Why Are So Many Young People Becoming Socialists? - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

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

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15164442
Socialism is growing people in PoFo,

Please make arguments that challenge this video. If you are going to say things out of ignorance and bullshit trolling like many do? I won't be responding.




He covers a lot of truths. Don't give me lies and falsehoods as answers.
#15164500
Scamp wrote:It's easier than working for many of these lazy trifling bums.


Lol. Lazy and trifling eh? Is that why they graduate from college with student debt promised jobs that never pay much? And a lot of dough they need to pay back? Who took the tests and studied and worked the waiter jobs to pay for school and get it together with internships?

The rich kids aren't lazy @Scamp they work hard....like Jared Kushner. Lol.

Who's rich daddy paid a lot of money to make sure his son got in to college. Competing with the lazy socialists.

Hee hee.

Varsity Blues, the rich and not quite up to scratch made it into the elite universities on some fraud claims of being Native Americans and being good at rowing and rich folks sports. LOL.

You are so invalid on your comment Scamp....

#15164502
Scamp wrote:It's easier than working for many of these lazy trifling bums.

In every generation young people fall in love with socialism. The message is very compelling and appeals to the heart and emotions. Marx was correct in his analysis of the flaws of capitalism, this resonates with the uninitiated young that are coming out of school. These days most colleges teach social justice 24/7. Furthermore, the educators of this era have on purpose ignored the genocides under Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, etc. They also fail to teach that socialism has never worked.

The marketing has changed a lot. IN the old days it was the worker versus the business owner. Now is the non-white versus white. It is an effective message that preaches victimhood much more efficiently. The message also has traction with white people that enjoy the savior complex (an accepted form of white supremacy by the left).
#15164503
Julian658 wrote:
In every generation young people fall in love with socialism. The message is very compelling and appeals to the heart and emotions. Marx was correct in his analysis of the flaws of capitalism, this resonates with the uninitiated young that are coming out of school. These days most colleges teach social justice 24/7.


Julian658 wrote:
Furthermore, the educators of this era have on purpose ignored the genocides under Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, etc. They also fail to teach that socialism has never worked.



As usual you're conflating *state capitalism*, or *Stalinism*, for actual workers-of-the-world socialism, Julian. In *none* of those historical nation-states did the working class actually have control of industrial mass production.

Stalin is best known for *Stalinism*, meaning bureaucratic elitist administration -- certainly not allowing workers to collectively control their own productivity.


Julian658 wrote:
The marketing has changed a lot. IN the old days it was the worker versus the business owner. Now is the non-white versus white. It is an effective message that preaches victimhood much more efficiently. The message also has traction with white people that enjoy the savior complex (an accepted form of white supremacy by the left).



You're implying that the class division, and racism, both do not exist, somehow. The counter-argument to your willful blinkered line is simply the existence of *killer cops*, as seen with the current trial in Minneapolis, around the killing of George Floyd:



John Kelly • 9 hours ago

Another great article with a major flaw.

"The prevalence of police violence in the United States is, at its root, a class question, not a racial issue."

This is inaccurate and unnecessarily divisive. It is BOTH a class issue and a race issue... as anyone who has paid attention for decades should know by now. You could opine that class is a more important component, but to say that at its root it is not a racial issue is an absolute garbage take belied by the facts in the article.

"While racism plays a role, and the most backward and fascistic sentiments are encouraged within the police, the disproportionate number of minorities murdered is primarily a product of police patrolling the most vulnerable and impoverished communities."

And just by coincidence (!), those neighborhoods are often disproportionally filled with black people minding their own business in death cult America. Duh. This type of denial is a bad take for socialists. I reject this completely.

There is no reason to minimize the crimes of racist street executioners by denying or short-shrifting the racist component of policing in a country built on genocide and slavery... especially knowing the origins of policing in the early slave patrols. Not much has changed. I will never reject the class struggle nor the race struggle. They are inextricably intertwined.

I do reject the use of identity politics by DemocRATS as a cynical ploy used by a party of war criminals and capitalist piggies at the trough to gain political advantage without doing ANYTHING to actually address issues of race and class.



http://disq.us/p/2g37jy2
#15164505
ckaihatsu wrote:As usual you're conflating *state capitalism*, or *Stalinism*, for actual workers-of-the-world socialism, Julian. In *none* of those historical nation-states did the working class actually have control of industrial mass production.

Stalin is best known for *Stalinism*, meaning bureaucratic elitist administration -- certainly not allowing workers to collectively control their own productivity.


Translation: That was not real socialism. Got it!


You're implying that the class division, and racism, both do not exist, somehow. The counter-argument to your willful blinkered line is simply the existence of *killer cops*, as seen with the current trial in Minneapolis, around the killing of George Floyd:


Class division is as old as mankind. BTW, also happens among animals. We evolved in tribes and hence tribalism is inscribed in our genes, Sadly tribalism is the mother of all "isms".
#15164506
Julian658 wrote:
Translation: That was not real socialism. Got it!



Thanks -- that's gracious of you.

It's not just for *me*, though -- it also happens to be an important *qualitative* distinction, too:


Political Spectrum, Simplified

Spoiler: show
Image



---


Julian658 wrote:
Class division is as old as mankind. BTW, also happens among animals. We evolved in tribes and hence tribalism is inscribed in our genes, Sadly tribalism is the mother of all "isms".



Well, even tribalism -- in the sense of *pastoralism* / agriculture -- required a *material surplus* to exist, which *hasn't* existed for the vast majority of human existence:



Gordon Childe described the transformation which occurred in Mesopotamia between 5,000 and 6,000 years ago as people settled in the river valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates. They found land which was extremely fertile, but which could only be cultivated by ‘drainage and irrigation works’, which depended upon ‘cooperative effort’.48 More recently Maisels has suggested people discovered that by making small breaches in the banks between river channels they could irrigate wide areas of land and increase output considerably. But they could not afford to consume all the extra harvest immediately, so some was put aside to protect against harvest failure.49

Grain was stored in sizeable buildings which, standing out from the surrounding land, came to symbolise the continuity and preservation of social life. Those who supervised the granaries became the most prestigious group in society, overseeing the life of the rest of the population as they gathered in, stored and distributed the surplus. The storehouses and their controllers came to seem like powers over and above society, the key to its success, which demanded obedience and praise from the mass of people. They took on an almost supernatural aspect. The storehouses were the first temples, their superintendents the first priests.50 Other social groups congregated around the temples, concerned with building work, specialised handicrafts, cooking for and clothing the temple specialists, transporting food to the temples and organising the long distance exchange of products. Over the centuries the agricultural villages grew into towns and the towns into the first cities, such as Uruk, Lagash, Nippur, Kish and Ur (from which the biblical patriarch Abraham supposedly came).




Harman, _People's History of the World_, p.19
#15164508
ckaihatsu wrote:Thanks -- that's gracious of you.

It's not just for *me*, though -- it also happens to be an important *qualitative* distinction, too:

You are welcome!!!


Well, even tribalism -- in the sense of *pastoralism* / agriculture -- required a *material surplus* to exist, which *hasn't* existed for the vast majority of human existence:


The modern human is 200,000 years old. Before the onset of agriculture they ran around in small packs. This tribalism is prevalent in our close relatives the chimps. This is not a social construct.
#15164510
Julian658 wrote:
You are welcome!!!



---


Julian658 wrote:
Class division is as old as mankind. BTW, also happens among animals. We evolved in tribes and hence tribalism is inscribed in our genes, Sadly tribalism is the mother of all "isms".


Julian658 wrote:
The modern human is 200,000 years old. Before the onset of agriculture they ran around in small packs. This tribalism is prevalent in our close relatives the chimps. This is not a social construct.



What *is* a social construct is *who* does the work, *who* makes the decisions, and *who* gets the material surplus that any given society happens to produce, as with agriculture and industry.

Are these factors still decided by our genetics, or are these decisions due to social constructions like race and class?
#15164512
@ckaihatsu I would say race and class.

The trolls insist but never provide nuanced answers. What do You think of privileged kids needing to have a guaranteed advantage over racially disadvantaged groups. They got Big bucks but they need guarantees. They can't take adversity. It is too much!
#15164513
Tainari88 wrote:
@ckaihatsu I would say race and class.

The trolls insist but never provide nuanced answers. What do You think of privileged kids needing to have a guaranteed advantage over racially disadvantaged groups. They got Big bucks but they need guarantees. They can't take adversity. It is too much!



Your example of pay-to-play access to higher education from your second post is an apt one, Tainari -- it exemplifies *class* privilege in our society.

Incidentally I found the following piece to be rather interesting and thought-provoking, f.y.i....


https://www.npr.org/2021/03/31/98315745 ... e-niceness
#15164519
ckaihatsu wrote:Your example of pay-to-play access to higher education from your second post is an apt one, Tainari -- it exemplifies *class* privilege in our society.

Incidentally I found the following piece to be rather interesting and thought-provoking, f.y.i....


https://www.npr.org/2021/03/31/98315745 ... e-niceness



My senior seminar a long time ago was about bonobo behaviors precisely about cooperative groups.

I think humans need more sharing of favorite foods and sharing with strangers and plenty of sex. We would be happier. ;)
#15164520
Tainari88 wrote:
My senior seminar a long time ago was about bonobo behaviors precisely about cooperative groups.

I think humans need more sharing of favorite foods and sharing with strangers and plenty of sex. We would be happier. ;)



It actually unnerved me to think that perhaps the bonobo species is relatively *more* evolutionarily socially evolved than us humans.

Sure, we could learn from their 'lifestyles', but on the other hand *they* don't have to deal with how to organize complex modern societies so I'd say the bar is definitely higher for *us*.
#15164521
The status quo in America is breaking Americans. Extremes aren't necessary to fix it, you don't have to topple capitalism itself, you just need reforms like social democracies have in Europe. You need equitable healthcare and affordable education that's not based on being rich or drowning in debt.

Some socialism is good. Public schools, healthcare, subsidized university, pensions, roads etc. Mix these things with capitalism it has created the countries with the highest human development outcomes like in parts of Europe.
#15164523
Young people want Socialism because it allows for the insignificant and inferior people to equally share the wealth with the smart successful people who actually make the money. It's perfect for the millions of 30 year old adults who still live at home with their parents, and contribute nothing to society.
#15164524
ckaihatsu wrote:It actually unnerved me to think that perhaps the bonobo species is relatively *more* evolutionarily socially evolved than us humans.

Sure, we could learn from their 'lifestyles', but on the other hand *they* don't have to deal with how to organize complex modern societies so I'd say the bar is definitely higher for *us*.


The article I read through that you provided Ckaihatsu is clear. Bonobos actually do understand human languages as long as they are exposed to it as infant bonobos and are around humans. The predisposition for language is in their brains. They just don't possess voice boxes. If they did they would be able to speak a human language.

It means that the bonobo cooperative model is actually the one that gets all the achievement credits. Not the one about other less peaceful aspects of chimp behaviors.

Our needs for human contact with each other, to socialize and to eat and be together is very strong.

Being cooperative and sharing and all the rest is hardwired into our brains.

The newest bestseller by Rutger Bregman is about the hopeful side of human nature. Something rarely emphasized in scientific discussion about the nature of humanity Ckaithatsu.



We are not only selfish polluters and mass murderers of both humans and animals and the Earth....but also the ones who cooperate and are altruists and lovers of each other and nature and life. It is up to us to find out which part of ourselves do we want to emphasize?

The young socialists are growing. Because they want cooperation, they want a clean and healthy Earth, they want to not be slaves to making money and two or three jobs to finally be independent and get to be honest about balancing their lives with time for friends, time for being lovers, time for intellectual or artistic work, and time for friendship, and time for something more.

Bregman is right. Dissent and going against the status quo is important especially when the status quo is unjust.

It is interesting.
#15164526
Unthinking Majority wrote:The status quo in America is breaking Americans. Extremes aren't necessary to fix it, you don't have to topple capitalism itself, you just need reforms like social democracies have in Europe. You need equitable healthcare and affordable education that's not based on being rich or drowning in debt.

Some socialism is good. Public schools, healthcare, subsidized university, pensions, roads etc. Mix these things with capitalism it has created the countries with the highest human development outcomes like in parts of Europe.

I have always said that there are intelligence life forms in this planet. 8)
#15164527
ckaihatsu wrote:---







What *is* a social construct is *who* does the work, *who* makes the decisions, and *who* gets the material surplus that any given society happens to produce, as with agriculture and industry.

Are these factors still decided by our genetics, or are these decisions due to social constructions like race and class?


Humans exist in a hierarchy of competence and talent. There is a lottery system and if you are born in a family with great parents you have a great chance. If parents provide the best for the offspring then those kids will forge ahead. To change this you will have to get rid of the lottery system or equalize humans. However, if we were equalize all humans and put them all at the same level the hierarchy would appear again in a generation or two,
#15164528
Unthinking Majority wrote:The status quo in America is breaking Americans. Extremes aren't necessary to fix it, you don't have to topple capitalism itself, you just need reforms like social democracies have in Europe. You need equitable healthcare and affordable education that's not based on being rich or drowning in debt.

Some socialism is good. Public schools, healthcare, subsidized university, pensions, roads etc. Mix these things with capitalism it has created the countries with the highest human development outcomes like in parts of Europe.


Stop with the compromise Unthinking...you radical. Hee hee hee.

I like this timeline Unthinking.




Humans are social creatures and always have been Unthinking. In reality, our connections to each other are fundamentally our very essence. Socialism just is about emphasizing what we have always done and applying it to modern organizations. The sharing instincts and behaviors of bonobos mean we reach great accomplishments and achievements by being more cooperative and not more violent and selfish.

It is our better 'angels' in the DNA. But explanations are not cut and dried. it could be very complex but in the end. Destroying others doesn't mean we as humans are going to expand the violent and competitive and nasty side as the one that is going to give us a leap forward in evolving modern societies. It is really about cooperation in the end. It will always be that way. War and constant use of violence and destruction don't reinforce life. It never has. It was made to warn us to react to danger. It is not meant to be sustainable for years or decades. Sustaining life is a long-term commitment. Not meant for quick mass death and destruction.

Equality is really about human societies are language-based.
#15164530
Julian658 wrote:
Humans exist in a hierarchy of competence and talent. There is a lottery system and if you are born in a family with great parents you have a great chance. If parents provide the best for the offspring then those kids will forge ahead. To change this you will have to get rid of the lottery system or equalize humans. However, if we were equalize all humans and put them all at the same level the hierarchy would appear again in a generation or two,



Your trite official game-theory assumptions model what a person *needs* with who they *are* -- by so conflating biology with personality you unsuprisingly wind up with the Hobbesian dog-eat-dog mentality for *both*.

I'll counterpose an invocation of the real-world dimension of *scale*, to say that a person's individual individuality may be pursued and expressed once more-basic *biological* needs are satisfied -- something that human society can certainly accomplish for each and every person on the earth, barring no one.


‭History, Macro-Micro -- politics-logistics-lifestyle

Spoiler: show
Image



In other words we need to collectively organize a social world that universally satisfies common *needs*, so as to release more-individual *wants*.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 34

@Unthinking Majority Trump used the "Sle[…]

Big Vehicles: War Wagons

There's a weird dominance thing with some drivers […]

How? China is a dictatorship. China currently ha[…]

Unless the deep state is selectively arresting j[…]