Most unpopular viewpoint that you hold as a communist or anarchist?

[Skyhilist]

What's the one position that you take that you think would be most unpopular with other communists or anarchists (whichever of the two you are)?

I think mine would have to be that taking an ecocentric worldview will be much more beneficial and important for leftists than an anthropocentric one. What about you guys?

Also, I wasn't really sure where to put this, sorry if it's I'm the wrong category.

[CryingWolf]

I don't think socialism is historically inevitable.

[ind_com]

I think mine would have to be that taking an ecocentric worldview will be much more beneficial and important for leftists than an anthropocentric one. What about you guys?


This view is extremely popular and in a way a major factor in deciding the issues of struggle in the places where revolutions are actually happening today. During the Russian Revolution or the Chinese Revolution, natural resources were considered to be unlimited, and environment was not a factor. But today, capitalism is harming the environment to such an extent for its own profits, that if it is not stopped then it will surely kill us by pollution. In India, the mining companies have tunneled under villages and their activities have caused so much pollution that the people of whole regions are suffering from cancer and respiratory problems leading to death. Coca Cola and other industries have polluted the environment around their industries so much that the water and local food sources have either died out or become poisoned. Hence, the people's war in these regions has been partially motivated by saving the environment in order to save the people.

[Kindness]

I'm a pacifist and disagree with dialectical materialism.

[MP5]

Well as a Anarchist Communist (i hate labels but i guess that is the tendency i am closest to) i guess my most unpopular viewpoint would be that national liberation is the right of every group to emancipate themselves from imperialism. I am a firm believer in left wing nationalism which although popular with Marxist-Leninists put's me at odds with just about every Anarchist on the planet.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

I don't think socialism is historically inevitable.

To me that just seems realistic: nothing is "inevitable" unless we, as revolutionaries and activists, place our time and energy into kick-staring and organizing the anti-capitalist initiatives. If we do nothing than, contrary to popular belief, capitalism will persist. So I think that such is a level-minded opinion.
--------------------

Back on topic... mine... hmmm... not sure, will get back later on that.

[Zealot]

I don't care about animals and "animal rights activists" sometimes piss me right off, especially when they seem to care more about animals than humans and get outraged over such things as a shark getting shot at while ripping a human apart. Also, whiney pacifists with their hippy bullshit such as the one above.

[Questionable]

I think the labor aristocracy theory has been way overblown by modern Marxists and is used as an excuse for failure.

[Brutus]

I see pacifism as idealistic and think, actually, know that violence and bloodshed is the only way. Revolution is uncompromising, revolution is bloody! Revolution doesn't join arms with hippies singing "we shall overcome", as when a revolution really happens, these pacifists are going to change their views on revolution, they're going to hide in the back alley.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

I'd have thought all revolutionary leftists do...

Anyway, in my case, either of these two: my position that bourgeois hate crime and hate speech laws are in general a good thing, and that the labour movement should demand they be expanded until the bourgeoisie can no longer comply (thus shattering the illusions of some liberals); or my position that revolutionary Trotskyists (not Shachtmanites), revolutionary Maoists (not Third Worldists) and anti-revisionist Marxists-Leninists have more in common than is usually assumed, and that some form of agreement could be reached between us.

[Ostrinski]

This is hard question to answer because I think most of the viable answers here are going to line up behind the differences between tendencies instead of entail any controversial disagreement.

[Lokomotive293]

my position that bourgeois hate crime and hate speech laws are in general a good thing, and that the labour movement should demand they be expanded until the bourgeoisie can no longer comply (thus shattering the illusions of some liberals)

I didn't know that was an unpopular view.

[LeonJWilliams]

I generally support the EU (no borders, free movement of workers, arguably decreasing nationalism with single currency).

I say generally because I like them fining microsoft and intel for anti monopoly laws which other countries don't seem willing to do.

Of course the EU needs to be changed to genuinely work for the benefit of the working class and not just be another elitist body.

[Skyhilist]

This view is extremely popular and in a way a major factor in deciding the issues of struggle in the places where revolutions are actually happening today.

Ahh sorry, I was unaware. I don't have much experience with other ecocentrists in my area and was speaking based on what common leftist beliefs seem to be around here and on these boards in general where people tend to be more supportive of anthrapocentrism. Certainly a valid criticism though.

[Slavoj Zizek's Balls]

I currently think that ideology results in the stagnation of ideas. This is subject to change but that's my view for now.

[TiberiusGracchus]

I think there's a universal human nature and that what's good and bad in life is objective and in principle possible for science to answer.

I don't think this should be controversial for marxists but it seems that most have relativist and subjectivist positions on ethics.

[hatzel]

I have a tendency to ascribe undue importance to slightly irrelevant stuff. City planning, fashion shows, food ethics, all for some strange reason feel like valuable focal points worth thinking seriously about. Easily distracted, I am! Probably spent too much time at uni or something...

[Owl]

I believe that revolution can only happen once the population in large recognizes a need for it. I'm also a bit more pro-state than many.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

I don't like the way the left oft alienates and dehumanises two groups by positing antagonisms between the 'westerners' and 'everybody else'.

[GerrardWinstanley]

I think many of the contradictions and flaws in the human condition will remain upon ending capitalism and that religious belief will survive for a very very long time (humankind has too many anxieties and neuroses that socialism alone cannot erase).

This however does not rebuke the fact the only alternative to socialism is barbarism.

[Fourth Internationalist]

I think socialism (not communism) can be built in one country.

[Ravachol]

I don't give a shit about the left or its sects.

[Q]

I think the currently constituted sects need to be overthrown in order to strive for revolutionary unity.

[Fourth Internationalist]

I think a revolution doesn't have to be violent.

[Blake's Baby]

I think almost everyone who thinks of themselves as part of 'the Left' is actually ideologically supporting capitalism - no matter what they subjectively think they are doing, and not in a 'we all support capitalism buy buying bread' sort of way, but actually blatantly defending the interests of the capitalist class while claiming to defend the interests of the working class. Pointing that out doesn't make me very popular.

[Ostrinski]

I'm sometimes ambiguous about my politics for the purposes of being friendly with multiple tendencies.

[Luís Henrique]

I'm a pacifist and disagree with dialectical materialism.

I'm not for "gun rights" and I support dialectical materialism, which practically no leftists I know do.

Luís Henrique

[Luís Henrique]

I think almost everyone who thinks of themselves as part of 'the Left' is actually ideologically supporting capitalism

But, see, I'm more unpopular than thou, because I think those who believe that denouncing "almost everyone who thinks of themselves as part of 'the Left' as actual ideological supporters of capitalism" makes them exempt from that accusation.... are also actual ideological supporters of capitalism.

Luís Henrique

[Blake's Baby]

Hey, I specifically mentioned your 'we all support capitalism buy buying bread' argument, what else do you want?

[Ostrinski]

But, see, I'm more unpopular than thou, because I think those who believe that denouncing "almost everyone who thinks of themselves as part of 'the Left' as actual ideological supporters of capitalism" makes them exempt from that accusation.... are also actual ideological supporters of capitalism.

Luís HenriqueI tend to think that those that think those who believe that denouncing almost everyone who thinks of themselves as part of the Left as actual ideological supporters of capitalism makes them exempt from that accusation are also actual ideological supporters of capitalism are supporters of capitalism.

[Lokomotive293]

I believe that people who take the position "Yes, everything the bourgeois media and schools say about actually existing socialism is true, but that just wasn't/isn't REAL socialism..." are objectively supporting capitalism. Doesn't make me very popular on RevLeft.

[TheEmancipator]

I do not believe in the dictatorship of the proletariat.

[Tenka]

I'm a gay communist and I don't care about gay marriage.
Also, I believe all public toilets ought to be unisex (probably unpopular with trans comrades fighting to use the segregated room they desire to use).

[TheRedAnarchist23]

I see pacifism as idealistic and think, actually, know that violence and bloodshed is the only way. Revolution is uncompromising, revolution is bloody! Revolution doesn't join arms with hippies singing "we shall overcome", as when a revolution really happens, these pacifists are going to change their views on revolution, they're going to hide in the back alley.

This can only be answer with:

Grandola vila morena
Terra da fraternidade
O povo é quem mais ordena
Dentro de ti ó cidede.

I beleive revolution can be peacefull, but action is needed. So you could say I am non-violent revolutionary, but I think every other anarchist is the same. I beleive power corrupts, and that there can be anarchy in one territory.

[Luís Henrique]

I tend to think that those that think those who believe that denouncing almost everyone who thinks of themselves as part of the Left as actual ideological supporters of capitalism makes them exempt from that accusation are also actual ideological supporters of capitalism are supporters of capitalism.

I agree. There is no way that we don't support capitalism, if we live in a capitalist society. There is no magic operation against this, no holy water we can asperge on ourselves, no holy writing that we can recite, no bearded god to pray for.

The issue however is, is that the only thing we do? And what part of what we do is grounded in the delusion that we are somehow set apart from the unwashed masses by some ideological hocus pocus that makes us special, compared to what part of what we do is grounded in actual critical thought about our own actions?

Luís Henrique

[Luís Henrique]

Hey, I specifically mentioned your 'we all support capitalism buy buying bread' argument, what else do you want?

I think you misrepresent my argument.

It is not that we "support capitalism" by giving money to the capitalist that produces bread. It is that buying and selling are in and of themselves ideological operations; they require an ideological alignement to the idea of value.

Luís Henrique

[Petrol_Bomb]

I don't believe in the borderline genocidal tendencies of some very angry leftists who want to drag the rich out onto the streets and execute them. Do they mean everybody over a certain income line? I have friends that are lawyers and engineers who are wealthy, but have no relationship to the means of production. Are they up against the wall too?
Also, I don't mind the idea of some people having more (not enough to influence anything beyond their own lives however) as long as there isn't a large chunk of people born into having significantly less.

And being a mutualist/individualist anarchist makes me pretty unpopular as well I would imagine.

[Luís Henrique]

I'm a gay communist and I don't care about gay marriage.
Also, I believe all public toilets ought to be unisex (probably unpopular with trans comrades fighting to use the segregated room they desire to use).

Probably extremely unpopular with women in general too, if you ask me.

Luís Henrique

[Red Commissar]

I don't think (Hugo) Chavez is that bad of a guy, but at the same time don't see him as the next big thing for socialism.

[DasFapital]

I am more supportive of population control than most leftists.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

I am vehemently against gun 'rights'.

Whilst I don't consider capitalism to be - worldwide - the revolutionary social system it once was, I don't believe there is even the slightest chance it will crumble any time soon. It still works too well and, currently, there is no hope of its overthrow for that reason; it has at least a plurality of (both active and passive) political support, it has all the economic tools and it still 'works' in enough cases to shore up that support.

I don't believe in political parties, any of them, theoretical or actual existing.

I really don't think Lenin was all that great.

I believe we should honour those who died in the two world wars, from all countries, by wearing the poppy. We should reclaim this from those who use the poppy as a symbol of jingoistic, militaristic, chest-puffing pride in their country's ability to make war and total destruction.

[DB-710]

I really just can't stand hippies, vegetarians, animal-rights folks, etc. I just really tune out whenever they start talking. Always have and always will.

[Quail]

Well I guess being a vegan would make me unpopular with some of the posters here, although not so much with the people I know IRL.

I don't think I have any views which are particularly unpopular with other anarchists in that I haven't had many major disagreements about things with the other anarchists I know. I probably think that feminism (and other anti-discrimination movements) is more important than some others do. I don't think that a communist revolution would make sexism or racism disappear. Historically it has been necessary for women to fight sexism within the movement as well in wider society, and I don't see how group of people with sexist practices can forge a new society without sexist practices.

[teflon_john]

I'm a gay communist and I don't care about gay marriage.

this. marriage as an institution needs to be eliminated.

[TheEmancipator]

Let me amend that : nuclear family should be an institution to be eliminated. Your local community should be your family. You should love them as much as you would love a brother or father or sister or mother.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Let me amend that : nuclear family should be an institution to be eliminated. Your local community should be your family. You should love them as much as you would love a brother or father or sister or mother.

that's a bit idiotic.

I mean, not that the nuclear family institution shouldn't be neutered, but there makes no sense that you'd 'love' a stranger as you would somebody who has produced you.

I think that it's beautiful to love your own family, especially parents that have brought you up for year upon year upon year. The idea of being anti-nuclear family is that you should extend the love beyond that sphere, and that it shouldn't matter if your parents are man and woman, man and man, woman and woman or whatever..

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

that's a bit idiotic.

I mean, not that the nuclear family institution shouldn't be neutered, but there makes no sense that you'd 'love' a stranger as you would somebody who has produced you.


I think the idea is that, they should not be "strangers", at least not all of them. And when more than just the birth-givers are involved in the upbringing-- what then? Rearing of the young is not a thing to be given over to individuals on their own; people are not to have rights to do whatever they wish with their children because they claim some "natural right" by birth to do so (even a certain 'anarchist' on this board defended this odious position). Children must not be made to serve as fulfilment of their parents unrealised dreams, they are not to be shaped into images of their parents.

[TheEmancipator]

that's a bit idiotic.

I mean, not that the nuclear family institution shouldn't be neutered, but there makes no sense that you'd 'love' a stranger as you would somebody who has produced you.

I think that it's beautiful to love your own family, especially parents that have brought you up for year upon year upon year. The idea of being anti-nuclear family is that you should extend the love beyond that sphere, and that it shouldn't matter if your parents are man and woman, man and man, woman and woman or whatever..

I think you'll find biological nuclear love is just one of the big lies. Its another form of paternalist bullshit, as most parents nowadays have no interest in the well being of their children but rather in the "legacy" they'll leave behind, regularly wanting their kids to go further than them for reasons stated above.

Even if parents had some kind of emotional attachment, even if by some miracle they put their entire efforts in securing a better future for their children, they may be misguided by social conventions, conservative "values" and the idea of "class status", the exact thing we are fighting. Now, in the West you are seeing middle class/upper class teenagers being sent to Uni to do degrees they do not want to do. From birth they are groomed for office jobs or service-based, big money jobs. Many cannot handle it and end up joining our cause or another ideology for rebellious reasons or simply to find a real guide.

More and more we see the idea of a "coach", an outside figure that can be trusted, to help individuals find what they want to do, what their role in society is and what they stand for. I firmly believe that one day the whole concept of parenthood will disappear.
Any education should be provided by the State (in its widest sense), and not be corrupted by family.

[Fourth Internationalist]

I think anything that is sentient (animals including humans) has the right to live a happy life. That's why I am for both proletarian liberation and animal liberation (rights).

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

I think you'll find biological nuclear love is just one of the big lies. Its another form of paternalist bullshit, as most parents nowadays have no interest in the well being of their children but rather in the "legacy" they'll leave behind, regularly wanting their kids to go further than them for reasons stated above.

This is certainly not an experience i've come across. Indeed, in economic terms, being a parent is a selfless task as they provide the initial investments that allow a child to survive and flourish, yet the economic benefits accrue almost universally in the child's direction.

I seriously challenge you to prove this, though. Certainly, i'd say in developed countries parents are in a position to act in a much more positive, welfare-ist way towards their children, whereas in developing countries (And in history) parents have had to utilise their children as labour to produce within the household, or have even sold their daughters off in economic transactions to help the household survive.


Even if parents had some kind of emotional attachment, even if by some miracle they put their entire efforts in securing a better future for their children, they may be misguided by social conventions, conservative "values" and the idea of "class status", the exact thing we are fighting.

This doesn't really follow. Only if your parents are bourgeois, and they bring you up to be bourgeois. But that's not really their fault, because undoubtedly they have bourgeois values because their parents instilled it in them. It's just the class struggle. The majority of people are workers, and so will pass down a working class heritage to their children; numerically, this is likely to be the majority case.


Now, in the West you are seeing middle class/upper class teenagers being sent to Uni to do degrees they do not want to do. From birth they are groomed for office jobs or service-based, big money jobs.

Probably because that's in the material need of the child. I'm certainly glad I was sent to a decent school and encouraged to study at university rather than told I have to work a manual job from 16 by some prolier-than-thou prick of a person cavorting around as my 'life coach' or whatever.


Many cannot handle it and end up joining our cause or another ideology for rebellious reasons or simply to find a real guide.

'Another' ideology? Parenting, and familial relationships, are not an ideology. Kids rebel because that's what kids do. Every generation has had this. It's not new, and it doesn't reflect some changing familial paradigm. It's just how shit goes, kids love to experiment and see what they like.


More and more we see the idea of a "coach", an outside figure that can be trusted, to help individuals find what they want to do, what their role in society is and what they stand for. I firmly believe that one day the whole concept of parenthood will disappear.

A coach? In what? A life coach? I thought this was the stuff of the upper-class in Hollywood. I'm not normally one for nature over nurture, but one of the beautiful and consistent things, across all living species, is the maternal instinct that values the safety and well-being of the offspring. I mean, i'm all for having a music coach, or a sports coach, or a Teacher, but not to replace parenting.


Any education should be provided by the State (in its widest sense), and not be corrupted by family.

Formal education is indeed one area that the state excels at, particularly in relation to choices made by parents.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Well, politically I come from an anarchist/anti-authoritarian background, but I've always been a bit skeptical of federalism as a method of undertaking economic initiatives, and have felt that centralism is perhaps better for some things. I'm also critical of most (all?) anarchist definitions of "the state", as well as some of the philosophical positions held by anarchists. I don't think that the concept of a "revolutionary vanguard" is necessarily a bad thing, and I think some anarchists have embraced the concept although they would never use the word "vanguard", such as Errico Malatesta in his debate with Pierre Monatte.

[Zostrianos]

I have nothing but contempt for the so called "communist" dictators of the 20th century. Whatever good ideas and theories they may have had were far outweighed by their crimes. Even Lenin who wasn't quite as bad as the others and had tons of great ideas, still did his share of horrendous things - given the huge prominence of Leninists among the Left, my position is likely very unpopular, but so be it. Authoritarianism is not only incompatible with, but completely contrary to socialist ideals, for me at least.

[Tim Cornelis]

I like marriage.

Emotionally, I'm keen on the idea of nuclear family.

[Kindness]

I'm very pro-nuclear family (defined as a union of two parents of whatever gender [including same-sex and agender] and their children), as well as pro-extended family, which is unusual among leftists. I think the family should form the center of social life. In light of this, I'm also very pro-marriage (including LGBT marriages, of course) and would love to see marriage again take a prominent place in social life.

I'm in favor of virtue ethics and character education, which most people see as right-wing (it isn't, if anything the virtues would lead one to be anti-capitalist).

I'm a male feminist.

I'm a vegan and animal rights activist, which pisses some people off.

[Black_Rose]

For me, I suppose it is because I am a faithful Catholic ( but I am not yet confirmed although I am about to get confirmed on May).

[Althusser]

I'm sympathetic to guerrilla revolutionary groups, not when they massacre peasants like Shining Path, but I generally see the naxalites overthrowing the Indian state or Shining Path overthrowing the Peruvian state as a positive thing.

I'm also absolutely not a Maoist Third-Worldist (and the idea that first world proletarians are exploiters is absolutely fucked)... but I understand why they think the way they do.


For me, I suppose it is because I am a faithful Catholic (although I am about to get confirmed on May)

Why?

[Lobotomy]

I've already said this in other threads, but I do think men face certain problems that should not be overlooked. For example, the amount of men who go to college is in decline, and crime rates among men is very high. Men are held to very high expectations when it comes to emotional strength and masculinity and i think it can be very damaging to some. I absolutely do not support any men's rights bullshit though and I think feminism is capable of addressing these issues.

[Fourth Internationalist]

For me, I suppose it is because I am a faithful Catholic ( but I am not yet confirmed although I am about to get confirmed on May).

Gratz! I'm getting confirmed in May too! (though it's because my parents are making me :))

[Jesus Saves Gretzky Scores]

It seems like hating animal rights is the popular view.

[Let's Get Free]

I think "the left" is irrelevant and annoying in this period of time.

[Black_Rose]

Gratz! I'm getting confirmed in May too! (though it's because my parents are making me :))

I would seriously ask you to dissuade your parents and confirmation instructor from getting confirmed unless you really want to.

[Raúl Duke]

Hmm...

I personally think much of the left is worthless and much of what they do is pointless. I have my own pet theories on why. For starters, much of the left either explicitly or implicitly has this idea that success=amount of registered cadres, activists, members, etc and thus most seem rather keen on recruitment and visualize that a "successful" revolution is only possible if their organization or left organizations in general grow big enough. I personally think that being a leftist, in mindset but mostly in being active, is fringe and will remain so 'till revolution comes around. Most usual people aren't really interested in wasting time with what passes for leftism praxis (and I can't blame them): activism, theoretical circle-jerk, recruitment, etc. Working class people usually don't have time for activism and if they do, they usually don't see something to be gain or won from waving a bunch of signs and the possibility of facing arrest by the pigs for nothing (My Occupy experience led me to this fact. Our local Occupy had close to nothing legal resources and legal team. When police began stepping up with fines and possible arrest, the participants began to evaporate away. Legal defense is important).

I think "success" at this point is more about working class militancy and the intensity of class struggle than the membership roles of left sects. I personally think the left should, while playing other minor (I'm thinking "community organizing" kind of stuff, some might label it "lifestylist" yet much of left-activism is somewhat a "lifestyle") roles, try and focus to foment working class militancy particularly in labor struggles but also in other realms.

I have a seemingly unpopular opinion that the struggle for revolution is in a way somewhat deterministic: it will come about when class antagonisms reaches such a height, in the working class's pursuit for getting their demands met, that the working class end up overthrowing capitalism due to capital/the bourgeoisie/etc's intransigence. This event will happen "organically, spontaneously" more or less but even after the initial overthrow there will be "much to do" and I feel it's only at that time onwards where left ideologies (as they're currently constituted) will finally be "heard" and popularized (and I guess, possibly, where left ideologies may "fight" for their vision of the future, but personally I think the already moribund Leninism will more or less be "dead on arrival" when the revolution comes; another unpopular opinion to some in this site).

Despite if the above seemed determinist, I don't hold the view that "revolution is inevitable." I'm not dogmatic. The revolution can occur differently than how I think it might/should if at all (I wish it's not the case that capitalism can go on indefinitely, but that's just it, it's just a wish), who knows?

Another thing...
I call myself an anarchist, but I also seem to be different than many anarchists, at least how they were classically.


I'm also critical of most (all?) anarchist definitions of "the state", as well as some of the philosophical positions held by anarchists. I don't think that the concept of a "revolutionary vanguard" is necessarily a bad thing, and I think some anarchists have embraced the concept although they would never use the word "vanguard", such as Errico Malatesta in his debate with Pierre Monatte. I agree, I tend to use a more or less Marxian analysis of "the state." I find the classical anarchist view of the state a bit...childish...

I also am fine with this concept of "vanguard" but unlike those that harp on about it I don't think they play the pivotal (and usually substitutionist, but people tend not to fess up) role they imagine themselves to play. :lol:

The vanguard I say is those "pro-left/pro-revolution" people, the people like ourselves who label ourselves "anarchists," "marxist," etc. They certainly are a "minority" of the working class and will be so, more or less, until revolution/"revolutionary period." Their role, in my opinion, is to foment working class militancy, provide support for working class struggles, etc. During the "revolutionary period" I imagine the role is to advocate ideas and such towards the achievement of socialism/communism.

But they're certainly not "leading" anyone exactly, much less as a singular group. I'm totally against the substitutionist idea of a vanguard party.


I think socialism (not communism) can be built in one country. I somewhat agree with this, more or less, but I'm also confused...

I know ideally the goal is to spread all across the globe and I'm all for internationalism...
But did people expect the revolution to be this cataclysmic, global (occurring every where simultaneously) event like some sort of Rapture? I'm sorry, but I don't think that is realistic and we have to take into accounts that some societies/regions/etc may have reached "their moment" earlier than others (eventually though we will all get there and together we can work towards a unified, global, communist system).

---
I'm for gun-rights, although I guess in moderation (although to some, they probably think what I think is "too much.")

I'm concerned about the environment and this effects my eating habits (veers closely to vegetarian somewhat).

Also I disagree with dialectical materialism...although I'm not sure if disagree is accurate. I really don't know what the fuck dialectics is, I don't think it has any useful purpose (ugh more jargon), and I'm distrustful of it since left sects have used it to justify all sorts of bullshit and shenanigans since it's such an obscurantist thing.


i guess my most unpopular viewpoint would be that national liberation is the right of every group to emancipate themselves from imperialism.I have a weird relationship with "national liberation." While I know it's not "revolutionary/etc," fully 100% conscious of that fact, I do sympathize somewhat with some national-liberation/self-determination struggles (Puerto Rico, Palestine, etc) in varying degrees. However, I don't make it a big part of my left politics.

Finally, I have a soft spot for co-operatives and such. Don't care what some of you may say, I would probably rather work in a co-operative than in a fucking wallmart.

[Geiseric]

Something that makes most of "the left" hate me? Maybe the fact I believe an independent working class political party is necessary to be made. A lot of people here (usually who are in organizations) keep saying the revolutionary vanguard needs to be formed, but I'm saying there are steps to that which incudes but int limited to participating and leading in organically formed working class struggles, instead of building some bumfuck sect or "party",which doesn't really support anything unless they're in charge, which turns into recruitment always.

[Let's Get Free]

I also think that Marxist-Leninists typically aren't any better for actually moving beyond capitalism than outright supporters of capitalism are. Their approach in regards to the problems of capitalism always lead to capitalism’s continued existence.

[Os Cangaceiros]

A coach? In what? A life coach? I thought this was the stuff of the upper-class in Hollywood.

I think he meant more like a mentor/protégé relationship.

[Kalinin's Facial Hair]

I do not really oppose serving the army.

I also don't think police officers are all reactionary scum.

[HomelessMaoist]

I support big government, and at the same time support libertinism (for those who don't know what that is, it's having no morals), with the exception of being anti greed and cruelty.

I know that most leftists may be one or that other (or none), but very rarely both, to my knowledge.

[LeonJWilliams]

I do not really oppose serving the army.

I also don't think police officers are all reactionary scum.

They are ALL reactionary scum.

[Einkarl]

They are ALL reactionary scum.

Generalization much? This is like saying that everyone who works in a mexican fast food restaurant holds a specific set of universal ideals for such employees.
Sure many police men are in fact reactionary scum but I see no reason why an individual police man can't be a revolutionary. Cops are not bourgeois but rather proletariat and while it's true that the police are a tool of the bourgeois, so are all proletarians, in a sense.

[LeonJWilliams]

Generalization much? This is like saying that everyone who works in a mexican fast food restaurant holds a specific set of universal ideals for such employees.
Sure many police men are in fact reactionary scum but I see no reason why an individual police man can't be a revolutionary. Cops are not bourgeois but rather proletariat and while it's true that the police are a tool of the bourgeois, so are all proletarians, in a sense.

I assume you mean 'Generalise much?'

No they are not the same, your mind-set isn't relevant for working in a restaurant. The police have a certain mind-set, ask yourself, what kind of person would choose to do this job? Who would choose to be someone whose job is to tell other people what to do and enforce rules irrespective of whether you agree with them?

[Einkarl]

I assume you mean 'Generalise much?'

No they are not the same, your mind-set isn't relevant for working in a restaurant. The police have a certain mind-set, ask yourself, what kind of person would choose to do this job?

One that is forced to do so under their specific material conditions. They saw being a police officer as their way of making a living.



Who would choose to be someone whose job is to tell other people what to do and enforce rules irrespective of whether you agree with them?

That sounds like a lot of jobs to me. So are you telling me all lifeguards are reactionary scum too?


To answer the OP:
I dislike describing myself as a "communist" to some people, they immediately think I'm trying to be an edgy snowflake.

[LeonJWilliams]

One that is forced to do so under their specific material conditions. They saw being a police officer as their way of making a living.

That sounds like a lot of jobs to me. So are you telling me all lifeguards are reactionary scum too?

To answer the OP:
I dislike describing myself as a "communist" to some people, they immediately think I'm trying to be an edgy snowflake.

I don't want to get too off topic

On the lifeguard comment, do police only tell people what to do for their own safety?

The making a living argument is a bit mute too, is it ok to kill people because it's your job and you need to make a living? Better to live on welfare than be a cop.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

I think that people who put their philosophies ahead of actually doing something in reality are idiots.

I also think that left-wing intellectuals who entrench themselves in the articulate works of monsieur can'twriteinmodernenglish, and speak spitefully to people who disagree with them, are pretentious wankers

[Workers-Control-Over-Prod]

Something that makes most of "the left" hate me? Maybe the fact I believe an independent working class political party is necessary to be made. A lot of people here (usually who are in organizations) keep saying the revolutionary vanguard needs to be formed, but I'm saying there are steps to that which incudes but int limited to participating and leading in organically formed working class struggles, instead of building some bumfuck sect or "party",which doesn't really support anything unless they're in charge, which turns into recruitment always.

Wait.. are you sure you're a 'Trotskyist', comrade :confused:

[LewisQ]

I think modern leftism is still utterly infested with nationalism, and that the concept of "national self-determination" is incoherent tripe designed to allay this inconvenient truth.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

I assume you mean 'Generalise much?'

No they are not the same, your mind-set isn't relevant for working in a restaurant. The police have a certain mind-set, ask yourself, what kind of person would choose to do this job? Who would choose to be someone whose job is to tell other people what to do and enforce rules irrespective of whether you agree with them?

Someone in the Extraordinary Commission, perhaps, or in the Red Army, the VIKZheDor, TseKTran etc. etc.? I am not saying that policemen are good Chekists, by the way; many policemen if not most are bigoted, reactionary scum. But there is nothing wrong with a mindset that finds enforcement attractive, it seems to me, particularly when bourgeois ideology links that enforcement to protecting ordinary people.


Wait.. are you sure you're a 'Trotskyist', comrade :confused:

Trotskyism does have an unfortunate tendency towards sectarianism (but most other Marxist tendencies aren't exactly unified either), but there is nothing about Trotskyism per se that necessitates sectarianism; I think most Bolshevik-Leninists would agree with comrade Guthrie to an extent. I mean, revolutionary Bolshevik-Leninists, not splitters. Those fucking splitters! :cursing:

[Luís Henrique]

I think anything that is sentient (animals including humans) has the right to live a happy life.

I am against "happiness", as it is a cause of unhappiness (and yes, this is on topic...)


That's why I am for both proletarian liberation and animal liberation (rights).

The welfare of the lion requires the death of the antelope; the welfare of the antelope requires the starving of the lion. On which side are you?

Luís Henrique

[ellipsis]

I always get shit from anarchists for associating with Marxists and holding some Marxist points of view

[ZenTaoist]

I'd say my view about a post-anarchic revolutionary society being run by small communities. I don't think anything large scale would work, because it's not intended to in anarchism.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Support for armed struggle in some circumstances.

[hatzel]

I sometimes make really dubious claims like 'seriously Bataille is the single most important economist of the last 200 years' or 'Catholicism is Britain's last hope for religious freedom.' I tend to grossly exaggerate to make a point, you see, because it just feels more emphatic like that...

[Thirsty Crow]

I think dialectical materialism is a load of hot air. And worse than that, but this is enough for now.

I also think the notion of the historical interests of the proletariat should be trashed. And with it, the idea of the inevitability of socialism.

The dreamed up dichotomy between planning and market anarchy.

And national liberation. I don't think communists ought to cheerlead for the creation of new bourgeois states.

[Skyhilist]

I am against "happiness", as it is a cause of unhappiness (and yes, this is on topic...)



The welfare of the lion requires the death of the antelope; the welfare of the antelope requires the starving of the lion. On which side are you?

Luís Henrique

I believe she/he meant liberating animals from enslavement by humans (e.g. factory farming), not screwing with natural predator-prey relationships.

[Fourth Internationalist]

I would seriously ask you to dissuade your parents and confirmation instructor from getting confirmed unless you really want to.

Eh. It's just easier to go along with it. They already know I'm an atheist, and they already paid the fees and stuff. Plus I get to see my friends from 8th grade that I don't see much since I'm in 9th grade now and we all go to different high schools. My parents aren't very reasonable about religion or politics (my mom, possibly reasonable, I could object but my dad is a conservative that voted for Mitt Romney and is brainwashed, so he would never let me not get confirmed, but I don't care about what he does cause I don't like him.) The ironic thing is that almost none of the actual Catholic teens there except for a few know how to look up anything im the Bible, but I do. Probably cause I went to Catholic school K - 8.

[Fourth Internationalist]

I believe she/he meant liberating animals from enslavement by humans (e.g. factory farming), not screwing with natural predator-prey relationships.

Omg another Connecticutian :lol:! And yes, this is what I mean, Luís Henrique. There's no way to stop nature's cruelty, unfortunately.

[Einkarl]

I don't want to get too off topic

On the lifeguard comment, do police only tell people what to do for their own safety?

The making a living argument is a bit mute too, is it ok to kill people because it's your job and you need to make a living? Better to live on welfare than be a cop.

Okay last one. I promise.


Cops' job isn't to kill people, and most cops never kill or even injure anyone through their entire careers to begin with.

You also assume that the cop in question is even eligible for welfare and that welfare is avaiable in the place that he/she lives. It just seems childish to me to assume that all cops are reactionaries. :confused:

[Kenco Smooth]

Probably that there are important social traits that some people possess favourable levels of and that these differences are determined to some, quite significant, level by individual genetic differences. Doubt that will enamour me to most here.

[JPSartre12]

I disregard the majority of economic determinism and am a very strong proponent of free will.

I'm also an ardent pacifist, but I'm intellectually honest enough with myself to recognize that violence will most likely be necessary during the revolution, and I admit that I'm somewhat of a purist when it comes to councilism.

And even though I think that economic planning is vastly superior to an unfettered market, I'm not entirely opposed to incorporating some market mechanism into the planning system to help with effective distribution.

[ed miliband]

I disregard the majority of economic determinism and am a very strong proponent of free will.

I'm also an ardent pacifist, but I'm intellectually honest enough with myself to recognize that violence will most likely be necessary during the revolution, and I admit that I'm somewhat of a purist when it comes to councilism.

And even though I think that economic planning is vastly superior to an unfettered market, I'm not entirely opposed to incorporating some market mechanism into the planning system to help with effective distribution.

why do you have the icc down as an organisation? your politics sound more at home with some sort of michael albert sect or something.

[JPSartre12]

why do you have the icc down as an organisation? your politics sound more at home with some sort of michael albert sect or something.

Because I think that the left-communist tradition gets more right then it does wrong.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

Because I think that the left-communist tradition gets more right then it does wrong.

Didn't you use to support the anti-communist scum at the DSA?

[Let's Get Free]

The Star Wars prequels were better than the original trilogy. There, I said it.

[Romanophile]

Any anti‐capitalist revolution deserves support.

[Skyhilist]

Omg another Connecticutian :lol:!

I know right, it's unusual to see people from our state on these boards. We're only 2 years apart too I believe, although I probably haven't lived in Connecticut as long as you. I've actually never been sure on what exactly to call someone from Connecticut though, although Connecticutian doesn't sound quite as awkward as most other terms I've heard like "Connecticuter" and "Nutmegger" lol.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

The Star Wars prequels were better than the original trilogy. There, I said it.

That position might put you at variance with the rest of humanity, not just revolutionary leftists.

[JPSartre12]

Didn't you use to support the anti-communist scum at the DSA?

It was the first left-of-centre organization that I had ever joined, but I'm no longer a part of it, and I have not been for a while.

[Althusser]

The Star Wars prequels were better than the original trilogy. There, I said it.

I knew something was off about you.

[lemushyman]

I would advocate very heavy statism in the initial stages of socialism, and I am completely opposed to pacifism and this 'evolutionary socialism' bullshit that social-democrats talk about. If we want to get anything done, we need to overthrow the entire system, not gradually 'change' it.

[International_Solidarity]

Destroying Capitalism is more important than whatever specific tendency replaces it. Whether its an anarchist or a Stalinist I don't care, destroying Capitalism is more important.

[Lord Hargreaves]

Socialists who are not "green" piss me off, I don't know how popular a viewpoint that is. Global warming is going to be a catastrophe for the poorest people in our world, and has to be one of the biggest issues facing us today. I'm also a committed vegan, and I find it incomprehensible that anyone with a functioning moral conscience wouldn't be one also.

Also I increasingly don't believe there is any important difference between anarchism and Marxism, now that most M-L parties have collapsed and the Soviet block broke up. The arguments I see between the two on Revleft are almost all non-starters in my opinion.

[Geiseric]

The Star Wars prequels were better than the original trilogy. There, I said it.

Fuck you lord of the rings is the only acceptable geek franchise.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

Fuck you lord of the rings is the only acceptable geek franchise.

Even worse than Star Wars. Fuck Tolkien and stupid mediaeval fetishist fantasy, a pox on the genre.

[#FF0000]

i know some pretty okay white people w/ dreads

[Ostrinski]

The Star Wars prequels were better than the original trilogy. There, I said it.Now here's a dude I can work with in a revolutionary situation.

[GerrardWinstanley]

Peter Hitchens is actually a pretty talented journalist and a more witty writer than his late brother, even though he wastes most of his time playing the pub bore writing shitty blogs for the Mail on Sunday.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Even worse than Star Wars. Fuck Tolkien and stupid mediaeval fetishist fantasy, a pox on the genre.

Why are you always so crabby? You're crabbier than a seabed. I don't think I've ever seen you say, "yeah, you know, I didn't care for that very much." It's always "FUCK THAT RANCID PIECE OF SCUM TO HELL!" :lol:

[TheRedAnarchist23]

I think "the left" is irrelevant and annoying in this period of time.

Nearly all portuguese people agree with you there.
This does help the anarchist movement to grow though.

[ed miliband]

Peter Hitchens is actually a pretty talented journalist and a more witty writer than his late brother, even though he wastes most of his time playing the pub bore writing shitty blogs for the Mail on Sunday.

thing is, peter hitchens seems to see that everything is absolutely atrocious, and his despair at this realisation has led him to reactionary conservatism. whereas his brother thought we were living in the greatest of all possible societies. in a strange way chris was more reactionary.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

Why are you always so crabby? You're crabbier than a seabed. I don't think I've ever seen you say, "yeah, you know, I didn't care for that very much." It's always "FUCK THAT RANCID PIECE OF SCUM TO HELL!" :lol:

I'm a hotbed of hatred & despair. I can't stand anything and least of all myself. I'm like some old angry spiteful person, always whining of the bloody youth. Hated these dregs and their social situations since I was younger than they, and hated them even more when I was their age; little games they play; drinking and whatnot, loathsome, utterly. It's why I'm such an unpleasant person and no one likes me - I guess it's all right in the end as I rarely like anyone else anyway. Everything is shit and terrible and unendurable suffering. I can't even pretend being nice to people, which has ended up biting me in the arse more than a handful of times. Oh well. What can you do--

[Lord Hargreaves]

Peter Hitchens is actually a pretty talented journalist and a more witty writer than his late brother, even though he wastes most of his time playing the pub bore writing shitty blogs for the Mail on Sunday.

Yep I'd agree, he is an honest guy, and seems to actually believe in something - and believing in stuff is, as we all know, terribly unfashionable nowadays. But his views on social issues are bananas obviously

[Questionable]

I'm a hotbed of hatred & despair. I can't stand anything and least of all myself. I'm like some old angry spiteful person, always whining of the bloody youth. Hated these dregs and their social situations since I was younger than they, and hated them even more when I was their age; little games they play; drinking and whatnot, loathsome, utterly. It's why I'm such an unpleasant person and no one likes me - I guess it's all right in the end as I rarely like anyone else anyway. Everything is shit and terrible and unendurable suffering. I can't even pretend being nice to people, which has ended up biting me in the arse more than a handful of times. Oh well. What can you do--

You seem like somebody that likes The Smiths. Am I right?

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

You seem like somebody that likes The Smiths. Am I right?

I'm insulted. Unless that is a joke. I absolutely loathe.

[Art Vandelay]

I'm a hotbed of hatred & despair. I can't stand anything and least of all myself. I'm like some old angry spiteful person, always whining of the bloody youth. Hated these dregs and their social situations since I was younger than they, and hated them even more when I was their age; little games they play; drinking and whatnot, loathsome, utterly. It's why I'm such an unpleasant person and no one likes me - I guess it's all right in the end as I rarely like anyone else anyway. Everything is shit and terrible and unendurable suffering. I can't even pretend being nice to people, which has ended up biting me in the arse more than a handful of times. Oh well. What can you do--

I like you, you sound like myself.

[GerrardWinstanley]

thing is, peter hitchens seems to see that everything is absolutely atrocious, and his despair at this realisation has led him to reactionary conservatism. whereas his brother thought we were living in the greatest of all possible societies. in a strange way chris was more reactionary.On balance, I'd say you were right. Only one of the two took part in the campaign of propaganda that legitimised the most extreme act of military aggression by the United States for at least a generation.

About Peter Hitchens' reasons for converting, I think it might be more prosaic than that. AFAIK, he started writing for the Daily Express (back when the Express, although right-wing, used to be a respectable broadsheet) in the early 80's after quite a few career setbacks. I'm not sure his reasons were cynical (he is certainly financially better off now), but I suspect an envious resentment of the liberal establishment, which ironically his brother would go on to personify, played a part.

[Ocean Seal]

I don't think that religion is necessarily all that bad. I think that some folks just jump on it because they have nothing more interesting to talk about.

[Kalinin's Facial Hair]

I don't think that religion is necessarily all that bad. I think that some folks just jump on it because they have nothing more interesting to talk about.

This.

I don't have any bigger problem with religion. With the church(es), on the other hand...

[Sir Comradical]

I'm an absolute cricket tragic. Lefties I've noticed generally don't like cricket. Historically the only lefties who loved the game were CLR James, also Michael Manley who wasn't a commie but he was still pretty badass with his Jamaican accent.

[Let's Get Free]

A viewpoint I hold that is at odds with many communists and anarchists (particularly those anarchist of the insurrectionary variety) is that I am a strong believer in revolutionary self-discipline. I generally believe that serious revolutionaries should refrain from drug use and excessive alcohol consumption.

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

A viewpoint I hold that is at odds with many communists and anarchists (particularly those anarchist of the insurrectionary variety) is that I am a strong believer in revolutionary self-discipline. I generally believe that serious revolutionaries should refrain from drug use and excessive alcohol consumption.

Yea I have to agree with this one. I've read Lin Biao's "How to be a Good Communist" twice over. Plus there's that one panflet from that one psycho Russian Anarchist that is pretty cool.

[LeonJWilliams]

Okay last one. I promise.


Cops' job isn't to kill people, and most cops never kill or even injure anyone through their entire careers to begin with.

You also assume that the cop in question is even eligible for welfare and that welfare is avaiable in the place that he/she lives. It just seems childish to me to assume that all cops are reactionaries. :confused:

We are from different countries, where I am from welfare (although currently being erroded by the state) is available in ALL parts of the country.

I am not talking specifically about killing innocent people (although this does happen sometimes) but more about authority and abusing that authority, power goes to peoples heads, power corrupts, even if, in the unlikely situation that someone becomes a cop with good intentions.

[LeonJWilliams]

The Star Wars prequels were better than the original trilogy. There, I said it.

You sicken me.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

I liked Christopher Hitchens. Not politically, but I thought he was an alright kinda guy.

I voted for Ed Miliband in the Labour leadership contest.:blushing:

[Rusty Shackleford]

the 'left' can be creepy and alienating without even knowing it. At the same time, that alienation is not solely the fault of the 'left.'


Also, enough with peoples fucking faces being plastered everywhere. (its petty, and its not permanent. ties into the first point)

[ellipsis]

We are from different countries, where I am from welfare (although currently being erroded by the state) is available in ALL parts of the country.

I am not talking specifically about killing innocent people (although this does happen sometimes) but more about authority and abusing that authority, power goes to peoples heads, power corrupts, even if, in the unlikely situation that someone becomes a cop with good intentions.

Not to mention cops in the Bay Area make upwards of 180k a year, not exactly slave wages.

[kashkin]

I'm an absolute cricket tragic. Lefties I've noticed generally don't like cricket. Historically the only lefties who loved the game were CLR James, also Michael Manley who wasn't a commie but he was still pretty badass with his Jamaican accent.

Woah, cricket is a great game.

I'm not sure if this can be characterised as a viewpoint, but some people have said that I take far too great an interest in the military/military history.

[Comrade #138672]

I think the labor aristocracy theory has been way overblown by modern Marxists and is used as an excuse for failure.Not sure if it has been overblown. If it is true, which I unfortunately believe, then it is a big problem. To me it seems that the labour aristocracy is taking away part of the base we need to succeed.

OT: I think an unpopular viewpoint of mine is that I tend to believe in reincarnation, which is often interpreted as taking a stance against Materialism, while I would consider myself a Materialist nowadays.

[BeingAndGrime]

Im skeptical of value theory.

I dont know if revolution is possible.

I dont think, if it happens, the revolution will be global and simultaneous (though Im also completely against SioC). I dont think any party will play a significant role in it.

I find overly deterministic marxist sects annoying.

I find vehements opponenets of the nuclear family as ridiculous as vehement defenders of it.

I think 99.9% of socialists are socialist for moral reasons, even though they try and cover it up under enlightened self-interest.

[Thirsty Crow]

I dont think, if it happens, the revolution will be global and simultaneous (though Im also completely against SioC).

This is a false dichotomy. I don't think that any internationalist has argued that the revolution needs to be international in scope and simultaneous.

[LeonJWilliams]

Not to mention cops in the Bay Area make upwards of 180k a year, not exactly slave wages.

Where? (I'm from the UK)

[Flying Purple People Eater]

i voted for ed miliband in the labour leadership contest.:blushing:

what happened to principles!? :crying:

[hashem]

im totaly against so called "solidarities". these "solidarity campaigns" give opportunists a chance to present themselfs as progressives and friends of people, while they dont help the oppressed people at all. anyone can sign a worthless petition.

when i started exposing and working against such "solidarity campaigns", some called me a secret police agent and published leaflets against me. i was even threatened by some "leftists" who were practically serving the police. but i stood against the current. after few years my position was accepted by almost all of leftists in my country and even those who are still supporting such "solidarity campaigns", are ashamed to defend them in public.

[Raúl Duke]

A viewpoint I hold that is at odds with many communists and anarchists (particularly those anarchist of the insurrectionary variety) is that I am a strong believer in revolutionary self-discipline. I generally believe that serious revolutionaries should refrain from drug use and excessive alcohol consumption.

Ugh I hate that viewpoint, it smacks of "prolier than thou," "revolutionary martrydom," substitutionism, alienation, etc; especially if this viewpoint is part of the whole "revolutionary asceticism for cadres" kind of thought cultivated by some sects/political cults where they demand their members "to give it their all" to the Party/Revolution, etc.

Not to say I support excessive use of things that may be hazardous to your health, because I don't advocate that. But from your phrasing, there's no harm-reduction distinction among drugs except the bogus distinction between "alcohol" and "drugs" which is problematic. Not all drugs are the same, many are "less damaging" than alcohol.

This reminds me, I also dislike straight-edge people but I think that's kinda normal among many in this board.

[Let's Get Free]

Ugh I hate that viewpoint, it smacks of "prolier than thou," "revolutionary martrydom," substitutionism, alienation, etc; especially if this viewpoint is part of the whole "revolutionary asceticism for cadres" kind of thought cultivated by some sects/political cults where they demand their members "to give it their all" to the Party/Revolution, etc.

I don't see it as any of those things. Self-discipline isn’t ‘prolier than thouism’ or 'revolutionary martydom' or 'substitutionism' or any of that— it’s a practical way of living which doesn’t put short-term goals (like where the next joint is coming from, or what party is on at the weekend) ahead of doing something to make this world a better place for free people to really live in.

[hatzel]

"revolutionary asceticism for cadres"

I actually have a theory that the whole left is structured around these kinds of ideas. I mean take a look at the upcoming events forum, all these discussions and talks and so on...what do they all have in common? They're all at 6/7pm, aka dinner time. So you have to either plough through a quick meal at about 5:30 and then rush off, can't really enjoy that, or you save it for afterwards and then you have to starve for a few hours. Who would come up with such an idea without intending it as some form of penitence? Seriously answer me that...or maybe it's true what the 19th century conservatives said about 'continental socialism' and it's all structured around this weird Mediterranean idea that 11pm is a perfectly reasonable time to be sat at a dinner table :confused:

[Os Cangaceiros]

I don't see it as any of those things. Self-discipline isn’t ‘prolier than thouism’ or 'revolutionary martydom' or 'substitutionism' or any of that— it’s a practical way of living which doesn’t put short-term goals (like where the next joint is coming from, or what party is on at the weekend) ahead of doing something to make this world a better place for free people to really live in.

I think that one can indulge once in a while in life's pleasures and still keep a good focus on one's larger goals. Just look at the Nazis and the beer halls.

OK maybe not the best example but you get the idea!

[Raúl Duke]

I actually have a theory that the whole left is structured around these kinds of ideas. I mean take a look at the upcoming events forum, all these discussions and talks and so on...what do they all have in common? They're all at 6/7pm, aka dinner time. So you have to either plough through a quick meal at about 5:30 and then rush off, can't really enjoy that, or you save it for afterwards and then you have to starve for a few hours. Who would come up with such an idea without intending it as some form of penitence? Seriously answer me that...or maybe it's true what the 19th century conservatives said about 'continental socialism' and it's all structured around this weird Mediterranean idea that 11pm is a perfectly reasonable time to be sat at a dinner table :confused:

While it may not be at that "revolutionary monk stage," I do agree that there's in quite a few groupings this where idea that "Party work, Revolution work, 'Agitating/Organizing work" should becomes one's life focus or something like that (another reason why the left "turns off" the general working class population)...kinda like some bizarre role-play. To some degree perhaps every activism-like organization has that kind of mentality/vibe.

So showing up skipping, delaying, etc your dinner is acceptable in that mentality. (Although that's a minor example, some regular-minded people can wait but I see what you mean)

I guess one way they may get away with it better is that they offer free food/dinner; that's what student organizations at universities do.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

what happened to principles!? :crying:

I went through a labourite 'entryism'-ish phase, though it really didn't last long.

Was more the shock of having a Tory government for the first time I can remember in my life.

[hatzel]

So showing up skipping, delaying, etc your dinner is acceptable in that mentality. (Although that's a minor example, some regular-minded people can wait but I see what you mean)

Yeah I'm never sure quite how serious I am most of the time, but I'm sure that if I said 'can't come to that meeting, I have other plans' a whole bunch of people would probably say something like '...and that's more important than the revolution?! Reschedule or something!' Of course there are only so many hours in the day, we can't do everything, but I feel there are leftists who expect people to make personal sacrifices for the cause. Maybe not by saying outright that ascetism is a necessity, but there can certainly be pressures to put your life on hold. I mean, if you're down the park playing football with your mates instead of handing out leaflets, somebody's probably going to question your revolutionary credentials. In that respect this idea of revolutionary martyrdom is arguably genuine.

[Art Vandelay]

I liked Christopher Hitchens. Not politically, but I thought he was an alright kinda guy.

I was beginning to think I was the only one.

[Red Commissar]

Where? (I'm from the UK)

Bay Area (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Bay_Area) refers to the San Francisco-Oakland area and surrounding communities around the eponymous bay in California.

[Zealot]

I actually have a theory that the whole left is structured around these kinds of ideas. I mean take a look at the upcoming events forum, all these discussions and talks and so on...what do they all have in common? They're all at 6/7pm, aka dinner time. So you have to either plough through a quick meal at about 5:30 and then rush off, can't really enjoy that, or you save it for afterwards and then you have to starve for a few hours. Who would come up with such an idea without intending it as some form of penitence? Seriously answer me that...or maybe it's true what the 19th century conservatives said about 'continental socialism' and it's all structured around this weird Mediterranean idea that 11pm is a perfectly reasonable time to be sat at a dinner table :confused:

You think wayyy too much.

[Raúl Duke]

Yeah I'm never sure quite how serious I am most of the time, but I'm sure that if I said 'can't come to that meeting, I have other plans' a whole bunch of people would probably say something like '...and that's more important than the revolution?! Reschedule or something!' Of course there are only so many hours in the day, we can't do everything, but I feel there are leftists who expect people to make personal sacrifices for the cause. Maybe not by saying outright that ascetism is a necessity, but there can certainly be pressures to put your life on hold. I mean, if you're down the park playing football with your mates instead of handing out leaflets, somebody's probably going to question your revolutionary credentials. In that respect this idea of revolutionary martyrdom is arguably genuine.

I agree and it's a pretty big problem not only in radical/revolutionary left circles but anything under the banner of "activism." This kind of mentality is why the left will never be some sort of "mass" thing because most people just don't want to role-play the activist role in detriment/putting on hold to the other things in one's life, especially if said activism/political work seems pointless; like waving signs around and chanting at a demo, facing the possibility of being attacked and arrested by the cops, when so far demos don't seem to accomplish anything and don't really threaten the power structure (it's more of a nuisance to the elites, but rarely much else).

Although I guess by saying that people will think I advocate "doing-nothing" which is quite wrong: I'm just saying we need to re-think our strategy.

The example of the recent strike attempt of Walmart workers prove there are avenues of actions that regular people with every-day lives and some with families would risk pursuing and these are the kinds of actions we should encourage and support.

[Althusser]

It seems like hating animal rights is the popular view.

I don't think so. I love animals and I'm definitely for animal rights, but when I see people dedicate their lives to animals or the environment (rather than overthrowing capitalism) I tend to get a bit pissed off, similarly to the way I get heated when trendy liberals protest sweat shop labor in the the third world or the prison industrial-complex without making the ultimate critique against capitalism, a system that would exploit cheap labor for profit and funnel drugs into first world countries, specifically the United States, to warehouse excess labor.


I think 99.9% of socialists are socialist for moral reasons, even though they try and cover it up under enlightened self-interest.

What do you mean by this?

[ellipsis]

Where? (I'm from the UK)

Oh sorry, I always do that. The San Francisco Bay Area.

[o well this is ok I guess]

I actually have a theory that the whole left is structured around these kinds of ideas. I mean take a look at the upcoming events forum, all these discussions and talks and so on...what do they all have in common? They're all at 6/7pm, aka dinner time. So you have to either plough through a quick meal at about 5:30 and then rush off, can't really enjoy that, or you save it for afterwards and then you have to starve for a few hours. Who would come up with such an idea without intending it as some form of penitence? Seriously answer me that...or maybe it's true what the 19th century conservatives said about 'continental socialism' and it's all structured around this weird Mediterranean idea that 11pm is a perfectly reasonable time to be sat at a dinner table :confused: Whoa whoa whoa I can't be the only person that has to work until 9 sometimes. A lot of places don't close until 9 or later so yeah I'd expect that a lot of people with shit jobs don't eat until 11.

[electro_fan]

i don't think religion is always a bad thing and i think there might be a god tbh.

[Profunc]

I'm a pacifist and disagree with dialectical materialism.

What is your alternative theory to dialectical materialism?

I suppose my most unpopular viewpoint is that I'm not a fan of Trotskyist or Maoist tendencies and those who hold them. They certainly don't find me very fun to be around. :crying:

[Mass Grave Aesthetics]

i don't think religion is always a bad thing and i think there might be a god tbh.
woah, you are indeed on a dangerous path here.;)
Nah, actually I think an outright condemnation of religion as such is shooting yourself in the foot as a leftists and black-and-white thinking certainly isn´t helpful, but I think this is a pretty universally accepted viewpoint among us. Materialism =/= militant atheism.

[Domela Nieuwenhuis]

I consider communism a theory, not a science.
For me science is a stack of rock-solid evidence. Communism as we all (or at least most of us) likes to see has never existed and so can never bring us facts.

Also, i think dialectics is shit. Proving things because you can't prove it false is dumb as fuck. That just might mean that Jesus exists!
I like science, rock-solid, evidence-based science.

[electro_fan]

I think almost everyone who thinks of themselves as part of 'the Left' is actually ideologically supporting capitalism - no matter what they subjectively think they are doing, and not in a 'we all support capitalism buy buying bread' sort of way, but actually blatantly defending the interests of the capitalist class while claiming to defend the interests of the working class. Pointing that out doesn't make me very popular.
what do you mean by this?

[IrishWorker]

I support the death penalty for rapists and murderers.

[Leftsolidarity]

I support the DPRK

[Althusser]

I support the death penalty for rapists and murderers.

The whole idea of the death penalty is something I find difficult to come to a conclusion about. I believe, in a communist society, whatever judicial system that arises based on the general will of the people will be sufficient. I like the idea of shooting murderers and rapists though, and not particularly because I think it would be a deterent...

I always just seem to give people in our capitalist society a bit more sympathy, not that I'm a rape apologist, but as for the 500 gun murders in Chicago in 2011...... all I have to say is that people arise out of their material conditions and reflect their surroundings that formed their consiousness.


Also, i think dialectics is shit. Proving things because you can't prove it false is dumb as fuck. That just might mean that Jesus exists!

What do you means by this, and how does this relate to dialectics?

[IrishWorker]

The whole idea of the death penalty is something I find difficult to come to a conclusion about. I believe, in a communist society, whatever judicial system that arises based on the general will of the people will be sufficient. I like the idea of shooting murderers and rapists though, and not particularly because I think it would be a deterent...

I always just seem to give people in our capitalist society a bit more sympathy, not that I'm a rape apologist, but as for the 500 gun murders in Chicago in 2011...... all I have to say is that people arise out of their material conditions and reflect their surroundings that formed their consiousness.

I agree allot of the reasons that drive people to commit crimes that lead to the death penalty are because of the social and economic contexts they were raised and live in but I don't care tbh. If your gona rape some kid or kill some person, deny your victim a life then you don't deserve to live.

[electro_fan]

workerism is not always a bad thing

[Profunc]

I agree allot of the reasons that drive people to commit crimes that lead to the death penalty are because of the social and economic contexts they were raised and live in but I don't care tbh. If your gona rape some kid or kill some person, deny your victim a life then you don't deserve to live.

And you don't deserve to make that judgment call.

[IrishWorker]

And you don't deserve to make that judgment call.

I have as much right to make the call than anyone else.

[Skyhilist]

Although I recognize that they're correlated, I think that a clean environment is more important than a perfect economy (not saying capitalism can be reformed into being suitable for te environment). But I think we've gotta consider that we live in the environment. We can't have any sort of an economy if we have no environment to live in.

[Ele'ill]

criticism of production, industry, work (regarding a societal transformation)

[Let's Get Free]

I think that Lenin has got to be one of the most overrated politicians of the 20th century.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

what do you mean by this?
He means that he's a holier than thou sectarian. Left Communism = "Everyone else is doing it wrong. Only we are doing it right."

[p0is0n]

maybe i have a bit of working class pride in me. usually not very popular, esp. round marxist academia because "being a worker is nothing to be proud of" or whatever the fuck.

[Geiseric]

maybe i have a bit of working class pride in me. usually not very popular, esp. round marxist academia because "being a worker is nothing to be proud of" or whatever the fuck.

There's nothing wrong with being proud at struggling. I don't know what there is to be proud of except for working and organizing. Because how can you be proud unless you didn't start with an advantage?

[Blake's Baby]

Originally Posted by Blake's Baby http://www.revleft.com/vb/revleft/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.revleft.com/vb/showthread.php?p=2586273#post2586273)
I think almost everyone who thinks of themselves as part of 'the Left' is actually ideologically supporting capitalism - no matter what they subjectively think they are doing, and not in a 'we all support capitalism buy buying bread' sort of way, but actually blatantly defending the interests of the capitalist class while claiming to defend the interests of the working class...


what do you mean by this?

Not sure which aspects are the problem for you, so I'll try and make the whole thing clearer.

I think most people who identify with 'the Left' do so on the basis of ideologies which, in the end, support capitalism - specifically, Trotskyism and Stalinism, and also some forms of Anarchism. In the first two cases, it's social-democracy with more radical verbiage, in the latter case, radical liberalism. The attempt to found party dictatorships which administer state capitalism, is support for capitalism. 'Leftists' who support such policies support capitalism (no matter what they think they're doing).

The policy of supporting dictators or would-be dictators across the world who happen to be militarily opposed to the USA (or Israel), is support for capitalism. 'Leftists' who support such policies support capitalism (no matter what they think they're doing).




Originally Posted by Blake's Baby http://www.revleft.com/vb/revleft/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.revleft.com/vb/showthread.php?p=2586273#post2586273)
... Pointing that out doesn't make me very popular...


He means that he's a holier than thou sectarian. Left Communism = "Everyone else is doing it wrong. Only we are doing it right."

See?

By the way, I think the approved term is 'ultra-left sectarian'.

[ed miliband]

The policy of supporting dictators or would-be dictators across the world who happen to be militarily opposed to the USA (or Israel), is support for capitalism. 'Leftists' who support such policies support capitalism (no matter what they think they're doing).



let's be more explicit here: take a look at any of the threads on hugo chavez's death -- explicit support, not to say borderline worship, for a bourgeois nationalist. and not even, really, because hugo was opposed to america -- because he "was doing his best to help the working class". madness.

[BeingAndGrime]

I don't think so. I love animals and I'm definitely for animal rights, but when I see people dedicate their lives to animals or the environment (rather than overthrowing capitalism) I tend to get a bit pissed off, similarly to the way I get heated when trendy liberals protest sweat shop labor in the the third world or the prison industrial-complex without making the ultimate critique against capitalism, a system that would exploit cheap labor for profit and funnel drugs into first world countries, specifically the United States, to warehouse excess labor.



What do you mean by this?

i mean like people will say yeah the working class is exploited, and im a member of the working class, therefore i support revolution. im hard as fuck and only care for me and mine (obviously im making a ridiculous straw man but you get the point)

and of course people do want socialism because its better for them, but i think a lot of people also think its morally disgusting that millions starve to death and the world is so shitty and they support socialism out of an abstract love for humanity, even though it's cheesy as fuck (I know I do).

[Luís Henrique]

I have as much right to make the call than anyone else.

And rapists and murderers have as much the "right" to live than anyone else.

You simply cannot frame such problem within the "rights" discourse: either we want to have a rational penal system, or we want to have an irrational system of private vengeance (or of private vengeance disguided as "justice", which is probably only more repulsive).

If you want the State to kill rapists, prepare yourself for the idea that all rapes will be followed by murder. Evidently, the rationale here is that a woman's reason to live is between her legs - once that is violated, they are symbolically "dead", so the rapist is tantamount to a murderer.

Luís Henrique

[Luís Henrique]

Also, i think dialectics is shit. Proving things because you can't prove it false is dumb as fuck.

It is dumb (though I can't see how fuck is dumb, it seems to me a quite nice thing), but how is that even remotely related to dialectics? It is just a case of denying the antecedent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denying_the_antecedent).

Luís Henrique

[Jesus Saves Gretzky Scores]

I don't think so. I love animals and I'm definitely for animal rights, but when I see people dedicate their lives to animals or the environment (rather than overthrowing capitalism) I tend to get a bit pissed off, similarly to the way I get heated when trendy liberals protest sweat shop labor in the the third world or the prison industrial-complex without making the ultimate critique against capitalism, a system that would exploit cheap labor for profit and funnel drugs into first world countries, specifically the United States, to warehouse excess labor.

I more meant on this forum.

[electro_fan]

He means that he's a holier than thou sectarian. Left Communism = "Everyone else is doing it wrong. Only we are doing it right."
well hold on the left seems to get it wrong most of the time ... I'm not sure that calling somebody a "holier than thou sectarian" without giving any reasons is very helpful?

[Brutus]

Liking Chavez and Castro

[Ravachol]

I like science, rock-solid, evidence-based science.

So you dislike a significant part of modern science?

[Althusser]

I more meant on this forum.

I think people here sort of agree with what I said. I think the I don't care about animals stuff is just a reaction to the self-righteous animal rights activists that don't think the overthrowing of a profit based system (that would obviously make slaughtering of animals cleaner and more humane) is necessary or important.

You know... This lady!
http://image.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/102804/102804,1264180927,1/stock-photo-crazy-new-age-woman-with-old-guitar-45036586.jpg

The idealist new age hippie that believes humans can transcend all their problems (being that her main problem is the roach that she saw last night on the kitchen table in her Mahattan lower-east side apartment.)

[o well this is ok I guess]

I like being a student and living with mommy and paying shit-all for rent.

[MarxArchist]

Breakdown theory. People seem to hate it.

[Goblin]

Im cool with religions

[RadioRaheem84]

Oh jeez where do I even start?

1.) The biggest one is that while I believe the working class is in the right and is due justice, I still strive to be bourgeoisie. I really hate being poor. I would rather be a class traitor (as a rich person) than struggle like I am now (while living under capitalism).

2.) There are elements which I find in both white and ethnic working class communities which disgust me, most notably; racism, homophobia, gun worship, illiteracy and a glorification of ignorance. I blame the system first and foremost but I wish we could actually criticize these elements head on and to the victims themselves without being labeled racists or elitists or Bill Cosby wannabes. Mao did it, why cannot we today?

3.) I hate above all else liberalism and liberals, more so than I hate conservatives. I do not think we should even work with them as they are in the words of late Christopher Hitchens (who would then prove himself one too) "dangerous compromisers". They would throw you under the bus just to save face anytime they're red baited.

4.) I think revolutions can be non-violent but not in a pacifist Ghandi way just more on the defensive. Workers should reserve the right to defend themselves against class oppression when protesting or winning gains. I believe the rhetoric we hold is more powerful than their guns but that doesn’t mean we cannot defend ourselves. I like the Bolivarian Revolution approach from the PSUV base, and the mounting defense of their gains from right wing reactionary counters strike.

[RadioRaheem84]

I also want to add, and this might be extremely unpopular, but after extensively reading history, the USSR was the lesser of two evils in the Cold War. It really bothers me that in reality the bad guys one. Yes it was a paranoid war state that would've made it incredibly difficult to prove to them that you were not a traitor but seeing now the ravages of neo-liberalism there is no way the USSR was more of a monster. No way.

[Ele'ill]

Something that puts me at odds with a lot of internet leftists is that I defend the idea of animal liberation because I actually talk to people in real life and most radicals in favor of animal liberation are in favor of societal transformation as well.

[Per Levy]

well, i see all of the so called socialist states of any time to be nothing else then capitalism dressed in red. also im not high on national liberation. and all these partys and groups who think of them themselfs as some kind of vanguard of the working class are redicilous and useless.

[MGP]

I think that the chances of achieving communism as the result of working class struggle are close to zero and that the only way for it to happen, and through which I think it will happen, is by technological advancement.

[RedSonRising]

I think the vast majority of leftists have no idea how to communicate with the largely apolitical population.

I'm also quite worried about what happens when the oil runs out and don't assume a revolution will lead to some chrome-colored technocratic future.

I also don't belittle religious people.

[Chris]

I am pro-USSR from Lenin to Andropov and everyone in between.

I hold religious views.

I am in favour of small-farming over cooperatives or collectives. Likewise I am in favour of self-employment.

I am quite opposed to animal liberationists, and tolerance of predators in the wilds. On that note, I am an environmentalist, but of the view that nature is there to be exploited by humans in a responsible manner.

[sixdollarchampagne]

After I had thought about it for awhile, I came to the conclusion, years ago, that Hugo Chávez was a complete phony as a revolutionary, who would never make any fundamental changes in Venezuelan society. I feel that position has been vindicated by the way things have turned out, but that does not make my opinion any more popular.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

well hold on the left seems to get it wrong most of the time ... I'm not sure that calling somebody a "holier than thou sectarian" without giving any reasons is very helpful?
Left Communists tend to think almost all other communists are pro-capitalist ("left of capital").

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

I'm also quite worried about what happens when the oil runs out and don't assume a revolution will lead to some chrome-colored technocratic future.
This.

[SuchianFrog735]

I'm skeptical of violent revolution, and to a degree revolution in general(yeah, what am I doing on a forum called RevLeft).

At best I feel such actions would have to conducted like an experiment, because clearly revolution is not subscribing to the current system, so we can't really use our current reasoning to justify it beyond "liberating the proletariat".

[MP5]

Generalization much? This is like saying that everyone who works in a mexican fast food restaurant holds a specific set of universal ideals for such employees.
Sure many police men are in fact reactionary scum but I see no reason why an individual police man can't be a revolutionary. Cops are not bourgeois but rather proletariat and while it's true that the police are a tool of the bourgeois, so are all proletarians, in a sense.

But we don't all get a big fat check to beat and oppress our fellow members of the working class now do we? They actually sign up to be used as pawns by the bourgeois and the pigs goddamn well know that their only purpose is to serve and protect the interests of the state not the people. Although they are proletarians they are out there ready to kill and die for the bourgeois everyday. They whole job is to make sure the power structure remains the same.

I hardly see how we are all as guilty as cops.

[Doflamingo]

I could never see myself being a vegetarian, nor would I ever want to be for any reason at all. I would honestly rather die than be forced on a vegetarian diet.

[TheRedAnarchist23]

I think the vast majority of leftists have no idea how to communicate with the largely apolitical population.

Yep. If you start talking about mode of production and class analysis it is not going to work. You have to speak in a way all can understand. Explain slowly, beggining with "why not capitalism", and continuing by explaining the alternative.
It works when I do it.


I could never see myself being a vegetarian, nor would I ever want to be for any reason at all. I would honestly rather die than be forced on a vegetarian diet.

They never told me I had to be a vegetarian to be an anarchist!
Actualy all anarchists I know eat meat.

[Skyhilist]

I found being vegetarian hard the first week, although it honestly gets much better after that. I find a lot of leftists who are against the practice tend to only be considering the ethical appeals that groups like PeTA make rather than things like environmental impact, etc. (although given that they actually have all the evidence there would probably still be some anti-veg people)

[LeninBalls]

I don't get this hate for animal rights/vegetarianism. I float between veganism and vegetarianism for health, moral and environmental reasons. I also love animals and animal rights. I'm also a communist. You can be both!

I guess my unpopular viewpoint is that revolution is probably never ever going to happen and I think socialism is a lost cause. I don't even know why I'm back on Revleft.

[ken6346]

edit

[Mather]

As a communist, I oppose the Enlightenment and it's legacy and seek it's abolition.*

* No, I am not some reactionary that wishes to see a return to the era of feudalism, superstition and the divine right of kings. I do recognise that the Enlightenment was a progressive event in it's time but I also recognise that the Enlightenment is a product of the epoch of the capitalist era. When we reach communism we will need a new Enlightenment, one that keeps what is good from the previous Enlightenment and discards that which has become obsolete and dated. I say this because while the last Englightenment brought us the materialist view of the world, it has mainly been limited to the hard sciences (Astronomy, Biology, Chemistry and Physics). The last Englightenment has so far failed to widen the materialist worldview to encompass all aspects of analysis outside of the hard sciences, such as the social sciences and economics.

I also partly blame the Enlightenment with leaving us with the following three bullshit schools of thought:

- Utilitarianism (the philosophy, not the more general term)
- The myth of progress
- Positivism (and crap that came out of it like game theory)

[sixdollarchampagne]

I found being vegetarian hard the first week, although it honestly gets much better after that. I find a lot of leftists who are against the practice tend to only be considering the ethical appeals that groups like PeTA make rather than things like environmental impact, etc. (although given that they actually have all the evidence there would probably still be some anti-veg people)

I thought vegetarianism was great for several years, until I became anemic. Then I read that anemia means, among other things, that brain cells are not getting sufficient oxygen, which alarmed me, so I started eating chicken again, which, it would appear, cured the anemia. That's why I don't think vegetarianism is ultimately sustainable, in terms of one's health.

Is vegetarianism really very left wing, anyway? I mean the far left, at least, sees a role for (controlled) violence in a class society, i.e., smashing bourgeois rule. So pacifism (non-violence), which reminds me of vegetarianism more than a little, is actually foreign to the far left/hard left.

[Quail]

I know quite a few anarchists who are also veggie or vegan. I think that if you're left wing, you're more likely to actually care about other human beings and I don't think it's much of a stretch to extend that compassion to other animals. Also, if you're a vegan and you disagree with the exploitation of animals, you'd be a hypocrite to agree with the exploitation of humans under capitalism because people are animals too.

[soso17]

Okay last one. I promise.


Cops' job isn't to kill people, and most cops never kill or even injure anyone through their entire careers to begin with.

You also assume that the cop in question is even eligible for welfare and that welfare is avaiable in the place that he/she lives. It just seems childish to me to assume that all cops are reactionaries. :confused:

And it seems rather naive to give cops the benefit of the doubt, IMHO

[RadioRaheem84]

I know quite a few anarchists who are also veggie or vegan. I think that if you're left wing, you're more likely to actually care about other human beings and I don't think it's much of a stretch to extend that compassion to other animals. Also, if you're a vegan and you disagree with the exploitation of animals, you'd be a hypocrite to agree with the exploitation of humans under capitalism because people are animals too.
I think the reason a lot of people including leftists probably dislike veganism and vegetarianism is because they associate it with the fringe animal rights movement and all of the insufferable people who think humans are vile and nature is supreme. I know I certainly hate people who say they hate people but love animals. I tell ask them why and they answer because humans will hurt you (roughly translated to a human made me feel less than special so I like furry kittens who love me back). I scoffed and told this person they thought like that because they're hanging around puppies and to go hand out in the woods and see if a bear won't hurt you.

I remember receiving tickets to a screening of this movie where a dolphin received a free prosthetic tail. I didn't want to go see it and asked if anyone in the office would care to. Several people jumped at the chance and they asked me why I didn't want to go see such a heart felt movie. I told them I will go see a movie about Americans receiving free medical procedures before that. They didn't understan what I meant. They all mostly retorted that a dolphin is helpless and a human has all the chances in the world to receive medical attention. And these people were not hardcore animal rights activists either just apathetic co-workers.

[LOLseph Stalin]

I often compromise my own views in order to get along with comrades of other tendencies.

[Ele'ill]

I think the reason a lot of people including leftists probably dislike veganism and vegetarianism is because they associate it with the fringe animal rights movement and all of the insufferable people who think humans are vile and nature is supreme. I know I certainly hate people who say they hate people but love animals. I tell ask them why and they answer because humans will hurt you (roughly translated to a human made me feel less than special so I like furry kittens who love me back). I scoffed and told this person they thought like that because they're hanging around puppies and to go hand out in the woods and see if a bear won't hurt you.

I remember receiving tickets to a screening of this movie where a dolphin received a free prosthetic tail. I didn't want to go see it and asked if anyone in the office would care to. Several people jumped at the chance and they asked me why I didn't want to go see such a heart felt movie. I told them I will go see a movie about Americans receiving free medical procedures before that. They didn't understan what I meant. They all mostly retorted that a dolphin is helpless and a human has all the chances in the world to receive medical attention. And these people were not hardcore animal rights activists either just apathetic co-workers.

Just to clarify (I'll make this brief)- the people you are talking about are not those in favor of animal liberation they are liberals interested in liberal things such as the sierra club, charity, granting of rights etc..

[Pleb]

Good evenining Comrades and others. This is my first post.

I live in a pretty backwards working class area and being an anti fascist in itself is a difficult one and makes me very unpopular. The vast majority of working people who I know are racist c*nts.

While this it is not a position of the CP, I think parents should be banned from brainwashing children with religious crap. Again I it boils down to where I live. Here the children are segregated according to which strain of christianity they belong to. It absolutely disgusts me.

[Skyhilist]

I thought vegetarianism was great for several years, until I became anemic. Then I read that anemia means, among other things, that brain cells are not getting sufficient oxygen, which alarmed me, so I started eating chicken again, which, it would appear, cured the anemia. That's why I don't think vegetarianism is ultimately sustainable, in terms of one's health.

Is vegetarianism really very left wing, anyway? I mean the far left, at least, sees a role for (controlled) violence in a class society, i.e., smashing bourgeois rule. So pacifism (non-violence), which reminds me of vegetarianism more than a little, is actually foreign to the far left/hard left.

Vegetarianism only makes you anemic if done improperly. What keeps are oxygen supply healthy is our intake of vital nutrients into the body. Name one significant nutrient that would affect anemia that you can get from meat that you can from vegetarianism. The only nutrient in general that there is is B12. The reason for this is that when humans evolved we ate food out of the soil, which contains B12 usually (along with a lot of unhealthy stuff sometimes), which is why we evolved to need B12 despite the other unhealthy nutrients that are often in the soil when B12 is present. But you can get B12 enriched stuff now so it doesn't even matter. For all other significant nutrients their are good veg sources.

Here's part of the reason why I view veganism to be something that left-wingers should support: A healthier environment leads to healthier conditions for everyone, which is something the left should support. Eating animal products is inefficient and detrimental for the environment.

For example:
gTS2Yp-UgI0

[Fourth Internationalist]

I thought vegetarianism was great for several years, until I became anemic. Then I read that anemia means, among other things, that brain cells are not getting sufficient oxygen, which alarmed me, so I started eating chicken again, which, it would appear, cured the anemia. That's why I don't think vegetarianism is ultimately sustainable, in terms of one's health.

Yeah, if you're a vegan that eats only peanut butter and veggie burgers, chances are, you'll become ill and die if you don't change it. Veganism is such a broad term that means I could eat only (many) junk foods, veggie burgers, and peanut butter sandwiches and still be a vegan. The problem is not that someone didn't have meat, dairy, and other animals products, the problem is that that person didn't eat anything healthy nor a various amount of healthy foods of vegetables and fruits, which is an essential part of any meat-eating diet anyways.

[RadioRaheem84]

Just to clarify (I'll make this brief)- the people you are talking about are not those in favor of animal liberation they are liberals interested in liberal things such as the sierra club, charity, granting of rights etc..

Why do liberals ruin all good movements?

[Mass Grave Aesthetics]

Why do liberals ruin all good movements?
It´s their raison d´étre.

[Skyhilist]

Why do liberals ruin all good movements?

This.
They've even managed to ruin to a significant extent the environmental movement, which dumbfucks like Al Gore preaching about and converting people to "Green Capitalism", acting as if it's not an oxymoron.
I'm digressing though, sorry.

[Raúl Duke]

1.) The biggest one is that while I believe the working class is in the right and is due justice, I still strive to be bourgeoisie. I really hate being poor. I would rather be a class traitor (as a rich person) than struggle like I am now (while living under capitalism).

I feel the same way, so do most normal people.
Only a few weirdos on the left make it a fetish of not being rich or whatever.

[black magick hustla]

the left is counterrevolutionary
dont care about the enviroment
dont care about animals
dont care about "culture" and "education"

[NoOneIsIllegal]

I hate other anarchists and agree with a lot of Marxists.
I was an off-and-on vegan for a couple of years; now I could care less.
I don't get the hype around Emma Goldman. Even Marxists like her. I'll never understand.
It's unpopular of me that leftists try to hold people accountable for their racism, homophobia, and bigotry in general... and then they think I'm crazy that I call them out on their direct/indirect sexism and patriarchal attitude.

[o well this is ok I guess]

dont care about "culture" and "education" I feel bad reading "destroy the university" whilst sitting in a university.

[Os Cangaceiros]

dont care about the enviroment
dont care about animals


Same I guess, but I can respect people like LeninBalls' position on this topic, in regards to animals. Esp. in regards to individual health.

[Os Cangaceiros]

I don't get the hype around Emma Goldman. Even Marxists like her. I'll never understand.

She was a rebel who got shit on her entire life but never stopped fighting. I think that's a big part of the reason she's admired.

[Yuppie Grinder]

Emma Goldman had a nuanced understanding of sexual equality in an era when most socialists were heterosexist.

[Neoprime]

In a post-revolutionary socialist government, there's an idea that I wanted to put into practice called "Spurts of Imperialism" were you invade capitalist country against their will for more land for workers.

[Neon Dandelions]

I'm an existential and moral nihilist.

I believe that Communism and Anarchism are ultimately baseless ideologies just as Christianity, Capitalism, Imperialism, and Science. I think that all systems, despite their appeals to rationality or logic, are fundamentally grounded on subjective value judgements that the individual has little active control over. I think there should be more recognition of the theoretical limitations of worldviews and skepticism to ideas in general.

The ideal of anarchism appeals most to me, but I do not limit myself to speculation on communist varieties. I don't think there's any inherent wrong in Capitalist, Egoist, or Communist interpretations, though I've had a lifelong predilection for certain Leftist values.

I feel as though my views will not be loved :cool:

[MP5]

I found being vegetarian hard the first week, although it honestly gets much better after that. I find a lot of leftists who are against the practice tend to only be considering the ethical appeals that groups like PeTA make rather than things like environmental impact, etc. (although given that they actually have all the evidence there would probably still be some anti-veg people)

That reminds me but i really really hate the likes of PETA and other such groups such as Paul Watson and the Sea Sheppard arseholes. They are the worst type of "activists" there are. They get celebrities on board by saying they need their money to stop the awful seal hunt in Newfoundland, Canada ( seriously how many of these people can even spot the place on a map!), come up here and show some videos from the 1970's of how horribly these seals are treated by us barbarians as a part of their propaganda campaign aimed at Americans and Europeans who know no better. I guess it's alot easier to pick on people who live below or just above the poverty line then big corporations. The funny thing is they go crying all the way home when they deliberately provoke confrontations with the seal hunters and end up getting a few shells put into their boat by mistake :grin:

They have absolutely no idea as to what they are talking about least of all the social and economic conditions that force people to earn such a dangerous living anyway. Yes those people up on the Northern peninsula must hate seals so much and must be so blood thirsty that the are willing to eek out a very meager living by working in some of the most dangerous conditions possible just to stick it to those seals ;)1 . It could not possibly have anything to do with the fact that it is one of the very few ways that these people can earn enough money to keep their family going for another year now could it? But of course these upper middle class trust fund babies that make up the large portion of PETA would not understand that. Their more or less openly admitted prejudices of people from the island i call home do not exactly endear me to them to say the very least.

I have nothing against someone becoming a vegetarian because of health reasons and i have been one myself at various points actually. But i just can't do without my fish n chips, hamburgers and steaks :(

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

I'm an existential and moral nihilist.

I believe that Communism and Anarchism are ultimately baseless ideologies just as Christianity, Capitalism, Imperialism, and Science. I think that all systems, despite their appeals to rationality or logic, are fundamentally grounded on subjective value judgements that the individual has little active control over. I think there should be more recognition of the theoretical limitations of worldviews and skepticism to ideas in general.

The ideal of anarchism appeals most to me, but I do not limit myself to speculation on communist varieties. I don't think there's any inherent wrong in Capitalist, Egoist, or Communist interpretations, though I've had a lifelong predilection for certain Leftist values.

I feel as though my views will not be loved :cool:

I think most Marxists are metaethical nihilists (see Trotsky's "Their Morals and Ours") and existential nihilists. That said, I think few Marxists (or anarchists) would agree with the rest of your post: science is simply a useful way of understanding the world ("the proof of the pudding is in the eating", since I'm quoting Marxist classics) and communism "is justified" because of the material conditions, not some spiritualist "objective morality", whatever that might be.

[LOLseph Stalin]

Oh, I thought of another one finally(aside from my compromising my own views). I often put human rights ahead of animal rights since I feel it's natural to care first about the fate of your own species than that of another species. With that said, I am not active in animal rights/liberation movements nor do I care to be(with the one notable exception of anti-declawing movements).

With that said, it's not to say I don't care about animal rights, just that it can be the next step after humans are liberated. I feel like more people would care about animal rights in a post-revolutionary society anyway since human rights would no longer be a concern.

[Luís Henrique]

I often put human rights ahead of animal rights

Frankly, I have never met any leftist that didn't. It must be one of the most popular views among the left.

Luís Henrique

[LOLseph Stalin]

Frankly, I have never met any leftist that didn't. It must be one of the most popular views among the left.

Luís Henrique

Hmm...must be a liberal thing then to be passionate about animal rights. I've actually been attacked and called a specist for caring about human rights first.

[NoOneIsIllegal]

Hmm...must be a liberal thing then to be passionate about animal rights. I've actually been attacked and called a specist for caring about human rights first.
Yeah, I've come across that from a handful of liberals who were vegans. Even when I was a vegan I was often at opposite ends of other vegans; they can be an odd bunch.
I still love me some vegan Thai food any day of the week though. But the whole specist argument is ridiculous if you're an class conscious revolutionary. I do think the meat industry is run in an absolutely terrible way, but it is something I rather tackle after we handle our own problems.

[Fourth Internationalist]

*I guess it's alot easier to pick on people who live below or just above the poverty line then big corporations.

They attack corporations often. Very often. Being poor does not justify killing innocent animals. All forms of animal abuse should be stopped.

[Catma]

My most unpopular viewpoint is that I am, I suppose, a Utopian... I am against the impulse that we can't plan out what society will look like, and therefore the only thing we should be for is the destruction of capitalism. I think it's dangerous and irresponsible to approach the revolution in this manner and opens up many avenues of attack for organized counterrevolutionaries. It is also extremely difficult to argue against something without providing an alternative.

[Quail]

Yeah, I've come across that from a handful of liberals who were vegans. Even when I was a vegan I was often at opposite ends of other vegans; they can be an odd bunch.
I still love me some vegan Thai food any day of the week though. But the whole specist argument is ridiculous if you're an class conscious revolutionary. I do think the meat industry is run in an absolutely terrible way, but it is something I rather tackle after we handle our own problems.
I don't think it is realistic to expect to end all animal exploitation when human beings are still be exploited under capitalism.

[RadioRaheem84]

I feel the same way, so do most normal people.
Only a few weirdos on the left make it a fetish of not being rich or whatever.

Yes it would be very helpful to have a Marxist Soros type who became rich but is dedicated to the systems destruction even if it means losing his fortune. I for one think the radical left needs a strong financial backer.

[Sinister Intents]

I think the fascists after the revolution who want to hold onto their beliefs should be allowed to do so and be treated like any other person. Is this unpopular and reactionary?

I also often think that they should be utterly wiped off the face of the planet en masse.

[NoOneIsIllegal]

I think the fascists after the revolution who want to hold onto their beliefs should be allowed to do so and be treated like any other person. Is this unpopular and reactionary?
uuuhhhhh wut. I'm not sure letting fascists and reactionaries recoup their losses is a good idea...

I also often think that they should be utterly wiped off the face of the planet en masse.
There you go.

[Skyhilist]

Well seeing as humans rights and animal rights are often correlated, I think it makes sense to strive for both at the same time rather than putting one ahead of the other. For example, if you're striving to put an end to the meat industry then you're striving for human rights as well. Why? Because the meat and dairy industries often devastates areas that native people's rely on, for things like cattle grazing. The fact that in the USA we feed 70 percent of our grain to animals instead of people is also very inefficient and perpetuates human starvation. It takes, for example, 16 pounds of grain just to produce one pound of beef. Very inefficient and it only perpetuates hunger. Finally, greenhouse gas emissions from the meat, dairy, and egg industries alone are more than from all transportation combined. Climate change will affect all species, including humans if we do not do our best to slow it down at the very least. So as you can see, in many cases striving for animal liberation IS striving for human rights. That's why I don't think even people who care about their own species before the others should nit over look it.
But honestly, I think even if all this weren't true we'd still have an obligation to right the wrongs that we've made. Animals are now going extinc at one thousand times the natural rate due to humans. I think it's be irresponsible and selfish to let things like that continue to happen even if they didn't have an impact on humans (which they do).

[Lev Bronsteinovich]

I've got a few of these things going on:

I cringe at animal rights activists -- I am anthro-centric, period. I have nothing against animals being treated humanely, but people whose main concern is the treatment of animals set my teeth on edge.

I am against gun control -- I don't want to live in a world where the only people possessing guns are cops and criminals.

I am against age of consent laws, often used very selectively to victimize gay people. Of course I am against any kind of coercive sex -- but that should be dealt with in case-by-case manner. Not by the bourgeois state dictating when and with whom it is proper for a human to become sexually active.

I root for the New York Yankees.

[RadioRaheem84]

[QUOTE=BlackenedSoul;2588976]I think the fascists after the revolution who want to hold onto their beliefs should be allowed to do so and be treated like any other person. Is this unpopular and reactionary?
QUOTE]

That would be tough. I mean at the most it always be a kind of fake free speech thing like how the US obliges communists with "free speech" but will knock the shit out of them if they ever grew beyond their bounds.

[LOLseph Stalin]

I think the fascists after the revolution who want to hold onto their beliefs should be allowed to do so and be treated like any other person. Is this unpopular and reactionary?

I also often think that they should be utterly wiped off the face of the planet en masse.

As long as they're not outright trying to crush the revolution I don't see a problem with this...except it's highly unlikely fascists wouldn't be trying to crush the revolution in order to set up their own ideal society. Of course there's the an-caps too, but they're harmless since they don't believe in force :laugh:.

[LOLseph Stalin]

I am against gun control -- I don't want to live in a world where the only people possessing guns are cops and criminals.


This isn't an unpopular one actually. I know only like two leftists who are for gun control. I personally think it's silly that a leftist out of anybody would be for gun control, but whatever.

[TheRedAnarchist23]

I am against gun control -- I don't want to live in a world where the only people possessing guns are cops and criminals.

Obvious american. Only americans think this way. Here in europe there is gun control, and while the police do carry guns, they don't use them. Here we don't have cases of cops arriving armed and killing someone in cold blood.

[Lucretia]

My most unpopular view in terms of what people engaged in 'mainstream' politics think? That voting for a capitalist party is counter-productive and a betrayal of the working class. Heck, it is sometimes an unpopular view on this forum.

[Domela Nieuwenhuis]

Obvious american. Only americans think this way. Here in europe there is gun control, and while the police do carry guns, they don't use them. Here we don't have cases of cops arriving armed and killing someone in cold blood.

Yeah. And if they carry guns, it's a pistol, not some large ass M16 or a shotgun or whatever!

I am against gun-control, i am for a total gun-ban! But let's not go there.
Also above is not so much opposing ideology because this discussion is raging across every ideology.

[Willin']

That i'm apart of an forum where we are all some bunch of wannabe leftists and we continuously argue about Super Mario vs Colonel Sanders.

[Luís Henrique]

Hmm...must be a liberal thing then to be passionate about animal rights. I've actually been attacked and called a specist for caring about human rights first.

As much as I dislike liberalism, I wouldn't say that such people are liberals either. They look way more like fringe hippies or, more probably, internet trolls. Or perhaps Disney fans with an axe to grind.

Luís Henrique

[l'Enfermé]

I think Football is the most boring sport in the world that isn't played by old gentlemen.

[Luís Henrique]

Obvious american. Only americans think this way. Here in europe there is gun control, and while the police do carry guns, they don't use them. Here we don't have cases of cops arriving armed and killing someone in cold blood.

Yes, they do (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Jean_Charles_de_Menezes), and you have. Their count may be lower, but it is not zero.

Luís Henrique

[Luís Henrique]

I've got a few of these things going on:

I cringe at animal rights activists -- I am anthro-centric, period. I have nothing against animals being treated humanely, but people whose main concern is the treatment of animals set my teeth on edge.

I don't think this is unpopular within the left. We anthropocentrists are a very solid majority in the left - even in the internet left.


I am against gun control -- I don't want to live in a world where the only people possessing guns are cops and criminals.

This doesn't seem unpopular at all. True, among the Brazilian real-life left I am with the majority in opposing gun rights; but here in revleft, I am usually overwhelmed by the people who misbelieve we are going to do a revolution with legally owned guns.


I am against age of consent laws, often used very selectively to victimize gay people. Of course I am against any kind of coercive sex -- but that should be dealt with in case-by-case manner. Not by the bourgeois state dictating when and with whom it is proper for a human to become sexually active.

There are many leftists who agree with you; a sizeable minority to say the least. It is a foolish view, not least because who would deal with such issue in a case-by-case manner would be the bourgeois State, and it is probably rooted in a complete misaprehension of what age of consent laws do (they don't forbid minors from having sex, they forbid grown-ups from having sex with minors); but it is not hugely unpopular.


I root for the New York Yankees.

Now this is outrageous. Where is the Board of Admins?! Restrict, ban, behead, dismember!

Luís Henrique

[a_wild_MAGIKARP]

I'm not as harsh on religion as many communists.

And I don't think white males are nearly as privileged as some people make it sound.

[LifeIs2Short]

The revolution must be non-violent. By this I mean no lethal violence, rioting etc. on the other hand I endorse. As the State answers with violence, it will decrease it's own theoretical legitimacy and further alienate itself from the majority population. Also, the appearance of any sort of vanguard will immediately corrupt a socialist revolution, and the the result will inevitably be just a change in regime. The idea behind a revolution isn't to start with a majority, but rather to achieve the majority in the process.

[sixdollarchampagne]

I'm not as harsh on religion as many communists.

And I don't think white males are nearly as privileged as some people make it sound.

I agree with both points. As a male cauc, with very little prominence in the pecking order, when my brilliant career as an admin assistant ended, I was in the same pay grade that I had been hired in, 3 decades plus, earlier. Where's all that male privilege, when ya need it?

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

Re: Male Privilege
That "male privilege" is in the vast accumulation of unpaid women's labour which defines the condition of women in our society and means you, de facto, have a huge force behind you in all of your engagements with women (whether you are a rapist, or expect her to do your dishes, or not).

Unfortunately, I'd hardly call your veiwpoint unpopular.

As for for me, I'd say my most unpopular belief is that "high tech" will likely begin to disappear with the end of capitalism, as free labour is unlikely to poison its own communities with the mines and dumps necessitated by it. I imagine the replacement of the internet by new and different forms of communication within a century of the end of capitalism (not to mention jets, nuclear power, private automobiles, etc.).

[Raúl Duke]

Unlike some anarchists, many in the US, I really don't like Chomsky too much. I feel that by him sticking to the label of libertarian socialist/anarchist and yet advocate lesser-evil voting and make a false distinction of "really existing capitalism" in relation to capitalism in general (which he did in a recent "In these times..." article), this which pissed me off because it basically gives ammo for legitimacy to "an"-caps and market-supporting "anarchists," really lend to a lot of confusion and misunderstanding what anarchism is about in the US.

It's probably not a so unpopular view here, but in the general world it probably is within those who identify as anarchists in the US.

[Geiseric]

Re: Male Privilege
That "male privilege" is in the vast accumulation of unpaid women's labour which defines the condition of women in our society and means you, de facto, have a huge force behind you in all of your engagements with women (whether you are a rapist, or expect her to do your dishes, or not).

Unfortunately, I'd hardly call your veiwpoint unpopular.

As for for me, I'd say my most unpopular belief is that "high tech" will likely begin to disappear with the end of capitalism, as free labour is unlikely to poison its own communities with the mines and dumps necessitated by it. I imagine the replacement of the internet by new and different forms of communication within a century of the end of capitalism (not to mention jets, nuclear power, private automobiles, etc.).

Nuclear power can create free and greenhouse gas less energy though. Jets and stuff can be useful for things like doctors and other labor to go across the world to do things people at the destintion aren't trained to do, however Capital makes inventions such as combustion engines go to waste, for profit.

[LOLseph Stalin]

The revolution must be non-violent. By this I mean no lethal violence, rioting etc. on the other hand I endorse.

This I disagree with. The bourgeoisie use violence, do they not?

[Tenka]

Though not the least bit revolutionary, and in fact on some issues rather reactionary, George Galloway is a cool old fellow. I just wish his Scottish accent was less diluted.

[Domela Nieuwenhuis]

Nuclear power can create free and greenhouse gas less energy though. Jets and stuff can be useful for things like doctors and other labor to go across the world to do things people at the destintion aren't trained to do, however Capital makes inventions such as combustion engines go to waste, for profit.


I agree, however, you must realise that in about twenty to thirty years there will be no crude oil left (not much anyway), which will inevitably lead to the end of the combustion engine as we know it. As long as we, then, will use other fuels like hydrogen, the production will need the burning of other fuels or the use of alternative fuels.

So it's the engine, the powerplant or both, that will stop burning fuel.

As a mechanic i see a shift towards electric. I think electrical cars will most probably be the future.

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

I don't believe that the proletariat exists as a coherent, homogenous whole and only expresses a collection of economic relations rather than a single social-economic tie. So to me the whole spiel about fighting "subsitutionism" and waiting for the golden day where the entire working class of the entire world rise up all at once to defeat capitalism armed with a vast knowledge of the "correct" Marxist theory, and somehow learn enough administrative information to carry out the construction of a planned economy on an international scale, is nothing more than idealist absurdity.