Define what being a "Leftist" is

[Possum Jenkins]

Why do you think their fight was against hierarchies in general?

I think that a deeply-held belief in rationalism and liberty/equality will inevitably point you in that direction. Both then and now

Back then, thinking that all humans (white males at least) were equal, that caste didn't matter, and that the monarchy and priests weren't sent from god (or that god himself may not exist) was a pretty radical idea in an age of feudalism and coming off a few thousand years of slave societies. That's the liberty/equality part.

The rational part comes with rejecting mysticism and the supernatural and looking at human institutions. If the heavens aren't responsible for so much suffering and inequality, then what is? Oppressive institutions that create hierarchies.

So if you're a classical liberal, you had to be against hierarchy.

There's a pretty good argument that the natural inheritors of classical liberals of the 18th century are anarchists and non-authoritarian socialists, because they're the ones that reject hierarchy the most. Instead, we got the Ron Paul types that don't see a problem with private tyrannies (aka, corporations) exploiting workers, exploiting the environment, and amassing obscene amounts of wealth and power. These will obviously create immense inequality and the sharpest of hierarchies.

 

[Trotsky]

Are the marxists on college campuses using conflict theory to argue about class struggle in terms of economics or in terms of race and gender?

Both.

But the idea an undergraduate community would be as attune to, and affirmatively hostile towards, economic stratification within itself when those communities exist in environments of apparent economic equity is kind of silly. College campuses are, by current nature, inherently bourgeois. Your expectations necessarily require that the campus community start lobbying the administration outside of its own members' interests and towards ends that a college administration cannot do anything to address.

 

[DickSarp]

Not an argument friend.

Honestly, neither is yours. What do you mean by 'cultural Marxism" bc I have an idea that you're denigrating liberals with your broad vague brush. But that's my take.

Liberalism / leftists is open to progress and change, equality, justice, collective solidarity, democracy, science, education, minority rights, moderated capitalist meritocracies, and an opposition to absolutism.

 

[DickSarp]

Someone who hates white people and is into a lot of gay shit.

Are you referring to your own personally held views or something else?

 

[Gunny]

Hardly, if you want a decent conversation go to the POTWR sticky, if you want a trump clone go find the Palis abortions it replaced. If you want gifs then post nonesense.

And for the record he was also the winner of the WR best use of media for 2017. He is just giving the people what they want.

WR best use of media?

 

[Ruprecht]

Everywhere but America, "liberal" isn't a pejorative. It's also as likely to refer to economic liberalism and free market politics as civil rights or egalitarianism.
Left-wing politics have always been defined by opposition to the established hierarchy. Starting with opposition to monarchy, but including support for environmentalism and gender/racial/ethnic identity politics.
In this age, economic liberalism frequently supports entrenching or furthering the existing hierarchy. Hence right-wing liberalism.

 

[Greoric]

Honestly, neither is yours. What do you mean by 'cultural Marxism" bc I have an idea that you're denigrating liberals with your broad vague brush. But that's my take.

Liberalism / leftists is open to progress and change, equality, justice, collective solidarity, democracy, science, education, minority rights, moderated capitalist meritocracies, and an opposition to absolutism.

Just because you don't like an argument doesn't mean it isn't one, and you aggregated terms I defined as distinct. Very odd.

 

[Greoric]

Both.

But the idea an undergraduate community would be as attune to, and affirmatively hostile towards, economic stratification within itself when those communities exist in environments of apparent economic equity is kind of silly. College campuses are, by current nature, inherently bourgeois. Your expectations necessarily require that the campus community start lobbying the administration outside of its own members' interests and towards ends that a college administration cannot do anything to address.

Its obvious which one they're pushing harder, and no, it doesn't require them to lobby outside their interests with regard to race and gender (which they consider themselves as the new proletariat). Hence why their push is cultural... not economic foundationally.

 

[Greoric]

“They” are generally not Marxists. And even if some of them were, culteral Marxism is still like not a thing. It’s an invented term that no one on the left uses. So in future if someone asks you to define to a term, you should start by not using invented terms within that definition, it’s circular nonsenses and you are capable of better.

You're confused.

 

[Trotsky]

Its obvious which one they're pushing harder, and no, it doesn't require them to lobby outside their interests with regard to race and gender (which they consider themselves as the new proletariat). Hence why their push is cultural... not economic foundationally.

You did not understand my response: college campuses by nature do not bear the semblance nor effects of economic stratification that society does, even if cultural and racial division are downstream from it in society. What we generally see from college activists are actions lobbying their own administration, but college administrations only hold dominion over their own student bodies, not the rest of society. It is not an environment conducive to dry, economic socialist organization. I'm not even sure what that would look like since affirmative representation and state subsidization of lower income people, merit-based living stipends, etc. are already staples of higher education.

Nor, frankly, is there much mention of Marx in the first place. The term "cultural Marxism" is just buzzword fear mongering about progressive social thought dressed up as pseudo-intellectualism.

Also, your argument continually assumes its own conclusion.

 

[Jimmy Jazz]

someone who believes in the hierarchy of non white races depending on their own cultural bias.

 

[Greoric]

You did not understand my response: college campuses by nature do not bear the semblance nor effects of economic stratification that society does, even if cultural and racial division are downstream from it in society.

The angle of conflict theory they're applying is not in economic terms fundamentally. That's what you're not appreciating. The angle they're exploiting is on racial and gender terms, which is applied on campuses and extrapolated to society abroad. Instead of the working class uniting against the capitalist class, now its women, trans, gay, and POC uniting against whitey.

Except for some brainwashed dinosaurs like you (no disrespect intended), no one tries to make arguments for Marxism on economic grounds any more. Its just silly, because no one would actually fall for it. The real revolutionaries positioned in select institutions, know they're not going to convince the numbers of useful idiots like they could before on those terms, but they hold the same views for establishing international socialism. This is just a different strategy for the same goal, and the origins of a revolutionary movement have to start from somewhere. Thus, why not a place with young and impressionable minds?

 

[Trotsky]

The angle of conflict theory they're applying is not in economic terms fundamentally. That's what you're not appreciating. The angle they're exploiting is on racial and gender terms, which is applied on campuses and extrapolated to society abroad. Instead of the working class uniting against the capitalist class, now its women, trans, gay, and POC unite against whitey.

Except for some brainwashed dinosaurs like you (no disrespect intended), no one tries to make arguments for Marxism on economic grounds any more. Its just silly, because no one would actuall. The real revolutionaries, know they're not going to convince the numbers of useful idiots like they could before, but they hold the same views for establishing international socialism. This is just a different strategy for the same goal.

I am a member of leftist organizations that welcome and receive input from college-aged Marxists and, at some point, you just reach the point of tiring of people, armed with no experience or insights beyond fear-laced speculation, telling you about the state of Marxist discourse.

I also sometimes I wonder whether there will be a time that another figure like Adam Smith proves to be so useful in arranging morons around tribal fears and mobilizing them against their interests, that someone such as yourself will, with no concept at all of what Smith posited, substitute his name in for their reductive expressions of identity-political anxieties and delude themselves into believing they are profoundly versed in Smithian thought when in actuality they're just rationalizing backwards from having realized that they wet themselves.

Also, as far as "not appreciating" conflict theory, i.e. what you learn about in sociology 101, as applied to racial identity, etc., I'll let you know when I stop laughing.

And here's to having tried to take you seriously:

 

[HomerThompson]

I am a member of leftist organizations that welcome and receive input from college-aged Marxists and, at some point, you just reach the point of tiring of people, armed with no experience or insights beyond fear-laced speculation, telling you about the state of Marxist discourse.

I also sometimes I wonder whether there will be a time that another figure like Adam Smith proves to be so useful in arranging morons around tribal fears and mobilizing them against their interests, that someone such as yourself will, with no concept at all of what Smith posited, substitute his name in for their reductive expressions of identity-political anxieties and delude themselves into believing they are profoundly versed in Smithian thought when in actuality they're just rationalizing backwards from having realized that they wet themselves.

Also, as far as "not appreciating" conflict theory, i.e. what you learn about in sociology 101, as applied to racial identity, etc., I'll let you know when I stop laughing.

And here's to having tried to take you seriously:

Hold that L, playa.

 

[Greoric]

I am a member of leftist organizations that welcome and receive input from college-aged Marxists and, at some point, you just reach the point of tiring of people, armed with no experience or insights beyond fear-laced speculation, telling you about the state of Marxist discourse.

I also sometimes I wonder whether there will be a time that another figure like Adam Smith proves to be so useful in arranging morons around tribal fears and mobilizing them against their interests, that someone such as yourself will, with no concept at all of what Smith posited, substitute his name in for their reductive expressions of identity-political anxieties and delude themselves into believing they are profoundly versed in Smithian thought when in actuality they're just rationalizing backwards from having realized that they wet themselves.

And here's to having tried to take you seriously:

So nothing huh? If you really don't know what I'm talking about, then you have no idea how the revolutions for the ideology you support are actually structured.

And with that you sincerely have my deepest sympathy, because if the society you want ever came to pass, you'd be the first one to be executed. Why? Because when you see what its really like, you'll be so disillusioned with it, you're more likely to be an enemy of the state than its ally... and the revolutionaries in power can't have that kind of dissent.

Think I'm making shit up? Well look into what the KGB did for places like India. They kept lists of all the revolutionaries in their AO, useful idiots like you, and the plan was to execute them as soon as they flipped the region. You're a lamb walking to the slaughter house trying to coral other lambs into the pen with you.

 

[Gandhi]

WR best use of media?

Voted in by his peers twice!!!!

 

[HomerThompson]

Voted in by his peers twice!!!!

 

[Gandhi]

You're confused.

I'm the not one use right wing buzzwords to define rightwing buzzwords.

 

[Greoric]

I'm the not one use right wing buzzwords to define rightwing buzzwords.

Instead of being willfully ignorant on the topic, why don't you just read my posts? They're on this page.

 

[Gandhi]

You did not understand my response: college campuses by nature do not bear the semblance nor effects of economic stratification that society does, even if cultural and racial division are downstream from it in society. What we generally see from college activists are actions lobbying their own administration, but college administrations only hold dominion over their own student bodies, not the rest of society. It is not an environment conducive to dry, economic socialist organization. I'm not even sure what that would look like since affirmative representation and state subsidization of lower income people, merit-based living stipends, etc. are already staples of higher education.

Nor, frankly, is there much mention of Marx in the first place. The term "cultural Marxism" is just buzzword fear mongering about progressive social thought dressed up as pseudo-intellectualism.

Also, your argument continually assumes its own conclusion.

The problem with cultural marxists is that they are regressive leftists!!!