We communists must destroy racism - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Workers of the world, unite! Then argue about Trotsky and Stalin for all eternity...
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15067630
Donna wrote:lol I don't think you realize that this is the exact same argument that Richard Spencer and Eric Striker have been using since Christchurch.


who gives a fuck, logic is logic no matter who it's coming from. Your idiotic illogical fear mongering argument on the hand is the exact same bad argument that neocons used to massively expand the surveillance police state. So you're the one in fine company without a rational leg to stand on.
#15067634
http://eprints.leedsbeckett.ac.uk/555/7/Blackledge%20on%20MacIntyre%20for%20ACPQ%20Submitted%20Version.pdf
By contrast with MacIntyre’s conception of socialist leadership, it is a great strength of Lukács’s position that he recognised that ‘the class consciousness of the proletariat does not develop uniformly throughout the whole proletariat’. Consequently, a communist party could ‘only be created through struggle’ and in particular through the ‘interaction of spontaneity and conscious control’.69 So while Lukács distanced his ideas from those sectarians who deified the party as ‘the representative of the ‘unconscious’ masses’, he did so without flipping over into the opposite error of embracing a simplistic deification of spontaneity.70 Thus his use of the most contentious term in History and Class Consciousness: ‘imputed consciousness’.71 While often presented as the means through which he did deify the party, this term is best understood as the corollary of Marx’s essentialist model of social class.72 Far from allowing Lukács to slip back towards a form of dualism, it opened a space within which he was able to conceptualise socialist political intervention within the class struggle in a non-emotivist but yet activist way by means of the generalisations about class interests that could be made on the basis of the history of workers’ struggles. For instance, to say that workers have an objective interest in challenging racism even in the absence of an anti-racist movement does not imply imposing the idea of anti-racism onto the working class. Rather, it functions as a generalisation about objective interests made on the basis of previous moments of struggle. This way of thinking about politics opens the door to an interventionist conception of political leadership that escapes the emotivist substitutionism of self-appointed vanguards without liquidating the left into a (retreating) movement.73
#15067640
Sivad wrote:who gives a fuck, logic is logic no matter who it's coming from. Your idiotic illogical fear mongering argument on the hand is the exact same bad argument that neocons used to massively expand the surveillance police state.


Your logic is leaky though. Just because different state actors exploit the upsurge in white nationalism doesn't mean that the latter isn't a real problem.

So you're the one in fine company without a rational leg to stand on.


You're the one regurgitating the shitty takes of Richard Spencer and Eric Striker.
#15067643
Donna wrote:Your logic is leaky though. Just because different state actors exploit the upsurge in white nationalism doesn't mean that the latter isn't a real problem.


how good faith of you to totally misrepresent my point, donna.



You're the one regurgitating the shitty takes of Richard Spencer and Eric Striker.


good faith donna doesn't quite have a handle on logic and critical thinking just yet. don't worry, good faith donna, I'm sure you'll get it sooner or later.
#15067646
Sivad wrote:how good faith of you to totally misrepresent my point, donna.


Please clarify it then. Are you saying that anti-fascist discourse is causing or exacerbating the expansion of the surveillance state?


good faith donna doesn't quite have a handle on logic and critical thinking just yet. don't worry, good faith donna, I'm sure you'll get it sooner or later.


This sort of politics of infantile oppositionism where you blame leftists for literally everything going wrong in your country, including the rise of Nazi terrorism, is more of a symptom of political alienation than the beginning of some inscrutable new stream of thought. It's not. It's called triangulation, it happens during social crises and has become more commonplace since the Trump moment began in 2015. Effectively you are being seduced by third position assumptions but are trying to reconcile and adapt them to egalitarian language. Like a lot of things in US political thought, the ideological landscape you're trying to create is self-contradictory.
#15067650
more good faith "discourse" from good faith donna. :lol:
#15067665
The threat from white supremacist violence does not come from its frequency, but instead comes from the fact that it enjoys a certain amount of public and state support that is not found in other forms of terrorism.
#15067668
The threat from "white supremacist"(maniacs will always find a reason to massacre, ideology is incidental) violence comes from woketard progs trying to use it as an excuse to censor the internet, pass hate speech laws, give the reactionary deep state more power to surveil us and violate our civil liberties, etc.

77 deaths total, and that's every Western country combined(North America, Western Europe, and Oceania).
#15067672
Pants-of-dog wrote:There is no acceptable number of people being killed by racist terrorists.


That's like saying there's no acceptable number of people being killed by bee stings. :knife: The deaths are tragic but shit happens and there's no way to prevent it from happening short of mass systemic civil liberties violations. We don't amputate our appendages to prevent bee stings and we don't gulag society to prevent vanishingly rare mass shootings.
#15067709
Sivad wrote:That's like saying there's no acceptable number of people being killed by bee stings. :knife: The deaths are tragic but shit happens and there's no way to prevent it from happening short of mass systemic civil liberties violations. We don't amputate our appendages to prevent bee stings and we don't gulag society to prevent vanishingly rare mass shootings.


lol 320% uptick in far-right killings over 4 years but "shit happens" and "woketards" are to blame. Please tell us how you're not gate keeping for the fash and are a true progressive with black and Hispanic friends etc. :excited:
#15067741
Sivad wrote:That's like saying there's no acceptable number of people being killed by bee stings. :knife: The deaths are tragic but shit happens and there's no way to prevent it from happening short of mass systemic civil liberties violations. We don't amputate our appendages to prevent bee stings and we don't gulag society to prevent vanishingly rare mass shootings.


You do not have an argument.

Goodbye.
#15067765
Wulfschilde wrote:It’s a psychological thing that if every man, woman and child has a gun, mass shootings will end. Isn’t it called mutual assured destruction or something?


If that was true, why does America have such a high fatalities with guns rate?

I would say poverty is a bigger factor.
#15067769
Wulfschilde wrote:I don’t understand why we should want to disarm people though, wouldn’t that mean disarming people of color too? Then wouldn’t they be defenseless against the cops? We need guns to carry out the revolution


The solution would be to not arm to begin with and that would include cops. That is if you want to prevent gun deaths. Otherwise you tend to have mutual destruction because there is a class divide in America. The problem being one class thinks if you have nothing to lose you can only gain whilst the other thinks I must protect what I have which are principles that move away from mutual assured destruction theory as the equilibrium isn't balanced.

Nonetheless is you are talking about revolution then perhaps weapons have their place. But so does Satyagraha. Although I would say the biggest factor in a successful revolution isn't violence but in numbers that support it as shown relatively recently in the Orange Revolution.
#15067774
Wulfschilde wrote:So we disarm the cops and then beat them to death?


:lol:

Sure, if your aim is to kill cops.

Nonetheless I was only discussing why arming everyone doesn't result in less gun deaths - as thinking MAD has any relevance in this is exactly the kind of bullshit the NRA would say. Stats don't lie. Compare Gun fatalities with America to Europe and you can clearly see that flooding a nation with guns results in more deaths not less.
#15067778
B0ycey wrote:
this is exactly the kind of bullshit the NRA would say.



I was a NRA member in the early 70s. There was gun legislation in Congress. Back then, I didn't pay attention to politics, I learned about the dirty tricks the NRA was pulling from friends that were in the NRA.

Which is when I quit.
So how deadly is it?

I love how it's not just severe comorbidities, it[…]

The whole "The Dems are so unhappy people are[…]

I am very interested to know what you think about[…]

Sanders should be remembered as a wimp and a jerk[…]