This thread is permanently archived
The sad state of political debates

| In reality, other than in the fears of dominant (neo-)liberal and far-right propaganda, world politics is not dominated by evil communists and socialists.
It's the opposite case: Since the eighties and finally the nineties world politics is dominated by neoliberalism which transforms with each crisis more and more into neo-fascism. While chauvinistic religious fundamentalists, nationalists and racists movements slowly gain more and more power...

| ...socialist, social democratic and communist movements are either powerless like never before or they gave up their goals in favour for neoliberalism or even more autocratic forms of capitalism. But thanks to the long ongoing and combined power of liberal, neoliberal, conservative and far-right propaganda campaigns the general perception is massively distorted. For example in "my" country, germany, this led to the absurd situation that whacky racist theories, ...

| ...which even made their comeback into the parliament, are seen as equally "controversial" like much more serious and reasonable debates about how to deal with capitalism. So it is seen as equally scandalous if the head of a "socialist" youth movement talks about collectivizing big companies as if a far-right representant who sits in the parliament talks about "different reproduction strategies of human races".

| ...
And meanwhile these "liberals" seem to be only concerned about dehumanization when it comes to socializing housing market. It's the same liberals that always cry for lowering labor rights as an act of humanism, for example for a better integration of immigrants into the local labor market.

| >>557522
Dude I was thinking the same thing. They're well intentioned, but they don't realize that the capitalist class is just exploiting desperate people ultimately increasing the leverage they hold over the rest of society. It's the same with outsourcing. Capitalism thrives in the worst conditions for workers.

| i've thought a lot about this but i've never been able to put it into words. thanks for putting it so eloquently

| Yeah, we're just going to ignore the socialists in the games and comics industries. To be fair, any unironic socialist is just a useful idiot for the elite anyway. Whoever's pulling the strings doesn't really change the fact that your ideology is more detrimental to humans than cancer.

| >>557651 the worst part is that these useful idiots actually believe they're superior intellectuals
Maybe that's why they don't see what's happening in mainstream media, because they're so "intelligent" that they stay in their ancient book bubbles avoiding "commoner entertainment" and thinking we still live in the first industrial revolution

| this thread is the sad state of political debates

| >>557651
What do the creators in these industries have to do with anything? It's not like they own their workplaces, or printing presses, or the code they produce. That belongs to the capitalists who actually control the industry. And you didn't really say why socialism is so cancerous so I can't really respond beyond "no u"

| >>557676
I've never seen any socialists deride pop culture. Many contemporary leftist thinkers value it as a tool for cultural analysis. The Frankfurt School first proposed this idea. And sure a lot of lefties can be pretentious and snobby but that isn't a strictly socialist issue and isn't really relevant.

As for being, "useful idiots", you're the ones disregarding the system meant to combat the one that exploits you on a daily basis

| >>557748 here's the problem, you people claim that the system is exploiting me but it is not
If anything, I'm the one exploiting the system by getting an awesome job that pays well and is fun
Most people who feel exploited need to actually grow balls and take risks, every system will exploit you if you expect it to solve your problems for you

| >>557751
That's legit a wholesome ass argument, and I smiled a little bit reading it, but reality is a little more grim.

The goal of a capitalist is to make profits. If they pay employees what their labor is actually worth, they don't make a profit. They break even. Your employer is taking from you every time you clock in. No position as a wage laborer can pay well under capitalism.

There's a reason you're using the word risk btw, and some people can't afford to lose.

| >>557751
Btw, I've heard the "risk taking" rhetoric before, what kind of actions would that even entail

| >>557751 The fact that you like your job is not really evidence of anything, especially since the rest of your posts read like someone who is not happy.
I don't work; my money makes money while I dick around on this board. That is capitalism, comrade; the graft is getting you to think you like working in exchange for, you know, less value than you create.
(Cont'd below)

| >>557775 cont'd
Ever read Why Socialism by, uh, Einstein?

| >>557751
Like....you see that your basic argument is "I feel great, people who don't feel great just need to change their lives by taking risks," right? And that the people you're arguing against have like citations and sources and actual data that back up what they're saying?
Protip: that's because while you're working that job you love the people you're talking to are researching what you're trying to talk about. Neoliberal education is a factory for products like you, comrade.

| >>557759 no one who suggests "risk taking" as an answer for social issues has ever really taken a risk. They mean some capitalist propaganda like "just go get the career you want" and ignore systemic issues like the economy which make such things impossible for people who aren't them. Evidence: if this person ever actually took a risk and, you know, actually failed, they wouldn't be here selling their risk taking as something everyone should do. Would they?

>>aside woes glut

| >>557519 in reality, unless a debate is moderated, fact checked, and has a stated goal of increasing understanding or finding the truth, what "debate" winds up being is usually closer to an exercise in rhetoric and propaganda, which attracts spectators given to groupthink and having their biases catered to. It's why Ben Shapiro always wants to debate actual politicians

| Ok then, capitalism evil hurdur I'm oppressed because I need to work to live and I'll only be happy when I can exploit those who actually want to work and live off their efforts while I smoke cocaine in the beach, cause not having to work is "true freedom" and how the government will keep me supplied with whatever I need to survive is none of my business

| >>557802 how do you miss the point so hard?

| >>557651
>Yeah, we're just going to ignore the socialists in the games and comics industries.
Uh, what, where?
1. Liberals are no socialists.
2. Liberals have much more in common with conservative and even far-right reactionists forces (and vice versa), They only portray themselves as antagonists, but they aren't.
3. There are many communists, much more socialists and mostly social democrats that have neither theoretically nor practically anything to do with socialist ideas.

| >>557651
>[...] the socialists in the [...] industries.
We already know this lie from the historical nazi propaganda back than in germany. They blamed partly capitalists and generally socialist/communists for being all together part of a "jewish conspiracy". They just fooled the working class with racist lies to channel the real existing class conflict. The bourgeois conservative and liberal center parties collaborated with the nazis, and they'll do it again.

| tldr; heil hitler

| >>557821

| >>557940
One doesn't need to be a "marxist" to admit there is much truth in marx/engels analysis and criticism on capitalism. At least much more truth than in racist/nationalist/religious fundamentalist world views.
And at least it is capitalism which failures makes the ideals of marxistoid movements attractive to people. If capitalism would be such a good and fair thing marxist, communist and/or socialist ideas wouldn't be a thing at all.

| >>557940 >>558030
>And at least it is capitalism which failures *that* makes the ideals of marxistoid movements attractive to people. If capitalism would be such a good and fair thing marxist, communist and/or socialist ideas wouldn't be a thing at all.
Unfortunately the same thing applies for religious fundamentalist, nationalist and racist lies, which also become the more popular as well the more capitalism fails.

| I don't know if capitalism works, I don't know if socialism works and don't know if communism works
But let me just say one thing, the only relevant thing that seems to change between the systems is who is the "oppressor" and how they "oppress" people
No matter which you like there will never be an utopia

| >>558030
>one doesn't need to be a marxist to be a marxist

| >>558049
Well, they all somehow "work" in the end. But there are three things that should be considered:
1. Things are not always what they seem to be. Terms like "socialism", "communism", "capitalism" (a.k.a. "free" market) are often and in different ways used for political propaganda by power hungry groups and individuals.
2. There only were (and still are, and probably ever will be) hybrid systems, and no "pure" capitalism, socialism, etc.

| >>558049
3. Assuming that it would be the most reasonable thing to say "in the end the result matters", the previous points make it much more difficult to make a proper analysis, than any kind of political propaganda wants to make people believe.

| >>558050
>Uh, look at me: I'm to dumb to recognize that I just believe in another ideology myself, while I blindly and arrogantly accuse others to be this way.

| >>558030
I was just referencing a Slavoj Zizek qoute.

During the debate with Jordan Peterson. He asked him to prove there were powerful marxists influencing society.

| No offense or anything, I just wasn't expecting that response

| >>d1f38b
There was no offense to you. Even thought I'm no fan of hashtags and Slavoj Zizek, I think this is a very good quote.
I just misused your post as a strawman because you introduced the term "marxists" into this debate, which usually is introduced by people as killer argument to every debate that triggers their red scare 2.0.

What kind of response were you expecting instead btw.?

| Idk dude, "lol?"

| >>558107
Definitely using the term Red Scare 2.0 btw

Total number of posts: 37, last modified on: Sun Jan 1 00:00:00 1557068541

This thread is permanently archived