What examples of liberalism can we see among leftists? It's cool to point these out so that we know when they come up and can avoid them ourselves maybe. Also a fun game. Here's a few to start. Debate is encouraged 1. "Stalin killed millions of people." Irrational hatred of socialist regimes due to the huge death toll attributed to them by the bourgeoisie. 2. Rejection of entire national liberation movements because they sometimes kill civilians
1. "Troops out of Iraq, into Afghanistan!" 2. "Support the troops". 3. Being anti-corporate, as opposed to Anti-capitalist. 4. Paternal, humynitarian racism and national chauvenism ( the urge to "bring democracy" to various countries, appeals for military inventions to "Save these people from themselves" ie.Darfur)
Obvious one: There are real, substantial differences between M-Ls and Trots; none of these have to do with whether or not Stalin (or Trotsky) was an okay guy, a horrible criminal, etc., but it's always, always what the "arguments" boil down to. Marxists should be able to say that Trotsky was a wonderful man and remain M-Ls nonetheless, or that Stalin was a great person doing his best without their Trot credentials being revoked, and all should agree that these opinions are irrelevant.
Hatred of "consumerism", like why are you so attached to things, maaaaaan
While there's reason to be critical of a mass culture infused with bourgeois ideology, this is often a mask for (or abandoned in favor of) a hatred of the "mainstream" qua popular, a contempt for the "homogenous", "stupid" "masses" etc. A lot of kids glom onto Marx so they can stroke themselves over what heroic individuals they are for breaking from the lockstep of blahblah
"Free Tibet" To people who are in favor of this, I have a request and a question. 1. Find Tibet on a map for me. 2. Do you know anything about what Tibet was like before China? Anything at all? No? Didn't think so.
1. Constant moaning about human rights. 2. Insane fear of Islam becoming the dominant religion of the first world, as if the currently dominating religion of the first world is any better. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-3X5hIFXYU)
So you are honestly promoting the political tactics of the bourgeoisie to serve the ends of proletarian revolution? Moralism to the point of downright superstition, use ye not ye tooles of ye deville etc.
Hahaha. Yeah also post links to relevant threads and posts. http://www.revleft.com/vb/green-part...862/index.html
Yeah, I saw that thread. Does the OP have any idea what he's talking about?
Howard is fantastic, I fucking love that we have someone too liberal for RevLeft
We finally have someone too liberal for revleft? I would have never thought we get one.
We finally have someone too liberal for revleft? I would have never thought we get one. I think it happens plenty of time, but Howard is finally someone in revleft that is so liberal never seen before in revleft.
The Pol Pot thread made me realize that, no matter what the contents of this article, its very title is, for a liberal, a slap in the face to the Human Spirit. What happened in Cambodia wasn't a result of things "going wrong", there's nothing to be "explained" -- there was just evil, pure and simple. Evil happened, and explaining it (even if only to prevent it happening again) is tantamount to justifying it, and an insult to all those people who died
Yes, the Evil Man Theory of history, that people like Stalin and Pol Pot are just pure evil and do all they can to kill as many people as possible, defying material conditions and any kind of logic.
Supporting the states disarming of the working class as well as calling on the state too restrict political demonstrations and parties (which can only backfire for the left).
What's with Pol Pot? I completely reject his "contributions" and I find it disturbing his image is used for this group at all.
What's with Pol Pot? I completely reject his "contributions" and I find it disturbing his image is used for this group at all. I'd suggest you read this thread, comrade PF's replies in particular. Pol Pot's image is used because it pisses off liberals, I assume.
This is correct.
1. Constant moaning about human rights. And this is bad because? Supporting the states disarming of the working class as well as calling on the state too restrict political demonstrations and parties (which can only backfire for the left). This.
And this is bad because? Not perhaps bad in itself, but naĆ*ve as hell. Human rights are not universal, and usually matters of oppinion. Communists have always prioritized food, housing and healthcare as human rights above freedom of speech, freedom of movement and such. Reasons for this are quite obvious and it is very liberal of a person to think in some kind of "god given" right. Rights are fought for and not given by some abstract entity, whether god or state.