Every time I look into communism, all I see is a bunch of women and faggots. They have nothing in common with the average worker and are really off putting, especially to men.
How lronic
>>83470506Back in the day (early 20th century) it was a lot more masculine, with most of its support coming from engineers and menial laborers. Feminism and women entering the workforce irreparably corrupted leftism.
>>83470528I believe that too. The ACP is a good example of a communist/socialist party actually doing something, getting shunned by women and faggots for being socially conservative.
>>83470535>>83470528Progressivism was actually used by the capitalists to corrupt and shatter socialism, and now whenever any socialist movement grows too quickly, the media can yank the chain of social progressivism and watch leftists eat eachother over perceived racial slights, not being trans-affirming enough, etc. It was a very efficient and calculated move. If you remember, when BLM (an openly Marxist movement) got too large, they dumped propaganda into "Black Trans Lives Matter" which alone completely shattered the BLM movement through infighting over intersectional rights. The same was done further back with OWS.A modern socialist movement must necessarily be socially conservative and openly hostile to progressivism because of just how laser focused and efficient progressive rhetoric is at breaking down normative hierarchies in systems (which is more or less the purpose of critical theory). As you said, the ACP is building off of these ideas to inoculate themselves against leftism, but there are even worse problems ahead.An interesting interpretation of Marx I read is that the class of exploiters, the bourgeoisie in a sense, includes all who take more than their share of labor-value and put in only a fraction. This can very well include "immigrants," "women," really anyone who is not "productive," or perhaps simply anyone at all that is what might be called an "identity-based petty bourgeois class." Leftists in the 20th century argued that white people in the West were, even if literally working class, a "racial petty bourgeois" or "race aristocracy" that benefited immensely from the capitalist system and thus, any socialist movement would necessarily need to abolish whiteness to succeed.These ideas were interestingly pushed by wealthy capitalist academics, but you get the picture. Leftism will never again be revolutionary.
>>83470506you're not really looking into communism then
>>83470597>Leftism will never again be revolutionaryQuite a bold thing to say. You can always argue that "revolutionary part of leftism" wouldn't be leftist anymore even if it appears, kek
>>83470944That leftism is defined by being revolutionary? I think this leads to a lot of problems, but sure. You can say modern progressive politics are now right wing and serve to preserve a certain status quo, although most leftists will find a lot of problems in what can ultimately be argued from this perspective.
>>83470528People always bring that up and it's been talked about to the point it's not even funny, simply the conditions for workers back then were much worse, in first world capitalist countries we've become so good at keeping the worker happy enough that it would never make sense to challenge the status quo, the only hope to stop runaway capitalism is national socialism, ethnic unity etc. but it will never happen, and communism is a joke, always has been.
>>83470535>communists>being conservative in any capacityThis will never not be humorous to me.
>>83470506>I don't want the proletariat to emancipate because women and gays want them to emancipate. All hail billionaires Brutal
>>83471093That was the time before conservative meant "fat asshole that dropped out of highschool and is really racist too".
Just take a good look at all communist leaders, all of them were ugly retarded manlets, that's all you need to know, retarded manlet populists, we got fags like Lenin who should have been curbstomped american history x style by le workers, we got that barely not a midget gooky mcslopehead ho chi minh, incredibly retarded fags like Mao, Stalin, Kim etc. grim really
>>83471067>simply the conditions for workers back then were much worseAdjusted for inflation, food costs less, housing costs more and otherwise things haven't changed much. I guess we buy phones instead of books.
>>83470597That's a funny way of saying Jews want to subvert the goy and they'll trick both sides to do it.
>>83470506Even Karl Marx himself was basically just a NEET who never lifted a finger in his entire life. And when he did try to collaborate with muh proletariat he ended up in fist fights with them so that tells you all you need to know.
>>83471011Fair kick. Left/right division is arbitrary to begin with, so wouldn't see any problem with that desu. At the same time, standpoint of the populace is probably different
>>83471067>always has beenWhat scared Woodrow Wilson so much then?)
>>83471093Ah yes, because the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc were famously progressive...As someone here said, the problem with modern 'communism' is that it kinda lost its meaning when people either use it as a buzzword or some retarded ultra-progressives self-identify with it. Socialism / communism is about uplifting the working class and communal private (not personal though) property. I mean as an idea it sounds good, but in practice it is stupid too, however I can at least respect actual socialist / communists rather than lgbthdtv+ larpers who call themselves communists.
>>83470506>consult the picrelIt literally explains all the problems with modern leftism
>>834717042012 really was the beginning of the end. PC culture always existed in the 90s and 2000s, but it just exploded everywhere around 2012. I also think the "legitimate rape" comment by Todd Akin added fueled to the fire
>>83470506>>83470528>>83470535Massively embarrassing thread. Women don't represent the average worker, but also you're bitching about women in the workforce. Why do you bother speaking?
>>83471861Yeah and nowadays you can notice it in almost any leftist group. There can be no decisive action taken or at least statements given without everyone infighting about how does it affect the disabled/trans/poc/gay/native or whichever other minority they decided to focus on today. And ironically because of it, the rightist circles have more freedom of though and expression in their ideology than leftist ones. Not to mention that it then gives the rightist an easy way to appear reasonable when their opposition is screeching about some ultrasmall minority and how they are the most important thing in xyz thing
>>83471913Women are labour aristocracy.
>>83470528Honestly I agree with this. Women ruined leftism because they are eternal grifters and become right wing later on. Death to women, Mao hated women.
>>83471704Yeah, communism has been fucked because of progressivism. They are literal fifth columns. Is there a good modern leftist author against idpol?
>>83470506Great tactics actually, to stop it from even starting to being a threat to status quo, just make it inseparable from feminist and queer identity politics along all other kinds of pussy entitled victimhood movements while at the same time at the same time burying the class dilemma below it, thats why you newly they them communists are so happy when a corporation makes a products and shows that say they are le good inclusive revolutionaries and they proceed to support said corporations as great socialist social justice warrior armies.
>>83470506And who does that serve? The capitalists of course.
