We communists must destroy racism - Page 3 - 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.
#15067787
Donna wrote:
Good luck getting Rich to engage in a conversation. He's a bit of a ghostly figure.



Good luck getting me to even *see* these updates on-time -- I got wrapped up at that other thread, and am just seeing this one now. Thanks.


---


ckaihatsu wrote:
So this means that you're all for rank-and-file workers and labor unions being able to organize, correct -- ?



Rich wrote:
I do not think that labour Unions overall help the general good, but professional associations also operate monopolies, so I think they should be allowed.



And where do you stand on strikes? Once organized, and no agreement on a new contract can be reached, do you think the workers and their unions are justified in a work stoppage until a suitable contract is proposed?


---


ckaihatsu wrote:
How would 'income redistribution' be done, exactly? As things are now income redistribution happens with 'quantitative easing', supplying public funds to the markets (banks), for the sake of keeping capitalism alive.



Rich wrote:
Pretty much as now. I'd like to see higher Capital gains, Corporation, inheritance and Mansion taxes. we need to combat the race to the bottom on rich people's taxes. Lets start by wiping, Morocco, San Marino, the channel islands and the like off the map as political entities. I'd also like to see a United British and Irish Republic.



So just a splash of Sanders-type populism, huh?

And consolidate the bourgeois state as much as possible. Okay, you may not be running for elections *now*, but we got you covered.


---


ckaihatsu wrote:
There's nothing currently 'wrong' with the world's human population. You're sounding like a Malthusian.



Rich wrote:
I am a Malthusian. The last 200 years are just a blip in a Malthusian world. The environmental damage we're doing to (non -human) nature is just displaced Malthusianism.



Very dramatic. So instead of proposing *technology*-type approaches to change the climate for the better (racks of portable algae tanks everywhere, etc.), we should instead have a species-wide free-for-all as to who gets to live and who has to die. Very pagan. Very 'Wicker Man'.


---


ckaihatsu wrote:
You're showing a preference for political Zionism, which is contrary to your repeated 'laissez faire' pronouncements.



Rich wrote:
I'm fairly pro market. I'm not a (right) Libertarian. I don't believe in absolute property rights. Consistent with this I don't believe in absolute self ownership. I also don't believe in absolute national sovereignty. I am happy to use Good and Evil rhetorically, but I don't believe at least intellectually in absolute morality. I believe however that we have evolved to emotionally believe in absolute morality, although its pretty easy to punch holes in any absolute morality system.



Okay, if 'morality' isn't the determining factor (it's morally ambiguous just to be a consumer in modern society) then whose empirical / objective interests should be *favored* by society? As things are now the state is bourgeois and does much to uphold private property interests, even taking on *warfare* against other countries / entities, for the same.

Do you think things are pretty-much as they should be, or what needs to be improved-on regarding the state and the economy, as they're currently structured?
#15067797
Wulfschilde wrote:
Animals defend their territory from each other because that is how they control the resources in their territory. Bourgeois and capitalists do the same thing because they are animals



I think animals can be forgiven for being opportunistic, as over food and territory, but *people* -- ? No, not nearly as much.
#15067905
Donna wrote:320% uptick in far-right killings


So you're just gonna keep running with that retarded propaganda, eh? I get it, it sounds a lot more serious than 77 deaths worldwide. A 320% increase means the world needs prog larper commanders now more than ever. Antifa assemble! :lol:


but "shit happens"


It does indeed. There are deranged mentally ill people out there and sometimes they go on killing sprees, that's all there is to it. These people aren't stable rational individuals with coherent motives who are operating at the direction of a larger political organization, they're just maniacs doing maniac shit.

When some maniac rams his truck into a Trump registration tent or shoots up an ICE office or a congressional baseball game it has nothing to do with the woketard movement. If they hadn't found the woketard movement they would have used some other political ideology as an excuse. And if it wasn't politics it would have been religion or the particulars of their own personal psychosis, the reasons are meaningless because the ultimate cause is mental illness and not ideology. If it was ideology there would be a lot more incidents.


"woketards" are to blame


...for trying to expand the surveillance police state by hyping a statistically non-existent threat.

Please tell us how you're not gate keeping for the fash


This reminds me of when I used to tell conspiracy theorists that there's no such thing as chemtrails and they start calling me a government shill. They called me a gatekeeper too, I guess fevered minds think alike.

and are a true progressive


I'm not a progressive, I can't stand performative wokeness and militant identitarianism.


with black and Hispanic friends etc.


I didn't say friends, I'm not some over-priviledged prog from the suburbs with a few token brown friends. I grew up in section 8, I lived with these people. I live with them, I work with them(and for them), I party with them, I've been locked up with them. They're part of my family, they're who I am. I got two natives and a mexican sitting on the couch in my living room right now playing Xbox. That's why to me they're not just two dimensional victims to be conveniently exploited for performative woketard politics.
#15067998
Sivad wrote:So you're just gonna keep running with that retarded propaganda, eh? I get it, it sounds a lot more serious than 77 deaths worldwide. A 320% increase means the world needs prog larper commanders now more than ever. Antifa assemble! :lol:


It means that white nationalism as a political philosophy is experiencing a revival in working class communities, on social media and even in mainstream cultural conversations. In our analysis it constitutes a threat to the interests of minorities and marginal people, to proletarian solidarity, and to civil society.


It does indeed. There are deranged mentally ill people out there and sometimes they go on killing sprees, that's all there is to it. These people aren't stable rational individuals with coherent motives who are operating at the direction of a larger political organization, they're just maniacs doing maniac shit.


There's a difference between someone who carries out a massacre for abstract or subjective reasons (e.g. Las Vegas, Sandy Hook) and someone who deliberately targets an identifiable group within our social reality (e.g. the Pittsburgh synagogue killings, the El Paso shooting, or the /pol/-inspired Christchurch massacre).

It's also spectacular that you're in denial that there exists a very real category of criminal that murders people purely out of racial resentment.

When some maniac rams his truck into a Trump registration tent or shoots up an ICE office or a congressional baseball game it has nothing to do with the woketard movement. If they hadn't found the woketard movement they would have used some other political ideology as an excuse. And if it wasn't politics it would have been religion or the particulars of their own personal psychosis, the reasons are meaningless because the ultimate cause is mental illness and not ideology. If it was ideology there would be a lot more incidents.


The reality though is that leftists are far less prone to terroristic violence. The scenarios that you described are highly unlikely to occur. Can the same be said about El Paso or Christchurch? I don't think so.


...for trying to expand the surveillance police state by hyping a statistically non-existent threat.


Let me guess, the left is also to blame for the Patriot Act. :p

But this is a weak argument even if we give it the benefit of the doubt (which is difficult because the surveillance state has already enjoyed two decades of Islamist terrorism for any number of pretexts). Just because the surveillance state recuperates and co-opts the appearance of anti-fascism and anti-racism does not mean that this cynicism should be yielded to.


I'm not a progressive, I can't stand performative wokeness and militant identitarianism.


No one asked.


I didn't say friends, I'm not some over-priviledged prog from the suburbs with a few token brown friends. I grew up in section 8, I lived with these people. I live with them, I work with them(and for them), I party with them, I've been locked up with them. They're part of my family, they're who I am. I got two natives and a mexican sitting on the couch in my living room right now playing Xbox. That's why to me they're not just two dimensional victims to be conveniently exploited for performative woketard politics.


A bit rich coming from someone who just chastised "woketards" for tokenism. Whatever your politics are, it would be nice if they had some internal coherence instead of it being this internet melodrama where you have to make redundant statements like "I'm not a progressive". It's as if you feel entitled to not reveal what you really think about anything. The reader is made to simply trust your castigation of "woketards" from this throne of mystical insight that you occupy.
#15068339
Donna wrote:
Whatever your politics are, [Sivad,] it would be nice if they had some internal coherence instead of it being this internet melodrama where you have to make redundant statements like "I'm not a progressive". It's as if you feel entitled to not reveal what you really think about anything. The reader is made to simply trust your castigation of "woketards" from this throne of mystical insight that you occupy.



Besides the obvious 'aggressive-passive' behaviorist tactic often used, I've also identified that many non-leftist debaters are simply using *psychology* and don't deal with the subject matter at-hand in any kind of reflective or coherent way.

I posted on this last month:


ckaihatsu wrote:
Also, I think I'll take this moment to contribute a recent thought of mine, that:

Behaviorists need to get the fuck out of politics.


For reference here's this:




Behaviorism vs. Cognitivism

Behaviorism and Cognitivism are two movements in psychology that have significant implications for viewing learning and education. Behaviorism is the study of behavior for the purpose of identifying its determinants. Behaviorism employs mechanism as a fundamental metaphor, which assumes that behavior is governed by a finite set of physical laws. Cognitivism was a reaction to Behaviorism. It is the study of mental processes through the scientific method and abstractions from behavior. Cognitivism employs mechanism and information processing as the principle metaphors for interpreting findings.

The two movements differ particularly in their views on behavior. Behaviorism, whose research subjects were mostly animals, views behavior as an irreducible consequence of environmental stimuli, where as Cognitivism, whose research subjects are often humans, sees behavior as a point from which to abstract the mental processes behind the behavior.



[...]



viewtopic.php?p=15060679#p15060679
#15068510
ckaihatsu wrote:Besides the obvious 'aggressive-passive' behaviorist tactic often used, I've also identified that many non-leftist debaters are simply using *psychology* and don't deal with the subject matter at-hand in any kind of reflective or coherent way.


Quite true. There is an inordinate preoccupation with the task of pinning down the 'type' of person who becomes a leftist or communist and it quickly becomes a Manichaean struggle for differentiation. It is a classic example of superstition-stereotypy on the F-Scale, where the mind is effectively trying to figure out who the out-groups are (creating categories, taxonomies, etc.) in an attempt to partition the mists of history. My hope is that Sivad comes around to realize that the content of leftism is larger than the Lacanian psychodrama playing itself out on American college campuses.

What is genuine is proved in the fire, what is false we shall not miss in our ranks. The opponents must grant us that youth has never before flocked to our colours in such numbers, ... in the end, one will be found among us who will prove that the sword of enthusiasm is just as good as the sword of genius.

Engels, Anti-Schelling (1841)
#15068541
Donna wrote:
Quite true. There is an inordinate preoccupation with the task of pinning down the 'type' of person who becomes a leftist or communist and it quickly becomes a Manichaean struggle for differentiation. It is a classic example of superstition-stereotypy on the F-Scale, where the mind is effectively trying to figure out who the out-groups are (creating categories, taxonomies, etc.) in an attempt to partition the mists of history. My hope is that Sivad comes around to realize that the content of leftism is larger than the Lacanian psychodrama playing itself out on American college campuses.

What is genuine is proved in the fire, what is false we shall not miss in our ranks. The opponents must grant us that youth has never before flocked to our colours in such numbers, ... in the end, one will be found among us who will prove that the sword of enthusiasm is just as good as the sword of genius.

Engels, Anti-Schelling (1841)



Yes, and good to hear, Donna.

I chalk-up this mindset you're describing to 'tribalism', pardon the expression -- it's meant to convey a *non*-materialist, feudalism/pastoralism-type groupthink group identity and hierarchical individual social ranking as being the basis for a person's socio-political consciousness, even in the present-day.


G.U.T.S.U.C., Individualism - Tribalism

Spoiler: show
Image



Unfortunately the retro mindset is (obviously) *outdated*, and was as soon as people were technologically equipped to live independently, something that happened sometime in the 19th century, give-or-take, and not for everyone, of course.
#15068888
Donna wrote:It means that white nationalism as a political philosophy is experiencing a revival in working class communities, on social media and even in mainstream cultural conversations. In our analysis it constitutes a threat to the interests of minorities and marginal people, to proletarian solidarity, and to civil society.


yeah, like I said, you're hyping it for political traction. What, you think you're the first bunch of political zealots to wildly exaggerate a threat just to panic the herd into your own corral? :lol:


There's a difference between someone who carries out a massacre for abstract or subjective reasons (e.g. Las Vegas, Sandy Hook) and someone who deliberately targets an identifiable group within our social reality (e.g. the Pittsburgh synagogue killings, the El Paso shooting, or the /pol/-inspired Christchurch massacre).


Not in those cases there isn't. It's a distinction without a difference.

It's also spectacular that you're in denial that there exists a very real category of criminal that murders people purely out of racial resentment.


I don't deny that, it's just that there's a difference between organized methodical hate and lone freaks who went off their meds and shot up a walmart.

The reality though is that leftists are far less prone to terroristic violence. The scenarios that you described are highly unlikely to occur. Can the same be said about El Paso or Christchurch? I don't think so.


I'd say the two are equally so highly unlikely that the only reason anyone would try to bring them into the "discourse" would be for cheap partisan hackery.

Let me guess, the left is also to blame for the Patriot Act. :p


Well your brand of "leftist" practically invented the mass surveillance state so....


Just because the surveillance state recuperates and co-opts the appearance of anti-fascism and anti-racism does not mean that this cynicism should be yielded to.


Wait, this is priceless, you're saying that just because the surveillance state is using this bogus threat as a pretext for expansion that's no reason for the prog fascisti to stop hyping the bogus threat or oppose the expansion? :lol:

that is some primo prog logic there, boy. just magnificent. :lol:


No one asked.


:lol: did you forget that one post up you accused me of pretending to be a "true progressive"? You're so neck deep in "good faith" "discourse" that you can't keep track of it all.


A bit rich coming from someone who just chastised "woketards" for tokenism.


It's not rich, it's the exact point I was making. :lol: You accused me of tokenism and I'm pointing out that in my social circle if anything I'm the token white guy.

Whatever your politics are, it would be nice if they had some internal coherence instead of it being this internet melodrama where you have to make redundant statements like "I'm not a progressive". It's as if you feel entitled to not reveal what you really think about anything. The reader is made to simply trust your castigation of "woketards" from this throne of mystical insight that you occupy.


This is a how a prog apologizes for calling you a nazi conquistador, they blame the person they unfairly stigmatized for not explaining themselves better to their prog inquisitors. :lol:
#15068893
their solution to everything is mass gulaging. I'm starting to think that it might not be about social justice at all and they just really like gulaging people...
#15068912
In Latin America, the successful socialist revolutions have all make huge steps forward in terms of racial equality.

I think that the success of the revolutions depended heavily on resolving a lot of the racial divides that separated the workinc class.
#15068935
Sivad wrote:yeah, like I said, you're hyping it for political traction. What, you think you're the first bunch of political zealots to wildly exaggerate a threat just to panic the herd into your own corral? :lol:


Our theories and analyses are very much aware of the fact that our tactics significantly weaken the fascist movement. They are unable to do anything in public without getting sniffed out and deplatformed by leftists. But let's not fool ourselves here, their ideas are dangerous because they are exploited by the ruling class in times of crisis and leftists and minorities have a right to defend themselves.


Not in those cases there isn't. It's a distinction without a difference.


Motivation is pretty significant here. It matters to criminologists, law enforcement, lawyers, sociologists, et al. Are you really going to argue that all mass murderers share the same motive?


I don't deny that, it's just that there's a difference between organized methodical hate and lone freaks who went off their meds and shot up a walmart.


You seem to be implying though that lone wolves cannot be motivated by hate-thinc and fascist ideology. I'm not sure why you think this is the case.


Well your brand of "leftist" practically invented the mass surveillance state so....


If you're going to blame the left for surveillance capitalism, at least accuse it of copying the Soviets. :lol:


Wait, this is priceless, you're saying that just because the surveillance state is using this bogus threat as a pretext for expansion that's no reason for the prog fascisti to stop hyping the bogus threat or oppose the expansion? :lol:


Just because the nazis happen to be a threat to the security establishment doesn't mean that the left is responsible for it. Your argument makes zero sense. :?:


It's not rich, it's the exact point I was making. :lol: You accused me of tokenism and I'm pointing out that in my social circle if anything I'm the token white guy.


Fair enough, hyper-tokenism would be more accurate.

...

Meanwhile in Germany:

The Guardian wrote:'Who is there to protect us?' Far-right murders in Hanau spark anger and fear
Many in traditionally diverse area believe security apparatus is not tackling far right with full strength

As the people of Hanau rallied together in the wake of a deadly and racist assault on its community, there were not just whispers filled with fear but also cries for help and shouts of anger.

“We are going through a very difficult time,” said Hidir Karademir, 65, one of more than 5,000 who had gathered at the town’s market square, just streets away from the shisha bar where a racist gunman took the lives of nine people.

“It’s really shocking to see this kind of hatred arrive in the Rhine-Main area, where multiculturalism has been our way of life for decades,” Karademir said. “We want to shape our future together, and if we don’t stand side by side in situations like this, then we’re in trouble.”

Advertisement

In Hesse, multiculturalism is not seen as a modern phenomenon forced on society with the 2015 influx of refugees, as it is in parts of former East Germany. The western state has the most ethnically diverse population in Germany, if you exclude the small city state of Bremen; in Frankfurt, half the population has a migrant background, most of them with roots in Turkey and Poland.

The Turkish and Kurdish community in particular has long been part of the area’s DNA. The novelist Jakob Arjouni’s Frankfurt-set Kayankaya detective novels, about a hard-drinking Turkish-German detective with a broad Hessian dialect, were first published 35 years ago.

“Hanau is a city of migration,” said Newroz Duman, 30, an active member of Hanau’s Kurdish community. “You never have to look over your shoulder here out of fear that someone might spit at you because you have black hair. I’ve been to Saxony, you know – Hanau is different. I’m always happy when I come back here.”

Yet the region is not immune to flashes of far-right extremism either. It was in nearby Kassel that the neo-Nazi Stephan Ernst murdered the CDU politician Walter Lübcke to take “revenge” for his pro-refugee views in June last year. The city was also where a rightwing extremist terror network, the National Socialist Underground (NSU), murdered 21-year-old Halit Yozgat in his family’s internet cafe in 2006.

Speaking in Hanau market square on Thursday evening, the German president, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, said the terror attack had inflicted a “deep wound” on the town’s community. But for many people this week’s events have merely reopened a wound that had been festering since the true extent of the NSU killings was exposed in 2011.

Initially ignored as the result of local gang warfare and belittled as “doner murders”, the NSU murders left behind lingering distrust of the state government that flared again during Thursday’s wake. As the state premier, Volker Bouffier, took to the microphone, there were chants of “Release the NSU files” from the crowds.

Many of Germany’s domestic intelligence agency’s files on the activities of the NSU have been destroyed under dubious circumstances, and a 2014 report into Yozgat’s murder has been restricted from public view for 120 years.

“Today they say ‘never forget’, and tomorrow they will have forgotten the victims just like they did with the NSU,” muttered one young Turkish-German man in the crowd.

For people such as Karademir, the real concern is not that there are individuals in Hanau who hold rightwing extremist views, but that Germany’s security apparatus is not giving its full strength to protecting his community.

“Our biggest fear is not that there are people out there who hate us, but that rightwing extremists have infiltrated the institutions who are meant to protect us, like the police or the domestic intelligence agencies.”

Germany’s ex-spy chief Hans-Georg Maaßen, a CDU politician, has been publicly agitating for a hard-right policy turn in Angela Merkel’s party since being sacked by the chancellor, raising questions about the domestic intelligence agency’s priorities under his watch. “That someone like Hans-Georg Maaßen was able to be at the top of the federal office for the protection of the constitution, that’s scary,” said Karademir.

“What we are afraid of are not the people you can recognise as neo-Nazis in the street,” said Duman. “It’s the Nazi sympathisers in official functions that scare us. Who is there to protect us?

“Again and again we hear that the kind of people who carry out these attacks were being watched by intelligence agencies. Why were they not arrested? I want the state to take these rightwing extremist networks apart.”

On Friday morning Duman had come to the Kurdish cultural centre on the eastern outskirts of Hanau. Hundreds had visited the small club house since Wednesday night to support the family of 22-year-old Ferhat Ünvar, one of the victims of the attack.

The community had asked police for two buses to take friends and family to escort them to Thursday night’s wake in the market square, maybe even to say a few words from the podium, Duman said. Their request was not granted. In the end, only three politicians addressed the crowds. The names of the nine victims were not mentioned.
#15069010
Far-right AfD plays role of kingmaker in German state election

By Christoph Vandreier
7 February 2020

For the first time since the end of the Third Reich, a state premier was elected on Wednesday with the votes of a far right, fascist party, the Alternative for Germany (AfD). An alliance of three parties, the AfD, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and the neo-liberal Free Democratic Party (FDP), enabled FDP politician Thomas Kemmerich to assume the highest political post in the state of Thuringia, formerly part of the German Democratic Republic (East Germany). Twenty-two of the 45 votes for the new premier came from members of the AfD, the second largest parliamentary group in the state.

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/0 ... r-f07.html
#15069105
Donna wrote:Our theories and analyses are very much aware of the fact that our tactics significantly weaken the fascist movement.


What's with the rote responses in the first person plural? Why are you talking like the borg?


You seem to be implying though that lone wolves cannot be motivated by hate-thinc and fascist ideology. I'm not sure why you think this is the case.


I think their mentally ill minds can latch on to those ideas but it's not the ideas driving them, it's the mental illness.


Just because the nazis happen to be a threat to the security establishment


The nazis aren't a threat to the establishment. All terrorism is way over-hyped by the establishment as a pretext for mass civil liberties violations.


Fair enough, hyper-tokenism would be more accurate.


that wouldn't be accurate either. Tokenism is a woketard fetish. I don't patronize brown people by telling them all their problems are due to racism and I don't festishize them as two dimensional victims of white supremacy. I don't cynically exploit them for my bullshit politics and I don't hangout with them just to up my prog cred with the other woketards.
#15069183
Sivad wrote:What's with the rote responses in the first person plural? Why are you talking like the borg?


I was drinking last night. Under the influence I become very "party-minded". ;)

I think their mentally ill minds can latch on to those ideas but it's not the ideas driving them, it's the mental illness.


When people like Brenton Tarrant or Anders Breivik attach lengthy political diatribes to their actions (which egregiously targeted Muslims and social democrats), it enters a completely a different category of criminality and violence precisely because it is the opposite of criminal insanity: it is violence that attempts to manipulate what is real, and more specifically, attempts to consciously usurp the traditional monopolization of violence by the state. For this reason political terrorism cannot be chalked up to "mental illness". I feel this is another maga-country talking point that has stuck to your brain like fly tape because you've spent years debating milquetoast cultural issues like gun rights.

The nazis aren't a threat to the establishment. All terrorism is way over-hyped by the establishment as a pretext for mass civil liberties violations.


They are a threat to the security apparatus. Do you think things like Christchurch or El Paso reflect well on intelligence and policing communities?

that wouldn't be accurate either. Tokenism is a woketard fetish. I don't patronize brown people by telling them all their problems are due to racism and I don't festishize them as two dimensional victims of white supremacy. I don't cynically exploit them for my bullshit politics and I don't hangout with them just to up my prog cred with the other woketards.


You keep talking about yourself as if you have a bit of a guilty conscience. You know in your heart-of-hearts that America has a sublime racial hierarchy that is unjustifiable and glares like a sore thumb in times of social crisis. You just won't admit it because it means more work for yourself.
#15069198
Donna wrote:You keep talking about yourself as if you have a bit of a guilty conscience.


Do you see the game good faith donna's playing here? She slanders me with a series of bogus accusations and when I defend myself against her baseless slanders, good faith donna claims that the very act of defending myself is evidence of my guilt.

This is how these prog inquisitors work. They're slippery as fuck and they have no shame.


This is the shape of things to come if we ever let these progs get out of hand. They'll go on a grand inquisition and turn society into one giant struggle session where everyone is guilty until they prove their innocence but nobody can prove their innocence because the judge and jury are all fevered cultists worked up into a mass ideological frenzy.
#15069297
Sivad wrote:
Do you see the game good faith donna's playing here? She slanders me with a series of bogus accusations and when I defend myself against her baseless slanders, good faith donna claims that the very act of defending myself is evidence of my guilt.

This is how these prog inquisitors work. They're slippery as fuck and they have no shame.


This is the shape of things to come if we ever let these progs get out of hand. They'll go on a grand inquisition and turn society into one giant struggle session where everyone is guilty until they prove their innocence but nobody can prove their innocence because the judge and jury are all fevered cultists worked up into a mass ideological frenzy.



Since you asked, what *I'm* seeing here is a *personalization* of political issues, much like what Trump does with his cult of personality.

Politics is supposed to be about *societal issues*, and not about this-or-that personage unless it's an official exercise of some kind of power that's too imposing on others.

What's happening these days, and from the likes of you, Sivad, and others here at PoFo, is a *personalization* of the tensions that mount in the raising of certain *political* issues. Personalism is a gateway to strongman-cult, *fascist* cultural obsession that *dispenses-with* the body-politic altogether, in favor of a feudal-like fealty worship of monarchy as a replacement for mass democratic-minded dealing with social issues in common.

If you want to be taken seriously around here, Sivad, you need to talk about *politics*, which is what this board is set up for -- if you continue to prefer to characterize exchanges into a he-said-she-said-type drama, you should be writing soap opera scripts instead. Your time will be better-spent that way.

That said, you've reminded me of Maoism a little bit, so here's some material on that:



Cultural Revolution

The theory of the Cultural Revolution states that the proletarian revolution and the dictatorship of the proletariat does not wipe out bourgeois ideology—the class-struggle continues and even intensifies during socialism, therefore a constant struggle against these ideologies and their social roots must be conducted. Cultural Revolution is directed also against traditionalism.



Differences from Marxism

The two differences between Maoism and Marxism are how the proletariat are defined and what political and economic conditions would start a communist revolution:

For Karl Marx, the proletariat were the urban working class, which was determined in the revolution by which the bourgeoisie overthrew feudalism.[22] For Mao Zedong, the proletariat were the millions of peasants, to whom he referred as the popular masses. Mao based his revolution upon the peasants, because they possessed two qualities: (i) they were poor, and (ii) they were a political blank slate; in Mao's words, “A clean sheet of paper has no blotches, and so the newest and most beautiful words can be written on it”.[23]

For Marx, proletarian revolution was internally fueled, by the capitalist mode of production; that, as capitalism developed, "a tension arises between the productive forces and the mode of production".[24] The political tension between the productive forces (the workers) and the owners of the means of production (the capitalists) would be an inevitable incentive to proletarian revolution, which would result in a Communist society as the main economic structure. Mao did not subscribe to Marx's proposal of inevitable cyclicality in the economic system. His goal was to unify the Chinese nation and so realize progressive change for China in the form of Communism, hence, revolution was needed as soon as possible. In The Great Union of the Popular Masses (1919), Mao said: "The decadence of the state, the sufferings of humanity, and the darkness of society have all reached an extreme".[25]



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maoism
#15069492
ckaihatsu wrote:Since you asked, what *I'm* seeing here is a *personalization* of political issues, much like what Trump does with his cult of personality.

Politics is supposed to be about *societal issues*, and not about this-or-that personage unless it's an official exercise of some kind of power that's too imposing on others.

What's happening these days, and from the likes of you, Sivad, and others here at PoFo, is a *personalization* of the tensions that mount in the raising of certain *political* issues. Personalism is a gateway to strongman-cult, *fascist* cultural obsession that *dispenses-with* the body-politic altogether, in favor of a feudal-like fealty worship of monarchy as a replacement for mass democratic-minded dealing with social issues in common.

If you want to be taken seriously around here, Sivad, you need to talk about *politics*, which is what this board is set up for -- if you continue to prefer to characterize exchanges into a he-said-she-said-type drama, you should be writing soap opera scripts instead. Your time will be better-spent that way.

That said, you've reminded me of Maoism a little bit, so here's some material on that:


good thing you used asterisks to put emphasis on random words because otherwise I would have taken you for a crank.
#15069526
Sivad wrote:
good thing you used asterisks to put emphasis on random words because otherwise I would have taken you for a crank.



Yeah, did you get that insult from the kids you hang around with? They're just going to get more candy out of you in the long run.

How many of you conservatives have investments? A[…]

1. On the ''Socialism'' sub-forum, about Israel. […]

@B0ycey said: The simple matter is we do not […]