LGBT is not left. It's that simple. Their fight for (seemingly) equal rights (while homosexualists and heterosexuals have had equal rights for a long time) is a fight with an imaginary enemy, which is profitable for… Who? Right, the bourgeoisie. In short, LGBT is a tool in the hands of the bourgeoisie. THEIR STRUGGLE is a sex one, a gender one, doesn't matter, but it's not CLASS STRUGGLE. I personally have not seen demands to improve worker conditions and worker solidarity on LGBT events. No, they fucking want the equal rights that they already have. As for me, I don't care whether a person is gay or not. If he fights for worker rights and his struggle is a CLASS one, I will respect him regardless of sexual orientation
LGBT is not left
Other urls found in this thread:
We need a sex politics containment thread now.
I mean, in the US, the right to have sex for about 18-19 years, and the right to marry since like some time under Obama. It hasn't been that long.
But I generally agree to an extent. I'm burned tf out on gay shit. I used to love pride parades, but now they kind of piss me off. I don't know if they were any less corporate in 2012, but they at least felt like there was more to them… in my eyes at least. The last one I went to was so much boring corporate shit and so much of the fucking DNC monopolizing the political message… I used to see socialists and greens and the like. If they were at the last one I went to, I missed them.
Ok? Not everything is about political economy.
nigga you high
How in the fuck? At most it's one more thing to virtue signal about for woke points.
When you say "in short" it's supposed to be because you are summarizing a point you made, but you just stated your thesis twice.
Again, not everything has to be about class.
Because like you said social change to accept gays isn't really related to class struggle. Why would they be advocating for something different than the purpose of an event? Demanding LGBT parades be about class is as dumb as demanding for a union to be about LGBT people.
Being gay is still a capital crime in a lot of places.
Why you mad then?
But apparently if s/he also does pride parades at other times it chaps your ass?
Good post. OP is a closet faggot.
LGBT is not just the gays though, just saying.
Also in many parts (most) of the world, gay people do not have equal rights in law.
I thought we ditched this stupid idea 30+ years ago when all tankie countries legalized gays and pardoned+apologised to all the gays they imprisoned? They were ahead of almost every western state on this front.
That's an obnoxious and misleading way to put it, but read to the letter you're right.
To clarify one could say that being super pro-gay is as unleftist as being super anti-gay
LGBT faggots go the gulag too
False Over he vast majority of our worlds landmass they still face discrimination
Most religions on earth openly call for their persecution
And even in first world states where seemingly equal rights have been granted to them institutionalised discrimination and cultural backlash DOES continue
I don't think any harm exists in a socialist movement saying "LGBT Workers are still workers and do not deserve Euro be mistreated for personal choices / Immutable characteristics"
That's not IdPol it's just common sense
Being gay is cool and ok as long as its not the only thing that makes up your entire personality, there's a difference between normal people who happen to be gay and people who are like "LOOK AT ME IM RAINBOW REEE"
trannies are literal capitalism. victims of the pharma and plastic surgery industries. disgusting.
I have many faggot friends all the best faggots, everwhere I go faggots and you know what they tell me? They say user, I'm glad you gave me the choice to be gay and that you respect my lifestyle choice so I respect your straight white cisgender male superior status and I never talk about, promote, or heaven forbid publicly go on a date with another person of the same sex. In the spirit of MLK JR day I recognize what happens to minorities when they get too uppity about being considered humans with basic dignity. These are the type of friends I like, as a leftist. Only the best gays that no they're place. Fuck shemales though that shit is hella gross.
Yay, more idpol bitching.
Back to Zig Forums with all of you, faggots.
It's a DNC tactic yes, one that is quickly losing relevance though since even right wingers are much more accepting of it than in the past. So if you can't use it for political DNC it has no relevance.
Their struggle is one of acceptance and how people perceive them. But I think people will naturally be opinionated about it, I also don't see how it's super relevant to have a sexuality.
Go to r/socialism, niggerretard
Yes, they have.
Remember that LGBT does not represent all homosexual and trans people.
He is talking about western countries.
Oh yeah, corporations celebrate "Pride days", their pride parades in every city, TV shows litterally propagating that "being gay is OK". Say faggot and you can also say goodbye to your career.
Oh yeah, such discrimination.
So, maybe, the western faggots should support their rights and not islam as they usually do.
Where in the West do gays "support Islam"?
Not exactly. LGBT is no different from any other concern that is not directly related to the class struggle. I.e. it can be used as a tool.
And you will not see such demands in reading clubs, or historical re-enactment fairs.
Which is a correct position.
What rock were you living under? LGBT (well, IdPol in general) is often used to hijack and/or destroy Left movements. Once people start mixing in Liberal matters (rights of minorities) actually radical questions swiftly get phased out.
Fuck off scapegoating wrecker
Commercials and Libs getting people kicked of twitter for saying faggot does not invalidate that LGBT people still do genuinely face discrimination in some of these backwater de-industrialised shitholes like the worst parts of the coal and rust belt / Midwest
when you say that idpol is used by the ruling class to divide the left you are right but not in the way they think you are
you are the one doing the dividing
That is some damn fine bait you have there.
There are plenty of people who face discrimination. This alone doesn't make them revolutionary or even anti-bourgeois.
Sure. Substituting movement against Bourgeois order with the defence of minority rights means that Bourgeoisie wins. Top tier logic.
first our revolution. class is the biggest division
"first labor then gays" is my motto tbh
So MY revolution has to wait for YOURS? Nice homophobia you got there asshole.
Yeah, I'm not even sure how that's going to work. "First, the 10% of the workers that are cis/het/white/male/etc… oops, now there's some protestant-on-catholic drama, so now about 2% of workers will have a revolution…"
I… just do the universalism thing. Hard enough to piss off the hipster trendies.
Don't take the bait.
Too late for that.
It's not even bait. It's satire. We really have lost the ability to laugh, haven't we?
Nice bait. Now fuck off to Zig Forums
It’s because LGBT interest groups are no longer in opposition, but in the government. Pride Marches re no longer edgy, but no opposing them is.
In Russia being one of “the gays” was illegal tell 1993. CPRF and KKE are actively against “the gays.”
Institutional Discriminations is illegal.
Because gays are used by corporations to glorify the urban cosmopolitan heart of capital and look down on their region.
Yeah because your revolution is shit, it promotes lifestyles that doesn’t reproduce the human species, and attempts to marginalize those who do. Not doing reproductive labor is exploitation read Cockshott.
No it isn't.
Can you point me to the section that shows that institutional discrimination is never legal?
For instance denying black people loans because they're black or refusing to make a gay wedding cake?
Imagine citing an opinion piece that says the opposite of what you're saying because you didn't read it.
I never claimed that their isn’t people who want to discriminate against LGBT, I just said that it is illegal.
How is it illegal if the baker that discriminated won the case and faced no legal penalty?
Nigga, do you read?
Homosexuals and transexuals are fine and scientifically valid. "Queers" and "transgenders" is just humoring mental illness.
"Equal rights" for faggots is leftist.
There are different factions of egalitarianism. Theirs (and mainline leftism) has decided to focus primarily on 'equal rights' for identity, because it works.
It works because it builds a confederation to use against white men, who are opposed to egalitarianism instinctively, because they are genetically, intellectually, aesthetically, and physically superior to all other identity groups and it's unnatural for the weak to bully the strong as they do now under this leftist globo-homo hegemony.
Your orthodox marxist shit is a LARP. If you actually read Kapital, you'd see that socialism is predicted as an *inevitable* consequence of capitalism. Dialectical materialism produces more and more and more towards post scarcity, and eventually it just becomes more efficient to socialize everything, and efficiency will win out in the end.
The socialist revolution happened decades ago. News media is a propaganda mouthpiece for the ruling class, there is a progressive income tax and national bank in every country and if any country dares to not have one they get bombed to oblivion or the means of communication owned by the state labels them as pariah states and agitates endlessly for wars against them. The government is eternally in the business of providing subsidies and stimulus and tax breaks and bailouts to industry and ☘️finance☘️. The socialization of schools for politically correct education of children.
The socialist dream was realized long ago. But there's a problem: white men still exist.
If capitalists exist, it's capitalism. If capitalists don't exist, it may be socialism.
You don't need to tell faggots to kill themselves because they will get AIDS on their own and die.
This is just context denial of history.
Privilege, or private + law, is a law that applies only to one person (or, now, a group of people), with the implication that is an advantageous law or exception granted to them.
Privilege referred broadly to the nobility and aristocrats, not the bourgeoisie merchant class. Both sides of your picrel is bullshit, because there is not a single law that advantages young people, attractive people, able bodied people, or any of the other things on the left side. And, on the right side, Arnold Schwartzenegger is a bourgeoisie and powerful ruling elite who was brought down by an illegal immigrant ugly maid. That ugly illegal immigrant working class maid had enough power to take down a billionaire sitting politician despite him not committing a single crime, because he stuck his pee pee in her. His crime was being male (and race mixing but no body mentioned that).
Which, of course, changed when the capitalists deposed them to create government, and with it the institution of private property (the government/thug protection of MoP capitalists "own" against the workers who must use it, so that capitalists can exploit them for profits), which privileges them above the only other class that still exists, that of labor.
Until private property is abolished, and with it the capitalists that depend on it, the system in question is capitalism.
Leaving aside the fact that he wasn't a "billionaire", the guy is still worth hundreds of millions of dollars solely as the result of his divorce. Speaking of which, he wasn't humiliated by his maid, but by his wife, the daughter of a wealthy and powerful old industrial/political dynasty into which he very much married up, and a humiliation that only happened after he'd left office and declined a presidential run. Not to mention he's still getting film roles as fast as he cares to sign them.
Even pointing out what a pathetic slap on the wrist he got, the entire ordeal was strictly porky vs. porky.
Nice try, mr. Peterson, now fuck off to PragerU
Did you thought about the role of media in that process? And interest of bourgs standing behind them? Can you imagine what could happen if Schwarznegger won? The medial companies are litteraly making money on these #MeToo, LGBT etc. craps.
LGBT is left
LGBTs get universal free reeducation under communism.
Jordan Peterson is anti white you dipshit
Wew. Did you really just [sic] me like a pretentious faggot journo?
Okay. Was he rich and powerful and bourgie though? We're not getting chased off into the weeds on this. He was a sitting politician and a very very wealthy man with business interests.
An outright lie, moving right along.
Okay so after all that bullshit you admit that Schwartzenegger was indeed a porky after all. Thanks for wasting our time with your s0ylent pettiness. Now we can get to the actual issue.
How come this kind of porky vs porky didn't happen in the past, in those good old days of patriarchy? If it's porky vs porky it should have been happening as long as there have been porkys. But powerful rich men being taken down for non-crimes of sleeping with the help is a very new development. Powerful rich men didn't only just recently start sleeping with the help. The only thing that has changed has been the anti-male culture of crucifying a man for being a man. His wealth and power did not protect him. It was his maid's power, relative to his, which destroyed him. His wife didn't call in favors to destroy him. It was all handled in the court of public opinion and the legal courts, where he was disadvantaged and discriminated against due to his sex, and received no benefit from his power and money (other than what kind of lawyers he could get, I guess). Clearly his advantages weren't enough – all this despite him doing nothing wrong and having commited no crime.
>imagine using [sic] on an internet forum.
Nice LARP, Zig Forums
He was accused of sexual assaults in 2003. But he became a governor.
And what he has lost after the scandal with maid? Yes, his wife has divorced. But his wealth, power and popularity he hasn't lost.
It was just classical celebrity scandal.
That's your proof of socialism in America?
"Crucifying men for being men" is just narrative of corporations, the white liberal billionares are pushing and lobbying for these "new" "liberal" ideas and values. Where is that socialism?
Stop inventing things.
In Soviet Union only specific sexual act of male homosexuality was outlawed (and even it only nominally). As for KKE, it is not "actively against “the gays."" - that's Right-wing propaganda. KKE simply voted against the multiple reforms that also included introduction of gay marriage. Vote had nothing to do with the gay marriage and everything with reforming regular marriage (that would increase rights of the wealthy partners).
They dont actually.
At least here in the UK you can create a job opening that is only for LBTQP+s.
Where as you cant create a job opening thats only for normal people.
Try reading it yourself. It is communism that is inevitable, and it is historically inevitable (not actually).
So how come we always get fascism instead?
homosexuality is a bourgeois disease.
It stems from idleness and drug use, typical of the improductive parasites living at the expense of the worker.
That's why faggots were sent in gulags.
but you should.
because they sure do, to the point of defining themselves as homosexuals first and foremost.
and as such it will allways be the center point of any of their decisions.
Just goes to show you neither know nor care about the facts, and are content to regurgitate gibberish based on muh feefees and muh spooks.
That wasn't what I was >implying. Rather, my point was that even after his divorce, he's still worth hundreds of millions.
Due to his business ventures, his investments, and his alliances, yes.
Oh, ohohoho, oh my. That's the oldest porky-vs-porky powerplay in the book:
Gays being sent in gulags is due to their deviant sexual behavior, not because of them simply being gays (USSR penal code defined the punishable offense as the sexual act between two men)
In general, there are gays (normal dudes who keep their sexuality private and are in class struggle) and faggots (rainbow-flag obsessed, liberal idpolers)
LGBTs are just one of the many special interest groups that real political movements need to include in some way. Everyone needs their interests represented in some way.
Only problem is that stupid close-minded people, whether conservative, progressive, christian, muslim, atheist, whatever , tend to hate being on the same side.
Noone actually likes greedy people or groups. "Everyone" in total is for the most part against disproportionally represented or otherwise powerful entities.
And of course, individuals want their own freedoms protected too, so on that side of the fence it is also beneficial to be for a system where everyone holds a similar amount of power.
Gays = faggots
Stop with the arbitrary line. All to the camps
How much shitposting are you from 1/10, because sometimes it gets too hard to tell here.
Fuck off fag
The gay thing is yet another front in sexual politics to assert idealist, ideologically rightist aims on society in spite of all evidence and the flow of nature and human history. It is an assertion of sex-positivity when the reality of the world should push many men and women towards sex-negativity and a rejection of sexualist mores. (And it is doing exactly this; a good 1/3rd of men basically don't participate in sexual relations any more, or if they do it is only as a vice to be managed rather than anything positive.) By promulgating a gay lifestyle as an alternative, and more importantly removing all discussion of the reality of sexual life as a depressing nightmare best avoided, it pushes those on the fringes of society out of polite discussion entirely, and leaves people alone and terrified of everything around them, and when they themselves will be accused of having the incorrect sexual opinions. It is, in short, part of the invasive, totalizing movement necessary to late capitalism, where your sex life is no longer merely restricted but what you are allowed to feel and think is carefully regulated by powerful interests. It's an insult, and intended to be such.
The obvious answer to "gay rights" was simply to stop killing or institutionalizing people for homosexual behavior, and to stop with the obsessive search for homosexuals which has obviously been a failure and the interest of a few maniacs. The average person didn't really care that much about homosexuals, outside of perhaps disgust and a belief inherited from religion that such excesses were sinful and degrading. The drive tp hunt down and stamp out homosexuals was purely an interest of the upper classes and of a few obsessives, and that's why eventually there was a backlash and homosexuality was decriminalized, which was the right thing to do. Since that failed, the new strategy of the elites has been to push a deliberately noxious "gay lifestyle" and identity politics to continue the same aims as criminalization under a new guise, and most importantly to preserve the privilege of elite homosexuals (who were largely immune to persecution under the old laws), while keeping low-class homosexuals in a perpetually low social status and segregated (in order to function as a stable for elites to engage in sordid acts). If you want to see the true nature of the gay movement displayed, just watch a liberal erupt when you mention the idea that a homosexual-acting man would take a wife and sire children, and you get the idea that this "permissive" environment is all about segregation, quarantine, and retaining class-based privileges, rather than even liberal civil rights.
As for marriage, who the fuck cares? The state shouldn't have a say in marriage at all. There is no such thing as a meaningful marriage without the function of reproduction and family implied, so a gay union is just a legal fiction enjoyed so that same-sex couples can acquire legal benefits from the state, rather than something morally equivalent to a straight marriage. It is quite insulting that as we're celebrating "gay marriage", the rest of us are saddled with new restrictions, eugenics laws, forced family planning, "marriage counseling", and other invasive procedures. Far from the stated goal of the gay movement to abolish state marriage, the actual effects of the gay marriage legislation is to solidify the state's role in marriage and turn it from a statement of union between man and woman to a legal status requiring state approval, a process which has been ongoing ever since eugenics became the ruling ideology.
Absolutely this. Identity politics is a blunt instrument to crush genuineness.
Wait, what's wrong with marriage counseling? Do you beat your wife?
TIme to dump this useless thread already. Also, tankies get the bullet too. The only true communism is anarchist.
nigga how you gonna give the workers the means of production if not through the power of the state like nigga hahaha nonono nigga what the fuck this nigga
What about this event? en.wikipedia.org
Shouldn't we encourage more of this?
What a shit thread.
Honestly? I wouldn't say so, render unto LGBT movement the things that are LGBT, and unto workers' movement the things that are related to labour.
In a way, LGBT is left, considering that your ideology was only created by the Jews to enslave you cucks and to exterminate the white race.
don't you ever get tired of the same bait?
this thread needs to die already
I'm not gonna tell you to read a fucking book because you're visibly allergic to them.
Just go back to Zig Forums, hitlerboi.
Try harder next time.
Because homosexuality and so on are not inherently opposed to commodity production, which is why LGBT movement has been recuperated so easily and pink capitalism is now a thing. I don't see a problem if a homosexual is indeed an anticapitalist(since I'm speaking as one), but let us not pretend it'd be because such person has been granted higher insight into the inner workings of capitalism because of buttsex or scissoring.
the modern popular gay rights movement is class collaborationist at best and hates poor people at worst so who cares ?
HAPAS ARE SUPERIOR TO WHITES