Infighting
-
[dude with glasses in a communist t-shirt, arguing]
I'm the only leftist here, your opinions are TRASH[dude holding a theory book on smug, arguing]
Read theory you losers, you're all WRONG[dude in an anarchist hoodie, arguing]
Nuh-uh, I'm the only leftist here, you're SHITLIBS[the three dudes are now caught in a cartoon fight, glasses gone flying, punches everywhere, while a firing squad of nazis are targeting them with rifles]
[a confused nazi asks]
Why… why are they still arguing?
Infighting | The Bad Website
Infighting - A comic on The Bad Website
The Bad Website (thebad.website)
A professor in college once said something that stayed with me. He said that "bad ideologies will always find ways to self implode".
This stuck with me because it's true. Good ideologies tend to be pragmatic and flexible, and so they're able to adapt and evolve. However, bad ideologies tend to be more rigid and focus mostly on theories and ideals, and therefore they're unable to adapt or evolve. Far left ideologies firmly fall in the latter category which is why they are where they are.
-
People, people, people, we can kill each other AFTER the fascist are gone, please and thank you.
A lot of the far left types would rather have fascists rule and ruin everything just to spite their opposition rather than make compromises by working with them.
-
I feel like the nazis should be congratulating themselves on sowing discord, distracting those that could resist with bullshit
The infighting amongst the left is entirely self inflected
-
The only thing that matters is policy, I'll work with anyone as long as it's toward an egalitarian society with wealth redistribution.
Labels are nice for classifying, but not for executing. I don't care if you identify as leftist, or liberal, or progressive; I care if you support good policies.
The issue is that you're a minority in your camp. Broadly speaking, the left sees compromise as weakness, neutrality as cowardice, working with opposition towards a common cause as treachery. These are all symptoms of purity testing, and it's the reason why the left in so many places is completely paralyzed.
-
I mean, even the Holocaust could also be said to boil down to poor management if we're just doing shitty arguments.
The Holocaust was so devastating because the Nazis were incredibly efficient. Soviet genocides didn't rely on efficiency, but malicious negligence.
-
Comparing a famine caused by poor harvests across eastern europe and exacerbated by poor management to the fucking holocaust is wild.
Literally only tankies are stupid enough to believe old Soviet Propaganda about how Holodomer was not a genocide. when it clearly was.
-
This is why far "left" and "right" are itself misguided labels. It's more like far opposite on the other end where they meet.
Idk why you're downvoted, horseshoe theory has proven to be correct over time. There's that much that separates Marxist Leninist authoritarianism and Fascist authoritarianism
-
Horsehoe theory is misguided itself, it was pitched purely to distance liberalism from fascism when historically they are linked, and to demonize those who support collectivization over privatization. Read Blackshirts and Reds.
Liberalism is antithetical to fascism both ideologically and historically. Literally only online Marixsts are ignorant enough to think that liberalism is just fascism lite.
-
For almost all of human history, the current center of the the western Overton window would have been considered far, far left. Does that mean that monarchism and feudalism is the true center, and liberalism is actually the same as being to the far right of monarchism?
The modern left-right political spectrum only makes sense in a modern sense. Trying to apply it like it's some sort of universal law is stupid. Monarchism, for example, can't be placed on the spectrum because there are different types of monarchies that are radically different from each other and there are different monarchs within each of those systems that are radically different from each other.
-
The antidote to infighting in my experience is organizing in ideologically diverse spaces. I've organized with liberals and all types of different leftists. It has left me with the perspective that all these people are good people that just want better for the world. It's hard to get angry at them once you know them. Per usual the solution is to touch grass.
You're right, BUT it will never happen. Hearing different perspectives and understanding other viewpoints will not only broaden your horizons, but it will also deradicalize you... but the people who you are asking to do this are the radicals who are allergic to ideologically diversity. Purity testing is one of the hallmark defining traits of the modern left, and the further left you go the more extreme it gets. The far left will excommunicate anybody who doesn't agree with on just about everything. You simply can't have a serious movement with this type of mentality being as prominent as it is.
-
I didn't deny any genocide. And if you knew me better, you would understand how stupid this statement is.
I said your statement that liberal democracies have killed more people than regimes that are seen to be associated with communism is false.
To be frank with you, I think you are projecting an image of an enemy on me.
I do not like oligarchs, especially American ones because of their impact and their tendecy towards degeneracy.
I already told you I found standard US copytext around alleged differences between socialism and capitalism to be comically dumb. It's one of the reasons why my default mode of thinking is to assume that the content of common American socio-economic arguement is gibberish (unless proven otherwise).
I think Marx is prophetic and I believe his ideas will actually be realized in the future (maybe not in our lifetimes). In contrast the theological thought leaders of US-stope oligarchy (Friedman and other "economists") will go down in history as liars and criminal enablers; evil people.
That being said, communism as perceived by wider society is a dead end.
What we need is a new movement that reflects the dialectical materialism of the information age and offers a different mode of economic relationships to the oligarch regimes and the type of relationships that people associate with the word "communism".
I think we agree on a lot more things than you think, with the exception of "communism" as a brand, as opposed to it's end goals.
I didn’t deny any genocide.
I quoted you directly
But yes, I'm going to continue to take a page from your book. To everything you say: This is false.
-
I didn’t deny any genocide.
I quoted you directly
But yes, I'm going to continue to take a page from your book. To everything you say: This is false.
wrote last edited by [email protected]You do you. I still believe we are actually on the same side.
I made a good faith effort to try and explain my views and show that even if you disagree, there is a measure of nuance in what I am saying. I will note that good faith effort doesn't mean I was agree with falsehoods.
I will just add that your abrasiveness and lack of desire to build bridges won't lead to anything good. Mark my words.
-
You do you. I still believe we are actually on the same side.
I made a good faith effort to try and explain my views and show that even if you disagree, there is a measure of nuance in what I am saying. I will note that good faith effort doesn't mean I was agree with falsehoods.
I will just add that your abrasiveness and lack of desire to build bridges won't lead to anything good. Mark my words.
I made a good faith effort to try and explain my views and show that even if you disagree, there is a measure of nuance in what I am saying.
This is false.
I will note that good faith effort doesn’t mean I was agree with falsehoods.
Great, neither will I. Especially not genocide denial.
I will just add that your abrasiveness and lack of desire to build bridges won’t lead to anything good. Mark my words.
This is false
-
The issue is that you're a minority in your camp. Broadly speaking, the left sees compromise as weakness, neutrality as cowardice, working with opposition towards a common cause as treachery. These are all symptoms of purity testing, and it's the reason why the left in so many places is completely paralyzed.
How do you know that isn't confirmation bias? We have no idea how many leftists there are that see purity testers and decide to not engage.
-
Such an american comment. So indoctrinated into the two-party system that it's impossible to even imagine anything else.
Have you heard of the concept of coalitions?
Yeah I'm American.
Because what I said definitely sounds like something that happens in American politics.
-
How do you know that isn't confirmation bias? We have no idea how many leftists there are that see purity testers and decide to not engage.
It's a similar to MAGA in a way. MAGA's biggest problem, as an ideology, is that it revolves around blind loyalty to a single idiot and therefore the entire movement starts and stops with his whims, no matter how contradictory, damaging, or nonsensical. You could say it's confirmation bias that I have this opinion, but I think given recent events, this opinion does have a basis of fact to it. The same applies to the left when it comes to purity testing. It's really not hard to see how prominent purity testing is in leftist discourse.
-
Literally only tankies are stupid enough to believe old Soviet Propaganda about how Holodomer was not a genocide. when it clearly was.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Well you can either look at the now public soviet archives to see what the government was saying to themselves, you know primary sources, and plenty of historians who cite those or you can accept what anti-communists with no primary sources and a weird tendency to rehabilitate nazi-collaborators say.
-
A professor in college once said something that stayed with me. He said that "bad ideologies will always find ways to self implode".
This stuck with me because it's true. Good ideologies tend to be pragmatic and flexible, and so they're able to adapt and evolve. However, bad ideologies tend to be more rigid and focus mostly on theories and ideals, and therefore they're unable to adapt or evolve. Far left ideologies firmly fall in the latter category which is why they are where they are.
interesting u should say that. theres actually this political system that someone used complex systems analysis to create in an adaptable, yet stable way. very much like the evolutionary process.
if ur interested, its this series, particularly part 2:
-
It's a similar to MAGA in a way. MAGA's biggest problem, as an ideology, is that it revolves around blind loyalty to a single idiot and therefore the entire movement starts and stops with his whims, no matter how contradictory, damaging, or nonsensical. You could say it's confirmation bias that I have this opinion, but I think given recent events, this opinion does have a basis of fact to it. The same applies to the left when it comes to purity testing. It's really not hard to see how prominent purity testing is in leftist discourse.
It’s really not hard to see how prominent purity testing is in leftist discourse.
That's not what I'm asking, I'm saying you can't judge now many people are not engaging in purity testing.
You could say it’s confirmation bias that I have this opinion, but I think given recent events, this opinion does have a basis of fact to it
That's exactly what confirmation bias is. "All the toupees I see are bad, therefore, all toupees are bad." Confirmation bias with a basis of fact to it, still completely ignoring the toupees you don't notice.
-
I do it all the time.
I literally never see it, but I do often see you saying things that are explicitly incompatible with anarchism.
Who’s shitty hot takes are regularly posted on and laughed at in many communities
"We make fun of you in our secret tree house that you aren't allowed in" is not the sick burn you think.
I could give you 10 to 13 calling them out.
And for every one tepid, qualified criticism of the democrats you offer, I could you give 20 of you viciously tearing into the left for not supporting the democrats enough.
However terminally online little trolls like yourself aren’t interested in facts or reality. And your disapproval is a badge of honor.
Oh my god, go back to Reddit you insufferable dweeb. You're really doing the "facts and logic" bullshit?
Damn, this is some serious beef if y'all are taking it between posts.
Surely internet arguments are siloed to the post. I literally remember none of the usernames of people I've had arguments with haha
