Watch the full conversation here: https://youtube.com/live/OVl9FGe8fno?feature=shareChris, Marcelina, and Max join Katie to discuss the historic UAW strike. ...
the political compass was invented solely to make “right libertarianism” look like a real ideology. It was pushed by billionaire money into schools to rot peoples brains. Its not real and provides no insight, it only furthers political illiteracy in the US. Its not a random statement, its a bullshit concept
Is right libertarianism not a real ideology? I recognize that it’s awful, but that doesn’t mean it’s not a political position that can be taken. I only use the political compass because it seems more useful than the simple left-right spectrum.
I might say Marxists denigrate the political compass because it lays bare the authoritarianism of the position and the fact that communism is bigger than that specific position.
If there is a system that works better, please give me a link.
Your buying into the central assumption that their is such a thing as authoritarianism. All governments are authoritarian its a meaningless distiction in political economy.
Right libertarianism is a bullshit ideology, because its just liberalism.
The system that works better is just reality. Understanding that political economy is a single entity not separate axis
Your buying into the central assumption that their is such a thing as authoritarianism
What!? Are you claiming there is no such thing as authoritarianism? What do you call it when one group of people claims more territory then they need for themselves and then claims they have the right to use violence to get their way and you don’t?
All governments are authoritarian its a meaningless distiction in political economy.
If you see government as the only way politics can exist I guess that would make sense. You really should learn about anarchism.
Right libertarianism is a bullshit ideology, because its just liberalism.
Libertarianism is about maximizing autonomy and reducing or eliminating state power. The reasons why one might want those things, and the methods used to attain and maintain them make a distinction between left and right libertarianism.
Libertarianism is about maximizing autonomy and reducing or eliminating state power. The reasons why one might want those things, and the methods used to attain and maintain them make a distinction between left and right libertarianism.
This is exactly my problem with the political compass and why i said it was bullshit to start with. You are defining libertarianism as an ideology that can only be described by the political compass. Methods and distictions that are only meaningful if you sunder the concept of political economy. That’s why i said its only purpose is to make “right libertarianism” seem like a real ideology when its just liberalism
This wasn’t written by Marx but by Engels, how closely did you actually read this?
Basically, all bourgeois states are constantly “authoritarian” and any revolution against them must also be “authoritarian” (ie, it must use organized applications of force targeted at specific enemies)
There was a thread maybe a month back where we all took the test and everyone is “left libertarian,” because the entire design of this thing is ridiculous.
Ah, ok I think I see where some of your problems with this come from and where our disagreements come from.
You and many others see the political compass and the questions as one and the same. I’m seeing the compass square itself as a tool, the same way way I view the left-right political spectrum. The tool is distinct from any set of questions one might ask to locate an individual on the scale.
The fact that some horrible person or group came up with a tool doesn’t make that tool inherently useless. Now the questions they ask, sure, those are probably stupid and problematic.
Ignore the stupid questions and website and use the squares the same way you use the spectrum. Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Ok, please tell me the problems you have with the political compass disregarding the website and questions. If it’s so flawed, you should easily be able to point them out right?
I already have told you. Political economy is one thing not two separate axis. Promoting the opposite is promoting political illiteracy, which is the “tools” whole point. Its not educating its obfuscating.
I’d say your obfuscating by conflating politics and economics. Sure they are closely related and thus the X,Y graph, but they are not the same. Neither of us is the arbiter of truth so I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree here.
I’d say your obfuscating by conflating politics and economics
You could say that, but only because you’ve fundamentally bought in to a right wing framing through belief a right wing propaganda tool.
Neither of us is the arbiter of truth
Ok? Thats a complete thought terminating cliche. No one has to be the sole arbiter of truth to say things that are true about our material reality.
I didn’t invent the concept of political economy. If you think its obfuscation, take it up with the political theorists of the 17th and 18th centuries and the socialist theorists of the 19th who drew on their work.
I’m not inventing things and arbiting truth, im talking about actual theory and not propaganda models, that have clearly worked in your case.
Sure they are closely related and thus the X,Y graph, but they are not the same
This is the problem with the political compass, and its entire reason for existing. Its to decouple politics from economics and create a belief that some things are similar or related when they are not - a flattening of political understanding to render people illiterate.
The use of “authoritarianism” as an axis - a word that is not meaningfully definable - is only used to perpetuate the Cold War mythologies of communists being the same as nazis. Just like double genocide theory, this view of politics is ultimately nazi apologia.
On the reverse, it serves to legitimize “right libertarianism” by flattening peoples understanding to make it look like it has something in common with actual ideological traditions like anarchism. As a professed anarchist, you should abhor this flattening and equivocation and the model that promotes it. I’m not personally an anarchist, but i find it disgusting how they’ve sought legitimacy by trying to tie themselves to actual intellectual and political tendencies.
How do you type this out without spotting the obvious absurdity, just what do you think the point of politics is?
There can be no conflation because politics and economics are inseparable, like how hardware and software are inseparable components of computerization
Every civilization has a mode of production that allows said civilization to reproduce itself, and that reproduction is implemented as a matter of political will shaped thru the realities of whatever specific mode defines the civilization, it’s not a “close relationship” that may or may not interact depending on some vacuum context, instead politics and economics are literal embodiments of each other that always interact in the physical world humans inhabit
Votes are earned.
The political compass makes no sense
Chain link fences are useless. See I can spout random statements that sound like facts too.
Is right libertarianism not a real ideology? I recognize that it’s awful, but that doesn’t mean it’s not a political position that can be taken. I only use the political compass because it seems more useful than the simple left-right spectrum.
I might say Marxists denigrate the political compass because it lays bare the authoritarianism of the position and the fact that communism is bigger than that specific position.
If there is a system that works better, please give me a link.
Your buying into the central assumption that their is such a thing as authoritarianism. All governments are authoritarian its a meaningless distiction in political economy.
Right libertarianism is a bullshit ideology, because its just liberalism.
The system that works better is just reality. Understanding that political economy is a single entity not separate axis
What!? Are you claiming there is no such thing as authoritarianism? What do you call it when one group of people claims more territory then they need for themselves and then claims they have the right to use violence to get their way and you don’t?
All governments are authoritarian its a meaningless distiction in political economy.
If you see government as the only way politics can exist I guess that would make sense. You really should learn about anarchism.
Libertarianism is about maximizing autonomy and reducing or eliminating state power. The reasons why one might want those things, and the methods used to attain and maintain them make a distinction between left and right libertarianism.
This is exactly my problem with the political compass and why i said it was bullshit to start with. You are defining libertarianism as an ideology that can only be described by the political compass. Methods and distictions that are only meaningful if you sunder the concept of political economy. That’s why i said its only purpose is to make “right libertarianism” seem like a real ideology when its just liberalism
“You’re defining speed as something that can only be described by a speedometer” I can spew nonsense too.
You certainly can spew nonsense
He’s saying that it’s not a coherent political ideology so it exists only on the political compass
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1872/10/authority.htm
I’ve read this, I just think it’s wrong. Marx isn’t a god, he not everything he said is unquestionable truth.
Engels wrote On Authority, not Marx
This wasn’t written by Marx but by Engels, how closely did you actually read this?
Basically, all bourgeois states are constantly “authoritarian” and any revolution against them must also be “authoritarian” (ie, it must use organized applications of force targeted at specific enemies)
Just to point out how bullshit it is.
There was a thread maybe a month back where we all took the test and everyone is “left libertarian,” because the entire design of this thing is ridiculous.
Ah, ok I think I see where some of your problems with this come from and where our disagreements come from.
You and many others see the political compass and the questions as one and the same. I’m seeing the compass square itself as a tool, the same way way I view the left-right political spectrum. The tool is distinct from any set of questions one might ask to locate an individual on the scale.
The fact that some horrible person or group came up with a tool doesn’t make that tool inherently useless. Now the questions they ask, sure, those are probably stupid and problematic.
Ignore the stupid questions and website and use the squares the same way you use the spectrum. Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.
There is no baby here, only bathwater
Ok, please tell me the problems you have with the political compass disregarding the website and questions. If it’s so flawed, you should easily be able to point them out right?
I already have told you. Political economy is one thing not two separate axis. Promoting the opposite is promoting political illiteracy, which is the “tools” whole point. Its not educating its obfuscating.
I’d say your obfuscating by conflating politics and economics. Sure they are closely related and thus the X,Y graph, but they are not the same. Neither of us is the arbiter of truth so I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree here.
You could say that, but only because you’ve fundamentally bought in to a right wing framing through belief a right wing propaganda tool.
Ok? Thats a complete thought terminating cliche. No one has to be the sole arbiter of truth to say things that are true about our material reality.
I didn’t invent the concept of political economy. If you think its obfuscation, take it up with the political theorists of the 17th and 18th centuries and the socialist theorists of the 19th who drew on their work.
I’m not inventing things and arbiting truth, im talking about actual theory and not propaganda models, that have clearly worked in your case.
This is the problem with the political compass, and its entire reason for existing. Its to decouple politics from economics and create a belief that some things are similar or related when they are not - a flattening of political understanding to render people illiterate.
The use of “authoritarianism” as an axis - a word that is not meaningfully definable - is only used to perpetuate the Cold War mythologies of communists being the same as nazis. Just like double genocide theory, this view of politics is ultimately nazi apologia.
On the reverse, it serves to legitimize “right libertarianism” by flattening peoples understanding to make it look like it has something in common with actual ideological traditions like anarchism. As a professed anarchist, you should abhor this flattening and equivocation and the model that promotes it. I’m not personally an anarchist, but i find it disgusting how they’ve sought legitimacy by trying to tie themselves to actual intellectual and political tendencies.
Reddit has completely broken your brain.
How do you type this out without spotting the obvious absurdity, just what do you think the point of politics is?
There can be no conflation because politics and economics are inseparable, like how hardware and software are inseparable components of computerization
Every civilization has a mode of production that allows said civilization to reproduce itself, and that reproduction is implemented as a matter of political will shaped thru the realities of whatever specific mode defines the civilization, it’s not a “close relationship” that may or may not interact depending on some vacuum context, instead politics and economics are literal embodiments of each other that always interact in the physical world humans inhabit
Explain how you can affeft social issues without affecting class dynamics. Explain how you can affect class dynamics without affecting social issues.