No.9[View All]
Since we're all comrades here, and it's a common goal for us to achieve obligatory equality; what do you think of the SJW agenda?
86 posts and 14 image replies omitted. Click reply to view. No.573
>>399I like how she had to put "Look, SWEETIE" in front of the class statement to make it sound unreasonable.
No.575
>>405Anything good that feminism has done for working class women is a byproduct of things it did for rich women. It might even have been bad for working class women in the long run now a poor family can't survive on one income.
No.577
>>491>> retardTRIGGER WARNING FOR ABELISM No.595
>>444Considering you prob havent even read up on basic Feminist theory (Modern ones that is), you have no right to defend these supremecists.
No.633
>>575> having this amount of lack of faith in working class women. > not recognizing that sexism hurts the workers more than any other class No.712
>>355Biological sex is hardley superficial, evolutionary psychology has plenty to say empirically on just how non superficial it really is.
Sure there are outliers in the gender binary, but there is a very real reason why most genders seem pretty clear cut regardless of what society you are observing.
No.725
>>399fucking r/anarchism/
No.727
I stand for many the same thing as them(mainly the mainstream issues they tackle: LGBT issues, abortion, and whathaveyou) but either the way they broadcast their message or maybe just the entire way they tackle them irritates me.
It doesn't help that they take on campaigns that as a socialist I see as the problem of capitalism and turn the issue on it's head quite often.
No.734
SJW IS Marxism
No.736
>>734Nah, they would be far less annoying if they were
the lack of a proper analysis of society in their activism leads them to the weird kinda liberal victim worshipping as the answer rather than a marxist view of the oppressed
No.738
>>9It's capitalist degeneracy, just like homosexuality.
No.739
>>11Ugh I know how you feel. Check out our tumlbresque communist party.
http://communist-party.ca/ No.743
>>738Homosexuality is not caused by capitalism, it's not our fault shit like tumblr and pride happened, we just wanted equal treatment
No.745
>>743No, but modern homosexual culture is definitely capitalist is nature
No.746
>>745>homosexual culturethere isn't a universal
homosexual culture I can only assume you mean gatherings like
pride or some such which are hardly a fair representation of us
No.749
>>355Biological see I'd not even remotely superficial.
No.750
>>746Then do something about it. Ad it stands now they represent homosexuals and they will until the non decadent guys get them to shut the duck up
No.756
>>746Even if it isn't "universal" meaning all the same everywhere, there is still of course some elements of the culture which involve homosexuality. The ideas we have about homosexuality are cultural. Consider the difference between Western liberal countries and Islamic countries in terms of the role of homosexuality in the culture, both in terms of ideas about it and homosexual activity itself. There are clear cultural differences here. Both sides might naively think that their own cultural view is not cultural, but instead natural, or "closer to the real natural truth" than the other side, but we can't truthfully say they aren't cultural views. In the West we have certain cultural ideas about homosexuality, and I would say that many of these could be considered decadent or bourgeois for the reasons given above.
No.757
>>756Oops, thought I was in the other thread. Still, what I said mostly applies here.
No.759
>>756Well…yes, you're correct but I wasn't exactly referring to western culture, merely challenging that there is a homosexual culture that directly represents homosexuals
also, you believe homosexuality is bourgeois because of differing cultural opinions in islamic countries, I don't understand this or perhaps i'm simply not understanding your point.
No.767
>>759
>you believe homosexuality is bourgeois because of differing cultural opinions in islamic countriesThat's not what I mean. I mean that the role of homosexuality in both societies are both "cultural" meaning that there in in fact a "homosexual culture" in the sense that each culture has different ways of addressing and thinking about homosexuality. This was a response to the assertion that were was no "universal homosexual culture". Even though there is no universal homosexual culture, because culture isn't generally universal, there is still homosexual culture that we can discuss; lack of universality doesn't exempt it from analysis. I think that they way we think about homosexuality in the West, especially but not certainly not exclusively with LGBT activists and SJWs, often uses metaphysical, individualist, and idealist ideological frameworks. I think we should think of homosexuality and sexuality in general from a dialectical materialist point of view, rather than a metaphysical idealist point of view.
No.780
>>198Trotsky Trotsky Trotsky Trotsky Trotsky Trotsky Trotsky Trotsky Trotsky Trotsky Trotsky Trotsky Trotsky Trotsky Trotsky Trotsky Trotsky Trotsky Trotsky Trotsky
No.1042
SJW's and liberal feminists are capitalists, they're part of the problem. That said I think the relationship between Marxists and Marxist feminists is important especially since they haven't lost sight of what the fight was originally all about.
No.1045
File: 1413946557497.png (364.59 KB, 607x750, 607:750, 765_415139795218783_193573….png)
I'm a Communist and I think SJW's suck.
No.1114
Despite how I'm sure I'll get called a brocialist, (I'm looking for a red fedora just to piss people off.) I actually agree with sjw on a lot of things, just not their angle.
I do think sex is a struggle for power. I cannot say it'll always be that way, material conditions change a lot. But as it stands TODAY, relationships are a class war and the women are the lumpen bourgeois of it. I say petty bourgeois because they have more social standing in court, in the formation, but don't "own" the means of production. Perhaps labor aristocracy is better here. The fact is regardless of the "rape culture" there is also a very vivid "cunt culture" that treats men like shit for no reason, and establishes a society that thinks it's healthy for women to expect expensive rings, flamboyant rituals called marriage to make them feel like a Disney princess, but a man expecting a normal, monogamous relationship is self-entitlement.
I openly disagreed with my brother Jason Unruhe over the fat positive aspect of sjw. He proclaimed they are denying basic science. They said no such thing. We know fat is unhealthy, but it's nearly unavoidable in the first world. Obesity is rampant, and it is disgusting and stupid to shame people for their weight when it has become the majority. It's just another way to exalt the upper class who can afford health, or spend all their time being healthy and don't grow any sort of character. Fat positive's heart is in the right place if misguided in the means. I think we should push for publically available gyms, artificial pricing on food to make healthy food cheap as balls and fast food a luxury.
I think racial minorities and trans tend to get thrown under the bus a lot in the sjw community. We quickly ignore the plight of blacks, Muslims, and transgendered. Ever been to a dating site? Such "progressive" women are racist as fuck, and despite being "sex positive" have the nerve to call trans-men or trans-women freaks. While I only care about gender from a purely biological standpoint and think "gender identity" actually hurts the medical, psychological, and other human studies fields by humoring gender binary, I can also see their alienation and it disturbs me. Their choice to appear more feminine or more masculine to such extremes is well within their right. I don't think such things would even happen or at least as much were the alienation of people diminished along with less crap food fucking with our hormones.
No.1115
>>461>>480I'm in somewhat agreement. However, it's not about "Marxist place that hurts my feelings". Quite the opposite, someone obviously doesn't stop to think if they can't even manage to practice Marxism on a little 8chan group, what makes them equipped to tlk about revolution at all? What's their excuse? "Mu'h property?"
Banings are a form of discrimination and hate-crime as well. At best, it's petty bourgeois to be a moderator. Controlling a confined means of production to extract wealth, notoriety, and privileges at the expense of others. Sure no moderator, hell, no web admin here could be compared to Moot or Mark Zuckerberg, but than your employer isn't comparible to Bill Gates. Doesn't mean they haven't done something criminal or unforgivable.
Moderators are counter-revolutionary kulaks.
No.1124
>>1115People take bannings so seriously it seems. I admit though that I have gone at least slightly overboard in the past. So I think I'll probably generally tone it down a bit henceforth.
No.1127
>>743I normally post on /pol/. Do any of you find it weird That only 2 years ago, Tumblr was nothing more than the largest unregulated p0rn and gif dump on the net before turning into SJW central in the blink of an eye. I wonder if it has something to do with the Yahoo buyout, or…what I found on /pol/ just now (screenshot enclosed).
No.1129
>>1127Whoa, that's actually makes a lot of sense. Let's see how things go after she wins. If SJWism dies down, it might be evidence for it.
No.1146
>mfw I actually find myself agreeing with Jim Profit
No.1147
>>1114good points.
>>1115get a dynamic ip you baby lmao
No.1154
>>1114>considers fat shaming worse than grocery ghettos for the poorI really hate you children.
No.1235
>>1129>>1127And just think of it: Before Obama was elected, pop culture was anti-racist black culture. Back in the 2000s, remember?
No.1244
>>1235I wonder if the Democratic party will eventually gain a monopoly over political system by defeating the Republicans. After all, they each represent certain sections of the capitalist class, but as capital becomes more and more concentrated and monopolized, maybe one party will win out in the end.
No.1254
File: 1415012311804.png (252.52 KB, 1163x816, 1163:816, book_gottfried_feder_haddi….PNG)
>>413>1. the modern SJW "movement" (As people call it) are nothing more than Nazi 2.0SJW has nothing to do with "Nazism" or "National Socialism" and you make all Marxists look stupid by posting that kind of crap. The #1 most important idea in "National Socialism" or "Nazism" was the idea of "freeing the proletarian workers and the middle classes from the shackles of debt interest slavery" and "eliminating incomes unearned without work" as is explained in the central Manifesto of National Socialism (Nazis) which was written by Gottfried Feder in 1919 which you can read for free at the amazon.com link below:
http://www.amazon.com/Manifesto-Abolition-Enslavement-Interest-Gottfried-ebook/dp/B009Q85R32/Gottfried Feder not only wrote that ^^ book but he also wrote the 25 point NSDAP program which was what got the NSDAP elected in to the German parliament, so you could definitely say that Feder was the most important economic theorist in Nazism from 1919 to 1941 or so. So if you want to learn what the real (actual) original German "Nazis" really believed in their own words then you have to read that Gottfried Feder book because this book is much, much, *MUCH* more important than Mein Kampf as Feder's publishing of this book was the initializing force that directly led to the founding of the DAP by Anton Drexler, Gottfried Feder, Dietrich Eckart and the rest (this was before Hitler had even joined the party).
The tl;dr of Nazism or "National Socialism is that Gottfried Feder and Dietrich Eckart are for Naziism what Karl Marx and Engels are for Marxism, whereas the "Strasser Brothers vs Hitler" conflict in NatSoc is similar to the Trotsky vs Stalin conflict in Marxism, and the Nazism sees "incomes unearned without work" (such as incomes earned from loaning out money at interest or speculating on the stock market) as being "parasitic" incomes that need to be removed in the same way that Marxism wants to remove the bourgeoisie. The fact that Jews and Bankers and Gypsies were over-represented in the area of "incomes unearned without work" (i.e. loaning out money at interest) led to them being targeted by the National Socialists of that time period but you have to understand that the intellectual justification for targeting them was Feder's economic theories, similar to how Marx-Lenin's economic theories led to the Kulaks being targeted.
No.1258
>>1254Interesting, especially the comparison between the Strasser brothers, etc.
Overall your posr makes sense and yeah people should maybe avoid calling SJWs Nazis. It just helps to discredit them given the popular (possibly incorrect) ideas about Nazis.
No.1259
>>1258On that note, imagine if Trotsky had been purged like he was, but on the other hand Hitler and the right-wing faction had also been purged instead of the Strasserites. And they ganged up together on Britain and France and the USA… That would be a very interesting alternate history.
No.1260
>>1259Strasserism is still right-wing, racist, and ultra-nationalist.
Trotsky would have been just as likely to declare war on Strasserist Germany as Hitlerist Germany.
Never view fascists as anything other than scum.
No.1266
>>1260I kind of feel like fascism is closer to socialism than liberialism. What do you think?
No.1267
>>1266neither are even close to socialism
and frankly fascists are more dangerous
No.1270
>>1266I don't see how it's closer. Both are bourgeois ideologies, the difference being that fascism is the last resort and is an open dictatorship which crushes Marxism as well as liberalism.
Marxists defend bourgeois-democratic liberties insofar as they give room for the development of the workers' movement. Liberalism upholds said liberties so long as they keep the bourgeoisie in power, whereas fascism crushes them.
No.1276
>>1270Well it has a lot of socialized industrires, disdain for "undeserved profit", the idea that labor should benefit the society, and has a strong central government undertaking some economic planning. I feel like in that way it's building the foundations for socialism. Lenin said fascism was capitalism in decay, and didn't Marx say that as capitalism develops (decaying is the end stage of developing) that the foundations for socialism would be simultaneously built?
I get what you mean about the liberties. But I sort of think the transition from fascism to socialism would be easier than the transition from liberalism to socialism.
No.1277
>>1267Maybe closer in the dialectical sense though.
No.1280
>>561>churchill>anti fascistif anything churchill was one of the worst fascists who ever have lived.
and where are che, fidel, luxemburg & liebknecht etc?
No.1281
>>1276What Nazis say and what they do are two different things. The Nazis crushed the labor movement, and their "planning" had nothing in common with what the Soviets did.
I don't see how it'd be easier to transition either. In both cases (bourgeois democracy and fascist dictatorship) a revolution is required, and in both cases you'd need to expropriate capitalist property which is untouched under both systems.
These two books should give you a decent idea of the reactionary nature of fascism:
*
http://bookzz.org/book/981420/378c5d*
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B1ZP6ZurgOg-RTZHdy1TenpmREk/editIf anything transition was more difficult because of the wartime damage.
>>1280Churchill was many things (rabid anti-communist, anti-semite, racist, etc.) but he wasn't a fascist. When Nazi Germany was becoming a threat he was smart enough to realize that the British bourgeoisie couldn't "come to terms" with Nazism and force it to march eastwards to attack the USSR, and that the Nazis would attack the West first.
And for all his inveterate hatred of Bolshevism, "If Hitler invaded hell I would make at least a favorable reference to the devil in the House of Commons."
But yeah calling him an anti-fascist is still pretty silly. He did admire Mussolini throughout the 20s, as did FDR in the 30s.
No.1282
>>1281Also while we're on the subject, the Nazis actually involved themselves in privatization, see: www.ub.edu/graap/nazi.pdf
No.1285
File: 1415257935784.jpg (258.9 KB, 1163x816, 1163:816, book_gottfried_feder_haddi….jpg)
>>1254>The #1 most important idea in "National Socialism" or "Nazism" was the idea of "freeing the proletarian workers and the middle classes from the shackles of debt interest slavery" and "eliminating incomes unearned without work" as is explained in the central Manifesto of National Socialism (Nazis) which was written by Gottfried Feder in 1919>>1258>>1259If anybody here wants to read Gottfried Feder's book on "National Socialist" economic theory you can download it for free at the link below (this book is more about the left wing "Strasse" kind of National Socialism and it is purely economic theory and the entire book is pretty much free from racism). Start reading at around page 22 where it says "Mammonism is the heavy, all-encompassing and overhwelming sickness…." Here is the link:
https://7chan.org/lit/src/Feder-InterestSlavery-trans_Hadding_Scott.pdf No.1286
No.1308
>>1127tumblr was known fo rbeing full of hipsters 2 years ago. there was a /b/ raid in 2012. not too much of a switch from "fucking hipsters" to "social justice warriors"