I'm not exactly a communist...

[MidnightRain]

Hi all,

I was resisting the urge to sign up for membership here since I'm not a communist, but I've been reading threads in this forum and think I might be interested in sharing and discussing ideas with you people, if I'm allowed? I'm very open-minded and am always eager to learn about other people's viewpoints. I used to be an uber-liberal anarcha-feminist when I was younger, and I was fiercely passionate about my beliefs and never thought I'd change my mind about them, but surprisingly, as I got older, my beliefs gradually mellowed, and now I find myself sympathizing with aspects of both left-wing and right-wing ideologies, although I probably still lean more towards the liberal side since I'm pro-gay rights and pro-choice.

Anyhow, I just wanted to be honest about where I stand politically, and hopefully I'll still be allowed have membership at this forum.

Respectfully yours,
MR

[Q]

Welcome :)

If you have political questions, you can ask them in the Learning forum. That's why it's there after all!

If you have questions about your account, don't hesitate to send me a PM or ask here.

Sure you are allowed. Even if you are restricted to a specific anti-revolutionary subforum, you're still allowed to be here. So, what made you drop from the left?

[Popular Front of Judea]

Even if you are restricted to a specific anti-revolutionary subforum, you're still allowed to be here. So, what made you drop from the left?

I can't speak for the OP but the less than inclusive behavior of this forum and of the left in general does become tiresome. “The right seeks converts and the left seeks traitors.” Indeed.

[Per Levy]

I can't speak for the OP but the less than inclusive behavior of this forum and of the left in general does become tiresome. “The right seeks converts and the left seeks traitors.” Indeed.

to be honest, there is allready enough shit on this site without socialdems, liberals, conservatives, libertarians and what not spamming their anti-worker bs in every part of the forum. besides the site is called revleft.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

I used to be an uber-liberal anarcha-feminist when I was younger, and I was fiercely passionate about my beliefs and never thought I'd change my mind about them, but surprisingly, as I got older, my beliefs gradually mellowed
Just curious, why do you think that happened?

[Popular Front of Judea]

to be honest, there is allready enough shit on this site without socialdems, liberals, conservatives, libertarians and what not spamming their anti-worker bs in every part of the forum. besides the site is called revleft.

"This Community is open to all leftists." (Emphasis added) From the 'Forum Rules' that everyone that wishes to a member clicks their assent to.

[synthesis]

"This Community is open to all leftists." (Emphasis added) From the 'Forum Rules' that everyone that wishes to a member clicks their assent to.

Without getting into whether or not reformists and social democrats should be able to post outside of OI, her OP did say that she "sympathizes with aspects of both left-wing and right-wing ideologies." It seems hasty to castigate people for raising the issue before you know what aspects of the right she sympathizes with. I also don't think that the "right wants converts, left seeks traitors" thing is always negative. We live and die by our principles, and that necessarily includes the question of who we associate with.

That said, I'm less and less advocative of restriction as time goes on, because I'm starting to see that OI is kind of a ghost town these days. Five, ten years ago it was much busier and restriction wasn't as big of a deal because there was still a lot of discussion going on there. These days you might as well ban them.

[Blake's Baby]

Hello MidnightRain.

You aren't going to find many people here who are 'supportive of right wing ideology'. Whatever else we argue about, we're pretty much united on 1-people are people; and 2-they're more important than money. So expect plenty of arguments. Having said that, I look forward to debating with you (probably, in the 'Opposing Ideologies' forum, at a guess).

[Q]

Regarding those discussing offtopic board policy stuff: Stop derailing. This is an intro thread. Regard this as a verbal warning.

[MidnightRain]

Even if you are restricted to a specific anti-revolutionary subforum, you're still allowed to be here.

Well, that's unfortunate. So if I see a thread outside of the OI sub-forum that I want to post in, I'd have to say what I want to say by starting my own thread in the OI forum and hope the people in the aforementioned thread see it?


to be honest, there is allready enough shit on this site without socialdems, liberals, conservatives, libertarians and what not spamming their anti-worker bs in every part of the forum. besides the site is called revleft.

I don't think it would hurt to accept a few sympathizers and people who are respectful of your ideology into your discussions. As long as there's respect, flame wars are totally avoidable. Also, while browsing the threads here the other day, I saw people making fallacies in their political arguments, yet those fallacies don't get contradicted because everyone thinks along similar lines. So I think if you allowed for more dissent here, it would promote more intellectual growth for all parties involved.


So, what made you drop from the left?


Just curious, why do you think that happened?

It's not easy to explain, but I guess the short version is that people change? Honestly, I was kind of ignorant when I was younger, and I think left-wing arguments are generally more straightforward than right-wing arguments, so it was easy for me to buy into left-wing ideology back then. I think a lot of you liberals and ultra-liberals are good people with noble ideals, but I find some aspects of far-left ideology naive and idealistic, and wouldn't produce a strong, cohesive society if put into practice. But then, a strong, cohesive society might not even be your goal since you probably value individualism above all else.


"This Community is open to all leftists."

I appreciate your open-minded attitude, but to be honest, I don't really consider myself a leftist anymore.

[Blake's Baby]

Well, that's unfortunate. So if I see a thread outside of the OI sub-forum that I want to post in, I'd have to say what I want to say by starting my own thread in the OI forum and hope the people in the aforementioned thread see it?...

No, because my understanding is that if you're restricted you don't get to see the rest of the board anyway.





... Honestly, I was kind of ignorant when I was younger, and I think left-wing arguments are generally more straightforward than right-wing arguments, so it was easy for me to buy into left-wing ideology back then. I think a lot of you liberals and ultra-liberals are good people with noble ideals, but I find some aspects of far-left ideology naive and idealistic, and wouldn't produce a strong, cohesive society if put into practice. But then, a strong, cohesive society might not even be your goal since you probably value individualism above all else...

Sorry, we're not 'liberals'. Liberalism is a pro-capitalist ideology.

We don't value 'individualism above all else', we're communists. The clue is in the name here. We do want 'a strong cohesive society'. But our strong cohesive society will be made up of everyone in the world.

[MidnightRain]

Sorry, we're not 'liberals'. Liberalism is a pro-capitalist ideology.

Okay, but I meant liberal as in socially liberal or left-wing.


We don't value 'individualism above all else'

But wouldn't you always value an individual's rights over the interests of the collective community?

[Blake's Baby]

'Liberal' doesn't ever mean 'left wing'. At best, it means 'in the centre of capitalist politics'. And some of us don't even consider ourselves 'left wing' as we see 'the Left' as 'the left wing of capitalism'.


EDIT: to make that a bit clearer...

From right to left in terms of pro-capitalist politics, you have a spectrum of:

Fascism - Conservatism - Liberalism - Social Democracy - Leftism (Stalinism, Trotskyism, and some forms of Anarchism)

Then, in a completely different paradigm, you have revolutionaries, who are basically split between Marxists and Anarchists.


What are 'individual rights'?

Humans are social beings. Any 'political theory' that doesn't start from the question 'how can we best get along?' is... nonsense.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

yet those fallacies don't get contradicted because everyone thinks along similar lines.
There are some very significant differences between posters here, and even insurmountable ones.


It's not easy to explain, but I guess the short version is that people change? Honestly, I was kind of ignorant when I was younger, and I think left-wing arguments are generally more straightforward than right-wing arguments, so it was easy for me to buy into left-wing ideology back then.
Fair enough. What, may I ask, is your class background? I didn't become a leftist because someone made good arguments in its favor, I come from a working class background and became class conscious.


I think a lot of you liberals and ultra-liberals are good people with noble ideals
Liberals are reformists who support the capitalist system. It's not a synonym for revolutionary leftists, which is what we are here.

[Q]

Okay, but I meant liberal as in socially liberal or left-wing.
Politically speaking communists are "consistent liberals": We are for political freedom long beyond liberals quit their support.


But wouldn't you always value an individual's rights over the interests of the collective community?Communists stand on the position that in order to free the individual, we have to free everyone. The freedom of everyone is the ensurance of the freedom of the individual.

Under capitalism you need a lot of money to buy "freedom", but this implies and endurance of the status quo and a capitalist form of "freedom" (free markets, etc) which rest on many not being free. We want the revolutionary overthrow of these state of things.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

Yo, I'm the liberal bogeyman who wants to destroy your family and effeminise your children, Boowoo! Egalite, oOoOoOo! Not selling out to nutjob protestant work ethics, woOoOoOoOo! not being a hillbilly bigoted prick, wOoOooOoOoO! I'm against mythical cloud folk and encourage human tolerance, freedom and contact, wOoOoOoOo!

Liberal doesn't even mean anything anymore. It's just a shitslinging term for far-leftists and American eagle-breeders to attack politics juxtasposed to their own.

If I ever find myself called 'liberal' by a neolib conservative trash puddle of filth, at least I know I'm doing something right.

Welcome to RevLeft.

P.s. I am anti-life.

[MidnightRain]

From right to left in terms of pro-capitalist politics, you have a spectrum of:

Fascism - Conservatism - Liberalism - Social Democracy - Leftism (Stalinism, Trotskyism, and some forms of Anarchism)

I understand that, but when I used the term "liberal" I was thinking along a scale like... Totalitarian - Very Conservative - Conservative - Moderate - Liberal - Very Liberal - Libertarian

However, I will refrain from referring you lot as liberals in the future. My apologies for the hasty wording.


Fair enough. What, may I ask, is your class background? I didn't become a leftist because someone made good arguments in its favor, I come from a working class background and became class conscious.

I'm from a lower middle class background, though my family and I have experienced lengthy periods of working class life as well. I'm no fan of capitalism, but communism doesn't seem to be the best solution to me either.


The freedom of everyone is the ensurance of the freedom of the individual.

I've seen right-wing ideologies use similar lines of reasoning to support more authoritarian visions of society. Of course, they have a different idea of what freedom is.

[Thirsty Crow]

to be honest, there is allready enough shit on this site without socialdems, liberals, conservatives, libertarians and what not spamming their anti-worker bs in every part of the forum. besides the site is called revleft.Yeah, the Opposing Ideologies part is more than all a matter of practicality. Let's imagine for a moment that endless bickering of nominally revolutionary currents is joined by incessant debates focusing on the propagation of openly pro-capitalist talking points. Would be kinda chaotic, a real nightmare for mods.

Hi MidnightRain, welcome, and do keep in mind that while your honesty is admirable, you will probably be restricted to OI. You'll be able to read all threads and participate in OI discussions where you can ask questions (OI learning, for instance).

What about those right wing points you kind of agree with? Care to elaborate?

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

I guess I'm interested in how someone who identified as an anarcha feminist doesn't know the difference between a liberal and a communist. Did you just pick up the term and start using it or something? Out of curiosity, have you ever given some cynical speech to a younger person about how you used to do and believe this and that, but now you're older and wiser so bla bla bla centrism makes more sense?

[synthesis]

I understand that, but when I used the term "liberal" I was thinking along a scale like... Totalitarian - Very Conservative - Conservative - Moderate - Liberal - Very Liberal - Libertarian

So by "right-wing ideas" do you just mean you support a stronger state than most leftists? Because if that's the case you might be right at home with some of the Marxist-Leninists here, although you might find yourself having to defend your position on gay marriage and abortion to them.

[Thirsty Crow]

So by "right-wing ideas" do you just mean you support a stronger state than most leftists? Because if that's the case you might be right at home with some of the Marxist-Leninists here, although you might find yourself having to defend your position on gay marriage and abortion to them.
Oh you naughty you.

[ВАЛТЕР]

I bet this character thinks Scandinavian countries are socialist. I doubt you were ever much of an anarchist as you claim. Your ignorance regarding the differences between liberalism and socialism kind of gives that away considering it's pretty basic stuff that people get an early grasp of when entering leftist politics.

[Thirsty Crow]

I bet this character thinks Scandinavian countries are socialist. I doubt you were ever much of an anarchist as you claim. Your ignorance regarding the differences between liberalism and socialism kind of gives that away considering it's pretty basic stuff that people get an early grasp of when entering leftist politics.
How about fucking off?

It's a matter of basic decency not to attack someone who has offered no reason to do so apart from admitting that s/he doesn't uphold revolutionary politics but wants to discuss things. I bet you'll be whining how there's no new inflow of members and that there are few women on the boards (I assume that MidnightRain is a woman from the info on previous anarcha-feminist associations).

[ВАЛТЕР]

How about no.

I'm mocking her because she's trying to present herself as some kind of former anarchist who realized leftist politics were "idealist". When she herself can't figure out the difference between liberalism and socialism. If she wants to discuss things let her, I don't care. I just think it is dishonest to call herself a former anarchist yet call people here liberals. Something that doesn't take too long to figure out the difference between if she is a totally legit former anarchist who was way into anarchism and shit. .

[Jimmie Higgins]

I don't think it would hurt to accept a few sympathizers and people who are respectful of your ideology into your discussions. As long as there's respect, flame wars are totally avoidable. Also, while browsing the threads here the other day, I saw people making fallacies in their political arguments, yet those fallacies don't get contradicted because everyone thinks along similar lines. So I think if you allowed for more dissent here, it would promote more intellectual growth for all parties involved.I don't totally disagree; the contemporary red. left can be too insular in my opinion and in our practical activities, I think we always need to be trying to relate to broader groups of workers.

That being said, RevLeft isn't really for "practical activities", it's a debate and discussion site for rev. leftist politics (and one-on-one internet debates IMO, rarely resolve fundamental disagreements in perspective... I think it's possible, but generally it's a longer process for someone to be convinced and the internet is not as suited to that... at least this is what Facebook has taught me:lol:). Because these politics are a minority view (and one that is either dismissed or dennounced in mainstream capitalist politics) it's useful to have a space to discuss these questions without every thread becoming either a bunch of attacks or repeated arguments about why we think capitalism is harmful and unsustainable. I fully agree with banning fascists, but I wouldn't mind having a more open atmosphere when it comes to refomrists or social-democrats (though I still think there should be a revolutionary-only space for discussion). But at any rate, the majority of the members here appreciate and want a forum like this and I think it's useful... afterall there are any number of places for us to debate non-revolutionaries online and while the left itself might be too insular, in our daily lives it isn't and we are surrounded by liberal and conservative opinions and so that's why we feel the need to be able to discuss amongst ourselves online. If people make straw-figures of liberal or conservative views (although as it is people make straw-figures of other revolutionary perspectives anyway) it's not due to lack of exposure... these views are ubiquitous in capitalist society and most of us held them at one point or another ourselves.

[Jimmie Higgins]

How about no.

I'm mocking her because she's trying to present herself as some kind of former anarchist who realized leftist politics were "idealist". When she herself can't figure out the difference between liberalism and socialism. If she wants to discuss things let her, I don't care. I just think it is dishonest to call herself a former anarchist yet call people here liberals. Something that doesn't take too long to figure out the difference between if she is a totally legit former anarchist who was way into anarchism and shit. .I don't know if we can really determine that here (and I don't think it's appropriate to mock someone in introductions/learning unless it's clear they are trolling).

I recently met someone and they said they had participated in Occupy Oakland and so we talked about it and I said I was a socialist and she said, "Oh well, I'm an anarchist". As we were talking I was getting more and more confused by her statements and asked what she saw as a post-revolution society and she said, "Basically the same now, but no government and no taxes". I don't think she was real-life trolling, she was sincere - I think she was just not that familiar with the politics in depth and was attracted to / inspired by anarchism but in a still superficial way (no government!).

[ВАЛТЕР]

Yeah, you're right Jimmie....I came off elitist.

Sorry about that everyone. Welcome to the forums, feel free to participate in the discussions.

[Blake's Baby]

...
I recently met someone and they said they had participated in Occupy Oakland and so we talked about it and I said I was a socialist and she said, "Oh well, I'm an anarchist". As we were talking I was getting more and more confused by her statements and asked what she saw as a post-revolution society and she said, "Basically the same now, but no government and no taxes". I don't think she was real-life trolling, she was sincere - I think she was just not that familiar with the politics in depth and was attracted to / inspired by anarchism but in a still superficial way (no government!).

It's always possible she'd been fooled by 'an-caps' into thinking that 'anarcho-capitalism' has something to do with anarchism, so she described herself as an 'anarchist' when she meant 'free-marketeer who doesn't want to pay for other people's welfare checks'.

[Einkarl]

To the OP.

Welcome. Please excuse us if some members are coming off as a bit hostile, but you have to understand the political culture and history most of us derive our beliefs. I'd say Marxists (Marxist-Leninists, Left coms, Trots, Orthodox,Classical, etc.) and Anarchists of a Socialist/ Communist or Bakuninist tradition make up the vast majority of users on this site, and it is important to have some understanding of the history of these movements.

Even though we are called "leftists" many of us would prefer describe our politics as "revolutionary"; The thread that binds us is the belief that all humans are equal and that current society and means of production are detrimental to the vast majority of people. As such most of us agree that the solution to these issues is the union of the global working class (the majority) in the forceful overthrow of those few with power that benefit from the current social order. We don't identify with "Totalitarian - Very Conservative - Conservative - Moderate - Liberal - Very Liberal - Libertarian". These terms are meaningless (moderate,Libertarian, Totalitarian ) or synonymous (Conservative & Liberal).

Revleft is a site where revolutionaries can discuss, debate, and bicker among each other, which is why the admins and mods often send "non-communists" to the OI section. But I think you should be allowed to post questions in the "Learning" board if you are at least "left" leaning and legitimately want to learn about theory or history. However if you are here debate or refute arguments, then I suggest you do remain in the OI.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Yeah, you're right Jimmie....I came off elitist.

Sorry about that everyone. Welcome to the forums, feel free to participate in the discussions.

I get what you were saying. I can recall a few times when I younger being talked down to by people in their late 20s or 30s about how they were communists in college but with age they grew to accept that some things just have be this way or whatever, and it was always bullshit because it was clear they didn't know what they were talking about when they were 19 or 20 and so why the fuck should their opinion matter 10 years later? It's like big deal, you mistakenly gave yourself a title as a freshmen in college that you shouldn't have, and now you're going to talk down to me about how silly and idealistic I am? Fuck off, I hope if I ever feel that way I'll be respectful enough to just keep my mouth shut.

Anyway yeah, welcome to the forum hopefully you can learn something.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Yeah, you're right Jimmie....I came off elitist.
.nah... Just troll-weary.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

I like the juxtaposition of "I used to be a leftist" with the conflation of the left with liberalism.

It's like, no, buddy, you were a liberal.

And while I agree that liberal understandings are often simplistic relative to conservative understandings, both are still rooted in the same fundamentally liberal (in the classical sense) understandings.

So when you, OP, say you see the same "fallacies" repeated over and over, I'm deeply skeptical. It's not that I don't agree on some level, but it's that I think you'll find yourself coming up against some pretty developed theory if you try to pull what I think you'll try to pull. There are some folk pretty decently versed in economics and history here: how sure of yourself are you?

[#FF0000]

I don't agree on some level, but it's that I think you'll find yourself coming up against some pretty developed theory if you try to pull what I think you'll try to pull.

Haha, I dunno about that.

(Welcome OP)

[argeiphontes]

I understand that, but when I used the term "liberal" I was thinking along a scale like... Totalitarian - Very Conservative - Conservative - Moderate - Liberal - Very Liberal - Libertarian

It's better to think of any political scale as containing more than one axis. Maybe try the online test at politicalcompass.org (http://www.politicalcompass.org/) to see where you stand? You may belong here more than you think, or more than some others here think.

For example, I'm almost to the negative edge of both the Left-Right and Libertarian-Authoritarian scales, since I consider myself a libertarian socialist. On a single-line scale, that sounds like an oxymoron, but one can support individual liberties and also be a socialist. It belongs in the general 'anarchist' tendency.

(Right-libertarianism would result in absolute private tyranny of corporations and capitalists over private individuals.)

I'm also a market socialist (after reading some Schweickart), which is unpopular here but is still socialism.

edit: A great book about the libertarian socialist tradition is Daniel Guerin's Anarchism, with a nice introduction by Noam Chomsky that places libsoc as the proper inheritor of the (classical, not common-place conception) Liberal and Enlightenment traditions, where it belongs.


I'm from a lower middle class background, though my family and I have experienced lengthy periods of working class life as well. I'm no fan of capitalism, but communism doesn't seem to be the best solution to me either.

There's market socialism, which overturns the capitalist relations of production without being unrealistic or utopian (whatever that word means anymore).

[MidnightRain]

I guess I'm interested in how someone who identified as an anarcha feminist doesn't know the difference between a liberal and a communist. Did you just pick up the term and start using it or something?

There's more than one definition to the term "liberal". It's used many different ways. But like I said, I'll not use the term to describe revolutionaries anymore.


I doubt you were ever much of an anarchist as you claim. Your ignorance regarding the differences between liberalism and socialism kind of gives that away considering it's pretty basic stuff that people get an early grasp of when entering leftist politics.

I was a teenager when I considered myself an anarcha-feminist, and I admitted I was really ignorant back then. I read some materials on anarchist theory, and the stuff made sense to me, but they didn't talk about the difference between terminologies like liberal or anarchist. I just assumed "anarchist" was "very liberal" as opposed to just liberal, since people tend to use the word liberal to refer to politics left of the center on the political spectrum.


Because these politics are a minority view (and one that is either dismissed or dennounced in mainstream capitalist politics) it's useful to have a space to discuss these questions without every thread becoming either a bunch of attacks or repeated arguments about why we think capitalism is harmful and unsustainable.

Yes, I can understand that. However, everyone here should all know I'm not here to convert anyone into what I believe, I'm only interested in contradicting fallacious or overly-biased thinking when I see it.


I can recall a few times when I younger being talked down to by people in their late 20s or 30s about how they were communists in college but with age they grew to accept that some things just have be this way or whatever, and it was always bullshit because it was clear they didn't know what they were talking about when they were 19 or 20 and so why the fuck should their opinion matter 10 years later? It's like big deal, you mistakenly gave yourself a title as a freshmen in college that you shouldn't have, and now you're going to talk down to me about how silly and idealistic I am? Fuck off, I hope if I ever feel that way I'll be respectful enough to just keep my mouth shut.

I didn't mean to belittle your ideology with what I said before. Sorry if it came off that way. I meant I had more exposure to left-wing ideologies when I was younger because its arguments were more accessible to me. It was easy to believe in leftist ideals and feel like I was right because they were so straightforward. Conservatism just seemed so backward and I always reacted to it with a lot of hostility instead of opening my mind to how conservatives think. And the only kind of conservatism I had experience dealing with was American neoconservatism which I still abhor.

While I find communism idealistic -- I find any radical ideology to be idealistic because let's face it, most people are moderate thinkers and would never come to embrace radicalism, at least anytime soon. That doesn't mean I think communism in theory is unintelligent or immoral. In fact, I think the opposite. I wasn't trying to paint myself as older and wiser and intellectually above communism or anything like that. I just don't have that idealistic drive for radicalism as I used to have.


To those who have defended me, thank you. :) I'm not offended by the criticisms and am glad I posted because it has helped me gain better perspective. I'll be sticking around to read more threads here now and then, even though I won't get to participate.

[MidnightRain]

To the OP.

Welcome. Please excuse us if some members are coming off as a bit hostile, but you have to understand the political culture and history most of us derive our beliefs. I'd say Marxists (Marxist-Leninists, Left coms, Trots, Orthodox,Classical, etc.) and Anarchists of a Socialist/ Communist or Bakuninist tradition make up the vast majority of users on this site, and it is important to have some understanding of the history of these movements.

Even though we are called "leftists" many of us would prefer describe our politics as "revolutionary"; The thread that binds us is the belief that all humans are equal and that current society and means of production are detrimental to the vast majority of people. As such most of us agree that the solution to these issues is the union of the global working class (the majority) in the forceful overthrow of those few with power that benefit from the current social order. We don't identify with "Totalitarian - Very Conservative - Conservative - Moderate - Liberal - Very Liberal - Libertarian". These terms are meaningless (moderate,Libertarian, Totalitarian ) or synonymous (Conservative & Liberal).

Revleft is a site where revolutionaries can discuss, debate, and bicker among each other, which is why the admins and mods often send "non-communists" to the OI section. But I think you should be allowed to post questions in the "Learning" board if you are at least "left" leaning and legitimately want to learn about theory or history. However if you are here debate or refute arguments, then I suggest you do remain in the OI.

You're making unfair assumptions about me when you don't really know me.


It's better to think of any political scale as containing more than one axis. Maybe try the online test at politicalcompass.org to see where you stand? You may belong here more than you think, or more than some others here think.

Thanks. I've taken that test before, but it's kind of biased and inaccurate. Not to mention my political beliefs aren't easy to place on a political map.

Also, thanks for the book recommendation. :)

[Remus Bleys]

Welcome Midnight. I believe you to have once been under a false impression of anarchy. What anarchists have you read? Who would you say was the most influential? How active were you (if possible)?

I also believe a certain user has been helping you perpetuate these misinterpretations.

It's better to think of any political scale as containing more than one axis. Like these concretely means anything. :rolleyes:

Maybe try the online test at politicalcompass.org (http://www.politicalcompass.org/) to see where you stand? That site is so left-liberal.

You may belong here more than you think, or more than some others here think. If anyone doesn't belong here it's you.


For example, I'm almost to the negative edge of both the Left-Right and Libertarian-Authoritarian scales, since I consider myself a libertarian socialist.So am I. And I'm a bordigist.

On a single-line scale, that sounds like an oxymoron, but one can support individual liberties and also be a socialist. It belongs in the general 'anarchist' tendency. I believe you to be an anarchist in the same sense Midnight once was.


(Right-libertarianism would result in absolute private tyranny of corporations and capitalists over private individuals.)
Corporations man.

I'm also a market socialist (after reading some Schweickart), which is unpopular here but is still socialism.:laugh:


edit: A great book about the libertarian socialist tradition is Daniel Guerin's Anarchism, with a nice introduction by Noam Chomsky that places libsoc as the proper inheritor of the (classical, not common-place conception) Liberal and Enlightenment traditions, where it belongs.

You do an awful disservice to Anarchism.
Base your political ideology off of some individualist philosophical capitalist mumbo jumbo.


There's market socialism, which overturns the capitalist relations of production without being unrealistic or utopian :laugh:

(whatever that word means anymore).
It's meaning hasn't changed.

[Remus Bleys]

There's more than one definition to the term "liberal". It's used many different ways. But like I said, I'll not use the term to describe revolutionaries anymore.
Thank you.
A liberal is someone who leaves the room when a fight breaks out.




I was a teenager when I considered myself an anarcha-feminist, and I admitted I was really ignorant back then. I read some materials on anarchist theory, and the stuff made sense to me, but they didn't talk about the difference between terminologies like liberal or anarchist. I just assumed "anarchist" was "very liberal" as opposed to just liberal, since people tend to use the word liberal to refer to politics left of the center on the political spectrum. What specifically did you read.




Yes, I can understand that. However, everyone here should all know I'm not here to convert anyone into what I believe, I'm only interested in contradicting fallacious or overly-biased thinking when I see it.These two things contradict. They don't at face value, but we all know what you mean.


I meant I had more exposure to left-wing ideologies when I was younger because its arguments were more accessible to me. It was easy to believe in leftist ideals and feel like I was right because they were so straightforward. Again, I do believe you to be confusing "leftism" and liberalism.

Conservatism just seemed so backward and I always reacted to it with a lot of hostility instead of opening my mind to how conservatives think. And the only kind of conservatism I had experience dealing with was American neoconservatism which I still abhor.Do you think the rest of the world is any better?


While I find communism idealistic -- I find any radical ideology to be idealistic because let's face it, most people are moderate thinkers and would never come to embrace radicalism, at least anytime soon. :rolleyes:
Explain literally every revolution ever.


That doesn't mean I think communism in theory is unintelligentTell me what communism is.

or immoral.
The charges against Communism made from a religious, a philosophical and, generally, from an ideological standpoint, are not deserving of serious examination.

In fact, I think the opposite. I wasn't trying to paint myself as older and wiser and intellectually above communism or anything like that. I just don't have that idealistic drive for radicalism as I used to have.I wasn't saying you were idealistic or that I am smarter than you, but I am smarter than you and you are idealistic.



To those who have defended me, thank you. :) I'm not offended by the criticisms and am glad I posted because it has helped me gain better perspective. I'll be sticking around to read more threads here now and then, even though I won't get to participate.Don't get discouraged my assholish posts and read some theory.

[argeiphontes]

Thanks. I've taken that test before, but it's kind of biased and inaccurate. Not to mention my political beliefs aren't easy to place on a political map.


That's a problem with taking an online test about anything... ;)



Also, thanks for the book recommendation. :)No problem, I just started rereading it myself. Getting in touch with my roots, so to speak, before the internet ruins me completely. ;) Unfortunately I don't see it anywhere online, there are only some of his writings.

An interesting article, that sort of sketches out the social benefits of overturning capitalist relations, is Taking Over the Enterprise (http://www.rdwolff.com/content/taking-over-enterprise) by radical economist Richard Wolff. He also has a great couple of interviews on the Bill Moyers show (http://billmoyers.com/segment/richard-wolff-on-fighting-for-economic-justice-and-fair-wages/). (The follow up is Here (http://billmoyers.com/segment/richard-wolff-on-capitalisms-destructive-power/).)

The type of thing he is describing is not utopian. It's already being done by groups like Mondragon (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondragon_Corporation), though within a more limited ideology. What makes the whole "project" seem utopian is talk of any kind of efficient central planning, which brings up memories of the Soviet Union and its economic and social failures. (To say the least.)

Anyway, enjoy your stay.

[argeiphontes]

If anyone doesn't belong here it's you.

Well, if that's how you feel I recommend that you start a campaign to have me restricted then.

[Remus Bleys]

Well, if that's how you feel I recommend that you start a campaign to have me restricted then.
that would imply i care about you enough to make an effort.

[MidnightRain]

What anarchists have you read? Who would you say was the most influential? How active were you (if possible)?

I can't remember the names, but one book I remember reading about anarchism had a dark green cover and the cover picture I think was of a gun being pointed at a person's head. I tried to look for it on amazon so I could get the name, but couldn't find it. Does anyone know of it by any chance?

I also read bell hooks who was a revolutionary feminist. She actually did make a distinction between liberal and revolutionary feminism, but I didn't make the connection of those terminology differences in relation to communism, because I don't remember her having mentioned much if anything about communism.

I admit maybe I unconsciously exaggerated when I referred to myself as a former anarchafeminist, which I apologize. I guess I wanted to relate to your community and demonstrate my sympathy for your cause, as I was afraid I'd get a "why the f*** are you here" response and get kicked out or something.


These two things contradict. They don't at face value, but we all know what you mean.

No they don't. Socrates was interested in helping people see the fallacies and biases in their logical arguments, yet he wasn't a dogmatic person looking to convert anyone. I'm not comparing myself to Socrates or anything, as he's much smarter than I am. Also, I'm looking to learn from people if they contradict me back when I contradict them.


These two things contradict. They don't at face value, but we all know what you mean.


Anyway, enjoy your stay.

Thanks. I'll look into the resources you recommended. :)

[#FF0000]

sup MidnightRain.

just wanna jump in here and say that, while i understand that you're being hella diplomatic because you want to hang around here for awhile, that I think you'd be totally justified in telling everyone to fuck off.

[#FF0000]

for real you guys are the worst and you don't mean a single word you say. your politics are a scene for you.

[reb]

I bet this character thinks Scandinavian countries are socialist. I doubt you were ever much of an anarchist as you claim. Your ignorance regarding the differences between liberalism and socialism kind of gives that away considering it's pretty basic stuff that people get an early grasp of when entering leftist politics.

So? You probably think that the USSR was socialist.

[RedGuevara]

It's not uncommon to see an intro forum turn into a tirade here. Welcome and educate yourself as much as possible.:) This place offers a wealth of knowledge and always remember to be willing to learn EVERYTHING you can before passing judgement. Hope your stay will warrant you enlightenment.

[Einkarl]

You're making unfair assumptions about me when you don't really know me.

I didn't I make a single assumption about you. You yourself said you weren't a communist and I said that if you're here to learn then I welcome you but if you're here to argue against communism you should stay in the OI.

[Per Levy]

well that escalated quickly, @op: i would suggest in skipping this thread, it will be closed soon anyway i guess. go to OI and start a thread about your views, or ask questions, or just talk about stuff you like and see how it goes from there.

[synthesis]

Introduction Forum arguments/shitshows are by far the best arguments/shitshows.

[Yuppie Grinder]

Everybody chill out.

[Comrade Jacob]

I think we scared him away.

[Remus Bleys]

I think we scared him away.She. She. She. She. She. She. She. She. She. She. She. She. She. She. She. She. She. She. She.

Contrary to what you think, there are women on the internet

[Q]

She. She. She. She. She. She. She. She. She. She. She. She. She. She. She. She. She. She. She.

Contrary to what you think, there are women on the internet

Just because I just saw the We are Legion documentary...

I refer you to rules 29 and 30 of the internet.

Yes, this was probably a bad idea

[Sea]

From right to left in terms of pro-capitalist politics, you have a spectrum of:

Fascism - Conservatism - Liberalism - Social Democracy - Leftism (Stalinism, Trotskyism, and some forms of Anarchism)

Then, in a completely different paradigm, you have revolutionaries, who are basically split between Marxists and Anarchists.I assume you just do this to amuse yourself, yes?

edit: I mean, I totally understand if you were. I shill for Stalin to amuse myself once in a while :)

[Blake's Baby]

No.

Stalinism and Troskyism (and kinds of Anarchism that are tied up with 'national liberation' and/or working for Trotskyists) are the left wing of capital. Your goal is to manage the state, not destroy it.

You think you're 'to the left' of social democracy. We agree. But we're not 'to the left' of you, we're not at the same table, we're not even in the same building.

Which is why Left Communists, Council Communists and most Anarchists (and the majority of the Impossiblists) don't consider ourselves part of 'the Left' in the same what that Stalinists and Trotskyists do - we think of ourselves as revolutionaries.

[reb]

No.

Stalinism and Troskyism (and kinds of Anarchism that are tied up with 'national liberation' and/or working for Trotskyists) are the left wing of capital. Your goal is to manage the state, not destroy it.

You think you're 'to the left' of social democracy. We agree. But we're not 'to the left' of you, we're not at the same table, we're not even in the same building.

Which is why Left Communists, Council Communists and most Anarchists (and the majority of the Impossiblists) don't consider ourselves part of 'the Left' in the same what that Stalinists and Trotskyists do - we think of ourselves as revolutionaries.

I think describing them as being "to the left of social democracy" would be giving them too much credit.

[Q]

No.

Stalinism and Troskyism (and kinds of Anarchism that are tied up with 'national liberation' and/or working for Trotskyists) are the left wing of capital. Your goal is to manage the state, not destroy it.

You think you're 'to the left' of social democracy. We agree. But we're not 'to the left' of you, we're not at the same table, we're not even in the same building.

Which is why Left Communists, Council Communists and most Anarchists (and the majority of the Impossiblists) don't consider ourselves part of 'the Left' in the same what that Stalinists and Trotskyists do - we think of ourselves as revolutionaries.
You're so full of yourself, aren't you?

Anyway, I'm inching towards closing this thread, given it went so completely off the rails. But maybe, just maybe, we can leave it at that and go back on topic.

[Unumundisto]

Midnight Rain:

I, for one, would be glad to hear, and answer, your arguments against socialist &/or communist party platform proposals. ...and the fallacies that you say that you've found.

...in a forum that is intended for that purpose.

I'm new here, but it's my understanding that RevLeft has a forum that is designated for discussion with people who are saying what you're saying.

It's called the Other Ideologies forum (OI). You can find it by scrolling down the RevLeft forum index.

I'll look for you there, and, as I said, I'd be glad to be one of those who answer your arguments, and your claims about fallacies.

By the way, of course, when you say that you've found fallacies, you have a responsibility to be more specific--to share with us exactly what fallacies you're saying that you've found, and why you think that they're fallacies.

Unumundisto

[MidnightRain]

I, for one, would be glad to hear, and answer, your arguments against socialist &/or communist party platform proposals. ...and the fallacies that you say that you've found.

...in a forum that is intended for that purpose.

Thanks for your interest. I'm not really one for starting threads though, because it just feels so dramatic. I like to make replies to other people's threads/posts; it feels more low-key that way. Also, I got way more attention than I was looking for by starting this thread, haha.