Why are leftists so moral?

[Elysian]

Not only here but IRL, leftists appear more moral than religious folks. I kid you not. Despite their intellectual pretensions and insistence upon materialism, they seem to analyze everything in terms of morality - greed, cruelty etc. etc. - rather than see everything as a struggle for survival, and 'right and wrong' simply fit into this struggle.

Perhaps, we need a dose of Darwinism every now and then. Capitalists will do anything to survive, and this 'anything' may include cheating people, killing them, and so on. But this of course has less to do with morality and more to do with our intrinsic desire to survive. Nothing more to it, so let's not mystify this struggle by introducing morality and such absurd concepts.

[honest john's firing squad]

they seem to analyze everything in terms of morality - greed, cruelty etc.
They're the worst arguments to make about capitalism in my opinion, and they only serve to further the myth that the system was once "uncorrupted" and "morally pure". To be honest, it's not worth any of your time to listen to the clowns who make moral arguments against the present social order.

[Os Cangaceiros]

You're a pretty good troll. Wasn't it just recently that you were talking about how the rich were really good people at heart, and that you were a "Anarcho Calvinist"? :lol:

And now you're wearing tight pants and talking about how we need to discard morality. Super cool story.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Well, greed is directly descended from materialism... so yeah...

[Elysian]

You're a pretty good troll. Wasn't it just recently that you were talking about how the rich were really good people at heart, and that you were a "Anarcho Calvinist"? :lol:

And now you're wearing tight pants and talking about how we need to discard morality. Super cool story.

That was before I became aware, so would you stop bringing that up?

Thanks.

[Elysian]

Well, greed is directly descended from materialism... so yeah...

People will do whatever it takes to survive. Passing moral judgment isn't going to solve the problem.

[Vyacheslav Brolotov]

Not only here but IRL, leftists appear more moral than religious folks. I kid you not. Despite their intellectual pretensions and insistence upon materialism, they seem to analyze everything in terms of morality - greed, cruelty etc. etc. - rather than see everything as a struggle for survival, and 'right and wrong' simply fit into this struggle.

Perhaps, we need a dose of Darwinism every now and then. Capitalists will do anything to survive, and this 'anything' may include cheating people, killing them, and so on. But this of course has less to do with morality and more to do with our intrinsic desire to survive. Nothing more to it, so let's not mystify this struggle by introducing morality and such absurd concepts.

What kind of leftists are you talking to?

[TheGodlessUtopian]

People will do whatever it takes to survive. Passing moral judgment isn't going to solve the problem.

It's not moral judgement.... it is materialism. You see it as moralism but it simply isn't. The bourgeoisie are greedy: it's a fact. If they weren't socialism might not have been created.

[Elysian]

It's not moral judgement.... it is materialism. You see it as moralism but it simply isn't. The bourgeoisie are greedy: it's a fact. If they weren't socialism might not have been created.

The bourgeoisie are not greedy. They do what they do to survive, which you interpret as greed. This is a moral judgment, not a material analysis.

[Geiseric]

I'm a leftist and i'm not very moral. I use materialism to reach depressing conclusions. And obviously they're greedy, why else would somebody want so much power and abundant resources?

[Elysian]

I'm a leftist and i'm not very moral. I use materialism to reach depressing conclusions. And obviously they're greedy, why else would somebody want so much power and abundant resources?

You call it greed - and that's moral evaluation - but in their mind, it's only a survival tactic and nothing more. For them, this has nothing to do with greed; it's all about using certain means to survive.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

You call it greed - and that's moral evaluation - but in their mind, it's only a survival tactic and nothing more. For them, this has nothing to do with greed; it's all about using certain means to survive.

They have more than enough means to survive. How is it survival if they have more than millions of people combined?

[The Jay]

Nothing more to it, so let's not mystify this struggle by introducing morality and such absurd concepts.

Morality is informed by material conditions, they are not absurd, though they are subjective. It is not 'mystifying' class struggle to see the morality in it.

[Elysian]

They have more than enough means to survive. How is it survival if they have more than millions of people combined?

In the animal kingdom, you see big, strong elephants bullying the smaller ones to attract mates. Humans too have a natural instinct to spread their genes, so with power and money, they can attract mates and do just that.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

In the animal kingdom, you see big, strong elephants bullying the smaller ones to attract mates. Humans too have a natural instinct to spread their genes, so with power and money, they can attract mates and do just that.

Now you are bringing in "mate finding?" :lol:

[Revolution starts with U]

Propaganda


...basically

[hatzel]

...wait wait wait has Elysian now completed the transition from anarcho-Calvinist through Marxist to social Darwinist? How very droll...

[Elysian]

Now you are bringing in "mate finding?" :lol:

Or you can moralize over how 'greedy' capitalists are ... a poor material analysis.

[Ned Kelly]

It is in the material interest of my class to push as quickly as possible for socialism. Therefore I am a socialist.

[Mass Grave Aesthetics]

Many "leftists" are terribly moralistic. Does anyone here know any left reformists? I rest my case.

[MustCrushCapitalism]

What does it have to do with morality? It's in the material interests of the proletariat to violently overthrow the bourgeoisie. We have to resort to bourgeois morality in order to go against that idea, and instead accept your bourgeois overlords, or accept national interests over class interests.

Not to say we don't believe in morality, though. Just a different kind of morality - proletarian morality. What's different is that proletarian morality would emphasize fighting against injustice everywhere, instead of being ruled over by the bourgeoisie under the guise of "peace".

[honest john's firing squad]

a different kind of morality - proletarian morality.
Are you for real?

What such "proletarian morality" objectively exists?

[Revolution starts with U]

You can say "the interests of the ownership class are in the suppression of wages/expansion of profit, as opposed to the interests of the property-less laborer in wage expansion. This opposition of interests engages a dynamic struggle within the individual actors of different classes which fosters sometimes abrupt and radical shifts in the relationship to productive enterprise. The more laborers become aware of their situation, and have the power to promote it, the more society must necessarily shift towards a culture of solidarity, non-binding heirarchies, and production based on individual desire (rather than economic demand). Those with an interest in "owning" things will use whatever means possible to fight this movement."

Or... you can say "greedy rich pigs exploit your labor for gold toilets while you wonder if you're going to be able to pay your mortgage next month. Crush your chains and the fools that hold them!"

What sounds more provocative? ;)

[Positivist]

The bourgeoisie are not greedy. They do what they do to survive, which you interpret as greed. This is a moral judgment, not a material analysis.

Do the bourgiose need 80 million dollar mansions to survive?

[MotherCossack]

The bourgeoisie are not greedy. They do what they do to survive, which you interpret as greed. This is a moral judgment, not a material analysis.


You call it greed - and that's moral evaluation - but in their mind, it's only a survival tactic and nothing more. For them, this has nothing to do with greed; it's all about using certain means to survive.


Or you can moralize over how 'greedy' capitalists are ... a poor material analysis.


Capitalists will do anything to survive, so let's not mystify this struggle by introducing morality and such absurd concepts.


People will do whatever it takes to survive. Passing moral judgment isn't going to solve the problem.


this is a pile of stinking horseshit!
why should i excuse the monumental greed, yes, yes, yes......
G-R-E-E-D!!!!!! IT IS GREEDY TO TAKE SO VERY MUCH MORE THAN YOU NEED HOARDING WHAT YOU CANT STUFF DOWN YOUR NECK OR GIVE TO YOUR BOURGEOIS PALS ..... WHILE BABIES AND YOUNG CHILDREN DIE IN EXCRUCIATING PAIN ALL FOR THE WANT OF ONE BOWL OF RICE OR A COURSE OF ANTIBIOTICS.
IT IS INHUMANE AND GREEDY TO DEMAND HUGE PROFIT FOR SIMPLE LIFE-SAVING MEDICINE ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU ARE ALREADY PERVERSELY WEALTHY AND HAVE SO MUCH IN YOUR COFFERS THAT IT WOULD TAKE A MILLENIA TO COUNT IT .

IT IS ENTIRELY REASONABLE FOR THOSE POOR BASTARDS WHO ARE UNFORTUNATE ENOUGH TO HAVE BEEN BORN TO THE WRONG PARENTS IN SOME SLUM OR OTHER....[ TAKE YOUR PICK... THERE ARE QUITE A FEW]
TO, FROM THEIR POSITION AMIDST TOTAL DEPRIVATION AND SQUALOR... WITHOUT FLAT TELLIES, HOPE OR ANYTHING WE RECOGNISE AS OUR DAILY BREAD.... ENTIRELY REASONABLE FOR THEM TO LOOK OVER AT THE
MONUMENTAL EXCESSES OF THE SUPER_RICH IN THE WEST AND THINK:
HANG A BOUT.....
IT AINT FAIR!!! I WANT SOME!!!!!!

and it is not so fantastic a notion to suppose that such a person would not want it all!!!!! maybe..... some of us.... would settle for ......

OUR FAIR SHARE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
so MR lets-excuse-the-filthy-rich-and-theirs-they-are-only-trying-to-survive.
speak for yourself.... personally i am confident that i do not possess that insatiable desire to take so much more than i will ever need at the expense of others who are equally entitled to the pickings on offer.

[ed miliband]

hey, mothercossack, you should read this:

http://libcom.org/library/right-be-greedy-theses-practical-necessity-demanding-everything




Greed in its fullest sense is the only possible basis of communist society.

[ed miliband]

you should also read this:

http://libcom.org/library/who-blame-anselm-jappe



A short essay contesting the notion that the current economic crisis is the result of "greed" or irresponsible speculation by evil bankers or investment firms, asserting instead that it is an effect of a generalized crisis of value production caused by the falling rate of profit--an immanent law of capitalist production--and further maintaining that, rather than precipitating the crisis, the massive expansion of fictitious capital over the last 30 years was the only way its onset could be delayed until now.


it's very good.

[The Jay]

this is a pile of stinking horseshit!
why should i excuse the monumental greed

so MR lets-excuse-the-filthy-rich-and-theirs-they-are-only-trying-to-survive.
speak for yourself.... personally i am confident that i do not possess that insatiable desire to take so much more than i will ever need at the expense of others who are equally entitled to the pickings on offer.

If the OP is being sincere than he is most likely realizing that there is no objective morality and only a subjective one, so he is retreating into applying science to everything instead of reason in general. What he said is not entirely wrong either. Capitalists are a product of the system they were born into, they were conditioned to be greedy. While that does not excuse their behavior it does explain and show that it's not all their fault. I don't think that he's excusing their exploitation either since he supports a proletarian revolution. Seriously though, would it kill you to turn off capslock or use some grammar? Sorry but horrendous grammar is a pet peeve, I can tolerate average mistakes or speech without issue but feel free to ignore these last two sentences if it annoys you.

[Railyon]

You call it greed - and that's moral evaluation - but in their mind, it's only a survival tactic and nothing more. For them, this has nothing to do with greed; it's all about using certain means to survive.

Which, taken to its logical conclusion, leaves us with the insight that it is also in their material interests to abolish the underlying social relations that impose competition on them. Which, combined with the Marxian concept of surplus extraction and the inherent class interest of the proletariat can only leave us with communism; the alternative is their rising to the top, killing off all competition by whatever means necessary until "there can be only one". Say, do you support the latter?

Now, your resorting to social Darwinism is moralism because you apparently think that is the way it ought to be, and how it is natural and proper.

It seems to me like you have not idea about Marxian analysis of capitalism because you seem to think this mode of social relations is eternal and fixed, and completely okay.

[Anarpest]

I don't get it, why do you have such a big issue with morality? Isn't morality more or less inherent to the advocacy of any form of major social change?


this is a pile of stinking horseshit!
why should i excuse the monumental greed, yes, yes, yes......
G-R-E-E-D!!!!!! IT IS GREEDY TO TAKE SO VERY MUCH MORE THAN YOU NEED HOARDING WHAT YOU CANT STUFF DOWN YOUR NECK OR GIVE TO YOUR BOURGEOIS PALS ..... WHILE BABIES AND YOUNG CHILDREN DIE IN EXCRUCIATING PAIN ALL FOR THE WANT OF ONE BOWL OF RICE OR A COURSE OF ANTIBIOTICS. IT IS INHUMANE AND GREEDY TO DEMAND HUGE PROFIT FOR SIMPLE LIFE-SAVING MEDICINE ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU ARE ALREADY PERVERSELY WEALTHY AND HAVE SO MUCH IN YOUR COFFERS THAT IT WOULD TAKE A MILLENIA TO COUNT IT .

IT IS ENTIRELY REASONABLE FOR THOSE POOR BASTARDS WHO ARE UNFORTUNATE ENOUGH TO HAVE BEEN BORN TO THE WRONG PARENTS IN SOME SLUM OR OTHER....[ TAKE YOUR PICK... THERE ARE QUITE A FEW]
TO, FROM THEIR POSITION AMIDST TOTAL DEPRIVATION AND SQUALOR... WITHOUT FLAT TELLIES, HOPE OR ANYTHING WE RECOGNISE AS OUR DAILY BREAD.... ENTIRELY REASONABLE FOR THEM TO LOOK OVER AT THE
MONUMENTAL EXCESSES OF THE SUPER_RICH IN THE WEST AND THINK:
HANG A BOUT.....
IT AINT FAIR!!! I WANT SOME!!!!!!

and it is not so fantastic a notion to suppose that such a person would not want it all!!!!! maybe..... some of us.... would settle for ......

OUR FAIR SHARE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Oh, that's why.

[MotherCossack]

Seriously though, would it kill you to turn off capslock or use some grammar? Sorry but horrendous grammar is a pet peeve, I can tolerate average mistakes or speech without issue but feel free to ignore these last two sentences if it annoys you.


I could not possibly ignore such a comment.
Having let rip in the manner that I did, one would be an idiot not to expect some sort of reaction. Having said that I must confess I was not expecting to be criticised for my use of grammar.
I would be the first to admit that I am very lazy where capital letters are concerned..... being a more mature rev-leftian, I am a relative newcomer to the virtual communication/interaction scene. As such I am still celebrating my newly aquired ability to do anything at all 'on the computer.'
I am barely literate, where computers are concerned, and am never more than an email away from unspeakable rage or embarrassing blunders. The smallest technical hitch will derail me; I tend to react emotively [no change there then!] and, more often than not, manage to lose the lot.
Excuses, excuses. I know, I know.... and as far as bad grammar goes... sorry.
I am a little taken aback by your comment. Having noticed it myself quite a lot on revleft, i was not aware that I, too, was considered guilty of it.
I will endeavour to improve and check my posts more closely. If you could be a little more specific it would help a great deal; I can then make some improvements to my posts
As to the blanket capitals..... I do that when I am shouting, if you know what I mean. It just feels more emphatic. Maybe I will rethink that as it does seem somewhat clumsy now.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Or you can moralize over how 'greedy' capitalists are ... a poor material analysis.

Coming from the person who completely skipped over my last post and resorted to "mate finding." :laugh:

[pastradamus]

Leftism is moral because it was first written from a moral persepective by Karl Marx. The idea that a small few should benefit off the backs of the many is an immoral notion.

[pastradamus]

you should also read this:

http://libcom.org/library/who-blame-anselm-jappe




it's very good.

Stop posting links from "those we do not speak of"!
:lol:

[ColonelCossack]

I think that capitalist "greed" can be a material issue; it's what lowers the quality of
the material conditions for proles, or at least heavily contributes to it. So although greed is a moral issue, it also affects people's lives materially.

However, "greed" is an innate part of the capitalist system, so using "greed" as the only criticism of capitalism is wholly insufficient because it implies that the system can be changed, i.e. with "moral capitalism" to use David cameron's lingo. Moreover, it is overly-simplistic as a criticism and does not nearly get to the bottom of the reasons for the material conditions.

Therefore, we need to primarily use materialism to criticise capitalism; but because the material actions of capitalism are percieved as "immoral", we can use morality as an additional argument- keeping in mind that material analyses are more important to our theoretical development and our criticisms of capitalism.


Seriously though, would it kill you to turn off capslock or use some grammar? Sorry but horrendous grammar is a pet peeve, I can tolerate average mistakes or speech without issue but feel free to ignore these last two sentences if it annoys you.

Not everyone here uses English as a first language, though. Blaming people for spelling/grammar is not a good habit to bet into because of this, and also because it comes across as somewhat pedantic.

[Black Cross]

OP: Why do think its necessary to seperate evolution and morality? Wouldn't the former develop the latter?

[The Jay]

I could not possibly ignore such a comment.
Having let rip in the manner that I did, one would be an idiot not to expect some sort of reaction. Having said that I must confess I was not expecting to be criticised for my use of grammar.
I would be the first to admit that I am very lazy where capital letters are concerned..... being a more mature rev-leftian, I am a relative newcomer to the virtual communication/interaction scene. As such I am still celebrating my newly aquired ability to do anything at all 'on the computer.'
I am barely literate, where computers are concerned, and am never more than an email away from unspeakable rage or embarrassing blunders. The smallest technical hitch will derail me; I tend to react emotively [no change there then!] and, more often than not, manage to lose the lot.
Excuses, excuses. I know, I know.... and as far as bad grammar goes... sorry.
I am a little taken aback by your comment. Having noticed it myself quite a lot on revleft, i was not aware that I, too, was considered guilty of it.
I will endeavour to improve and check my posts more closely. If you could be a little more specific it would help a great deal; I can then make some improvements to my posts
As to the blanket capitals..... I do that when I am shouting, if you know what I mean. It just feels more emphatic. Maybe I will rethink that as it does seem somewhat clumsy now.

Don't worry about it, like I said, it's just a pet peeve that you're free to ignore. I can't tell you how to write, so enjoy your internet freedom! I know what you mean about getting upset online as I was not computer savy even just two years ago.

[The Jay]

Not everyone here uses English as a first language, though. Blaming people for spelling/grammar is not a good habit to bet into because of this, and also because it comes across as somewhat pedantic.

You two are English are you not?

[MotherCossack]

However, "greed" is an innate part of the capitalist system, so using "greed" as the only criticism of capitalism is wholly insufficient because it implies that the system can be changed, i.e. with "moral capitalism" to use David cameron's lingo. Moreover, it is overly-simplistic as a criticism and does not nearly get to the bottom of the reasons for the material conditions.

Not everyone here uses English as a first language, though. Blaming people for spelling/grammar is not a good habit to bet into because of this, and also because it comes across as somewhat pedantic.

my dear boy,.....aaahhh!!!!! did i make an problem.... i did better do careful otherwise : i most probably might do a mistake. what was i on about.....?
oh yeah.... i were just gonna lay intwo the kernal four......
sod it.... was i suggesting that:
Capitalism is bad!!!!!! because it is a tad greedy to gain control, greedily of the means of production. having done that in a greedy fashion, coerce the masses, the common and unwashed to work really bloody hard, making cheap, nasty stuff for inflated prices, at great greedy profit for them selves.
being very greedy the capitalist will pay his slave labour measly sustinence wages... while paying himself a grand greedy amount.
in all areas of capitalist life greed will be god, greed will reign supreme.
all hail greed, thane of glamis,
all hail greed, thane of cawdor,
all hail, greed, who shall be king hereafter.

oh apart from that capitalism is fine. yeah it is good...
you twit. love you. oh son of mine.
all aspects of capitalism are undesirable..... and to be honest, one of the most compelling right now is that it clearly does not actually work....
markets are performing poorly, banks are going belly up and need public assistance, there is a growing body of unrest in the world unhappy with the current status quo.
to me it is so obviously a deeply flawed idea.... and they are forced to spend so much time and energy selling it to the people, and invent more and more elaborate lies to substantiate their arguments. of
i was merely maintaining that greed is an important artery in the capitalist monster, it pumps life into it and keeps it running smoothly.

about the rubbish grammar .... well son, thanks for the very, veiled vote of support....shame you made it sound like i am a foreign language student who knows very little english and who needs extra help.
can someone please advise me where this terrible grammar was... i am keen to improve my skills and powers

[Elysian]

Coming from the person who completely skipped over my last post and resorted to "mate finding." :laugh:

The two are related.

[ColonelCossack]

You two are English are you not?

Well yes, that is true, but it's not really the point; having a go at people for their grammar is not a very good habit to get into anyway, even if English is the user's first language, and it does seem a little pedantic.

But this is OT.

[NGNM85]

Radical Leftism is rooted in moral outrage. It's most basic foundation is in the belief that to oppress, or exploit, human beings, in such a fashion, is deeply, and utterly wrong.

[Dean]

That was before I became aware, so would you stop bringing that up?

Thanks.


Calvin is not exactly a topic that the "unaware" know about. And you don't simply "become aware." What drove you to be a Calvinist? Chances are it was the same thing that makes you think as you do now.

[Luís Henrique]

It's not moral judgement.... it is materialism. You see it as moralism but it simply isn't. The bourgeoisie are greedy: it's a fact. If they weren't socialism might not have been created.

The bourgeois are not greedy, that's a ridiculous Christian argument. The bourgeois are owners of means of production; it is a social problem, not a moral one.

Luís Henrique

[Luís Henrique]

Good grief, this thread is repulsive. It seems that most people here are intent in proving Elysian is right, and that we leftists are indeed moralist idiots.

What happened to materialist analysis? What happened to class interests? What happened to the notion of alienation?

Luís Henrique

[Railyon]

The bourgeois are not greedy, that's a ridiculous Christian argument.

I disagree. The owners of the means of production MUST be greedy because competition forces them to be. It is inherent in capital accumulation.

I think saying "the system is bad because people are being greedy" is a totally different pair of shoes; upside-down in its argument.

[Luís Henrique]

I disagree. The owners of the means of production MUST be greedy because competition forces them to be. It is inherent in capital accumulation.

How can someone be "forced to be greedy"?

They do what they have to do in order not to be pushed out of the markets. They are merely tools of the automatic process of capitalist accumulation. They aren't even our lords; they are merely the house slaves of capital.


I think saying "the system is bad because people are being greedy" is a totally different pair of shoes; upside-down in its argument.

The system isn't bad because people are greedy - but that doesn't mean that people are greedy because the system is bad. The system is bad because it is based on exploitation of labour, and because can't fail to enter periodic crises that deeply disrupt people's lives. "Greed" isn't a useful category to analyse capitalist society. Or any other kind of society indeed.

Luís Henrique

[Hit The North]

I think it is right that communists, who's mission is the emancipation of the working class and humanity in general, should be morally outraged by the suffering and inequality that is caused by capitalism and imperialism. However, in our judgement, the solution is not located within the moral reconstitution of individuals, but in the revolutionary reconstitution of the social relations of production.

[Railyon]

They do what they have to do in order not to be pushed out of the markets. They are merely tools of the automatic process of capitalist accumulation. They aren't even our lords; they are merely the house slaves of capital.

Which is my point exactly; sink or swim.


"Greed" isn't a useful category to analyse capitalist society.

Which I didn't mean to imply.

[Ocean Seal]

Its like we have a new poster everyday.

[Anderson]

The bourgeoisie are not greedy. They do what they do to survive, which you interpret as greed. This is a moral judgment, not a material analysis.

Morality is a class question. Each class has different concept about morally good actions or things.

However working class morality is superior to that of other classes because it's actions are not only for their emancipation but also of entire mankind.:)

[Franz Fanonipants]

sweet fuck i get suspended and this cheesedick is still capable of ridiculous, low-quality shitposting that isn't even funny?

[Franz Fanonipants]

elysian basically because you are a genetic determinist you are the worst kind of scientism preacher

you should be banned

[Ostrinski]

Rofl, good to have you back Franz

[Franz Fanonipants]

op is basically that prick stephen pinker ban his ass asap

[NewLeft]

op is basically that prick stephen pinker ban his ass asap
lol y u hating pinker? cause his blank slate?

[A Revolutionary Tool]

I don't know what you mean by saying we're more moral, I'm a badass motherfucker :cool:

[Franz Fanonipants]

lol y u hating pinker? cause his blank slate?

peep bmh's public profile for a delicious quote from famous secularist liberal dickskin stephen pinker

e: nm i'll do the legwork comrades

"But the 20th century suffered "two" ideologies that led to genocides. The other one, Marxism, had no use for race, didn't believe in genes and denied that human nature was a meaningful concept. Clearly, it's not an emphasis on genes or evolution that is dangerous. It's the desire to remake humanity by coercive means (eugenics or social engineering) and the belief that humanity advances through a struggle in which superior groups (race or classes) triumph over inferior ones."

[Franz Fanonipants]

wait sorry elysian is, according to pinker, actually a nazi

ban his ass for being a nazi asap pls

[Anderson]

Why do we need to denounce the opponent without trying to win them over by logic and argument. I think we can have discussion between people with all kinds of left tendencies and even with many of the ignorant rightists. Personally I have had several discussions with different kind of people and always found them having some wrong pieces of information that shaped their thinking.
Marxism Leninism is a science and our way of looking at the world is Dialectical Materialism. If we are really equipped well with these weapons then we can win over all opponents, except those whose class interest is against the working class.
I see lot of impatience in forum and people hurling abuses and some ugly discussions with motive being to score a point and win the argument for the sake of winning. We should not hate loosing an argument or changing my opinion if given proper reasoning and logic.
With so much shit around the world happening we should be grateful to the people who take out time to be on this forum, at-least they have a concern at the happenings in society. :)

[Franz Fanonipants]

Why do we need to denounce the opponent without trying to win them over by logic and argument.

has 25 posts

knows everything

heres a hint comrade: op is a troll

[TheGodlessUtopian]

As far as I know the bourgeoisie are greedy, if they weren't than why do they not redistribute their accumulated wealth? Instead they keep it for themselves and live in luxury while the world starves... is this not greed spurred on by class position?

[Luís Henrique]

As far as I know the bourgeoisie are greedy, if they weren't than why do they not redistribute their accumulated wealth? Instead they keep it for themselves and live in luxury while the world starves... is this not greed spurred on by class position?

No, it is not.

They do redistribute their accumulated well to some extent; it is called charity.

They don't redistribute it in earnest because it is not in their class interests to do it; they would be taken out of competition if they did.

And the problem with them is hardly that they keep their wealth to themselves and live in luxury; rather they put their wealth into movement and exploit us in doing it.

"Greed" is irrelevant to a materialist analysis of society.

Luís Henrique

[TheGodlessUtopian]

No, it is not.

They do redistribute their accumulated well to some extent; it is called charity.

They don't redistribute it in earnest because it is not in their class interests to do it; they would be taken out of competition if they did.

And the problem with them is hardly that they keep their wealth to themselves and live in luxury; rather they put their wealth into movement and exploit us in doing it.

"Greed" is irrelevant to a materialist analysis of society.

Luís Henrique

Charity doesn't count in my book as that is completely optional (I was thinking more along the lines of a complete redistribution).

...the rest of your post was in line with my own thoughts (more or less).

[Elysian]

wait sorry elysian is, according to pinker, actually a nazi

ban his ass for being a nazi asap pls

Missed you, darling.:)

[Anderson]

Moral values change with the dominant class in society.
Society's moral values are a reflection of the moral values of the dominant class of the period.

At present bourgeois class dominates the society and therefore moral values of all classes are influenced by it (including working class people who have not equipped themselves with Marxism and leftists practicing the bourgeois ideologies masked as leftist labels)

But I doubt if we can claim that all leftists have high morals?
Haven't we heard of this popular trend - Privileges of Right, Prestige of Left:(

[x359594]

Very often Leftists are moralistic rather than actually moral. The moralistic stance is characterized by narrow mindedness, self-righteousness and a penchant for ad hominem argument. Maybe it's because a certain personality type is drawn to the Left.

There are certainly definite personality types attracted to particular Left sects. In another thread I saw a recent rant by a Sparticus League member that reminded me of earlier encounters. In the middle 1970s I went to a meeting of the Young Socialist Alliance (the youth group of the SWP) that was disrupted by a couple of Sparts who spouted emotionally overwrought rhetoric that had to do with some arcane theoretical dispute. On another occasion, two Sparts interrupted a talk by Bernadette Devlin on Irish political prisoners to make a statement about school busing in Boston. I saw the same keyed-up emotions on display, barely contained rage and free floating anger.

Though this is only anecdotal evidence, it does point to a continuity of personality typology.

[MotherCossack]

elysian basically because you are a genetic determinist you are the worst kind of scientism preacher

you should be banned


op is basically that prick stephen pinker ban his ass asap


lol y u hating pinker? cause his blank slate?


I don't know what you mean by saying we're more moral, I'm a badass motherfucker :cool:


peep bmh's public profile for a delicious quote from famous secularist liberal dickskin stephen pinker

e: nm i'll do the legwork comrades

"."


wait sorry elysian is, according to pinker, actually a nazi

ban his ass for being a nazi asap pls


has 25 posts

knows everything

heres a hint comrade: op is a troll

what have we here .... a headfuck,badass pillow fight!!!
oh what fun!!!!
i'm a total fuckface too can i be in yor gang, blad?
i'm rock hard.... yo see me kick ass.....

from the ridiculous to the sublime......


As far as I know the bourgeoisie are greedy, if they weren't than why do they not redistribute their accumulated wealth? Instead they keep it for themselves and live in luxury while the world starves... is this not greed spurred on by class position?

on the head !
well said..... i search for words... but you have put it there....i need add nothing.


except to say that as a downtrodden, victim of the current state of affairs i absolutely claim any moral high ground that eases the pain of my existance...

what the fuck else have i got......

they are fuckers, greedy, nasty, mean, and fucking stupid.... and they're not listening to us!dont expect me to make any allowances for them.... thyey have enough money to inform themselves... it is their responsibility to work out what is right.... i have...
or else.... let them eat cake!!!

[NGNM85]

This conversation is so ridiculous it's laughable. It's remarkable that so many, here, are under the misguided impression that the horrific human costs of exploitation, imperialism, etc., are a poor argument against said institutions.That that, alone, isn't enough. Perversely; this is one of those kinds of stupidity one only finds in the moderately-to-well educated.

[La Comédie Noire]

Marxists often like to pretend they are being "Scientific" and "objective", but we all know they are just really big ole softies at heart.

[MotherCossack]

This conversation is so ridiculous it's laughable. It's remarkable that so many, here, are under the misguided impression that the horrific human costs of exploitation, imperialism, etc., are a poor argument against said institutions.That that, alone, isn't enough. Perversely; this is one of those kinds of stupidity one only finds in the moderately-to-well educated.

I think that is what I am saying..... errr... arn't I?

only those of us with relatively comfy and stimulating lives, who are well fed and watered, can afford the luxury of, or have time for, intellectual pontificating on what is the most worthy hypothetical justification for any future action against the heinous, monstrosity of a state that we live in.

like i said.....as far as standards of living go ... i have always existed somewhere very near the floor of what is to be expected in our wonderful so called rich country.
So i make no apologies for any resentment, impatience, anger, outrage and bitterness that i may express hereabouts or any foul language that i may use to that end.

[BE_]

I care terribly for the downtrodden and oppressed. I've seen my father work his as off and barley get paid. I care for the poor kids who can't even get enough food to eat tonight because their parents don't have a high paying job. I feel sorry for the men who have to work in the Appalachian coal mines for a rich man who is just sitting on his ass. That's the reason I got into socialism.

Is that what you guys mean by moralist?

If that's what you guys mean by moralist, I don't care if that is moralist. I fucking care about humans. I hope the human race can live in peace and communism.

[SpiritiualMarxist]

I actually think people become leftist BECAUSE they have a predisposition towards true morality, i.e. they just believe in fairness. So the logical following is this:

I'm a ethical/moral person> I realize capitalism is inherently contradictory to this> I find that the economic alternative is socialism.

I honestly believe that the very people who are at the very top of the propagation of the capitalistic system are sociopaths so they can't grasp this concept.