Yep. If thats what the left is nowadays then yes, its true. But I'd differ between US/UK left and continental central Europe left.
In my opinion though and I'm looking at Germany specifically here, the lefts biggest issue is having embraced and becoming the bitch of economic neoliberalism for short term gains and long term social issues. While the socialists (SPD) were at power they created the class of the so called working poor (more than 3 million people in Germany), they did NOTHING against the issues that created the crisis of 2008 in terms of regulation, they suported the pillaging of Greece by private companies. etc. etc.
While the video is certainly true of the social actors in US/UK of this left I cannot identify with, politically the left in continental Europe (and specifically Germany) has ridden itself of its most important issue, namely social justice. Instead it has become the bitch of high finance like everybody else.
"Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed nonage. Nonage is the inability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance. This nonage is self-imposed if its cause lies not in lack of understanding but in indecision and lack of courage to use one's own mind without another's guidance. Dare to know! (Sapere aude.) "Have the courage to use your own understanding," is therefore the motto of the enlightenment."
Each side of the argument does the exact same thing. It's not new for the left to be doing it either. It's easier to deflect and point fingers than to admit you were wrong and made mistakes.
The heavy scrutiny every public word is now subject to is largely the result of the social media and 2.0 journalism and has little to do with ideology.
And as couleur says, this feels largely a UK/USA thing, places in which the "left" ideology has not been something very consistent with what it's been in the rest of the world at all. Even the most extremely left-leaning political parties in France are rather moderate about the social justice issues in comparison with the hysteria going on from the average joe in the US or the UK.
I also completely agree with him that the left has essentially forgot what it once was ( up until the 70's, roughly.. finally getting all that freedom they wanted so desperately during that period killed their motive ) about in favour of neoliberalism - the remains of the former idealogical frame barely able to survive until they're eventually forgotten about entirely.
Last edited by TheZor on Tue, 11th Sep 2018 10:26; edited 1 time in total
Its feels to me that this trend in westren world started here, Its not something new the right wing is in the regime, but since 2000s the labour party here never managed to get back and right wing worldwide Strengthened.
The reasons are quite similar if u think about that, especially that we were the spearhead with dealing with Islamic terrorism..
somewhat Ironic, we are not anymore, the situation might look quite tense, but relatively quiet here and terrorism attack close to zero.
Nailed it.
Still, the left's "purity test" mechanics in action or finding out that someone on the left has some not-so-charming ideas (like graham lineman turning out to be a TERF) are some of my favourite things to see, just glorious
boundle (thoughts on cracking AITD) wrote:
i guess thouth if without a legit key the installation was rolling back we are all fucking then
The big reason the right is gaining power in general, is simply because we see visual evidence that the ideas of the left are failing. Multicultural society was popular in the wealthy 90's and early 2000's when immigration was pretty low and wages were high.
The moment the crash of 2008 created financial troubles combined with instabilities in the East, things went south with a big flow of immigrants causing huge spikes in crime, a huge strain on our welfare systems all the while the left were looking away pretending as if nothing was wrong. When people were pointing it out, they were called racists. Even now, a decade later, when it's become INCREDIBLY obvious that the left-wing policies are a disaster, they still act as if it's the right way to go.
Now, the right isn't the answer either and a lot of people are waiting for a centrum party that takes the good stuff of the left that is feasible combined with the need to control immigration but sadly, this combination seems to be non-existent. You want good healthcare, good education, gun restrictions but also want to halt the flow of immigrants and be tougher on who gets to live here? Tough luck. There's no party like that.
'The left' choses its battles wrong.
- As stated above, they go along with neoliberal ideas, because they're too naive. They think only about open borders, but not about what this means economically in the mid-long term (eg pressure on social healthcare and wages, lower quality in education and so on).
- They support minorities by definition, meaning every fucked up religion or retarded culture gets its support, regardless what these stand for regarding human rights.
- Political correctness and SJWs, trying to silence any opposing voice, mostly via media and social networks.
All the above screams hypocrisy as well.
Personally, I don't think multiculturalism is a failure. A lot of places in the world (mostly in the western world, granted) have been multicultural for many decades. Most problems we see today are related to a new outburst in religiousness. No religion in the world will allow co-existing with non-/other-believers.
That isn't the fault of multiculturalism, more of a problem with secularism being put under pressure, by religions, and supported by the left, when these religions are (still) marginal in society (and then we're back to the hypocrisy).
'The left' choses its battles wrong.
- As stated above, they go along with neoliberal ideas, because they're too naive. They think only about open borders, but not about what this means economically in the mid-long term (eg pressure on social healthcare and wages, lower quality in education and so on).
- They support minorities by definition, meaning every fucked up religion or retarded culture gets its support, regardless what these stand for regarding human rights.
- Political correctness and SJWs, trying to silence any opposing voice, mostly via media and social networks.
All the above screams hypocrisy as well.
Personally, I don't think multiculturalism is a failure. A lot of places in the world (mostly in the western world, granted) have been multicultural for many decades. Most problems we see today are related to a new outburst in religiousness. No religion in the world will allow co-existing with non-/other-believers.
That isn't the fault of multiculturalism, more of a problem with secularism being put under pressure, by religions, and supported by the left, when these religions are (still) marginal in society (and then we're back to the hypocrisy).
I dont need a web page to tell me why. Just look around you and you will see the POS policies of loberalism in affect. Thanks Trump and Salvini for not following bad policies.
You want good healthcare, good education, gun restrictions but also want to halt the flow of immigrants and be tougher on who gets to live here? Tough luck. There's no party like that.
any why is that, one reason, money ... the money funds that which keeps them making more money . and filthy right scaremongering stuff makes tons of money,
Showing Hillary Clinton and talking about left. If there is neocon liberalism it's the fucking clintons. They want to appear socially left but without a strong economic left your stupid ideas of a happy world are nothing but fairy dust to fool your followers into feeling superior to those other assholes
People need to get their head examined if the examples in that video are anything that the left should mainly pursue
Hah, yeah, what the fuck does Hillary Clinton have to do with the left? You have to be waaay far into the depths of the right to see Hillary as a leftist.
And why are we STILL talking about Hillary, she was dumped by the people ~10 years ago and people still bring her up in their arguments.
Because people on the left still use her, that's why. She's treated as some weird mother figure. I've seen people address her on Twitter as if she was a teacher on a school yard, thinking she might do something against whatever upset the poor little snowflake that day.
But yeah, that witch is very right wing, just won't admit to it. She's the worst parts of the left AND the right combined and then people wondered why Trump won.
Well, the only left in yankland that have shown it's face in recent decades is Bernie Sanders and he's at least honest but I don't think the yanks are ready for anything like that anytime soon. As long as the republicans (and to some extent democrats) rattle the communist ghost every opportunity they can the left will be seen as extremism and being forced to work in state owned slave factories (which is kind of what capitalism is all about, the only difference being who owns the stuff )
Well, the only left in yankland that have shown it's face in recent decades is Bernie Sanders and he's at least honest but I don't think the yanks are ready for anything like that anytime soon. As long as the republicans (and to some extent democrats) rattle the communist ghost every opportunity they can the left will be seen as extremism and being forced to work in state owned slave factories (which is kind of what capitalism is all about, the only difference being who owns the stuff )
It's amazing how the word "socialist" makes them have nightmares of the CCCP - the most laughable part is at how IGNORANT those yanks are when it comes to what socialism actually means. They're allergic to socialism yet the most radical republicans are all too happy to yell about how great the army is ... AND THE ARMY IS A SOCIALIST CONSTITUTION!
Or how about ... the police, firefighters, the roadways, parks, etc. etc. ALL SOCIALIST. (Parks & Rec actually made fun of this with Ron who was all too aware that parks were socialist) Yet god forbid they have systems that might help the poorest of the country.
Socialism is basically using taxes and other common resources to create systems that help society on the whole. It's that simple. Communism is something very different although socialism is obviously part of communism in many ways.
i think a lot of American's seem to get confused with the difference between socialism and communism.
I'm all for social programs but dead set against communism, strange that a lot of people advocating for communism in the west seem to be rather well off
The night is dark and the road is long. Come on dead men, return to your homes.
Last edited by dangerouseddy on Wed, 12th Sep 2018 15:04; edited 1 time in total
i think a lot of American's seem to get confused with the difference between socialism and communism.
I'm all for social programs but dead set against communism, strange that a lot of people advocating for it in the west seem to be rather well off
The good part of socialism, is that it's extremely flexible. Either you use public funds for something, or private funds. Railroads in certain countries are state-owned, private owned in others. Same with fibre cable networks, phone cables, etc. If a country prefers to handle something themselves using public funds, then they can. If they think a private company or companies can do better or cheaper, they can do that as well.
With health care, you can go NHS and basically make everything free, or you can have the system used in most of the EU: you can get large deductions according to how much coverage a certain procedure or medication has.
The US is extremely backwards and antiquated in how they operate - socialism isn't some evil entity but a very good system to make sure the population is better off where needed. You can argue about less-critical stuff like the ones I named above (phone cables, train networks, etc.) but stuff like health care not being socialized is just insane for a country that thinks it's the best country in the world.
I don't know why so many on the left are against capitalism paired with social programs and safety nets to protect people and all for communism which has been demonstrated in practice only to benefit people at the top. I'm probably not expressing myself well in these posts imho.
The night is dark and the road is long. Come on dead men, return to your homes.
Some of them feel uncomfortable with supporting a system that thrives on inequalities and asymmetrical relationships between individuals and states, further emphasized by globalization. Of course they have the rough idea that it's likely to be the most functional and desirable economical system that's been created so far, but what can you do ?
What you're describing ( capitalism+social programs ) is modern-left / centrist parties in Europe. I don't see many non-extreme left-wing, if any at all, that suggest that we get rid of the capitalist system altogether or even begin to question it.
Communism is pretty much dead in Europe ( although it's slightly more lively in countries who had a stronger communist tradition ), it's even more tangible when you compare it to how really powerful it was up to the 80's, really. Some people will always get seduced by the appealing ideals of communism as long as its supporters keep it somewhat alive, that's how it goes. Don't worry though, they're going extinct.
A system which mostly "benefit[s] people from the top".. I believe that's currently the case, or I'm missing something.
It's basically trying to do best for everyone vs fighting human nature.
Personally, I'm shocked humanity ever thought communism could work. Anyone with even half an inkling of human nature, knows it would never work.
At work we got an interesting situation on one machine that shows how communism could never work. We got three workers doing the same work:
- person 1 = very skilled, manages to do more work with less effort, is not very neat, however, and tends to be sloppy filling stuff out
- person 2 = less skilled, takes more time to do stuff, but is very neat and fills everything out correctly
- person 3 = least skills, least motivated, doesn't fill out much at all, very sloppy. Only reason we keep him, is because we work with temporary unemployment during slow weeks and he's willing to be unemployed at those times while the others aren't.
Now, person 2 complains that he is the one who has to keep everything in check - he sees person 3 making a mess of it and person 1 knows he's the most skilled so gets away with stuff that person 2 wouldn't get away with. Person 2 doesn't accept this however, and starts to do less, leading to certain work not getting done. When we tell person 2 to start doing more, he complains pointing at person 3 and partially at person 1.
Now, communism expects people to work as a well oiled machine without there being benefits but when even managing just THREE PEOPLE on a single machine is such a headache, how the fuck do you handle an entire country like that? People ALWAYS compare themselves with others. And the moment you appoint people to oversee these people, you create a power structure that's open for abuse.
Times were very different back then, but I agree that they failed to predict the most predictable thing ever about human nature.
If I can't get off considerably better than my neighbour, why bother ?
Regardless, I doubt we're really qualified to be talking about communism and its applications ( not talking about history of course ), at least I know I'm not fluent enough to be questioning this or that particular point.
Times were very different back then, but I agree that they failed to predict the most predictable thing ever about human nature.
Well yeah, communism exploded due to the terrible working conditions compared to the rich layer of society exploiting them. Communism was an ideal, something workers had to look up to so of course these under-educated people would think it's a great idea. But Karl Marx should have known better. He stood by communism and his supporters claim that "true" communism just has never been done yet so defend his views but that's nonsense - human nature makes "true" communism impossible. Marx was just blinded by his own vision to see that, while in theory it's a good idea, it's not practical at all.
It reminds me of Plato's idea to have society be ruled by a group that consists of the brightest minds on the planet. Plato was very much against the idea of people dumber than him ruling over him but while smart politicians can be good, it also makes it easier for them to get away with deep corruption.
The biggest issue I have with communism is that for it to work EVERYONE has to agree fully and bend to the communist ideal. That is of course just ridiculous, hence the tendency to use force to keep the masses in check, root out non-communist movements and so on and ultimately lead to one form of dictatorship or another until it ultimately fails after years and years of oppression and suffering. Communism is a paradoxical pipedream that should be viewed as a warning example.
It reminds me of Plato's idea to have society be ruled by a group that consists of the brightest minds on the planet. Plato was very much against the idea of people dumber than him ruling over him but while smart politicians can be good, it also makes it easier for them to get away with deep corruption.
Haha, yeah, I remember that idea from Plato and how I liked it when I discovered it.. It was very seducing when you read it, but you realize how improbable it actually is when you read contradictions about it. An oligarchy of any sort is bound to become corrupt no matter the number of safeguards
And so... we're stuck with democracy, unless someone comes up with a better idea
Frant wrote:
The biggest issue I have with communism is that for it to work EVERYONE has to agree fully and bend to the communist ideal. That is of course just ridiculous, hence the tendency to use force to keep the masses in check, root out non-communist movements and so on and ultimately lead to one form of dictatorship or another. Communism is a paradox that way.
I think Marx was pretty conscious of the fact that the general population would resist the communist ideal and therefore was willing to use force - partly because they're stuck in their current system and are unable/unwilling to rewire. I might be totally wrong about what I think I remember here, but I think Marx didn't condemn the use of force.
This inability to rewire is one of the main reasons even evolving from current capitalism seems close to impossible, it's so ingrained with our approach to life.
Communism just CAN'T work on full a country by its nature (and Human one) its prone to collapse shortly and a small party will take other.
The sad thing there are still few people on the world with the bullshit
"Its wasn't tried enough!" These kind of people are delusional and can't be taken seriously.
I agree that it can work to an extent on small communities though but even then there some limits and it's not really "full" communism rather partly.
I also agree with Il_Padrino on most points about left wing, one of its biggest problems that it doesn't know when to say "no" to the miniriotes it supposed to "care" What I mean that the left has to put limits to the tolerance and not blindly accept any culture or demands.
"Fuck Denuvo"
Your personal opinions != the rest of the forum
Last edited by JackQ on Thu, 11th Jul 2019 07:17; edited 1 time in total
Nice video haha, pretty spot on. The silly outrage culture leading to ridiculous scenarios, various cults of the perpetually startled over absurdly petty matters and the identity shoehorning typical of the US and UK (which I love to make fun of - whilst dying inside when the process affects games/movies/TV shows) aren't too pronounced here to be honest, but I can definitely see patterns of the whole thing forming on practically all the sides.
The main issue however (when it comes to my country) is the quite extraordinary ability of the traditional left to underestimate severe problematics that affect society and/or acknowledge them without providing solutions that aren't abstract mumbo-jumbo. How immigration should be regulated in a humanely yet logistically/economically/socially acceptable way is one these issues, but also the insane unemployment rate, the perpetually decaying welfare, unpresentable state of the infrastructures etc. etc., the current left sadly is (and I say that as a leftleaningmen myself) completely detached from the real world, living under some sort of Simpsons' dome.
They keep neglecting the fact that reality has more shades of grey than Sasha's wild dreams and there's no room for standing on high moral horses. It doesn't really help that in Italy their level of corruption is nearly as high as the Mafia-ridden fascism-flirting opposition, it makes people say "they're all the same" and damn, in this case the generalization isn't wrong. It's not surprising that as a result, populism with its strong slogans, extreme measures and banal promises for the simple minded is rampant, people would sell their soul for even a bit of hope and pragmatism even though in most of the cases they still end up completely empty-handed.
So? What does it mean to you in the context of the thread? That a left party lost, because they became the bitch of EU Politics an didnt really do any left politics? Unlike the conservatives who promised to privatize even more?
"Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed nonage. Nonage is the inability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance. This nonage is self-imposed if its cause lies not in lack of understanding but in indecision and lack of courage to use one's own mind without another's guidance. Dare to know! (Sapere aude.) "Have the courage to use your own understanding," is therefore the motto of the enlightenment."
Signature/Avatar nuking: none (can be changed in your profile)
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum