Communism: Hide your own insecurities and become the ultimate conformist!

[Ironwill]

Well I have been doing some reading lately and I have found a true gem. I have decided to offer some comments on it while attacking communism. I am sure many of you will recognize where this is from. So please feel free to comment :lol::

Are my contact with many leftist/communist it has become ever so obvious that many have some type of insecuritie and almost always never comprehend what they are truely saying. They suffer from oversocialization and feelings of inferiority.

These passages from the texts sums it up well:

"Modern leftist philosophers tend to dismiss reason, science, objective reality and to insist that everything is culturally relative. It is true that one can ask serious questions about the foundations of scientific knowledge and about how, if at all, the concept of objective reality can be defined. But it is obvious that modern leftist philosophers are not simply cool-headed logicians systematically analyzing the foundations of knowledge. They are deeply involved emotionally in their attack on truth and reality. They attack these concepts because of their own psychological needs. For one thing, their attack is an outlet for hostility, and, to the extent that it is successful, it satisfies the drive for power. More importantly, the leftist hates science and rationality because they classify certain beliefs as true (i.e., successful, superior) and other beliefs as false (i.e. failed, inferior). The leftist's feelings of inferiority run so deep that he cannot tolerate any classification of some things as successful or superior and other things as failed or inferior. This also underlies the rejection by many leftists of the concept of mental illness and of the utility of IQ tests. Leftists are antagonistic to genetic explanations of human abilities or behavior because such explanations tend to make some persons appear superior or inferior to others. Leftists prefer to give society the credit or blame for an individual's ability or lack of it. Thus if a person is "inferior" it is not his fault, but society's, because he has not been brought up properly."

"Notice the masochistic tendency of leftist tactics. Leftists protest by lying down in front of vehicles, they intentionally provoke police or racists to abuse them, etc. These tactics may often be effective, but many leftists use them not as a means to an end but because they PREFER masochistic tactics. Self-hatred is a leftist trait. "

"We certainly do not claim that leftists, even of the oversocialized type, NEVER rebel against the fundamental values of our society. Clearly they sometimes do. Some oversocialized leftists have gone so far as to rebel against one of modern society's most important principles by engaging in physical violence. By their own account, violence is for them a form of "liberation." In other words, by committing violence they break through the psychological restraints that have been trained into them. Because they are oversocialized these restraints have been more confining for them than for others; hence their need to break free of them. But they usually justify their rebellion in terms of mainstream values. If they engage in violence they claim to be fighting against racism or the like.
31. We realize that many objections could be raised to the foregoing thumb-nail sketch of leftist psychology. The real situation is complex, and anything like a complete description of it would take several volumes even if the necessary data were available. We claim only to have indicated very roughly the two most important tendencies in the psychology of modern leftism. "
__________________________________________________ ______
I think Mr. Kaczynski displays a knowledge much greater than that of Karl Marx in the area of human psychology. What gets me is Marxists (note: should be called "Engelists) always claim that "science" backs them up and that they are the ultimate "progressive" advocators of science. Dead wrong! This is shown by their belief in dialectical materialism. Also one should note almost nothing of use has come via class struggle in an individual nation but rather most of our current technology was developed due to the conflict between nations (which, yes, is usually ideological in nature).

The fact is:

Many communists (leftists) have only a small understanding of human psychology. They also close themselves off to many of the possibilities and brand them as "idealistic".

Will a world wide socialist/communist state ever occur? No! Why? Because the conditions will never be right on this ENTIRE PLANET. Think about that for a second! Hell the conditions might be right for some regions of a country but not the whole country.


Communists/leftists can feel free to call others reactionary but in reactionarys there are things that are positive. The fact is often when you make "progress" by some sort of standard you loose something in another. This is seen in current society with the relation between mental health and technology, processed food and obesity, and many other areas.

At this point I know I will prob be banned or resricted. I consider myself more of an anarchist and will prob be flammed for that but flame away :)

[Nolan]

Cool story bro.

[Jacobinist]

"At this point I know I will prob be banned or resricted. I consider myself more of an anarchist and will prob be flammed for that but flame away" - Soon to Be banned

I'll be right behind you. I keep getting threats, apparently for 'threads-hitting' and 'spamming.'

Im sorry management team, I dont consider it spamming when you disagree with a statement here, and subsequently state your 2 cents. I m sure If I weren't a libertarian communist, and instead 'spammed' pro-stalin or mindless party line bullshit, I think I'd be fine, 'cuz I sure see a lot of that bullshit and they dont get banned.

[Muzk]

Ah crap, he got me, I'll go cut myself because I'm so insecure about revolution.

BULLSHIT


Dead wrong! This is shown by their belief in dialectical materialism.Haters gonna hate.

[RedStarOverChina]

Eh. I've seen worse.

[Wolf Larson]

Ted was a sociopath and read "The Question Concerning Technology" over and over [Heidegger] and misinterpreted it and also held some of Heidegger's fascination with fascism. If you want to be an individualist, in my preferred society, it would be possible BUT individualism does not entail using private property to exploit wage slaves and or facilitate, rent, interest or usury. Real individualists were men such as Henry David Thoreau who, like Ted, lived in the woods by his own hands/labor for an extended amount of time. Individualism is in fact like Ayn Rands little motto -

I swear by my life and my love of it I will never live for the sake of another man nor ask another man to live for mine

The things is, capitalists do in fact ask other men to live for their sake. What do you think wage slavery, rent, interest and usury is? Capitalism is parasitic- it makes a majority working class live for the sake of a minority capitalist class. Workers live to provide abundance and leisure for the capitalist. So, if Ayn Rand actually believed her little motto she would not have been a capitalist.

Mutual aid on the other hand is not parasitic. The difference between Mutual Aid and capitalism can be found here:

Socialist Ants

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnltUzQLqgw

CAPITALIST ANTS

http://www.cals.ncsu.edu/course/ent525/close/SlaveAnt.html

[RadioRaheem84]

Ridiculous trash. Where did you get this? Leftists don't dismiss science and reason. We dismiss the fact that science has capitulated to power and is in the service of private industry these days.

Yeah, Leftists like Richard Levins, Marxist professor of Public Health at Harvard wrote an excellent piece in the latest issue of Monthly Review addressing the very issues raised in this ridiculous posts. I suggest someone paste it on here for the OP to read.


I consider myself more of an anarchist and will prob be flammed for that but flame away

Probably an anarcho capitalist.

[¿Que?]

Modern leftist philosophers tend to dismiss reason, science, objective reality and to insist that everything is culturally relative. It is true that one can ask serious questions about the foundations of scientific knowledge and about how, if at all, the concept of objective reality can be defined. But it is obvious that modern leftist philosophers are not simply cool-headed logicians systematically analyzing the foundations of knowledge. They are deeply involved emotionally in their attack on truth and reality.
If you're attacking something for being cold and emotionless, how does it help to be cold and emotionless?!!?:confused:


Thus if a person is "inferior" it is not his fault, but society's, because he has not been brought up properly."
And if I was Freud, I'd say, "tell me about your mother." I think Ted betrays a little childhood parental frustration by this statement. He fails to understand that socialization is a process involving a lot more than just upbringing. Very simplistic thinking in my book.



I think Mr. Kaczynski displays a knowledge much greater than that of Karl Marx in the area of human psychology. No he does not. In any case, Marxism is a social theory. Marx himself was concerned with society and social organization above individual psychology. It's like accusing Einstein for being a lousy cook. Not really his area of expertise.


This is shown by their belief in dialectical materialism.
What's wrong with dialectical materialism?



Communists/leftists can feel free to call others reactionary but in reactionarys there are things that are positive. The fact is often when you make "progress" by some sort of standard you loose something in another. This is seen in current society with the relation between mental health and technology, processed food and obesity, and many other areas.
I found a great definition of reactionary, which I use. It basically means you are trying move society to place where it was in the past. Using this definition, I really see no overall benefit to reactionism.

Plus, your logic is confused. You say there are advantages to reactionsim, but you use disadvantages of progressivism to support this claim. Are you sure you want to abandon dialectical materialism?:laugh:

I tell you, in my younger days, I had a fascination with those who did stuff, regardless of ideology. Those who were able to radically change the face of society, or who just went against the system, no matter what. Nowadays, I think change for change sake is not too smart, and action for action's sake is self defeatist (eventually you get caught or have to live your life in hiding). If I'm going to change the world, or do something drastic like our friend Ted, it's going to have to mean something.

[RedSonRising]

Look man, if you think that going onto a revolutionary leftist forum and attacking a main current of anti-capitalist theory is going to do anything worth anyone's time, you're sadly mistaken. If you want to cite reasons why you think mainstream values interact with the left in a negative way, cite some relevant examples beyond some speculative and non-empirical historical bullshit spouted out against the only revolutionary segments of modern society.

And you wonder why there's no significant core-country upheaval acting towards proletarian interests.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Ridiculous trash. Where did you get this? Leftists don't dismiss science and reason. We dismiss the fact that science has capitulated to power and is in the service of private industry these days.

Yeah, Leftists like Richard Levins, Marxist professor of Public Health at Harvard wrote an excellent piece in the latest issue of Monthly Review addressing the very issues raised in this ridiculous posts. I suggest someone paste it on here for the OP to read.

I think I know what you're talking about. If anything, it can be found here: http://richardlevins.com/

[The Douche]

At this point I know I will prob be banned or resricted. I consider myself more of an anarchist and will prob be flammed for that but flame away :)

Being an anarchist doesn't get you banned, but you don't seem to understand marxism, so maybe you ought to learn more about it before attacking it.

I would not reccomend learning about either anarchism or marxism from the unabomber, also you only post his piece on marxism, but I seem to remember him being equally harsh on anarchism.


Im sorry management team, I dont consider it spamming when you disagree with a statement here, and subsequently state your 2 cents. I m sure If I weren't a libertarian communist, and instead 'spammed' pro-stalin or mindless party line bullshit, I think I'd be fine, 'cuz I sure see a lot of that bullshit and they dont get banned.

You do spam, it has nothing to do with your personal politics. My politics are hated by almost everybody on this board (less than 5 or so people probably agree with me), but I am not going to banned. And the only warning points I have recieved are from when I break the rules.


Get over yourselves.

[Jacobinist]

"You do spam, it has nothing to do with your personal politics. My politics are hated by almost everybody on this board (less than 5 or so people probably agree with me), but I am not going to banned." - C$

Thats bullshit. What exactly do you consider 'spam?' And if I've spammed so much, give me one link to an example of such. I dont purposely go around starting flaming wars. I dont ever copy paste same responses, ever. The one thing I do, often to a fault, is show my disagreement with the models of communism that we presently consider 'viable.' I always suggest thinking outside the box, is all.
__________________

[Dimentio]

This gem is from Theodore Kaczynski, more well-known as the Unabomber. He is a luddite and a lunatic as well, having sent mailbombs to numerous individuals and institutions.

Thread moved to OI.

[The Douche]

"You do spam, it has nothing to do with your personal politics. My politics are hated by almost everybody on this board (less than 5 or so people probably agree with me), but I am not going to banned." - C$

Thats bullshit. What exactly do you consider 'spam?' And if I've spammed so much, give me one link to an example of such. I dont purposely go around starting flaming wars. I dont ever copy paste same responses, ever. The one thing I do, often to a fault, is show my disagreement with the models of communism that we presently consider 'viable.' I always suggest thinking outside the box, is all.
__________________

Because it seems like every post you have on the site is an attack on Leninists. Now, believe me, no poster on this site is more opposed to the statists than I, and I/my organization has come under fire quite regularly for our militant actions against leninism. But that is not all I am on here to talk about, I'm not just trying to incite arguements, I try to participate in constructive discussion.

[Jacobinist]

"Because it seems like every post you have on the site is an attack on Leninists" - C$

Every post? Yeah, like I said, some people walk right into this by not thinking about what they post. I know people who's nearly every post is pro-stalinist, anti-trtosky, anti baukinin, anti-[insert pre-fix here]-ism, and there's no problem with that. But if I simply point out the bourgeois element in Leninism, all of a sudden Im a constant spammer and must be silenced. Now thats leninism in action!

[#FF0000]

"Because it seems like every post you have on the site is an attack on Leninists" - C$

Every post? Yeah, like I said, some people walk right into this by not thinking about what they post. I know people who's nearly every post is pro-stalinist, anti-trtosky, anti baukinin, anti-[insert pre-fix here]-ism, and there's no problem with that. But if I simply point out the bourgeois element in Leninism, all of a sudden Im a constant spammer and must be silenced. Now thats leninism in action!

You are delusional if you think that there is a marxist-leninist bias on the admin or mod team.

The problem is you go into threads that have absolutely fuck-all to do with what you're going on about, and basically do whatever you can to bring some ridiculous sectarian debate into it.

[Jacobinist]

"You are delusional if you think that there is a marxist-leninist bias on the admin or mod team" - Loves

Did I say that? Going with your 'gut feeling?'

[Dimentio]

"Because it seems like every post you have on the site is an attack on Leninists" - C$

Every post? Yeah, like I said, some people walk right into this by not thinking about what they post. I know people who's nearly every post is pro-stalinist, anti-trtosky, anti baukinin, anti-[insert pre-fix here]-ism, and there's no problem with that. But if I simply point out the bourgeois element in Leninism, all of a sudden Im a constant spammer and must be silenced. Now thats leninism in action!

Believe me, we are also swearing a lot about marxist-leninists who delve into the same endeavour.

[Die Rote Fahne]

tl;dr

What I gathered is that you're an idiot.

[Belisarius]

in stead of focusing on the lefts adherence to abolish superiority/inferiority (which we don't, we do acknowledge that some people can be for example smarter than others), it is interesting to focus on ted's absolute belief in it. if there really isn't anything but social structures, then he in his little cabin away from society is actually a nobody, since he doesn't belong to society. he holds to the belief of superiority, because otherwise he would be inferior himself.

[The Douche]

"Because it seems like every post you have on the site is an attack on Leninists" - C$

Every post? Yeah, like I said, some people walk right into this by not thinking about what they post. I know people who's nearly every post is pro-stalinist, anti-trtosky, anti baukinin, anti-[insert pre-fix here]-ism, and there's no problem with that. But if I simply point out the bourgeois element in Leninism, all of a sudden Im a constant spammer and must be silenced. Now thats leninism in action!

But you don't engage in a principled discussion of the "bourgeois elements in leninism". I have recieved warning points for arguements about leninism, but not because I am anti-leninist, it was because I was flaming. Drop the victim complex, man.

Also the ironic thing is that many anti-revisionists complain about a trotskyist/anarchist dominance in the mod team.

[mikelepore]

This is my first reaction to the quoted anti-leftist passage in post #1. Responses in any debate are supposed to address very specifically what the adversary has asserted. To use comments similar to "they dismiss reality", "they don't comprehend what they are saying", "they say what they say because of their psychological needs", "they need an outlet for their hostility", "they are in rebellion against the right values", etc., is not a valid form of debate for any purpose. I call such phrases modular plug-in phrases, because any debater, on almost any subject (politics, religion, history, ethics, etc.), and regardless of viewpoint, could refer to a database of many such phrases and randomly insert some of them into any speech. By doubling or tripling the length of a speech, this practice often creates the illusion that the speech has a lot of specific content. I am not fooled by this practice. If my political or economic recommendations are counterproductive or unworkable, my critic ought to be able to indicate the precise reasons why, without psychoanalyzing me, Dr. Freud.

[Skooma Addict]

I call such phrases modular plug-in phrases, because any debater, on almost any subject (politics, religion, history, ethics, etc.), and regardless of viewpoint, could refer to a database of many such phrases and randomly insert some of them into any speech. By doubling or tripling the length of a speech, this practice often creates the illusion that the speech has a lot of specific content.

I am stealing this.

[Dimentio]

in stead of focusing on the lefts adherence to abolish superiority/inferiority (which we don't, we do acknowledge that some people can be for example smarter than others), it is interesting to focus on ted's absolute belief in it. if there really isn't anything but social structures, then he in his little cabin away from society is actually a nobody, since he doesn't belong to society. he holds to the belief of superiority, because otherwise he would be inferior himself.

Ted was socially awkward, and alike so many other luddites and primmies, he blamed modern technology. Unlike most primmies though, he killed and maimed people.

[Comrade B]

1978 May 25–26 Northwestern University (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwestern_University), Evanston, Illinois Terry Marker, campus police officer minor
1979 May 9 Northwestern University John Harris, graduate student slight November 15 Chicago, Illinois 12 American Airlines (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines) passengers smoke inhalation 1980 June 10 Chicago Percy Wood, United Airlines (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines) President cuts and burns
1981 October 8 University of Utah (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Utah), Salt Lake City, Utah none—bomb defused
1982 May 5 Vanderbilt University (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanderbilt_University), Nashville, Tennessee Janet Smith, university secretary severe injury to hands requiring extensive rehabilitative treatment
July 2 University of California, Berkeley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_California,_Berkeley), California Diogenes Angelakos (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diogenes_Angelakos), professor right hand and face; near complete recovery
1985 May 15 University of California, Berkeley John Hauser, graduate student partial loss of vision in left eye, loss of four fingers on right hand June 13 Auburn, Washington none—bomb defused
November 15 Ann Arbor, Michigan James V. McConnell (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_V._McConnell) and Nicklaus Suino McConnell: hearing loss; Suino: shrapnel wounds
December 11 Sacramento, California Hugh Scrutton, computer rental store owner first fatality
1987 February 20 Salt Lake City, Utah Gary Wright, computer store owner injured
1993 June 22 Tiburon, California Charles Epstein, University of California geneticist destroyed both eardrums, lost parts of three fingers
June 24 Yale University (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yale_University), New Haven, Connecticut David Gelernter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Gelernter), computer science professor right hand and right eye
1994 December 10 North Caldwell, New Jersey Thomas J. Mosser, advertising executive second fatality 1995 April 24 Sacramento, California Gilbert P. Murray (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilbert_Murray_%28lobbyist%29), timber industry lobbyist third fatalityThis is a list of the other works of your 'Philosopher'
The list is set up Date, location, person, and injury from the bomb that was sent to them in the mail by Kaczynsk

[Jacobinist]

you don't engage in a principled discussion of the "bourgeois elements in leninism". I have recieved warning points for arguements about leninism, but not because I am anti-leninist, it was because I was flaming. Drop the victim complex, man." -C$

What? How can you discuss the bourgeois elements in Leninisn, when you get called a Trot/anarchist, immediately? And another question, what are these golden 'principles' according to Revleft standards (which I may say are pretty funny)?

[anticap]

By doubling or tripling the length of a speech, this practice often creates the illusion that the speech has a lot of specific content.

Argumentum verbosium: "proof by verbosity" (nicely described @ 14:08 in this video (http://herebedragonsmovie.com/), which is worth watching in its entirety), a.k.a. "proof by intimidation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_intimidation)." Colloquially identified with the phrase, "if you can't dazzle them with brilliance, then baffle them with bullshit."


I am stealing this.

The least you could do, then, is to thank the man. Crikey, you pro-caps won't even give away rep for free. :p

[Dean]

Many communists (leftists) have only a small understanding of human psychology. They also close themselves off to many of the possibilities and brand them as "idealistic".

Fromm and Adorno were both psychologists and Marxists. Marx is also regarded as one of the first sociologists.

I also note that your entire criticism is devoid of any distinct psychological argument - other than crude political slander - so I wonder why you are applauding psychology and lamenting that "leftists don't understand it." Apparently, neither do you.

[Skooma Addict]

The least you could do, then, is to thank the man. Crikey, you pro-caps won't even give away rep for free. :p


I can't thank people.

[anticap]

I can't thank people.

Oh. I didn't know that. Apologies for the ribbing then.

I guess it makes sense. We can't have you people bumping each other up the rep list, if there is such a thing. :p

[Lyev]

To the OP; I consider myself a Marxist but I do not claim to "back myself up with science" or however you phrase it. I might be reproached by other leftists here, but I do not see Marxism as a science. We just analyse things in a "scientific" way. Q posted something which summed up my thought processes quite well. This is how Marx (and an absolutely vast wealth of theorists, writers, economists, politicians, philosophers, scientists, activists etc. after him) analysed/analyse information:


1) Skepticism of unsupported claims

2) Combination of an open mind with critical thinking

3) Attempts to repeat experimental results.

4) Requires testability

5) Seeks out falsifying data that would disprove a hypothesis

6) Uses descriptive language

7) Performs controlled experiments

8) Self-correcting

9) Relies on evidence and reason

10) Makes no claim for absolute or certain knowledge

11) Produces useful knowledge

I.e. nothing is ever infallible.

[Dean]

Oh. I didn't know that. Apologies for the ribbing then.

I guess it makes sense. We can't have you people bumping each other up the rep list, if there is such a thing. :p
There is (http://www.revleft.com/vb/memberlist.php?order=DESC&sort=reputation&pp=30)

And I think OIers should be able to give out thanks, and receive them. ATM they can only receive positive or negative karma via the scales in the upper-right of each post.

There is some discussion atm of implementing some of these changes.

[Dimentio]

Funny that Ted Kaczynski is painted as an authority on human psychology...