I can’t wait for the internet to crash and burn. It started out as a niche hobby for dorks, and it’s heading back that way

  • imogen_underscore [it/its, she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    ok enlightened centrist lol. liberalism and conservatism are both contradictory ideologies for dumb dumbs and are inherently regressive, how’s that. liberalism had its day of being a phase of progression but it’s time for it to go in the trash can of history. get back to me when you see the light of dialectical and historical materialism and realise Marxism-Leninism is the only alternative that’s fit for furthering the progression of humanity. but keep mounting a soft defense of conservatism if it gets you off or whatever

    to your edit: evaluating an ideology should be done through the lens of how fit it is for accomplishing the universal liberation of all working and oppressed peoples. I don’t give a fuck if liberalism is a “smart” decision for some bougie mfs to protect their class interests. that doesn’t make it valid or good or worth any kind of justification. it’s at best a trite thing to point out

    • MarxMadness
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 months ago

      liberalism and conservatism are both contradictory ideologies for dumb dumbs

      Claims to be a materialist, believes that the vast majority of Americans have no material basis for their politics and are just stupid

        • EelBolshevikism [none/use name]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          they’re trying to say that libs and conservatives are libs and conservatives because they’re crackers and get free pats from the empire for doing so, not that they’re actually morally right to be or have an equally valid perspective

          edit: Nvm I don’t know what they’re saying

          • MarxMadness
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            3 months ago

            No, you understand perfectly. “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it” and all.

            No idea why “this person makes money off this policy, so they have a material reason to support it” is suddenly a controversial concept

            • EelBolshevikism [none/use name]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              I think it’s that you’re implying the actual ideological framework they claim to have is sound from their perspective, when it certainly isn’t. They basically just make shit up to justify their material motivations.

              • MarxMadness
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                Those frameworks are sound if you don’t have the priors leftists do. That doesn’t mean they’re good, it just means they’re internally consistent.

                Take homelessness. If your prior is that housing is a human right, then you think the government should make sure everyone has housing. But if your prior is that housing is something individuals have to provide for themselves, you aren’t as concerned about homelessness.

                A lib with the latter prior isn’t stupid; they just have a fundamentally different belief about how society should work. It’s not that they haven’t read the books we have on homelessness, it’s that they simply disagree with the importance we place on the issue. Often they disagree because they understand that agreeing would have a material cost.

                Of course, plenty of libs also have incoherent worldviews, or really are just uneducated on important topics. My point is that viewing them all that way isn’t correct, and falls into the same “no reasonable person could possibly disagree with me” trap we rip on others for buying into.

                • EelBolshevikism [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  the problem is that developing priors requires thought in the first place and said priors are usually developed due to other terrible interpretations of things they’ve gone through. there is no real such thing as a prior, it all just goes back forever until the beginning of history

          • imogen_underscore [it/its, she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            i think I got that I just think it’s a trite thing to point out around here and it falls flat anyway because it isn’t “smart” for fuckloads of Americans to be liberals or conservatives, the working masses of America would plainly be better off under socialism they just have propaganda brainworms about it. in most cases it’s not a “well thought out opinion” it’s just how citizens of the imperial core are successfully programmed to think