/leftistpol/ - Leftist Politics

I agree OP, but that is the nature of leftism/progressivism. You throw all kinds of left ideas at the wall and see what sticks. The splintering in some cases may be more of a strength than a weakness.

It also highlights how Stalinism and Maoism, which it's strict party line dogma, perverts leftist ideals, which by it's nature is highly eclectic.

>>43
One rarely meets a (presumed) leftist who agrees that purges and revisionism are a feature and not a bug.

Can you elaborate on the mind hoops that reconcile the creation of Utopia (presumed a stable form of society) with this sort of ceaseless tearing down of pre-existing, age-old social structures?

Seems to me that, the more you lay bare un-channeled human nature, the more leftists' abstract theories on society fracture. This phenomenon by itself should be enough to discredit the claim that leftist dialectic is somehow plugged in in a historical process that bends towards rationality.

What I'm trying to get at is: how do you explain increasing chaos as a process of progress?

>>44
>Can you elaborate on the mind hoops that reconcile the creation of Utopia (presumed a stable form of society) with this sort of ceaseless tearing down of pre-existing, age-old social structures?
Well I don't think the conception of a "Utopia" is such a dominant trope in leftist thought as you make it out to be. What Marx described was more of a resultant state of the process that leads a society from pre-agrarian, agrarian, industrial to finally communist realities. Just like Fukuyama's "End of History" isn't really his theory of an Utopia but rather what he sees as the political-economical arrangement that people of industrialist, modern society will settle in in the long run.
I would argue, thought, most mainstream leftists are content with an evolutionary approach. Improving the conditions of workes and the poor, limiting capitalist excesses, etc., not fighting for Utopia (other than indirectly). Others are your revolutionaries who do exactly that, like Leninists and offshots.
Personally I am between those two schools. I think some issues deserve a revolution while the system itself should be given time to evolve (both by itself and directedly).

>What I'm trying to get at is: how do you explain increasing chaos as a process of progress?
As you may be aware (your rhetoric makes me think such), leftism/progressivism/whatever one calls it, and conservatism are the opposite sides of basically a quasi-biological trait of human mentality (I would wager even other higher animals fall into those two camps).
While this never changes, the nature of "leftism" certainly does by era and place. What was leftist 100 years ago in Russia isn't necessarily now in e.g. UK. And when/if a leftist society has been succesfully established, of course that natural human prospensity will continue to exist, and it's leftist outlooks will continue to change. But that doesn't mean all of it's outgrowths have to be welcomed into the new leftist state (just like SJWism now doesn't have to be). They have to be evaluated, debated and rejected, just as much as any other idea.

>>44
Also I realize I haven't quite answered your increasing chaos as a process of progress question quite yet, but that's because it's an insanely interesting question and I haven't had time yet to write a deserving reply. I'll probably write a better on in the coming days.

leftist is ultimately always about devolving power to the smallest unit. it's only a problem because some moderate leftist organisation are not okay with this. but they'll be proved wrong just like their bed fellows on the right

daily reminder the right also prone to fragmentation


republicans libertarians ukip conservatives


and capitalism is self defeating

If the the Left was concerned with unity it'd be the Right.

Just goes to show these left liberals are truly on the side of individualism. Why then is this harnessed by the Right?

>>54
All of the political groupings you mentioned are, besides spread across an ocean, historically leftist. Read >>53, which explains why parties hung up on individual rights are leftist. Conservatives being leftist should warrant no explanation, since they peddle programs that were leftist ten, twenty, thirty years ago.

Capitalism, too, is leftist, in a tad more obscure way. You have to go back quite a bit to see where capitalist doctrine pulls away from the then-ruling ideas of wealth through estate, lineage and reputation.

(going even further back, Cato has an illustrative quote on how despised capitalist doctrines were in Roman Republican times:)

''In his Essay on Duties, Marcus Tullius Cicero tells a story about Cato the Elder.

One day Cato was asked, what is the most profitable aspect of property ownership? Cato answered, "Raising livestock with great success." He was then asked about the second most profitable aspect of ownership. "Raising livestock with some success," he answered. And what about the third most profitable aspect? "Raising livestock with little success." And the fourth? "Raising crops." Then his questioner asked, "What about money-lending?" Cato replied, "What about murder?"''