My mom is constantly uttering socialist, communist and anarchist talking points. She genuinely seems like an anarchist. Every time I mention Anarchism or Communism however, she calls me a stupid leftist. She always votes for the far-right party of my country.
How the FUCK am I supposed to tell her that she's actually unironically an Anarchist without her freaking out about leftism.
Other urls found in this thread:
This is the best possible choice so congratulate her.
Quote anarchists and see if she agrees with it? Maybe when you tell her it's an anarchist's quote, she will open her mind up to it.
When the entire world returns to something akin to the Wild West? After the economy collapses and everyone who couldn't afford a SpaceX to the new Mars resort, is blaming each other based on irrelevancies like race or religion?
It's no use. Every time she says something related to that whole Anarchism thing, and I point it out, she seems upset with me. I just want her to open up her mind about leftism.
Well what is it that she claims to like about the far-right party?
Yes, this is the best choice.
Give her a copy of the communist manifesto except cross out "communist manifesto" and write "main kampf" and then tell her after she reads it
What does she say exactly
also who does she vote for? There is a difference between ideal and practical
Fuck your mom she sounds like a cunt that doesn't give a shit about you
Obviously she's playing 4D chest and realizes that left wing parties only bandage and prolong capitalism while you're still stuck in your socdem phase like a little baby boy
No she's being correct. OP is a faggot and I hope he gets raped by Fascists.
Stop it!
This.
I actually have a similar problem. My mother used to be a Socialist back in the 70s (Very active in the union for civil servants, lived with a member of the socialist workers party, taught us kids to never look down on people we don't know the full story of), but at some point in the 90s she started a business out of necessity after a divorce and it has lasted until the modern day.
However, today the company is at an end, she blames her workers for just being careerists and not caring about her. She is quite dismissive of the fact I'm a socialist now, she claims it will never work because people are too selfish, too lazy and too corrupt.
I try to make the argument to her that people don't have the luxury of "loyalty" as she sees it (basically she hires unqualified people to give them a chance, but then hopes they will work harder than someone who would cost her more out of sheer loyalty) because capitalism keeps people scared of caring about anything but their own survival, and creates this very real attitude of oppressor and oppressed. This sets a precedent of "only needing to work for themselves" because that's all they'll get no matter how hard they work while under someone else's employment.
I tell her, when people aren't pitted against each other (whether that's worker vs worker or worker vs superior) to make ends meet, then people will feel comfortable working hard together for a common good. But she just says "It's human nature to be greedy and self-serving" and just will not accept that it's the system that encourages this nature.
Am I just incorrect? Am I not getting through to her because I'm completely wrong?
Your mom, like OP's mom, is playing 4D chess. They know that it is the only way to make you and everyone else Socialists.
Similar story, my dad used to be a socialist and was even jailed and tortured in the 70s for his politics (we're from south america). Now weve had a leftist government for over a decade, but now my dad hates the left and the unions, he unironically votes right wing now. He says that the unions ended up being just a different venue for bloodsuckers and social climbers, he talks very angrily of the left saying that they should be thrown in container and launched into the sun to prevent them fron infecting anything more. He also says that same thing about socialism not working because people are selfish are corrupt, but in a more angry way, his usual saying is (translated) "the human being is a miserable rat that will steal and swindle just because it can, that's why it needs a system made for rats".
I try not to talk about politics with him and I don't tell him I'm a socialist, he's so bitter and angry I don't even know what I could say.
Lol are you from uruguay
I don't think your objective should be making her realize she's a leftist, if economically she's an anarchist maybe tell us what social aspects make her right-leaning.
Yep.
Same here but for Portugal, mine was not tortured but was arrested and interrogated once and actively pursued by the PIDE afterwards (our secret police). He was not a communist, but a member of the Socialist Party, but became disillusioned after watching corrupt bureaucrats ascend in the party's hierarchy. He's now a pro-Salazar rightist.
moms get the gulag
Damn it, how do we prevent this from happening in our generation? People foolishly think "Well I've experienced someone being greedy, I've felt greed before, let's just hand it all over to the ultra-capitalists who openly talk about how much they love greed! That will make the world a better place, because I understand greed!"
Cease all moralism, cease seeking ideological purity. Emphasize the scientific, and expose them to the truth. After they know the truth, they can do whatever they want, they can't unknow it.
How do I learn this?
Cockshott.
Paul Cockshott?
A lot of this seems to be based on class, predictably enough. Like the user's mom who became a petit-bourg business owner and then her politics changed as a result.
My mom is sort of an ur-populist in her politics. She has liked at various times: Bernie Sanders, Ron Paul, Donald Trump (not any more), Dennis Kucinich, Kinky Friedman (this is an obscure Texas-only thing), Jesse Ventura, etc. She has no loyalty to any political party and even thought it was unfair that Howard Schultz, the Starbucks CEO, was harshly criticized for considering a presidential run because, as mom said, "Anyone should run if they want to!" At the same time she liked watching him get heckled lol.
She's also a high school dropout who has only worked working-class jobs in her life. I consider her my political-populist barometer and am more interested in her opinions because my (educated, petit-bourg nearing middle-bourg) dad listens to Nate Silver too much and thinks he's some kind of math god. He is good on economics / business topics but politically naive like that.
I'm involved with a socialist (socdem) group, although I'm not particularly active in it, and she is open to the concept but I talk about it in terms of labor unions (which she thinks are a good thing) and more rights for workers and so on. Like there was a paid sick leave campaign that was successful here thanks in part to socialist agitation. Like basic respect and rights for workers plays really well with her, because again her jobs have been cleaning hotel rooms, working at a 7/11, and working in a shoe factory (back in the 1970s before that shit moved overseas). She was even in the union and had fond memories of the union getting them better wages than they otherwise would've had. And then I'll point to our relatives who work at Walmart who are poor and are treated like shit by that company, and talk about how Walmart crushes any attempt by workers to unionize. Her: "that's horrible!"
And basic respect for workers, service people like waiters and so on: she hates it when people are rude to workers (my dad can sometimes be, but he has always worked in offices – one of his less endearing traits).
There's also one of these alt-right/neo-Nazi gangs active around here. Usually their shit is torn down pretty quickly by lefty cleanup crews but I spotted one of their stickers while taking mom out for a glass of wine. I showed it to her, and tore it down, and seeing that actually horrified her. I think because we're nerds who post on Zig Forums we think the discussions that go on here have some kind of broad salience with the public, when it's not so really, but Zig Forums has that same problem – look at how bad Sargon tanked it while running in the European elections over in the U.K.; even the right-wing tabloids were calling him a gross pervert once he stepped outside of the weird, subcultural echo chamber.
Most people out there think radical stuff is just a tiny number of insignificant people, and I think that's basically true for the most part. And Zig Forums's approach to politics is to basically prey on these normies' naivety. But I consider my mom to be a pretty normal person, and seeing that stuff for real definitely freaked her out. I had to be like "there's nothing to be afraid of, these men are cowards."
Half the time a lot of would-be populists on the right would be leftists . However rather than seeing this trend as something to take advantage of, the online left I meet usually responds to it with scorn and derision.
The fact is that there's a serious attitude problem many people on the left just wont ever address. While the right welcomes people with open arms (like a cult imho) you pretty much have to fight tooth and claw to get into the left. All this does is create anger at the left and a false image of what it really means.
Then you have people who sneer "Well they're voting against their own best interest, so they're stupid, so we never needed them anyways", or "If you're so DUMB that you agree with most left talking points but still support the right because of some STEREOTYPE than we don't need you!"
It's the weird devotion to rationalism, wherein if people agree with a few leftist policies than they should be left wing, but if they aren't for some reason it's just chalked up to personal stupidity.
I have a lot of right wing friends, in my time hanging out with them I've heard:
And what happens when I even casually bring up Socialism?
These are all from young conservative dudes. Some have even said they'd support ending nation states for a one world government, I'm not fucking joking. The issue is almost entirely based in attitude and aesthetics and THIS has to be the number one thing the left tackles.
I think this is precisely the cause of Alt-Right, not just because the left derisively calls anyone who supports centre-to-right-wing politics an idiot, but because we don't allow them an argument to disprove.
Not that I blame fellow leftists for this, we're fighting against a well-funded and right-wing media. It's literally give them an inch, and they'll take it as we've admitted defeat.
My mum supported Thatcher and thinks she had to be tough and uncompromising because "she was the first female Prime Minister."
cant you try to sit down and have a serious conversation, like ask her to move aside her prejudices and take this seriously because its important for you
Yeah, she really put those northern and Welsh misogynists in their place by destroying their livelihoods, while providing no alternatives after the fact.
Even if that statement was true, it's the actions of a despot and not someone acting out of self-defense.
Pfft, like far-right people can't fetishize that as being indicative of one's sexuality.
They'll say it's gay, innit?
I think the problem is mainly this hyper-moralizing "I'm a good person" stuff. It's calling the right-wing people morally reprobate or something that I think gets people's hackles up. Ultimately, the right-wing media stars are largely frauds who don't really believe in what they're saying most of the time, and the right doesn't have any solutions to the problems of what I'd call the "modern condition" really.
Because I've clicked on alt-right videos I get this stuff recommended now, and one recent one was helicopter footage of guy on a motorcycle running from the cops, and the creator had dubbed over stuff from Fight Club and Taxi Driver and so on – just playing on this feeling of deep alienation and despair with no way to articulate it.
Also
You're arguing from the wrong angle. Socialism is in the self-interest of people. It is the politics of the working class.
I think it's not just actual leftists to blame for that. I think a common "criticism" of communism/socialism is that "it all sounds nice, but don't forget that they want you to work yourselves into the ground and keep you in poverty to fund their own luxuries!" AKA the accusations of 'virtue signalling'.
The irony is that's not even communism, that's literally and unironically how capitalism works…
I've always said to people that Socialism isn't altruistic, you're not providing your labour to provide "stuff" for other people that you wouldn't also expect yourself.
Right-wingers are largely driven by emotion, and by using emotional/moralistic arguments like how socialism helps poor people and the under-privileged, you're tying how someone feels about other people to how much they support socialism. When they see corruption, or human fallibility, they might feel disillusioned with humanity and stop supporting means to help them, when they see a panhandler buying booze, they feel betrayed. As a consequence they might go back to right-wing politics just out of spite. If you've actually argued with a right-winger, the ones that aren't immediately devolving into insults, they often demand personal affection (How have you helped me?) or personal perspective (Don't link we me to some Marxist text, use your own words). It's easy to dismiss them as the illiterate europeans they whine about, but it's not as simple. Thus all moralism must eliminated.
That's a new worldfilter. Nice.
But modern right-wingers are arguing from a point of moralism.. well a christian sense of moralism which is still ingrained in our society apparently.
How do we go up against the likes of Jordan Peterson's supporters, who claim, argue and win support with the reasoning that they're just gentlemen looking out for moral fabric of society, while we eschew moralism?
Any technical, scientific, philosophical or even pragmatic reasoning gets met with the accusation that we're just using word soup like the politicians they hate do.
Stop supporting things that have a negative impact on society just because the Right opposes them
Drug use, prostitution, homosexuality, open borders etc.
Why the fuck would I do that?
You don't.
And you shut the fuck up.
I'm gay.
Tell me how I am having a negative impact on society.
I didn't say "every single gay person has a negative impact on society"
I said homosexuality has a negative impact on society
I understand, but as you said the right-wing are driven by emotion because it works in getting their way. For things like promoting basic respect for internet sex workers in the face of stuff like "the thot audit" and "the thot search engine", this is just impossible to reason with emotion that's influenced by religious values.
I use sex work as an example, but the fucking church has a line on everything. Even usury, which weirdly our late stage capitalism is built on.
Uh-huh. Now shut the fuck up.
no u
This isn't even a fast board, are you that bored on 4chan that you're willing to troll this? Maybe leftypol would be exciting for you, if you give it a chance.
what is wrong with the thot audit? supporting sex work is not a leftist position, in fact it could be a useful tool for capitalists to expand markets.
Also Lenin conducted the biggest thot audit
It works because it's how they are. You can denounce it for the idealist bullshit that it is, but you have no ground to have an "argument" on. you certainly won't win by engaging them on their terms.
...
But how do we conduct an opposition that isn't easily seen as us being merely above the conversation?
I know you're saying we shouldn't argue on their terms, but that seems like a luxury we don't have right now.
Irrelevant. Drag them kicking and screaming towards materialism, or don't bother at all.
That depends on a case by case basis really
what they see as immoral is really just opposing self destructive behavior
Because it's a freedom women should be entitled to, no one expects men to be pure and therefore nothing more should be expected of women.
why
But if you word it like that, it seems like it's coming from a more condescending person than the guy saying "It's da joos and moslims innit?"
I feel like, we need to adopt some sort of universal pat on the back, something that provides people a reason to feel pride in being "a good person" that this new-right is providing.. but by actually being a good person instead of a religious fundamentalist piece of shit.
how
Because humans enjoy sex like no other mammal does, but we attach a very animalistic attitude that women should be the property of one while tolerating that they need "time" to find that one.
When women enjoy their sexuality, even through something like Tinder, we still expect that it's in the context that they might find their husband anyway. So we abhor "thots" because we know it's them being completely free, they're in no way doing it in the hopes they'll snag a husband through it.
literally muh feels
Do you have an argument grounded in materialism and not feels and spooks?
I don't know, but that seems to be what's happening in the UK right now.
I think with the moralism of the past being labelled as "SJW" that did seem to be an unsatisfiable standard, it has gone back to the very satisfiable standard of religion.. especially when it's now considered a pick'n'mix where homosexuality is wrong but extra-marital sex is okay because "it's just women".
I think it probably is the same problem, expressed differently, to what happened to communism in the west previously. It's needs a human face, not apathy to the concept of moralism.
Obviously not. People like to make comparisons about our sexual culture with the rest of the animal kingdom, but that's because they're either retards or looking to make restricting rules for god knows what purpose.
Calling women "thots" for what society still congratulates men is enough proof for me.
You're whole reasoning was " it feels good" literally muh feels
And? What is the actual problem here
Also, where the fuck is your argument that is grounded in materialism? As fancy as we think we are, sex is nothing but a bee spreading pollen, there is nothing sinful about our sexuality in the same way it's not lewd to look at a pretty plant.
I never said that, all mammals presumably feel good when having sex, it's just that we're able to rationally understand it rather than just mindlessly feeling a compulsion.
That you're a Brosocalist. If you're in this to provide men a legal right to women, then you're better off at /r9k/
My argument for what exactly?
I never said that
And?
For you to bring it up, you must have had some kind of disagreement with my post? What was it?
This is brocialist board. Fuck off radlib.
Bite me twice
no u
Yes you did here
"Because humans enjoy sex like no other mammal does"
You're a liberal and better off at reddit if you're going to pick accusations over arguments
You’re ignorant as fuck about Zig Forums if you think they have anything to do with Carl of Swindon
"Women should have thec right to be prostitutes"
Socialism is about equality for all, you need to justify to me why YOU should be able to dictate what women can and cannot do, not the other way around you prat.
Who does it harm when done properly?
But user, strong independent wymin having the privilege right to be paid money for renting out their intellectual property (camwhoring) is what socialism is all about - what are you, an incel?
Women are intelligent people themselves, they may decide what they do with their bodies. Regardless of what you or I think about it, we shouldn't have the hierarchical right to dictate what ALL women can and cannot do.
It doesn't harm anyone, some women enjoy it and in extreme cases women do it to pay for education/rent in the modern capitalist world. They don't need the shaming by fat little cunts on the internet.
Socialism is about worker ownership of the means of production and the economic equality that cones from it
Not how arguments work bud. You made the claim and are failing to justify it.
Just fuck your mom! It's very easy!
What claim are you referring to? You've obviously taken issue with something I've said, but you won't explicitly say what that was. If you don't tell me exactly what it is you're arguing against, I won't reply.
This is a fantasy scenario. The real world is never always "done properly"
Who does "camwhoring" (that you decided was prostitution) harm?
See>>2904632
LMAO. Anyway, you literally have no arguments besides empty idealism and petty adhoms.
You believe in rights, which makes you a liberal.
When no one has rights, someone does.
That human sexuality is based around the rationality that we enjoy it?
I never contested this.
However that isn't a counter point or a justification
I said that humans enjoy sex in a way that cannot be justified nor explained by the animal kingdom, but people still try to.
What is your fucking point? What's the argument? Why am I incorrect? Christ
Appeal to nature isn't any sort of justification for legal policy
Well you made a claim and are failing to defend it
That's my point! How are you not getting this?
So what if a woman steals, kills, swindles, abuses, or otherwise harms another person? We don't have the 'hierarchical' right to oblige her to be a decent human being?
inb4 camwhoring doesn't hurt anyone, selling rent for intellectual property (or your own body's sexual organs, for that matter) that has no real value is goddamn theft and if you disagree you're not a communist. If you're so inclined to "exploring your sexuality" or whatever the fuck in that way then you can go do it for free :^)
Oh yeah, those are equivalent to flashing one's tits on the internet, isn't it?
Christ, this was my first day on leftypol, you're all just the same as 4chan. left or right, you're just a bunch of dickheads looking for power over that girl who was allowed to reject you.
I'm out, I'm sure you'll be glad to read.
I forgot about creating this thread. I'm sorry for the disputes I've started. I'll go to bed, guys. Good night.
Nothing, absolutely nothing. I think she's just scared of brown people.
She generally hates politicians, we started our own delivery service because she thinks bosses are inherently exploitative, she constantly talks about helping the poor and africans and shit and claims it's all caused by capitalism, she's constantly mad about how things are getting more expensive and how we are literally getting exploited by the elites that way, the list goes on and on. She's the type of person who would love a stateless, classless and moneyless world based on charity and gift economies. But she's scared of brown people.
She's voting for the FPÖ, the "freedom (only for whites)" party of Austria. And yes, she has voted for them even after the recent scandal you might have heard about. She loves empty slogans.
Thats a logical fallacy and does not hold up in debate
You're winding me up aren't you? This is a troll.
I hope you're not actually the boss of someone because that'd be exploitative.
sounds good
and?
well if you think voting has anything to do with a persons political leaning then you're diluted.
There is no chance for Communism in Bourgeois democracy any party that is elected will just solidify power for the ruling class
You fail to defend a point you made. Your only argument is a fallacy.
I'm just waiting for you to make an actual argument not some petty appeal to nature
You brought up materialism, you have not yet explained what materialism has to do with sex.