oh these people have less food than us, therefor they'll revolt.
Of course not, but the actual nonsocdem left hardly scores above 5%. And in place where socdems and socialists work in one party, the first group decisively dominates.
He doesn't know shit, he just wants da wall and he'll likely leave the rest to his advisers
How did that occupy wall street work out, hmm? :^)
Well, if "Third World" isn't appropriate, then maybe you'd prefer "non-first world" or "non-western world"?
...
Well, first of all you have to be aware that "normies" usually are not normal at all. Normal=/=Common.
And second, you have to find some leftists who don't act like RPG players, or total fags, or teenagers, or all at the same time. A lot of lefties are, actually, immature fags. So it will be useless trying to pretend to be something that they're not when discussing with normies.
Most leftists are a bunch of sectarian fags who are always fighting each other and trying to impose their own snowflake version of leftism. They can't discuss things properly even with leftists, so I think it's kinda hard they'll be able to convince a "normie".
If you live if heavily anti-socialist country present leftist arguments without using using classic leftist terminology. And never, NEVER admit you're farther than a soc-dem.
Not even kidding.
Here's the thing.
Normies fucking hate idpol. They react to it on a visceral level. If you want normies to actually pay attention to left wing ideas and memes, zizek is a very good start. The biggest hurdle to getting people to being interested in "the left" are leftists such as Trotskyists who sit around trying to sell their stupid paper, if they're not trying to infiltrate gay rights or whatever to hollow them out and turn them into nothing more than soapboxes for their stupid tiny trot groupsicle. Zizek (and critical theory more generally) is how you say "listen, the left is full of fuckwits, but there are aspects that are good that you will agree with" and as long as you're remotely entertaining, people will listen.
They might not identify as leftists, because leftism has such a bad fucking rap (thanks tankies, thanks trots) but if they're going around slaying idpol dragons and promoting things like worker's control or whatever then who cares?
… You mean the hellspawn that gave birth to SJWs?
Frankfurt School had nothing to do with it.
Frankfurt School wasn't behind this. SJWs are more of a butchering of Maoist conceptions of social struggle, adapted to first world sensibilities after infiltrating the radical left through some feminist and black power movements. Critical Theory isn't to blame, although I will admit that some "tools" that were developed from the general ideology have been adapted into weapons by SJWs.
If you want one thing that separates the Frankfurt School from "SJWs" it would be that the Frankfurt School were Marxists who held to a materialist understanding of oppression, whereas SJWs are effectively neoliberals offering atomised, individualised solutions to the status quo that are based around identity politics and more often than not are centred about making neoliberalism "more friendly" to marginalised minorities. It is accurate to say that critical theory in the post-WW2 era did realise that the working class wasn't inherently revolutionary and was trying to consider the revolutionary potential of non-integrated minorities, but this was still done from a materialist standpoint, the point was still something similar to socialist revolution. Contemporary idpols/SJWs are not materialists, they desire a reduction of the political field to competing particularist fiefdoms as opposed to centring politics in the material basis of oppression.
Half arsed attempt at tl;dring critical theory:
Marx said that communist revolutions would happen in the United Kingdom, in the United States, in Western Europe like Germany or France. However, revolutions did not happen in prosperous, industrialised countries: there is about a fifty year gap between Das Kapital, and the socialist, Bolshevik revolution in 1917. Of course, Lenin and his contemporaries were all douchebags, and basically made the country even crappier than it was beforehand. So a lot of socialists elsewhere wanted to explain what the fuck happened.
In 1922, a number of scholars got together and were trying to figure out why Marx was wrong, how come Marxist economics didn't work, why the Soviet Union was authoritarian and crap, and why despite society getting more and more unequal, why were fewer and fewer people getting involved in socialism?
These people became known as the Frankfurt School. They were composed of people from a number of liberal humanities disciplines, and their idea was that essentially that the role of culture and psychology and other factors weren't taken into account by Marx. There were other factors besides class that were in play, and the reason why Marx was wrong and the Soviet Union ended up being such a shitty place meant that everyone needed to understand these other factors in order to return Marxism to the emancipatory, liberatory philosophy they felt it was supposed to be. Orthodox Marxists centre capitalist relations of production and commodification, but for critical theorists
In short, they were interested in how culture and liberal society helped abstract and stave off aggression against the bourgeoisie. The key aim was to try and articulate the complex set of mediations connecting the economy, social and political institutions, culture, everyday life, and individual consciousness as parts of a reciprocally interacting social system that uphold capitalism, and to express potential alternatives to this.
I'm not M-L or tankie but I would still disagree here. Nicholas II was the kind of leader that made people really, really want to kill him.
Ironically, the Soviets may have actually laid the groundwork for an actual Marxist revolution.
ALL CRITICAL THEORY, ALL OF IT DEBUNKED, BECAUSE OF AN INNACCURATE POL MEME. DEBORD ONLY CARED ABOUT TRANS RIGHTS RIGHT
FUCK OFF WITH THIS SHIT
I'd disagree, but I think what's important here is that the negative viewpoint of those who founded the Frankfurt School towards the Soviet Union was a key, if not the core, component of why they became A Thing.
By not behaving like a teenager of role-player.
Problem solved.
hey, Holla Forumsish here
your guys biggest problem is you use words representing complex concepts too much, like most leftists, and expect normal every day people to understand what the fuck you are talking about
part of why Trump is winning is he doesnt just listen to the people he speaks to them in ways that they can understand, "I'm going to build a wall and make Mexico pay for it" being one fine example
pay attention to my point
you guys talk too much using complex concepts and it hinders your message
like that comic where Holla Forums and Holla Forums are playing a board game and talkign and Holla Forums calls jews spooks and Holla Forums says Holla Forums talks too much about ghosts
I thought that was funny because I don't know what the fuck you guys are talking about most of the time and it seemed like Holla Forums was taking the piss out of Holla Forums
I've honestly never seen that one, do you have it?
I knew it was still here
bullshit though. Bernie's platform is "FREE SHIT," right? What could be simpler than that?
Discuss the values underneath. Pretty much everybody agrees with them.
Say you value work and workers, say they deserve to be rewarded for creating the wealth we enjoy etc.
Leftypol is the most normie friendly platform of hardcore leftists I've seen.
You wouldn't get a word, if you heard RL hardcore commies talking.
>part of why Trump is winning is he doesnt just listen to the people he speaks to them in ways that they can understand devolve into a mindless mob of zombies, that don't need to thing of what the fuck he actually IS saying.
Just like Hitler. Just like pol.
Well, if you want to know what one is saying, you can ask him "can you explain what that means?"
You can also always READ ZIZEK
The problem is, you don't want to think!
You wanna take a pill and sleep to the sweet sound of "nuke the world" and "I'm gonna save you, trust me! Am rich!".
Also, talking about existentialcomics and not even knowing what they are.
I hate 'murica.
I'm admittedly on the far-right by the standards of this board (but the fringe left anywhere else, especially here in burgerland), but it's just the simple truth that the average person doesn't care about the highest-minded ideals and theory. I'm not necessarily going to reject political violence as a whole (that would be lunacy), but The Revolution as you like to think of it is about as likely to happen as Holla Forums's muh rope day. If you can't address people's immediate concerns, you won't win them over to anything.
image related
...
Keep cool and listen to your normie friend arguments. Try to adapt to your "target" by hiding your power level if necessary. Here is an interesting video on this subject : youtube.com
oh i know it is
they only have a vague idea, yes, but that also goes for the left if you take one look at the vast disagreements on how to change society, how things should be organized, etc.
they're way better at it than Holla Forums but there's still far too much LARPing, though i agree with your points about bernie (who i voted for in my state's primary, though i know hillary will be the nominee lol)
You can't. Any positions so out of line with the norm cannot be believed to be genuine. This is the power of ideology.
LAPRing and disagreeing on "what to do after the revolution" is how the left has fun.
On the other hand, this, indeed usually backfires and we end up with people rejecting anything remotely realistic for it is "not revolutionary enough".
But, I think, if someone comes here wanting to see beyond their Ideology, we are not all theory spewing Inteligencia (and nomenclature Rebel) and can actually think of themselves about stuff.
it hot him a little over half of the number of votes Hillary got
if he were a woman you know it would be more
incredibly un-relatable like most of your post, this wins you no points for talking down to people like they are ignorant children that need to be "enlightened" instead of treating them as peers and giving them advice or better yet suggesting solutions that steer them in the right direction
hell your whole post is a "I know better than you" teenager post
Less successfully than the similar movements in Europe where they showed more willingness to fight the cops. Golly, I wonder what we could change this time?