When people don't understand that communism is not a lifestyle...

[The Douche]

You're a communist but...

"your shoes were made in a sweatshop!!"

"you buy name brand things"

"you eat at McDonalds"

"you don't donate all your money to charity"

"you participate in capitalism by having a job/buying things"

"you drive a car"



Shut the fuck up

[Искра]

you don't suport nationalist gangs in India and Nepal which scream: PEOPLEEEEEEES WAAAAAAAAAAAAAR

[Blake's Baby]

I like to try the counter argument of 'have you ever experienced anything at all in your life that you didn't pay for? Then you're a socialist and should stop complaining'.

[The Douche]

Its dumb, feel-good consumer activity is for liberals, not communists. In what way is advocating making your purchases from on capitalist institution instead of another revolutionary?

And it doesn't matter, because if you did do these things they suggest, they would just say "but you're only one person, your actions can't do anything alone". Their argument has no real weight...

[Искра]

I'm communsit just because one day I'll be new Iron Felix and all of ya are fucked.

[NewLeft]

I used to have this misconception.. I blame the primitivists.

[Le Rouge]

''Why don't commies wear all the same clothes?'' NOT

[The Douche]

I used to have this misconception.. I blame the primitivists.

Most primitivists don't live specific lifestyles under the guise of them being revolutionary...

[NewLeft]

Most primitivists don't live specific lifestyles under the guise of them being revolutionary...
Then what's the whole point of their anti-consumerism..?

[Tavarisch_Mike]

Like a day before, there was this talkshow where they showed the new chairman for the Lefwing party here in Sweden. He calls himself a socialist (which is rare theese days) where they asked him if its ok for a socialist to like expencive wines and such things. Luckly he went like; "yeas ofcourse, i think the left have had to much of a ideal of ascetic lifestyle."

[Ele'ill]

The PNW - You have to be wearing at least 93% black all the time in order to be an anarchist. The exception is if you intentionally don't wear 93% black all the time then you're still an anarchist. The catch is that your friends have to be wearing 93% black all the time in order to be real anarchists in order to pull this off otherwise just forget it you're not an anarchist and you're not allowed to attend our super secret vegan cookie baking party in the basement of a basement warehouse that was abandoned in the 30's under ground buried in a tunnel under the river.

[NewLeft]

The PNW - You have to be wearing at least 93% black all the time in order to be an anarchist. The exception is if you intentionally don't wear 93% black all the time then you're still an anarchist. The catch is that your friends have to be wearing 93% black all the time in order to be real anarchists in order to pull this off otherwise just forget it you're not an anarchist and you're not allowed to attend our super secret vegan cookie baking party in the basement of a basement warehouse that was abandoned in the 30's under ground buried in a tunnel under the river.

This is so true. Every college anarchist event.. Vegan food only.

[Blake's Baby]

Because many anarchists are vegan. Thing is, veggies can eat vegan food, and omnivores can eat vegan food, but vegans can't eat non-vegan food. If your average Anarchist group is 1/3 omnivorous, 1/3 veggie, 1/3 vegan, and 1/3 of people can eat type 1 food (in this case with meat and fish) and 2/3 can eat type 2 food (in this case without meat and fish but with eggs and milk) and 3/3 can eat type 3 food (in this case without meat, fish, eggs or milk)...

... why would anybody make types 1 or 2 food? That's not lifestylism, that's just sense.

PS, I'm not a vegan.

[NewLeft]

Because many anarchists are vegan. Thing is, veggies can eat vegan food, and omnivores can eat vegan food, but vegans can't eat non-vegan food. If your average Anarchist group is 1/3 omnivorous, 1/3 veggie, 1/3 vegan, and 1/3 of people can eat type 1 food (in this case with meat and fish) and 2/3 can eat type 2 food (in this case without meat and fish but with eggs and milk) and 3/3 can eat type 3 food (in this case without meat, fish, eggs or milk)...

... why would anybody make types 1 or 2 food? That's not lifestylism, that's just sense.

PS, I'm not a vegan.

Carnivores can't eat vegan food.

[Blake's Baby]

Carnivores can't eat vegan food.

Guess you missed the bit where I said:


... If your average Anarchist group is 1/3 omnivorous, 1/3 veggie, 1/3 vegan...


No-one is a carnivore, though. Even wolves aren't totally carniverous.

So, yeah, I forgot to say, most anarchists are real people who actually exist, and not, you know, vampires or whatever.

[Doflamingo]

I wear band t-shirts and I love coca-cola. Buying these things do not make me a capitalist.

Also, what's with this talk of anarchists being vegans? I love beef steaks and pork ribs.

[Firebrand]

[QUOTE=Blake's Baby;2368183] Thing is, veggies can eat vegan food, and omnivores can eat vegan food, but vegans can't eat non-vegan food. If your average Anarchist group is 1/3 omnivorous, 1/3 veggie, 1/3 vegan, and 1/3 of people can eat type 1 food (in this case with meat and fish) and 2/3 can eat type 2 food (in this case without meat and fish but with eggs and milk) and 3/3 can eat type 3 food (in this case without meat, fish, eggs or milk)...

... why would anybody make types 1 or 2 food? That's not lifestylism, that's just sense.QUOTE]

Yeah but i refuse to eat vegan food on principle. I can deal with vegitarian, stuff because thats basically normal food with the meat left out but vegan food its like, lentils and tofu and stuff. Nasty.

[NewLeft]

I wear band t-shirts and I love coca-cola. Buying these things do not make me a capitalist.

Nope, you sound just like an anarchist!

[Susurrus]

I've been accused of dressing like a communist.

[PC LOAD LETTER]

I've been accused of dressing like a communist.
Castro chic?

And, wolves are opportunistic omnivores, kinda like us ... cats are obligate carnivores, though. Even housecats.

I usually eat a meat-limited diet ... because it's healthier. But I like steak. I went veggie for a while. Ended up going full-fiend for a burger one night. Shakes, hallucinations, everything ... until I tasted the burger. Then it all went away.

Tofu is tasty, too.

[Bronco]

Because many anarchists are vegan. Thing is, veggies can eat vegan food, and omnivores can eat vegan food, but vegans can't eat non-vegan food. If your average Anarchist group is 1/3 omnivorous, 1/3 veggie, 1/3 vegan, and 1/3 of people can eat type 1 food (in this case with meat and fish) and 2/3 can eat type 2 food (in this case without meat and fish but with eggs and milk) and 3/3 can eat type 3 food (in this case without meat, fish, eggs or milk)...

... why would anybody make types 1 or 2 food? That's not lifestylism, that's just sense.

PS, I'm not a vegan.

Vegan food is shit though

[Blake's Baby]

...

... what's with this talk of anarchists being vegans? I love beef steaks and pork ribs.

Guess you missed the bit where I said:


Guess you missed the bit where I said:


....If your average Anarchist group is 1/3 omnivorous, 1/3 veggie, 1/3 vegan...




No-one is a carnivore, though. Even wolves aren't totally carniverous.

So, yeah, I forgot to say, most anarchists are real people who actually exist, and not, you know, vampires or whatever.






... cats are obligate carnivores, though. Even housecats...


Maybe I also should have said, most anarchists aren't cats?

Nor are most cats anarchists, just to be clear on that. Not even 'anarcho-capitalists'.



Vegan food is shit though

Nah. Shit's produced by animals and is therefore right out.

[The Douche]

Then what's the whole point of their anti-consumerism..?

The ammount of anti-comsumerist primitivists (who translate that position into a lifestyle choice, and who then insist that lifestyle choice is necessary to be a consistent revolutionary) I have met, is about on par with the ammount of people who hold that idea from various other tendencies. Very few.

[Rafiq]

Moral consumerism is a demonstration that you believe capitalism is capable of forfilling the world's problems. It's postmodernism.

Communists cannot be moral consumerists because we attack the root of the problem, (of sweatshops existing, of enviromental issues, etc.).

To be a moral consumer is to bend down to the concept that these issues can be resolved within the constraint of Bourgeois society.

[The Douche]

Moral consumerism is a demonstration that you believe capitalism is capable of forfilling the world's problems. It's postmodernism.

Communists cannot be moral consumerists because we attack the root of the problem, (of sweatshops existing, of enviromental issues, etc.).

To be a moral consumer is to bend down to the concept that these issues can be resolved within the constraint of Bourgeois society.

Do you talk like this in real life?

[Rafiq]

Do you talk like this in real life?

Yes, I don't see how that's relevant.

I'm not sure what you're getting at.

I don't talk this way casually, if that's what you mean, with friends, etc. (Because, no one gives a shit, and rightfully so I suppose)

If I'm engaging in a political, or 'intellectual' discussion than yes.

[The Douche]

Yes, I don't see how that's relevant.

I'm not sure what you're getting at.

I don't talk this way casually, if that's what you mean, with friends, etc. (Because, no one gives a shit, and rightfully so I suppose)

If I'm engaging in a political, or 'intellectual' discussion than yes.

Just wondering. I used to say shit like that when I was younger, cause I thought it sounded better, but now I consciously think about ways not to talk like that when I talk politics.

Do you, though.

[Crux]

"you eat at McDonalds"
Now, why would you do that?

[The Douche]

Now, why would you do that?

Uh, cause they have a dollar menu?

[NewLeft]

Just wondering. I used to say shit like that when I was younger, cause I thought it sounded better, but now I consciously think about ways not to talk like that when I talk politics.

Do you, though.

Why? Yeah, it comes off pretentious, but..?


The ammount of anti-comsumerist primitivists (who translate that position into a lifestyle choice, and who then insist that lifestyle choice is necessary to be a consistent revolutionary) I have met, is about on par with the ammount of people who hold that idea from various other tendencies. Very few.

I encounter the primitivist type everyday.. They aren't the Zerzan type, but they talk shit about agricultural and how we need to go back to our huntergatherer whatever roots. They are all into the anti-consumerist thing and they think its revolutionary.

[Susurrus]

Castro chic?


Nah, I just usually wear a khaki vest, solid color t-shirt, and cargo pants as my daily attire. I guess because it's pocketed and plain, that is communist to them.

[The Douche]

Why? Yeah, it comes off pretentious, but..?



I encounter the primitivist type everyday.. They aren't the Zerzan type, but they talk shit about agricultural and how we need to go back to our huntergatherer whatever roots. They are all into the anti-consumerist thing and they think its revolutionary.

It comes off as pretentious, and when you're pretentious, people shut you out. In my opinion, the point of a debate is never to convince your opponent, its to convince observers. So being snooty isn't going to help anybody identify with you/your positions.

You say they're "not the Zerzan type", by this, do you mean they are not actually primitivists, but just people who have a fetish for hunter-gatherer/primitive communist societies?

The primitivists I know are about 75/25 as far as people who eat roadkill/aspire to live feral lives vs people who don't. But even those who do lifestyle type shit, don't think those actions are going to bring down civilization, they do them as a sort of personal therapy, and a preparation for the collapse, which they see as inevitable.

[Agent Ducky]

Do you talk like this in real life?

Another question: Does Rafiq call people "moralist scum" and other Rafiq-insults in real life?

[NewLeft]

It comes off as pretentious, and when you're pretentious, people shut you out. In my opinion, the point of a debate is never to convince your opponent, its to convince observers. So being snooty isn't going to help anybody identify with you/your positions.

But when you're pretentious.. The point is to come off as more enlightened.. Nothing to do with actual debate. (I would know)


You say they're "not the Zerzan type", by this, do you mean they are not actually primitivists, but just people who have a fetish for hunter-gatherer/primitive communist societies?

I guess, but what difference does it make?


The primitivists I know are about 75/25 as far as people who eat roadkill/aspire to live feral lives vs people who don't. But even those who do lifestyle type shit, don't think those actions are going to bring down civilization, they do them as a sort of personal therapy, and a preparation for the collapse, which they see as inevitable.

So they're just cynics? Isn't that what primitivism is?

[NewLeft]

Another question: Does Rafiq call people "moralist scum" and other Rafiq-insults in real life?

I wanna see a Rafiq vs Chomsky debate. :lol:

[Quail]

Making vegan food is also inclusive to people who might not eat various things for religious reasons or intolerances (lactose intolerance is quite common), and there's less hygiene stuff to worry about.

[Искра]

I hate vegan anarchists forcing that shit food on everyone else. Croatia (and this part of the Wolrd in general) it 100% anti-vegan (Fuck hell, I killed a chicken when I was 5)... and then you have this stupid anarchists forcing us with this crap on bookfairs. I don't eat that out of principle... It's smells like shit and I eat only stuff which used to have a mother. But, I don't have problems with vegans if they are not preachy shitheads. I don't go around preaching how it's ok only to eat meat...

[Nox]

I wanna see a Rafiq vs Chomsky debate. :lol:

Chomsky would win because he is perfect.

[Agent Ducky]

Chomsky would win because he is perfect.

But Rafiq... He has so much rage... All the rage....

[The Douche]

But when you're pretentious.. The point is to come off as more enlightened.. Nothing to do with actual debate. (I would know)

If you're pretentious, you look like an asshole.


I guess, but what difference does it make?

A pretty big one, do you think moronic hippies who say "we should all just like, share everything maaaaaan", are communists? Then why are people who say "things were so much better back in the day, we should all live like the native americans, maaaaan", primitivists?


So they're just cynics? Isn't that what primitivism is?

What?



Chomsky would win because he is perfect.

Chomsky has terrible politics. Rafiq's might actually be better.

[Rafiq]

I don't present myself as a "people's debater" or whatever. If I'm having a political discussion with someone, they best be able to understand what I'm saying.

[The Douche]

I don't present myself as a "people's debater" or whatever. If I'm having a political discussion with someone, they best be able to understand what I'm saying.

Dude, self-aggrandizement is kind of pathetic.

[NewLeft]

If you're pretentious, you look like an asshole.

Ok.


A pretty big one, do you think moronic hippies who say "we should all just like, share everything maaaaaan", are communists? Then why are people who say "things were so much better back in the day, we should all live like the native americans, maaaaan", primitivists?

I actually do.. Maybe the hippies aren't pure commies.. I'm into the whole relative thing, so who cares if they want to call themselves commies. Same with primitivists. What would be the criteria to be a primmie anyway?


What?

I don't know..


Chomsky has terrible politics. Rafiq's might actually be better.

Terrible politics? What is terrible about it.

[The Douche]

I actually do.. Maybe the hippies aren't pure commies.. I'm into the whole relative thing, so who cares if they want to call themselves commies. Same with primitivists. What would be the criteria to be a primmie anyway?

I think, to be a communist, you need to have a clearly defined set of economic and political principles, not just a vague idea of "people should share things".


Terrible politics? What is terrible about it.

We can start with his endorsement of liberal politicians every couple years.

[Rafiq]

Dude, self-aggrandizement is kind of pathetic.

I'm in high school and usually humans my age don't give a shit about this stuff. Why should I attempt to sound more simplistic for high schoolers who don't care?

Maybe when I'm older(and go to a lot of demonstrations) you'd have a point.

[Rafiq]

I think, to be a communist, you need to have a clearly defined set of economic and political principles, not just a vague idea of "people should share

Communism isn't about sharing or equality for all. That's populist garbage.

Communism is a process of dictatorship

[NewLeft]

I think, to be a communist, you need to have a clearly defined set of economic and political principles, not just a vague idea of "people should share things".

I guess, but for primmies it doesn't seem like they have a method of achieving that goal, it's just a goal of huntergather communal peaceful living.


We can start with his endorsement of liberal politicians every couple years.

I wouldn't say that he endorses bourgeois politicians.. It seems like people always ask him who he's voting for and he starts off by saying "well, both parties represent the elite.. but if the repubs win then they will do this and it's worse for the average.. etc. So I'd vote for obama in a swing state.. But don't expect much.." I don't see anything wrong with that. I would vote for a bourgeois politician if the difference was a social democrat vs ron fucking paul.

[NewLeft]

Communism isn't about sharing or equality for all. That's populist garbage.

Communism is a process of dictatorship
But it's not "communism" that we want, it's the theory and practice..etc. At least to me. I don't care if some hippies want to call themselves commies.

[Rafiq]

But it's not "communism" that we want, it's the theory and practice..etc. At least to me. I don't care if some hippies want to call themselves commies.

Communism is the hammer of the proletariat. It's an ideological weapon, not an end goal (that benefits all people)

[NewLeft]

Communism is the hammer of the proletariat. It's an ideological weapon, not an end goal (that benefits all people)
I just don't care if it's called communism or not.

[Искра]

Communism is not a process of dictatorship as in communism there are no classes left to "dictate".

[Rafiq]

Communism is not a process of dictatorship as in communism there are no classes left to "dictate".

Classless society was just a predicted result of proletarian domination.

[The Douche]

I'm in high school and usually humans my age don't give a shit about this stuff. Why should I attempt to sound more simplistic for high schoolers who don't care?

First of all, the majority of the world doesn't really care about "this stuff". And one major reason that so few people are interested in it, is because its presented in a manner which is very alienating. People often think about how work sucks or being poor sucks. They don't need to hear (nor are they interested in hearing) anybody wax philosophical with some leftist jargon.


Maybe when I'm older(and go to a lot of demonstrations) you'd have a point.

The people at demonstrations are the least of my concerns, they're probably so entrenched in their cool do-gooder liberalism that communism is of little interest to them.


Communism isn't about sharing or equality for all. That's populist garbage.

Communism is a process of dictatorship

Yeah, I don't think you understood what I said.


I guess, but for primmies it doesn't seem like they have a method of achieving that goal, it's just a goal of huntergather communal peaceful living.

Then you don't understand the primitivist critique of civilization.


I wouldn't say that he endorses bourgeois politicians.. It seems like people always ask him who he's voting for and he starts off by saying "well, both parties represent the elite.. but if the repubs win then they will do this and it's worse for the average.. etc. So I'd vote for obama in a swing state.. But don't expect much.." I don't see anything wrong with that. I would vote for a bourgeois politician if the difference was a social democrat vs ron fucking paul.

lolwut


Communism is not a process of dictatorship as in communism there are no classes left to "dictate".

Communism certainly is a process.

[NewLeft]

Then you don't understand the primitivist critique of civilization.

No honestly, all I've ever heard from them is that we need to turn back the clock and undo each agarian revolution up to neolithic..


lolwut

That's Chomsky..

[The Douche]

No honestly, all I've ever heard from them is that we need to turn back the clock and undo each agarian revolution up to neolithic..



That's Chomsky..

Yeah, I know that's chomsky, its also advocating voting for bourgeois candidates.

[NewLeft]

Yeah, I know that's chomsky, its also advocating voting for bourgeois candidates.

What is he supposed to say? Revolution 2012? Just occupy.

[The Douche]

What is he supposed to say? Revolution 2012? Just occupy.

Uh... yeah?

[NewLeft]

Uh... yeah?

Yeah he should. Maybe he will for 2012, nevermind..

[Agent Ducky]

First of all, the majority of the world doesn't really care about "this stuff". And one major reason that so few people are interested in it, is because its presented in a manner which is very alienating. People often think about how work sucks or being poor sucks. They don't need to hear (nor are they interested in hearing) anybody wax philosophical with some leftist jargon.


This. I've found that using big, fancy words, while it makes you sound smart, makes people shut down and just go "Wow, she's smart. I'm not gonna bother to understand what she's saying though."

[thriller]

While I try to avoid the things the OP was about, yeah it drive me crazy. Especially with my sister she always brings up the fact that she is more 'communist' than me because she decided to be homeless for a year or two. She says 'Ive always been less materialistic than you' and I say 'Exactly!' and she doesn't get it. I always get a grin and she gets confused.

[PC LOAD LETTER]

While I try to avoid the things the OP was about, yeah it drive me crazy. Especially with my sister she always brings up the fact that she is more 'communist' than me because she decided to be homeless for a year or two. She says 'Ive always been less materialistic than you' and I say 'Exactly!' and she doesn't get it. I always get a grin and she gets confused.
WHY did she choose to be homeless ... was it for bragging rights?

[thriller]

WHY did she choose to be homeless ... was it for bragging rights?

1/2 bragging rights, 1/2 not wanting responsibility. She was pretty addicted to drugs and owed a lot of debt that parents cosigned for.

[PC LOAD LETTER]

1/2 bragging rights, 1/2 not wanting responsibility. She was pretty addicted to drugs and owed a lot of debt that parents cosigned for.
Aw man, I'm sorry dude.

[thriller]

Aw man, I'm sorry dude.

It's alright, she's really come around in recent years, but it still eerks me weird when she brings up being homeless. I don't diss on others for being homeless, and I dont appreciate being dissed on for NOT being homeless. She's also pretty lifestylist, hasn't really read much on political leftism, just buys into the whole "anyone against capitalism should refuse to participate in society." Which, being a Marxist, disagree with.

And actually I was homeless for a few months, but didn't really like it, and was able to get out of it.