Who is the most masculine leftist? - Page 5 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

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

All general discussion about politics that doesn't belong in any of the other forums.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

#15045176
@Agent Steel, I would like for you to show evidence that democrats have less testosterone.

Mind you, I'm not dirty stinkin' democrat, so I really don't give a shit what the numbers say, if there are anyway.


Side note, I can be the strong man you need at night.
#15045225
Schwarzenegger ran as a Republican and beat a Democratic governor while defining himself socially liberal and fiscally conservative, which means he could have even been a Clintonian Democrat, and he allegedly employed Democratic advisers. In my opinion he always meant to be progressive and he's more charismatic and masculine than ever. Aging is not always bad it seems.
#15045319
SSDR wrote:Marxism-Leninism was first collectively popular in the Russian Empire.

Marxism-Leninism was a revolutionary product that came from the standards of the Russian Empire. Some of those standards are:

- Cultural masculinity (Aggressive rougher men, submissive fake women)
- Christian values (Coming from an Eastern Orthodox culture, Stalin was one for example)
- Family (Eastern Europe is more family oriented)
- Hostile views against casual sex, masturbation, and physical relief

Marxism-Leninism came out of a religious, Slavic Eastern European culture and society in the 1900's and 1910's. Many of the policies that Stalin presented in the Soviet Union that had some resemblances of those standards are:

- Conserving the family institution
- Conserving traditional men and women gender roles
- Going against masturbation and dis encouraging casual sex
- Manipulating men to be very masculine, thus making culture more rough and socially alienating

Marxism-Leninism is a scientific sociological tool that was used to get a religious, family oriented, Eastern culture towards gaining real consciousness. This was popular from the 1920's to the 1950's. Once a society like that starts to gain real consciousness, there is no point of having some of those values that dominated that society before socialism and Marxism-Leninism.


I agree with a lot of this but you must remember that at the time of the Russian Revolution of October 1917 a lot of those values were applicable among the working class in Anglosphere countries. Remember, the early part of the 20th century was before the cultural liberalisation that took place in the West after the war. Of course England and America were different to Russia and always have been, but the programme of Bolshevik socialism was more applicable in the earlier periods than it was by the 1960s or 1970s.

SSDR wrote:Eastern Europe is more conservative, more family oriented, more religious (or just has more religious values), and more masculine. The reason why Stalinist politics are not popular anymore is because the generations of today, and no earlier than the 1960's, did not come from a religious culture where values from before socialism still dominated their societies like how the Soviet Union was during Stalin's time.


I don't think socialism can be constructed under conditions of social liberalism and extreme individualism as they exist in contemporary Western societies. I don't mean that complete patriarchy and conservatism are conducive to socialism but certainly not what is in the West now. The USSR at the time of 1917 was far more suitable than anywhere in the West today.

SSDR wrote:English translated texts show at 6:50 in video, Stalin's claim that:

"However, it was not as difficult for "them" (Western British, French, etc.) to work,
As it was for Us RUSSIAN Communists,
in the period of TSARISM,
When even the SMALLEST STEP FORWARD was considered a SERIOUS CRIME
"

Even as early as the 1950's after the Second World War, Western socialist parties in Britain, France, Ireland, or Italy did not need Marxism-Leninism or Stalinist politics because they did not come from the conditions that the Tsarist government in the Russian Empire imposed on socialist parties from the 1870's to the 1910's.


Western communist parties achieved the most when they were in their Stalinist phase before Eurocommunism and before Hungary 1956 led to the start of a wavering in their faith in Moscow's line. In the the 1950s the British Stalinist party had two MPs in government. That is completely alien to think that it was even possible but that was the politics of that era. After the development of the New Left and Eurocommunism Anglosphere communists lost any influence. But this is possibly due to the Anglosphere left's complete disillusionment with the reality of Stalinism and the Soviet inteventions in Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968. However in the continent in Italy and France the communists remained strong even after the development of Eurocommunist tendencies. But again, this may have been because even in those days of the 1970s and 1980s they were not as insane culturally left as they are now and probably had a more appealing programme. I simply cannot imagine cultural leftism of the type that exists in the Anglosphere now days being present in continental communist parties even after the development of Eurocommunism.

Part of me wonders if the extreme cultural and communalist leftism, as much as it is now found among all communist parties world wide, is a phenomena particularly characteristic of the Anglosphere left. The obsession with race, gender, privilege and policing of language all seems to be a product of the Anglo-American New Left and prior social conditions in those two countries.

@Agent Steel

I would encourage you not to become a communist of any sort. They fought religion by closing mosques, churches and temples. For this I can't embrace Marxism. It's also too absolute. Man needs some level of economic freedom.

Please don't become a far right fascist or Nazi either. That's another type of insanity.

What we need is a new ideology that is based on truth and human principles, one that is not violent. It doesn't need to be democratic but what is important is that it's not extreme and doesn't result in innocent people getting hurt. Communism and fascism hurt innocent people and that is why I cannot embrace either.
#15045345
Political Interest wrote:I agree with a lot of this but you must remember that at the time of the Russian Revolution of October 1917 a lot of those values were applicable among the working class in Anglosphere countries.

Correct. The Anglosphere countries were dominated by religion.
Remember, the early part of the 20th century was before the cultural liberalisation that took place in the West after the war.

Correct. The cultural liberalization was heavily promoted by Zionists. Cultural liberalization is also a cultural capitalist product.
Of course England and America were different to Russia and always have been,

More socially individualistic, more socially liberal, more feminist, and more culturally passive than Russia.
but the programme of Bolshevik socialism was more applicable in the earlier periods than it was by the 1960s or 1970s.

Various socialist movements in the west by the 1960's were dominated by "Eurocommunism" of Italy, France, and Portugal. Austromarxism, and neo Trotskyism.
I don't think socialism can be constructed under conditions of social liberalism and extreme individualism as they exist in contemporary Western societies.

Some elements of social liberalism yes it can. It already did. Jazz and big band was commonly listened to in the Soviet Union by the 1950's. Lenin believed that some elements of womens' fashion in the Soviet Union were to follow contemporary (liberal) western fashions. Women wore make up. By the late 1960's, rock music was very popular in all of Eastern Europe. Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Poland, DDR, and even the Soviet Union had commonly played rock bands like Olympic, Indexi, Grupa 220, Team 4, die Sputniks, or Blackout.

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Team_4
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sputniks
https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackout_ ... 2_muzyczny)
https://bs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indexi
https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic
https://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grupa_220

These examples of liberal music groups were influenced by western capitalist culture and social values. Many people also listened to the Pink Floyd (well played in the DDR by the mid 1970's), Yes, or Black Sabbath.

http://rockdock63.blogspot.com/2009/02/ ... grade.html

Social individualism has no correlation with economic socialism. A socially individualistic culture or nation that promotes social competition like the United States - Yes that is very anti Socialist.
I don't mean that complete patriarchy and conservatism are conducive to socialism but certainly not what is in the West now.

The West has been brainwashed and socially manipulated by the United States since World War Two, so that the States can manipulate the West to hate socialism. That is why. The West today is even more anti socialist than it was in the 1950's because they have been brainwashed and manipulated by the States and American lead NATO for decades.
The USSR at the time of 1917 was far more suitable than anywhere in the West today.

Correct. But I claim that this is because the Russian Empire did not set up its infrastructure to manipulate its masses to strongly hate socialism like how the States did after World War Two because at the time of the 1910's, there was no strong hostility towards socialism since there was no socialist country (until the Soviet Union).
Western communist parties achieved the most when they were in their Stalinist phase before Eurocommunism

Correct. Marxism-Leninism is far more strong than Eurocommunism.
and before Hungary 1956 led to the start of a wavering in their faith in Moscow's line.

Many of the counter revolutionaries of the 1956 Hungarian Revolution were also socialists, but they were pro Western socialists, and anti Marxist-Leninist.
Stalinism and the Soviet inteventions in Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968.

I think it is because capitalist governments brainwashed western masses like in Britain or in France (obviously USA as well) by getting them to think that Soviet involvements in Hungary and Czechoslovakia was "oppressive" and "wrong."
I simply cannot imagine cultural leftism of the type that exists in the Anglosphere now days being present in continental communist parties even after the development of Eurocommunism.

"Cultural Leftism" that political movements like the anarchist Antifa promotes are ANTI SOCIALIST. That is why.
The obsession with race, gender, privilege and policing of language all seems to be a product of the Anglo-American New Left and prior social conditions in those two countries.

I find this interesting and useless since topics like race have nothing to do with socialism.
#15045610
Agent Steel wrote:I'm watching Bernie Sanders' rally live and this topic is obviously relevant.

Seriously, what is the deal with his fanbase? Why do they appear so un-masculine? There must be some reason.

It just doesn't make any sense to me.


Pictures?

I want to see these pussy ass people.
#15045611
Agent Steel wrote:I'm watching Bernie Sanders' rally live and this topic is obviously relevant.

Seriously, what is the deal with his fanbase? Why do they appear so un-masculine? There must be some reason.

It just doesn't make any sense to me.

Why aren't you rather watching an action movie?
#15046532
Beren wrote:He's recovering from an accident during a bodybuilding competition in West Germany in 1967.

11 pictures of Arnold Schwarzenegger you've probably never seen before

I read about that incident: one of his biceps came shooting out of his arm, and attached itself to the face of one of the judges like a squid.

Monsanto and Glaxo quickly shuttled Arnold and the judge off the stage and into a Hollywood hospital set where Arnie was immediately photographed for propaganda purposes engaging in "healthy" activities.

Thanks for the flashback! :lol:
#15046538
Beren wrote:Why aren't you rather watching an action movie?


Because Agent Steel is buying some skin care products from Amazon. He is preparing for making a masculine impression. Don't interrupt his reveries.

Lol.

@Rancid doesn't like come mierda Agent Steel.

I am laughing thinking about Rancid's facial expressions and thought processes involved in Agent Steel watching the unmasculine men in Bernie Sanders rallies. He is checking out if some of them have big penises or if they don't have the right stuff....being effeminate men....he has ideas on how to make them real men.....

Rancid, I know you think about how to make men look good at work. It is part of your MO.

:D
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8

Well the first thing you can be relieved about is[…]

Yes, that is the beauty of free market capitalism[…]

The answer is simple. Stop invading, Russia. Se[…]

Actually, the big fall on monday was due to the h[…]