[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / b2 / baaa / choroy / dempart / doomer / mde / pinoy / vichan ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

A collective of people engaged in pretty much what the name suggests
Winner of the 78th Attention-Hungry Games
/bimbo/ - Plastic and Fantastic!

April 2019 - 8chan Transparency Report
Comment *
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.

File: fcea681ee31e84f⋯.jpeg (5.9 KB, 189x266, 27:38, download.jpeg)


Often on the left we complain that the modern right doesn’t really engage Marx on his ideas. But its not just Marx, its really any ideas left of center (or any idea that cant be put into a meme, infographic, or be shouted at them by a youtube personality).

The reason Jordan Peterson doesn’t read Marx is because he has a pragmatist epistemology – it is ‘true‘ if it produces a society of human flourishing. Once you understand this is the angle JP is coming from, his insane position of not needing to read and/or understand the ideas of his opponents to ‘know that they are wrong’ makes sense. Marxism produced stalinism and the gorillions, therefore not only is it morally wrong, but it is FALSE in the Petersonian sense. It doesn’t matter if Marx literally wrote angelic prose, and tomes of wisdom which extended human intellectual understanding to the star trek age (and for all Peterson knows, he very well could have, as hes never read Marx outside the communist manifesto, ONCE, as part of his debate with Zizek). Because Marx’s thoughts (or at least what he thinks are Marx’s thoughts) lead to bad consequences, they must be UNTRUE. The actual content of what Marx said, advocated, or theorized is irrelevant - hes wrong either way.

Obviously this is not compatible with a scientific materialist worldview. If faced with the old “if a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it still fall?” question, Peterson would really be forced to say that the statement “the tree fell” is untrue because the tree falling or not falling didnt directly help human flourishing either way. As far as the crazy archetypes he believes in, they are simply unnecessary to explain history or society and a simple application of occams razor should suffice for that. Also his ideas of Chaos versus Order are really tautological since every time people accuse him of using his preference for order over chaos to shit on feminism, etc. He and his fans just say well chaos is good sometimes too. Saying that society is made up of two things that are both equally important and are needed at different times is literally contributing nothing.

Now as for why his fans dislike Marx and subscribe to this idea: simply, they are dunning krugers who are too lazy to read and think about ideas deeply and just want a daddy with a veneer of academic respectability to tell them the people/ideas they are already predisposed to hate are bad.

Marx = gorillions and also SJWs = Marx and theyre all bad. A huge portion of the rational skeptic crowd switched from LE LOGIC N SCIENCE meme to petersonism so quickly you would get whiplash.

They could go from logic and rationality one second, to crazy jungian dragons and witches the next, without a second thought about how these two things are diametrically opposed, simply because they are using “retcon reasoning”. They have a conclusion in search of an answer, and just want to be validated in their hating of SJWS. If logic, science, and rationality owns the libs one day, then thats good. If they have a new meme that owns the sjws now, even better. They really need to just admit that it was never about logic, reason, and rationality, it was about the need of guys with mediocre intelligence and a lot of free time to win arguments on the internet and look superior by any means or intellectual gymnastics necessary. They simply want their preconceived ideas validated by someone, and they don’t really care what line of thought that person uses to get there.

Say what you want about the ancaps and their libertarian icons of Mises, Hayek, and Bahm-Bawerk. As much as they straw-manned and misunderstood Marx, at least they had the decency to try to read Marx, or at least pretend like they had read him.


P.s. after Peterson backed out of the debate with Wolff, he wrote an introduction to the new edition of the gulag archipelago where he dedicated it to "the richard wolffs of the world" lol.

btw I think Peterson is actually a deeply insecure man who is actually intimidated by people with quantitative intelligence, which may explain why he backed out of the wolff debate. He would never debate someone like Cockshott



what a fucking clown


Peterson is a little bitch whose UNI cabinet door lock kept getting smeared with toothpaste and glue.



>why he backed out of the wolff debate

After he backed out he has written an introduction to the latest print of The Gulag Archipelago dedicating the book to "All the Richard Wolffs out there."

Yes. The guy is deeply insecure and a pseud.


I think people like peterson grossly over exaggerate how bad the conditions were in the gulags.



I'm not a scholar or anything but that is my impression too. The vast majority of people in the gulags survived and were there for something like five years. There's absolutely no comparison between the gulags and the nazi death camps, and anyone who would make such a comparison is either ignorant or a dishonest hack.



Gulags had problems with malnutrition, freezing, and death by exhaustion. Of course, at the same time gulags *were* structured differently from US prisons, e.g. inmates were paid for their labor and had better access to reading materials, but in terms of staying alive you were generally better off in a US prison.

For gulags to be profitable (inmates helped build dams and other big projects) the costs had to be kept low, but also the average Soviet citizen in the 1930s-40s wasn't exactly living in prosperity, so attention naturally went toward meeting their needs first rather than gulag inmates who were either convicted for political reasons or for stuff like rape or murder.

By the time Stalin died, the gulags were already determined to be unprofitable and thus moves were already being made to reduce them. See: https://b-ok.cc/book/777082/ae389c



The problems with living conditions in the GULAG system only really arose during the Great Patriotic War, when everyone's living conditions suffered.



What koshervatives should we dab on instead?




Half of "th*rd-positionists" have views that differ from your average neocon (or at best SocDem) by one or two points, and the other half are edgy teens that have never read any kind of materialist theory ever and just regurgitate either spiritualist bullshit or propaganda about the USSR.


File: 1d7a38b74d35697⋯.gif (17.25 KB, 303x299, 303:299, 1d7a38b74d35697fc46bc4640c….gif)


>Stop paying attention to these stooges and look into people who speak the actual truth.

Could say the same to you



>The Gulag Archipelago

>An abridged fiftieth anniversary edition was released on 1 November 2018 with a new foreword by Jordan Peterson.

>Natalya Reshetovskaya, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn's first wife, wrote in her memoirs that The Gulag Archipelago was based on "campfire folklore" as opposed to objective facts. She wrote that she was "perplexed" that the Western media had accepted The Gulag Archipelago as "the solemn, ultimate truth", saying that its significance had been "overestimated and wrongly appraised". She said that her husband did not regard the work as "historical research, or scientific research", and added that The Gulag Archipelago was a collection of "camp folklore", containing "raw material" which her husband was planning to use in his future productions.[16] A controversial work, authored by a historian suspected of working with British intelligence, claims that her memoirs were part of a KGB campaign, orchestrated by Yuri Andropov in 1974, to discredit Solzhenitsyn.[17] Historian and archival researcher Stephen G. Wheatcroft asserts that it is essentially a "literary and political work", and "never claimed to place the camps in a historical or social-scientific quantitative perspective".[18] Revisionist historian, J. Arch Getty writes of Solzhenitsyn's methodology that "Such documentation is methodically unacceptable in other fields of history."[19] Gabor Rittersporn shares Getty's criticism saying "he is inclined to give priority to vague reminiscences and hearsay……inevitably [leads] towards selective bias.[20] Communist Party member, Roy Medvedev has referred to the book as "extremely contradictory".



You don't understand nationalism if you think socialist economics and nationalism can coexist.


File: 511849b0f9266d5⋯.png (249.83 KB, 1042x749, 1042:749, 7b8fefb0a0acc3c545c35a6e1e….png)


>muh Stalin killed gorillions

>muh Capitalism and Communism teamed up, ignoring that the west literally let Hitler get away with everything till the last minute because they were terrified of being in any kind of alliance with the USSR, even to the point they delayed opening up a western front till after Stalingrad.




this, the whole reason the west gave so many concessions to hitler up until the last minute was that people like churchill wanted hitler to attack the soviet union



To be fair, Churchill in the late 30s was openly criticizing Chamberlain's attitude toward the USSR, since Churchill realized that trying to "appease" Hitler and hoping he'll march eastward was going to backfire on the UK.


File: da51818f0933895⋯.jpg (159.69 KB, 736x982, 368:491, 7a.jpg)


Not that the /pol/yp has any points, but I don't think "nationalism" is bad as long it's not bourgeois. To quote Mao

"Can a Communist, who is an internationalist, at the same time be a patriot? We hold that he not only can be but also must be. The specific content of patriotism is determined by historical conditions. There is the "patriotism" of the Japanese aggressors and of Hitler, and there is our patriotism. Communists must resolutely oppose the "patriotism" of the Japanese aggressors and of Hitler. The Communists of Japan and Germany are defeatists with regard to the wars being waged by their countries. To bring about the defeat of the Japanese aggressors and of Hitler by every possible means is in the interests of the Japanese and the German people, and the more complete the defeat the better…. For the wars launched by the Japanese aggressors and Hitler are harming the people at home as well as the people of the world. China's case, however, is different, because she is the victim of aggression. Chinese Communists must therefore combine patriotism with internationalism. We are at once internationalists and patriots, and our slogan is, "Fight to defend the motherland against the aggressors." For us defeatism is a crime and to strive for victory in the War of Resistance is an inescapable duty."

But of course the nationalism/patriotism of the /pol/yp is something that should be eradicated.



I wish he had debated Wolff instead of Zizek.



>To quote Mao

dude was fucking based



>Stalin didn't really kill anyone

Only real part of your entire post, git gud, though I would add

>Stalin didn't really kill anyone that didn't deserve it





>Everyone is a jewish puppet

How can whites even compete? or any force in the entire universe, really.



Ah, yes, how could I forget about Stalin's redemption arc, my favorite part.




>goyim goyim goy goyim goy goy goyim

Aren't there any other yiddish words you can learn? Why are neo-Nazis so compulsive with their tired memes?



The reason you get banned is because you spam literal repetitive shite like this with no arguments.



Either lurk until you can actually understand politics and create arguments, or get banned for being a pest.


File: a0d7a0187ef2217⋯.jpg (1017.24 KB, 2000x1656, 250:207, 59a8bbab4cd9aa8a96484b550d….jpg)


>muh China was controlled by Jews

>muh Rittenberg

To quote Ismail:

>Sidney Rittenberg worked as a translator, so naturally he would be in a position to "observe" the Chinese leaders whom he assisted. Observation doesn't imply control, especially considering that (as one biography notes) "[during the Cultural Revolution] he ran afoul of Jiang Qing, Mao's wife and member of the Gang of Four, and was sent to solitary for another 10 years" ("another" because he was also in confinement in the late 40s and early 50s as a supposed American spy.)

The thread >>>/marx/10163


>In the German revolution of 1919 alone, the Communist leaders were mostly kikes.

This again?



>Over 80% of foreign support for the commie chinks were kikes

Assuming the "over 80%" bit is even true, what were the practical results? Rittenberg was persecuted twice under Mao. I also don't know how one could differentiate Israel Epstein from the likes of non-Jews like Edgar Snow or Anna Louise Strong, other than the fact that Snow and Strong were both more influential than Epstein and Epstein ended up arrested under Mao.



>"hes never read Marx outside the communist manifesto, ONCE, as part of his debate with Zizek"

Why would tell such an dishonest lie? He clearly said he also read half of it when he was 18


the archetypes fucking exist man whether u like it or not. It is the exact opposite of a scientific materialist worldview because it is beyond science. Anything outside the realm of what we already know is usually ridiculed until humans can rationally perceive it as an absolute truth. Just because we can't prove something doesn't mean it is invalid. We have more work to do as a species to fully comprehend the inner workings of the human psyche.



>muh archetypes

>until humans can rationally perceive it as an absolute truth.

except that will never happen because you cant prove them definitively to exist or not. Its like religious beliefs. Its one thing to say something is unproven but petersons archetypes are literally unfalsifiable


File: 4791b2161eed46c⋯.jpg (123.94 KB, 532x800, 133:200, 4791b2161eed46c53607e270a4….jpg)


think of it like this. a much higher percentage of americans are in prison than any other country in the world soviet union (while it existed) included. gulags were just prisons but less shitty and .1% of people there were there for political crimes. sometimes people even got to leave and they would voluntarily go back since it didn't really suck like an american prison or nazi concentration camp

everything we know about the soviet union is misinformation. and shills like peterson use that misinformation to push a far right agenda to stop any form of modern socialism or prosperity for the masses in its tracks

[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / b2 / baaa / choroy / dempart / doomer / mde / pinoy / vichan ]