Controversial General Political Discussion

[Logiko]

My opinions on subjects never changed though. The closest thing is Isareal-Palestine which was something I knew nothing about.

If you tell me that you don't agree anymore with what I mention. I'm completely ready to change my opinion as well.

You're once again using yourself to represent leftist as a whole. And just because I disagree with the methods of people who fancy themselves leftist, doesn't mean I'm against leftism itself.

I'm not a representation of leftist, I simply know the range of the leftists ideologies.

> This range is conditionned by deep philosophical conflicts and the action in front of the status co and capitalism today.

If you think that people can just call themselves leftists and depict liberal or conservatives point of view on things, there is a problem because it completely confuses the political spectrum. There are reasons why we call leftists "leftists" and there are reasons why we call rightists "rightists".

And I consider that I know quite a few thing about that since I literally travelled the political spectrum from right to left myself.

A. I'd be called a radical leftist by definition with the changes I support though.

Ok. I'm willing to believe you. Are you ok to talk about that ? What change would you like to see ?

. I literally explained the history and necessity of radical leftism and you agreed with it if I remember correctly....

Yes. And yes, you are making mission to ridiculize every step I take to try to make a change based on the radical left spectrum. How do you explain that ?

Listen. Maybe you really think you are a radical like me and I'm willing to accept it as well, but for some reason you are adopting the rethoric that is literally opposed to radical leftism:

- From explaining that we must listen to everyone and not reject hurtfull ideology even through disrespect if necessary
- To denying CLEAR problems of problematic behaviors. (you are not the only one btw)
- To systematically using lies and the deformation of the rethoric that I use to make me look like a fool, cf examples above.
- To ridiculize my argumentation systematically when I try to make BASIC radical and materialist leftist points (and trust me, I know, despite what I just told you before, that I'm explaining things very clearly here)
- To rant because Iabel people
- To not understanding why similar opinions on the world will also correlate with similar political place on the political spectrum and political groups.
Etc..

A radical leftist do not criticize other for doing so, they are usually doing the SAME things. So either, you are not surrounded in your environement by other radicals (and you can't see this) or there is a problem. Either you are lying to me or you are lying to yourself.

OR (and this is possible)

You didn't really thought about it, and you have contradictory beliefs. This is highly possible since I've seen you - as you said - say things that were really ok and others not so much.

I disagreed with your attempts to get Zenos7 punished

It's not just Zenos, it's the entire panel. I won't have this debate back. I've already explained in detail and CLEARLY why transphobia on this forum was not properly moderated. And I include what Zenos do say sometimes as well.

Second example : The refusal to moderate transphobic post and the delegitimization of the critics against transphobic post

Again, here are the rules of the forum on transphobia (funny, it's not mentionned, but I will consider that it's included in "discriminatory comments"):

"Discrimination: Sexism, Racism, Xenophobia, Homophobia aren't permitted. Berating users specifically or making vague discriminatory comments to bait a reaction out of users will likewise not be tolerated, any off-topic discriminatory remarks will be dealt with accordingly.


Before going further : What is transidentity and what is transphobia ? :

For you to understand that, I will post a set of ressources from the LEFTIST LIBRARY and OTHERS:

1. Transidentity

- [VIDEO] - Identity : A Trans coming out story - How it would feel like to be Transgender ? - Philosophy Tube - IMPORTANT
> This video is magic and amazing. It's the most important video you can watch to understand what transidentity is. It literally a transition in real time and it's really touching. Really ! I recommend it !

HERE : Is a video to explain briefly what transgenderism or transidentity is
HERE : Is a video to explain transidentidy from a scientific point of view
HERE : Is a video with researches sources to explain why Transidentity is not a mental illness.

2. Transphobia

To really understand what is transphobia: Those two sources are the most important:

What is Transphobia : From the site TransActual (a trans activist site)
What is Transphobia : From the site Planned Parenthood (The institutions that helps LGBTQI+ people and young women in distress)

For our problem here, the important part to understand is this one (Quote from the second source):

"Transmisia/transphobia takes many forms. In general, transmisia/transphobia is any attitude, belief, behavior, or policy that:

• Stigmatizes or harms trans, nonbinary, and gender nonconforming people;
• Denies the validity of their identities;
• Sees them as less human; and/or
• Treats them as less worthy of care and respect."

HERE : Is a "Some More News" Video debunking a lot of transphobic myth and bigoted history

And a few ressources on transphobia :

- [VIDEO] - What is transphobia ? - Philosophy Tube
- [STUDY] - Transphobia's impact on Trans men
- [STUDY] - Transphobia's impact on Trans women

Now..

- Context : Before coming to this forum, I was not a big trans defender, of course I was pro LGBTQI+ but not really actively... then I noticed Yamato fans being weird, and transphobic to the point of trashing up Yamato's personnality AND genderfluidity (yes, Yamato is not just a man or a woman, but most likely both depending on situations).. Weird.. but then I noticed here and there on the forum, an important number of transphobic rethoric.. and those were not moderated. In good faith, knowing that transidentity is not something easy to understand, I made a big post in the political thread to explain what transidentity was, testimonies from trans people, various explanations etc. After that I demonstrated why it could be harmfull for Trans to buy Hogward Legacy and therefore finance JKR a transphobic radical feminist. I clearly stated that it was okay to buy the game but I wanted people to know the possible consequences...

You can go back to this post if you type "#ThePostThatStartedTheWar" in the research bar. After facing a big shielding from reactionnaries.. I then talked about the right that Trans should have to uses women's bathroom..

Oh my.. the error..

After this thread and this remark, I faced multiple days of transphobia, first light, then extrem from multiple people. So of course, I didn't let that pass and I countered.. a LOT. No insults, simple labels and big explanations. One guy refused to back off and I continued countering his dangerous rethoric for hours (yes, dangerous because even words can hurt, you never know who can be reading what you say and how it can affect them) .. and the threadban came.. Not just for him, but for me too. I gave you the reason at the beginning.

This is the moment when I felt that there was a problem.

After that, the political thread was launched and various subject appeared. And sometimes.. transphobic arguments. Each time I had to face them because said argument were not moderated. Transphobic posts of this "battle" are still visible to this day.

In fact even a moderator - under the excuse of rationnality - tried to explain what transgenderism is but clearly did not understand anything about it and made false claims while explaining that yes, trans people are victims of hate crimes but... they are some are still demanding too much (note : having equal rights) and should stay at their place. (I will not quote it, but if the staff wants to have it, I will show it to you) (not in those words exactly)


- Moderation : I started to see a strange paterns. So not only transphobic posts were not moderated, but I noticed that I was being laughed at and mocked by the moderation for reporting people for transphobia. For them, what I was reporting was not transphobic.

For them, someone saying "trans people are mentally ill" OR "trans women are not women" are not transphobic rethoric and therefore should not be moderated. It's just "another vision of the world".

So, let me repeat what Transphobia is as described by Transpeople who face it and activists or helpers who fight violences against trans people and those who attempt suicide daily":

"Transmisia/transphobia takes many forms. In general, transmisia/transphobia is any attitude, belief, behavior, or policy that:

• Stigmatizes or harms trans, nonbinary, and gender nonconforming people;
• Denies the validity of their identities;
• Sees them as less human; and/or
• Treats them as less worthy of care and respect."

In other words, Transphobia means not only being harmfull directly to transpeople or calling for violence against them, it can be also more basic stuff like denying their validity or their identity. So..

- When someones calls Trans people "mentally ill" : Not only are they showing psychophobia (other big subject here), but they are stigmatizing trans people
- When someones says that "Trans women are not women or are men" : They are DENYING the VALIDITY of their identities.

In both case, it's Transphobia and it's potentially harmfull for any trans people that could pass by.

You don't agree ? I don't care. We are not talking about agreeing here, but respecting the human rights and dignity of other people. Where I live, such post could be liable to a fine in front of the Police !

Transphobia is not okay and it hurt some peoples. So, behave ! If that's too radical for you, the problem is not me.

THOSE TWO THINGS (racist rethoric and deny of transphobia) are two undeniable proof that at least a part of the moderation here is NOT educated on important subjects related to discriminations or hatefull rethorics and CAN'T therefore apply the rules correctly.. at the moment !

Also : You don't understand : I don't want anyone to get punished. In reality I'm against that. I simply want people to understand that this is not accepted and for the post to be removed. Nothing more. (and eventually, if they keep doing it, a little TO)

Again. If you REALLY think that you support Trans, look at what I described in this quote. What I said is not my invention, it's based on the work of activists who face transphobia everyday. Those people know what they are dealing with and when they say that saying "a trans woman is not a woman" is damaging for trans people, it's not a small estimation, it's a known fact.

If you still think I'm saying some BS on the matter, then, I'm sorry, but you are simply ignoring THEIR experiences. And you are not on their side.

So.. I'm willing to listen, but the effort but go both ways. have a talk with the staff, and consider what I said about transphobia here:

>>

A - Transphobia :

The moderation is far too tolerant on transphobia. In my thread on moderation linked before, I demonstrated how Transphobia was being accepted here. This should not happen on a forum with strict rules on discrimination. We can't know what is the state of people who read hate against their identity online, words can hurt and kill.

To fix that, I think there are a few things to do:

- Moderators must all be aware of the ENTIRE spectra of transphobia. For that, I have listed sources in the linked thread about Moderation.
- The rules must be clarified and transphobia must be added, as today, this is the part of LGBTQI+ people that is the most attacked with interesex people
- I recommend that you link sources about transidentity in the rule OR in another section of the forum (I suggest you add a few sources about diverses social subject as well : Racism, Anti-semitism, Islamophobia etc., if you want I have a LOT of ressources for you in the LEFTIST LIBRARY)
- As a bonus, I would highly suggest that you recruit people from the trans community who wants to help to reduce the problem as a moderator

And I'm not advocating for bans here. You define your own limits. If it was me, I would simply remove the transphobic content and eventually threadban after a few clear warnings. Nothing more. Again, I have the feeling that you think I want to censor people or punish them, but it's not my goal anymore. I think it's possible to make change without banning everyone.

I'm a moderator. I wanted the guy the elaborate so I could decide the exact punishment. I never said he was okay or supported what he said so...

Come on.. The guy says this:
>>

While I have no doubt this is true, have you looked into the subject of race realism?

and

Nazism might have been correct on some grounds, like ethnic responsibility to one's nation isn't AS replicated when a foreign element is in one's nation (i.e. Jewish people in this context) but that doesn't mean you kill them or harm them.

I see instantly the problem (race realism is scientific racism > ergo racism), so I'm calling you to stop and warn the guy from going too far:
>>

@Uncle Van I sence something dark here.

"Race realism" is a fascist and racist concept that consider that races are a reality and that some races are biologically superior to others because of what they think science says.

Instead you turn against me. You say that "Racial differences are facts" and you tell him yourself that I called you to get him banned, when all I wanted is for you to remove the content and warn the guy not to go too far, which he did. And you are telling me that you continued to debate about race with the guys so you could see if there was a problem ?

Come on... Why can't you just admit that it was not the best reaction ? I'm not an a*shole, I can understand that.

You're deliberately attributing scientific facts with Nazism as a scare tactic. Race does exist. The human race for example. Climate differentiates the human race in many ways, one of them being those with lighter skin tones being more susceptible to skin cancer.

1. Race realism > Scientific Racism > One of the basis of Nazism.
2. It's the human SPECIE not "race". There are no races in humans.
3. The guy was talking about "race realism" which is the belief in scientific racism that distinguish humans that are superior that others. So please. Just stop.

It was not ok to let him go on. It was not ok to debate about that. It was not ok period. You can't have a rule about the refusal to accept Nazi ideology on the forum and debate about a the good and bad point of and ideology used by Nazis.

Let's just agree not to reproduce that.

You're assuming I don't understand or refuse to accept?

Your words speak for you. If you understood the problem, you would never have said that. Simple as that.

We were talking about something very specific, which is the method of telling people they are perfect and everyone else the problem, appeals to narcissists. How does saying that correlates to me believing obese people deserve no respect, I do not know.

Because that method that you are criticizing IS EXACTLY what we do when we understand the problematic that face people in obesity or people with disabilities. Anyone who understand this problematic understands ALSO the importance of positive affirmation.

Accepting people as they are, meaning sometimes telling them that they are perfect as they are, means that you do not attach the notion of perfection on something that the person can't control, but on her personnality and behavior ! Someone who understands the struggle of people in difficulty ALSO understands the importance of NEVER reducing a person to their situation when talking to them !

If a person needs you to tell them that they have too much weight, they will ASK you. If a person needs you to ask them what to do with their lives, they will ASK you !! It's not your place or anyone elses place to tell someone that they are disabled or too fat. THEY ALREADY KNOW.

From experience (really, just this week I had an argument with a relative who tried to explain to me how to deal with my mental illness) I can assure you that there is nothing better than positive affirmation (or even no affirmation at all) to HELP a person get over a situation.

Simply accept the person as they are. ("perfect" as they are). Adding a judgment or an advice on the lives of people who already stuggle against themselves only adds more pressure on them.

So the ONLY thing that you can do, is be there for them.

As mentioned before, you exaggerate and assume what I believe with specific circumstances, and try to correlate it to a broad spectrum.

No. The notion of pushing self development on people with difficulty is a CORE value of meritocracy. I do not assume, I once again only analyze what you are saying.

Again, i'm open to change my mind if you come back on that.

Meritocracy, just like patriarchy is a system that oppresses us all and that we legitimizes ourselves. This is like a system on auto-feed. This type of sentences are typical of people who have meritocracy still very deeply rooted in their ideology (once again, I talk from experience, I have to face this with some of my relatives regularily).

You can't be a radical leftist and still keep that type of ideology, it's just not compatible. And on the political spectrum, the political family that arbors the most those traits are liberals and conservatives.

So you tell me..

Sounds like you're once again using yourself to represent everyone else. And I would always post links to prove whatever I said about you. With me, you heavily exaggerate.

Well. I guess there is not a lot of people who want change here. So it's fair.

Let's say that you do that to me specifically.. Which is not really better. Aside from arrogance my arguments are concretes.

With me, you heavily exaggerate.

Mate.. you are constantly deforming and lying about things I say. I ALWAYS have to quote everything back, either because you distord the context, or one word or convenientely forget one sentence, which is enough to completely ruin my argument and make me look like a fool.

I told you, when I speak, i'm always very careful about the words I use to avoid this kind of situation, so when you deform something, I know it instantly.

So stop that. And respect will come back.

Yeah no. I was specifically talking about you laughing off posts about men's struggles which included high rate of suicide.

What you don't remember is that I never laughed at those facts. I laughed at the argumentation of Bob saying that women had a better time than men who were really struggling in front of feminism. This argumentation was indeed laughable.

On the other hand I went his way each time he developped the struggle of men even going as far as telling him MULTIPLE TIMES that he did understand one basic aspect of Patriarchy (the struggle of men) but refused to accept that it was part of a larger system (patriarchy) and that therefore women had it MUCH harder.

And you took that, and distorded it to make me laugh at men struggling.. while completely odisregarding the fact that >> I AM a man that is struggling and who faced personnaly the problem of suicide.

So I'm willing to believe that you don't remember or maybe don't really understand what I say sometimes.. but please, be careful mate. Saying that I'm making fun of men who struggle and deal with suicide when it's exactly my situation is just nonsense.. don't your think ?

And for the last part, yes, when you consider that "we should not play hot potatoes to see who really struggles"... I'm sorry but this is the denial of a clear feminist constatation and the struggle against patriarchy. It's a necessity to understand that women have a much harder time than men under patriarchy.

Never said nor implied that the center was the rational way

Ok.. You know what ? Maybe it's my memory playing tricks. I don't want to take a half hour to find that quote back. So I will come back on that.

And the anarcho-communist answer is that you build an alternative, prefiguring communism by building structures that do what you think should be done, and then that becomes an alternative that exists which people can turn to if they want to, and people turning to it may or may not be violent,

I like this way better.

I don't think a revolution is really needed. But this might be my ignorance talking.

I think the argument is that the means and the ends are the same thing, if you push a ball one way, all else being equal, the ball will move in that direction, so if you just reproduce and reinforce capitalism, you will only end up with capitalism, does that make sense?

I get that, but it's an affirmation that stands on the hypothesis that capitalism can only reproduce capitalism..

But what happens when we remove Meritocracy from the equation ?

Maybe it's my ignorance once again talking, but did Marx ever talked about Meritocracy as a system ? Because... let's take the materialist approach. The materialist approach will say that Meritocracy is created by Capitalism as a way to justify itself... but Meritocracy is - after all - just a belief system. What happens if we manage to convince everyone that Meritocracy is BS ?

Materialist would tell me "But the bourgoisie will by essence refuse to question Meritocracy".. maybe yes.. But let's say that this ideology becomes hegemonic:
- In the working classes
- In the middle class
- The the small bourgeoisies
And let's say that it becomes "HYPE" to stop believing in that dumb system (because after all, Sciences explains us that it's BS)..

Well.. isn't there a chance here to create a socialist transition THROUGH capitalism ? By literally transforming capitalism INTO a socialist system gradually ?

I want to believe in that.. but this might be my idealistic side talking here.

When it comes to materialism, I am reffering to the belief that only physical things exist and that there are no spirits, I believe that physical things do have an effect on us, but I do believe that spirits exist

I see. I think it's indeed not incompatible with materialism. What you are talking about here is you not being physicalist.

You are a materialist but still have spiritual beliefs.

I - on the other hand - am completely physicalist and materialist. I do not believe in anything spiritual in the physical sence (Although I can be spiritual in the ideological sence). For me, anything spiritual would be by defaut part of the material reality of the world, simply a reality that we would not yet understand. (I do not even believe in Free Will)

 

[Daniel]

and then that becomes an alternative that exists which people can turn to if they want to, and people turning to it may or may not be violent,

Once the government of a nation takes control over the life of an entire population, it will become almost, if not impossible for these people to turn into an alternative solution since the those in the government will create "deterrents" in place such that the will of rebellion will eventually get worn down.

It gets real hard for the majority of the population over there after that.

Post automatically merged: Oct 16, 2024

but refused to accept that it was part of a larger system (patriarchy)

So you wanted him to handwave the blame towards some other party/system instead of giving him advice on how to deal with his plight?

Also got him permabanned from here too. Don't think he'll forget that either.

All I've seen from you from your posts are constant criticisms and no affirmations.

 

[Uncle Van]

I'm not a representation of leftist, I simply know the range of the leftists ideologies.

Then you can stop saying people are anti-left for disagreeing with your methods on a weeb forum. Emphasis on weeb forum.

If you think that people can just call themselves leftists and depict liberal or conservatives point of view on things, there is a problem because it completely confuses the political spectrum. There are reasons why we call leftists "leftists" and there are reasons why we call rightists "rightists".

Not like there are people who give wrong labels.

And I consider that I know quite a few thing about that since I literally travelled the political spectrum from right to left myself.

And I literally work around this shit 24/7. But I dont go around saying I'm more qualified than others or that my words hold more weight than them.

Ok. I'm willing to believe you. Are you ok to talk about that ? What change would you like to see ?

As stated multiple times before, we need a social democracy to start things off. Politicians need to get kicked out of the stock market, and heavy regulation on capitalism to prevent monopolies and protect workers rights. Capitalism by it's very nature relies on inequality and exploitation.

Yes. And yes, you are making mission to ridiculize every step I take to try to make a change based on the radical left spectrum. How do you explain that ?

This is a weeb forum for the purpose of escapism from the struggles and exhaustion of real life. You are trying to bring real world political nonsense to them, and they clearly expressed their hatred of politics when unwanted. That is why this thread is semi-hidden.

You are like a manager trying to call their employee when they're on vacation, and calling them lazy for not picking up the phone for work related stuff.

A radical leftist do not criticize other for doing so, they are usually doing the SAME things. So either, you are not surrounded in your environement by other radicals (and you can't see this) or there is a problem. Either you are lying to me or you are lying to yourself.

OR (and this is possible)

You didn't really thought about it, and you have contradictory beliefs. This is highly possible since I've seen you - as you said - say things that were really ok and others not so much.

Cult-like behavior. That's like saying a Zoro fan while always agree with a Zoro fan.

It's not just Zenos, it's the entire panel. I won't have this debate back. I've already explained in detail and CLEARLY why transphobia on this forum was not properly moderated. And I include what Zenos do say sometimes as well.

Again. If you REALLY think that you support Trans, look at what I described in this quote. What I said is not my invention, it's based on the work of activists who face transphobia everyday. Those people know what they are dealing with and when they say that saying "a trans woman is not a woman" is damaging for trans people, it's not a small estimation, it's a known fact.

Ever changing definitions that you find on different websites doesn't override the official and universal definition of a trans woman. Using words correct by definition is not transphobia.

I see instantly the problem (race realism is scientific racism > ergo racism), so I'm calling you to stop and warn the guy from going too far:
>>


Instead you turn against me. You say that "Racial differences are facts" and you tell him yourself that I called you to get him banned, when all I wanted is for you to remove the content and warn the guy not to go too far, which he did. And you are telling me that you continued to debate about race with the guys so you could see if there was a problem ?

I corrected the guy and he agreed. You have a habit of crying wolf so it's important to make sure.

Because that method that you are criticizing IS EXACTLY what we do when we understand the problematic that face people in obesity or people with disabilities. Anyone who understand this problematic understands ALSO the importance of positive affirmation.

Once again, we were talking about something very specific, one of them being the Fat Acceptance movement which claims obesity is healthy and sexy, which is factually untrue. Harsh truths are better than comforting lies, especially of those lies are having them die before age 40.

Books have chapters. If someone disagrees with a single chapter, you make it seem like they disagree with the whole book.

Well. I guess there is not a lot of people who want change here. So it's fair.

Yeah you can start by not throwing politics in the face of people who are here for escapism and entertainment. I'm certain that if a random Jehova Witness shows up at a child's birthday party, he'd get kicked out.

What you don't remember is that I never laughed at those facts. I laughed at the argumentation of Bob saying that women had a better time than men who were really struggling in front of feminism. This argumentation was indeed laughable.

On the other hand I went his way each time he developped the struggle of men even going as far as telling him MULTIPLE TIMES that he did understand one basic aspect of Patriarchy (the struggle of men) but refused to accept that it was part of a larger system (patriarchy) and that therefore women had it MUCH harder.

And you took that, and distorded it to make me laugh at men struggling.. while completely odisregarding the fact that >> I AM a man that is struggling and who faced personnaly the problem of suicide.

So I'm willing to believe that you don't remember or maybe don't really understand what I say sometimes.. but please, be careful mate. Saying that I'm making fun of men who struggle and deal with suicide when it's exactly my situation is just nonsense.. don't your think ?

When somwone brings up suicide rates, responding with sarcastic gifs, emotes and saying "boohoo poor men" is quite dismissive and problematic.

Ok.. You know what ? Maybe it's my memory playing tricks. I don't want to take a half hour to find that quote back. So I will come back on that.

Which is a regular thing with you. I got like 10 posts with me saying liberalism, centrism, and libertarianism wont solve a thing in right wing America.

 

[Brush D. Teeth]

During the Trump campaign of 2016 there was definitely a lot of manipulation with algorithms on YouTube, Facebook and internet as a whole. This was fully demonstrated by stuff like Cambridge analytica.

Also asking people what are their values and what should you do to make them change their minds is way too direct imo. But yes you have to find that out

Still happening.

 

[Blax Blah]

Once the government of a nation takes control over the life of an entire population, it will become almost, if not impossible for these people to turn into an alternative solution since the those in the government will create "deterrents" in place such that the will of rebellion will eventually get worn down.

It gets real hard for the majority of the population over there after that.

Post automatically merged: Oct 16, 2024

So you wanted him to handwave the blame towards some other party/system instead of giving him advice on how to deal with his plight?

Also got him permabanned from here too. Don't think he'll forget that either.

All I've seen from you from your posts are constant criticisms and no affirmations.

"
I like this way better.

I don't think a revolution is really needed. But this might be my ignorance talking."

I think that's up to whether people want to use those structures or not, and whether companies and the state will be violent about people choosing it or not, but yeah,

"
get that, but it's an affirmation that stands on the hypothesis that capitalism can only reproduce capitalism..

But what happens when we remove Meritocracy from the equation ?

Maybe it's my ignorance once again talking, but did Marx ever talked about Meritocracy as a system ? Because... let's take the materialist approach. The materialist approach will say that Meritocracy is created by Capitalism as a way to justify itself... but Meritocracy is - after all - just a belief system. What happens if we manage to convince everyone that Meritocracy is BS ?

Materialist would tell me "But the bourgoisie will by essence refuse to question Meritocracy".. maybe yes.. But let's say that this ideology becomes hegemonic:
- In the working classes
- In the middle class
- The the small bourgeoisies
And let's say that it becomes "HYPE" to stop believing in that dumb system (because after all, Sciences explains us that it's BS)..

Well.. isn't there a chance here to create a socialist transition THROUGH capitalism ? By literally transforming capitalism INTO a socialist system gradually ?

I want to believe in that.. but this might be my idealistic side talking here. "

Well I will link a book here written by Zoe Baker about means an ends unity, but I would like to mention, from a socialist point of view, capitalism is not meritocratic, I think because the idea of a capitalist exploiting workers comes from the fact that a capitalist just owns capital and lives off of the profit created by the workers working and developing that capital, only paying them back some of the value their work produces, and many socialists do not want a meritocratic system, they want a system that is "from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs", and that doesn't mean you can not get more by working more, but for example, you would have guaranteed food, housing, water, even if you may say people don't "deserve" that,

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/anarchopac-means-and-ends

I remember anark making a video about meritocracy too, I will link it here too:

Edit: I think this quote from the Means and Ends book by Zoe Baker would be pretty good to see to get a first idea of the book,

" it is not enough to desire something; if one really wants it adequate means must be used to secure it. And these means are not arbitrary, but instead cannot but be conditioned by the ends we aspire to and by the circumstances in which the struggle takes place, for if we ignore the choice of means we would achieve other ends, possibly diametrically opposed to those we aspire to, and this would be the obvious and inevitable consequence of our choice of means. Whoever sets out on the highroad and takes a wrong turning does not go where he intends to go but where the road leads him.[1]"

Post automatically merged: Oct 16, 2024

Once the government of a nation takes control over the life of an entire population, it will become almost, if not impossible for these people to turn into an alternative solution since the those in the government will create "deterrents" in place such that the will of rebellion will eventually get worn down.

It gets real hard for the majority of the population over there after that.

Post automatically merged: Oct 16, 2024

So you wanted him to handwave the blame towards some other party/system instead of giving him advice on how to deal with his plight?

Also got him permabanned from here too. Don't think he'll forget that either.

All I've seen from you from your posts are constant criticisms and no affirmations.

I think I don't know enough to know what to support, but, I want to help other people anyway, and if say donating money and helping people get housing and food and water is illegal, I will do it illegaly,

 

[Mathias]

A bunch of good scientific and peer reviewed studies that goes against my opinion and good materialist counter arguments mainly.

A solid and rationnal argumentation helps too. I can change my opinion quite easily nowadays.

This might be true for a "belief system" but not for every opinions. When Brazil banned twitter you were in favor of protesting against the government and its institutions for some reason. Defending big corps all of a sudden somehow.

 

[Blax Blah]

This might be true for a "belief system" but not for every opinions. When Brazil banned twitter you were in favor of protesting against the government and its institutions for some reason. Defending big corps all of a sudden somehow.

They may not be defending a big corporation, but defending someone's freedom to use some normal software,

 

[Mathias]

They may not be defending a big corporation, but defending someone's freedom to use some normal software,

Then they shouldn’t defend twitter

 

[Blax Blah]

Then they shouldn’t defend twitter

It could be seen as indirectly defending twitter, but it may be more about defending people's ability to use twitter, I'm not sure because I haven't read or remember seeing that conversation,

 

[Mathias]

It could be seen as indirectly defending twitter, but it may be more about defending people's ability to use twitter, I'm not sure because I haven't read or remember seeing that conversation,

The recent Brazilian twitter ban has nothing to do with defending « free speech ». You’ll see people like Logiko uniting with Nameless on that subject. Peak comedy.

 

[Brush D. Teeth]

Why can't Nameless agree with Logiko on some topic?

 

[Mathias]

Why can't Nameless agree with Logiko on some topic?

They can and then it’s called peak comedy

 

[Blax Blah]

The recent Brazilian twitter ban has nothing to do with defending « free speech ». You’ll see people like Logiko uniting with Nameless on that subject. Peak comedy.

I think I only heard about it and didn't see much about it, what does it have to do with?,

 

[NAMELESS]

The recent Brazilian twitter ban has nothing to do with defending « free speech ». You’ll see people like Logiko uniting with Nameless on that subject. Peak comedy.

This might be true for a "belief system" but not for every opinions. When Brazil banned twitter you were in favor of protesting against the government and its institutions for some reason. Defending big corps all of a sudden somehow.

It has everything to do with free speech. they arrested 0 left wing journalists/influencers. They label right wing guys as fake news spreaders and get them cancelled and later on arrested. Imagine being so ignorant that you side with dictators...wait, that is what left wingers have always done.

Post automatically merged: Oct 16, 2024

Why can't Nameless agree with Logiko on some topic?

we both like rock/metal,so there is that.

 

[Blax Blah]

https://x.com/ftchina/status/1838263412402327938

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GYPcBpTXwAAy0mp?format=jpg&name=medium

 

[NAMELESS]

I think I only heard about it and didn't see much about it, what does it have to do with?,

Brazilian supreme court is going after conservatives voicing their opinions online. Elon refused to comply with their illegal actions, so they banned twitter. The first victim was actually rumble,it has being banned for over a a year now.

 

[Logiko]

So you wanted him to handwave the blame towards some other party/system instead of giving him advice on how to deal with his plight?

Also got him permabanned from here too. Don't think he'll forget that either.

All I've seen from you from your posts are constant criticisms and no affirmations.

Either, you didn't read what I said to him or you don't care to understand at the moment:

First, the guy didn't struggle. Bob was someone who ADVOCATED for men who struggled, because for him there was a injustive and women are treated better than men. I actually gave him PLENTY of affirmation multiple ways how - as a man - you can deal with struggles, because - let me remind you once again - this is a subject that touch me DIRECTLY compared to Bob who was simply rambling anti-feminist things because he listened to much to Shapiro or J.Peterson.

So please, do not even try to reverse the blame here. I don't like this kind of behavior.

I took HOURS of my times to give him ressources on the reality of the situations of men AND women and to make him understand the problem with Patriarchy which is - BTW - not a party, and not some kind of organization, but a SYSTEMIC problem. If you want to understand what this means > Leftist Library section "understanding feminism"

Then you can stop saying people are anti-left for disagreeing with your methods on a weeb forum. Emphasis on weeb forum.

That's not gonna happen. Like I told you, if you depict a set of beliefs, you are socially part of a political group on the political spectrum OR highly contradictory.

For ex. You can't be anti-feminist and a leftist.. that's not how things work.

Not like there are people who give wrong labels.

I've never been proven wrong on the labels I gave until now. Can't say the same for others.

And I literally work around this shit 24/7. But I dont go around saying I'm more qualified than others or that my words hold more weight than them.

You show me things that make me think that you are actually opposed to leftist subject. But maybe it might be an error of comprehension between us. I'm willing to change my mind on that, but if you keep repeating things that show me exactly the opposite, I have no reason to.

As stated multiple times before, we need a social democracy to start things off. Politicians need to get kicked out of the stock market, and heavy regulation on capitalism to prevent monopolies and protect workers rights. Capitalism by it's very nature relies on inequality and exploitation.

Ok. I agree on that too. And this is indeed what a leftist would say.

What is your point of view on Meritocracy ?

This is a weeb forum for the purpose of escapism from the struggles and exhaustion of real life. You are trying to bring real world political nonsense to them

And this.. shows me that you do not understand one of the CORE value of radical leftism:

The refusal to politicize politic subjects.

I forgot this point, but this is one of the major reasons why I keep siding you up with liberals (because it's the side that constantly depoliticizes subjects). I've explained in detail many many many times how it was important as spectators to politicize the discussions about the stories we are consuming. This politization is ESSENTIAL to avoid missing core subjects relative to the narrations and the thematics of the story.

One Piece is highly political so choosing to refuse the politization of political subject (such the Nakama war was) is heavily problematic. It's prevent us from understanding and discussing why we are debating and fighting so much.

There is no such thing as "real world nonsense", politization is essential. You were just led to believe that depolitization was normal in discussion about stories, but it's not.

and they clearly expressed their hatred of politics when unwanted. That is why this thread is semi-hidden.

There is a difference between politization (which I did for example in the case of the minks) and labelization which I do when someone doesn't understand why I counter them so much. Politization is necessary to understand fully stories, labelization is necessary to avoid confusionnist behaviors is political debates.

You are like a manager trying to call their employee when they're on vacation, and calling them lazy for not picking up the phone for work related stuff

Not really no. And this show that there is a political gap between us. Until that gap is breached, I will have a hard time seeing you on my side.

Cult-like behavior. That's like saying a Zoro fan while always agree with a Zoro fan.

See.. you don't understand. What I'm telling you is different.

You are telling me that "i don't know who leftist are" for the simple reasons that your vision of leftists is made by people who call themselves leftist but are actually in opposition to leftist or radical leftists.. So when I tell you that you are not surrounded by radical, I'm telling you that you actually can't know what real leftism is because you are mainly listening to their political opposite.

We have guys like that in the political spectrum in France. Hollande, the former french president, keeps talking about the left when in reality, the guy made Macron who he is today and has developped a full rightist politic in power.

That's what I mean by confusionnist. People who try to appear progressive when they have in reality anti-progressist ideas. And the problem is your behavior is similar. You are telling me that you would be considered a radical leftist, and you give me good reasons to, but in your actions, you keep on showing me an ideology opposed to leftism.

You criticize capitalism, but you refuse the politization of debate.. it's purely contradictory. So when you use this rethoric and make me say that I'm not the representation of leftist when all my values are the product of leftists struggles, then you are creating confusionnism.

So again, I'm willing to change my mind, but you will have to make a step forward to understand that when I say that I understand leftism, I mean that I understand what is NOT leftism.

Ever changing definitions that you find on different websites doesn't override the official and universal definition of a trans woman. Using words correct by definition is not transphobia.

See.. refusal to accept the experience of oppressed people. You keep on thinking that I take what I learn from random website when in reality, this warnings of mine come from a deep understanding of the notions of heteronormativity and transphobia.

Understanding that is confirmed by all the people (trans people) I know the work.

You will not be on their side as long as you will think that I'm changing definition. This conspirationnist belief about cancel culture and woke that we are trying to cancel people for random words in general is ALSO one of the reason why I can't consider you on the progressive side at the moment.

Again. If you still do not believe me. Go to the r/trans , tell them that you are a moderator on a forum and you want to have a precision on transphobia. Ask them if saying "A trans woman is a man is transphobic". It's a very easy and quick exercice. You will have your answer and it will not come from me. (just be nice to them please)

I corrected the guy and he agreed. You have a habit of crying wolf so it's important to make sure.

sigh

Once again, we were talking about something very specific, one of them being the Fat Acceptance movement which claims obesity is healthy and sexy, which is factually untrue

Can you give me example of groups of people promoting body positivity who consider obesity as healthy ?

No because it looks like the common Van thing you are used to do, and I mean by that deforming completely the rethoric of people to create conflict.

People who promote body positivity and fat acceptance never say that obesity is healthyn they know the reality of obesity, but yeah, it's important to allow people in obesity to feel sexy. This is PRIMORDIAL for them to gain confidence, which is the opposite of what you promote by pushing your standard and judment on those people.

So indeed, we are talking about a specific thing, but it looks like you are not understanding the core of it.

Harsh truths are better than comforting lies

You see that the problem. "Harsh truth" are the reason why people can't accept themselves and start to get better. Because throwing to the face of those people a "harsh truth" that they ALREADY KNOW can only have one effect : Make them think that they do not do what is needed to get out of their situation.

In other word you harsh truth is not better, it's counter productive and pro actively hurtfull.

Yeah you can start by not throwing politics in the face of people who are here for escapism and entertainment. I'm certain that if a random Jehova Witness shows up at a child's birthday party, he'd get kicked out.

Yeah.. keep comparing politization of a political discussions about a political story with endoctrinement.

You are once again showing that you refuse politization, which is one of the core reason why leftist fight liberals in the first place.

When somewone brings up suicide rates, responding with sarcastic gifs, emotes and saying "boohoo poor men" is quite dismissive and problematic.

Again, you are lying. I laugh WHEN Bob tried to explain to me that men have it harder than women. in other words, in a separate comment with separate quote.

Again, you are lying about a conversation that you never followed.

It's crazy how I'm the only one making an effort to bridge the gap here, once again, but you keep the attacks and the lies.

Which is a regular thing with you. I got like 10 posts with me saying liberalism, centrism, and libertarianism wont solve a thing in right wing America.

Show them to me please.

Well I will link a book here written by Zoe Baker about means an ends unity, but I would like to mention, from a socialist point of view, capitalism is not meritocratic, I think because the idea of a capitalist exploiting workers comes from the fact that a capitalist just owns capital and lives off of the profit created by the workers working and developing that capital, only paying them back some of the value their work produces, and many socialists do not want a meritocratic system, they want a system that is "from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs", and that doesn't mean you can not get more by working more, but for example, you would have guaranteed food, housing, water, even if you may say people don't "deserve" that,

Capitalism is purely meritocratic. Meritocracy is the self justification for capitalist to maintain capitalism.

The ideas that some people deserve to be rich and other deserve to be exploited is the core value behind the justification of capitalism. There can't be change without removing meritocracy for the equation.

" it is not enough to desire something; if one really wants it adequate means must be used to secure it. And these means are not arbitrary, but instead cannot but be conditioned by the ends we aspire to and by the circumstances in which the struggle takes place, for if we ignore the choice of means we would achieve other ends, possibly diametrically opposed to those we aspire to, and this would be the obvious and inevitable consequence of our choice of means. Whoever sets out on the highroad and takes a wrong turning does not go where he intends to go but where the road leads him

We really have to make leftism more accessible... because this is unreadable. I had to put that in google traduction and even then it's make no sense.

The point is : Meritocracy is the problem and the backbone of capitalism. We cannot get rid of capitalism without getting rid of meritocracy at the same time because if we do not, we are bound to repeat capitalistic systems on other societies.

This might be true for a "belief system" but not for every opinions. When Brazil banned twitter you were in favor of protesting against the government and its institutions for some reason. Defending big corps all of a sudden somehow.

Oh come on, can you all stop lying about what I say, this is getting ridiculous...

I never said that we should protest against the gov for banning twitter. I remember in fact being quite neutral on the subject since I had no knowledge of the in and outs of the conflict. I even laughed at nameless for not being able to use twitter because of Elon..

On the other hand, the moment where I said that people should protest came when someone told me that the gov was planning to ban VPN's usage, which is not normal and highly dangerous.

As shown here:
>>>

8,800 dollars fine daily for accessing twitter with vpn in Brazil

This is so absurd

My answer:

Yeah. I don't really get the fine on users. They are not responsible. This is really shady, a lot of people are using X by necessity.

And to Nameless explaining to me that it was "communism"

No. That's actually the opposite. They know that people will have to use it and they intend to make money out of it. It's 101 capitalism.

And to this

This judge also ordered remove all vpn from google apps and app store

Bro....

I replied:

Now this is authoritarian. (But not fascist)

So I never sided with big corporation, but with the right of people to be able to access the information they want without restriction. Some people use twitter out of necessity. Banning twitter is one thing that I can understand, banning VPNs is dangerous for the freedom.

Can we have discussions without deforming the rethoric of others... please people ?

 

[Brush D. Teeth]

It has everything to do with free speech. they arrested 0 left wing journalists/influencers. They label right wing guys as fake news spreaders and get them cancelled and later on arrested. Imagine being so ignorant that you side with dictators...wait, that is what left wingers have always done.

Post automatically merged: Oct 16, 2024

we both like rock/metal,so there is that.

Left wing guys usually like left wing dictators, right wing guys like right wing dictators. Basically, everyone is always talking about democracy but no-one really likes it.

I am curious about what kinds of metal you like, but especially someone like Logiko (I am asking Nameless, not Logiko).

 

[Ravagerblade]

Of course the radical leftist would believe anything and everything must be politicized.

*A person walking down the street* "How dare they walk on the right side, Those Nazi, Transphobic Misogynistic pigs!"

Spoiler

 

[Logiko]

Of course the radical leftist would believe anything and everything must be politicized.