WHERE THEM LEFTISTS AT?

Are there any intellectual leftists worth checking out, that are well informed and use facts?

There never seems to be a prominent figure pushing the left narrative, except for insane political figures, Hollywood and millennials. I only ever see people who are right leaning, libertarians or classical-liberals. Which for the most part, agree on pretty much everything, except for varying gun regulations, abortion and same sex marriage.

I feel like I shouldn't be making assumptions without hearing a reasonable argument for both sides.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=G4gPXvW3DG4
youtube.com/watch?v=G4gPXvW3DG4n
youtube.com/watch?v=LS0OUv6eiO4
youtube.com/watch?v=4HLK4kNP5J0
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

>intellectual
>leftists

You forgot the "pseudo" prefix, OP.

This is probably not the right place to ask.

Here (((I))) am.

Michéa.

>everything is in baguette speak

Also Zizek is a bit memey but worth checking out.

David Rubin, Christina Hoffsomers maybe

...

He's kind of a modern Orwell in persepctive. I guess you could read Orwell but i understand you want living authors but there is a dearth of good ones. On the left most of the living ones are batshit insane or liberal scums like Chomsky or Badiou. On the other hand, on the right there is pretty much nothing aside from Alain de Benoist but he doesn't write much nowadays.

What flag is that

...

Nom chomsky

What flag

You could ask leftypol. For all the banter on Sup Forums against them it's one of the very few places where you can have decent left-wing discussions on the Internet. Many of them are former Sup Forums denizens so they are mostly immune from the liberalism that plagues most of the modern left.

Bunkerism

OP, THERE IS A GOOD INTELLECTUAL LEFTIST WORTH CHECKING OUT
8/leftypol/ actually PAID for an intellectual speaker to speak on leftist ideals:
youtube.com/watch?v=G4gPXvW3DG4
its damyoutube.com/watch?v=G4gPXvW3DG4n good. he slams obama, the intelligence agencies, trump, basically the entire establishment.

its worth listening to

>leftists
>facts
>intellectual

Pick two.

Chomsky is shit and should be taken out of this list. How the fuck is "The Essential Chomsky" a book that goes "further on Marxism"?

He's pretty good. A shame he endorsed Jill Stein.

>intellectual leftists

Man, even with all these suggestions it's so difficult to take these people seriously. These are all just abstract ideologies of a bygone era, without many examples of practical application in the current western society, presented by insane individuals. Wishful thinking of an impossible utopia.

I would have thought that since most people in the public sphere identify as progressives or leftists, there would be more modern day speakers who would provide solid arguments and educate the people on their beliefs. Instead it's just virtue signalling hipsters, parroting some cherry picked memes from dead philosophers

If the works of Karl Marx is the best the left has to offer for their side, I don't think I will be able to empathise with their side. Especially after living in Eastern Europe and experiencing communism/socialism first hand. I don't understand why modern progressives would want to identify and push such ideologies?

>These are all just abstract ideologies of a bygone era, without many examples of practical application in the current western society


Mutualism isn't too popular but is by far the leftist system that would be the easiest to implement. It does away with private property (so no accumulation of capital) yet keep the markets (so no need for micromanagement/economic planning). Check it out. The main intellectual in this field is Proudhon. Unfortunately he's been long dead.

>Marx

Marx was destoryed in academia in the late 1960s by Post Structuralism.

There is no "left". Just a million shards.

The right are too stupid to realize modernism is dead, they're like a dinosaur whose brain has died and the body is still twitching.

Pic related.

Sup Forums should blame this guy and his ilk for "degeneracy" rather than Jews.

If you're right wing you owe Foucault a debt of gratitude. He did your dirty work for you.

Is it Belmondo ?

Leftism is Fake Philosophy, as per Scruton's use of the term.

>leftists
>intellectual

Scruton didn't know what "post-modernism" was, as late as 1992.

He's a fucking retard.

Consider yourself "right wing"?

Answer this: where does money come from?

Ive never met a right winger who can answer this question.

Maybe for the economic right. For the social right the demise of left-wing economics isn't good.

Currently? Government fiat.

Well I guess it's -because- the left is a million shards. They have no consistency, so the right associates them with the thing that most famously represents the left.

It's easy to categorise the right, because they all want the same thing for the most part, which is similar to what classical liberals and libertarians want. While the left don't seem to know what they want, every person you speak to has a different idea of what it means to them.

Wrong.

Like some retarded lefty has a clue.

>Well I guess it's -because- the left is a million shards. They have no consistency...

That's thanks to Foucault, he destroyed the left's core. He also destroyed the right, too. But, they don't care about intellectual shit - all they care about is phantoms of the mind, like "nationhood", "blood", "soil", and the eternal "other" who they can oppose and define themselves against...

Google "where does money come from".

You will shit your pants, if you're right wing.

It's time to go home.

Money is made up. Comes from the bowels of the mind.

Technically it's still government fiat.

interest on loans in a (((kike))) economy

how does the economy jump to symbolic money from barter? Increases in wealth to make bartering inefficient.

Saul Alinsky.

Brilliant guy. He basically wrote the textbook for radicalization and organizing. It is perfect.

Indeed.

No.

It's in the form of credit issued by private banks. In banking terms it's called "fountain pen money", it is created out of thin air by bankers.

When you pay off the debt to the private bank, the money vanishes from the economy.

Not even a puff of smoke.

If everyone paid off their debt, the economy would collapse.

I've frightened you. I'm sorry.

Go back to fantasy land, you're safe there. "Hail Trump", and all that...

There are no leftists besides shills and millennial degenerates. Communism has already killed tens of millions of more people than Hitler even came close to.

Not sure i would consider his work (not him) left-wing. His methods can be used by basically any side.

Sounds like someone in denial talking to themselves, desu. Trump is our president now. But he's not your president, Nigelette.

Max Stirner

Yep, Trump is President. Gold is good. God is great. Gun are our natural born birth right.

Never change, please, never change.

Your certainties are all I have left.

John Locke, David Hume, Adam Smith, Karl Marx, Milton Friedman, and Noam Chomsky are some of those writers that have been the most influential for me. I am a liberal although where you place me on the social/economic divide can really vary depending on the issue. For example when it comes to healthcare I am willing to infringe a bit on economic liberty for the purpose of single payer healthcare.

When liberals, at least some of the modern ones, start to push a narrative that moves into the authoritarian they begin to lose me. The whole debate on speech and mandated use of pronouns you are seeing in Canada is a good example of the authoritarian left that i despise.

It's still government fiat. The bank may create money out of thin air but the currency unit is still nominally that of the government and the bank's assets are therefore still vulnerable to governmental manipulation of its currency.

Now the new cryptocurrencies are an example of money not based on governmental fiat.

If you can't make a point without making reference to meta-meta-meta-meta-meta philosophies, then it isn't worth making. That's the big problem with the "intellectual" left, all they do now is build on one another's arguments until the basis underpinning it is completely obscured, and they've gone off on a tangent of meaningless gibberish.

I went into a film and media undergrad that turned out to be a front for this horseshit. It's a careful process of indoctrination, hooking people with problematic analyses of popular media, and then layering it with more and more verbose baloney. The reason you can't explain it without an elephantine base of epistemology is because without that base, it has absolutely no context or relationship with reality or lived experience.

I used to write so many essays, and fluff them out exactly the same way as this post, and I'd ace it every time, even though a lot of the time, I'd deliberately insert some utter meaningless nonsense. There was no difference.

Not really left-wing.

lol, no explanation as to why? A+

youtube:
Dave Rubin
H.A. Goodman
Jimmy Dore

He's a hegelian knew the rest of the left hegelians

Government manuipulation?

The private banks are at risk of private manipulation. This is exactly what we saw in the UK with the LIBOR rigging (inter bank lending rate).

Our economies are based on credit, not notes issued by central banks. Central banks merely set the base rate.

Money comes from faith. Faith that it has some universal value in the frame of the economy it's being traded in. It's relative value varies depending how much faith is held in it.

"Faith" is a nice way of putting it.

chomsky

>tfw you realize capitalism is actually the new world religion

This guy:
youtube.com/watch?v=LS0OUv6eiO4

He's a radical leftist but not a socialist/communist.

Sarcuck of Mossad

Also, John Rawls.

Although, he's a bit tedious.

The lack of a religion and an emphasis on the material is going to be the death of the west, capitalism is just a mechanism. That isn't to say we need a belief in god but man does need some type of unified system that helps create a sense of meaning and purpose that fills the need for the spiritual/divine that exists.

Those who fight for Islam are a good example, for all they lack in material wealth they are still as effective, if not more, then the armies of the west because they have a shared faith that allows them to transcend the material and work to accomplish great things

There's this guy...

youtube.com/watch?v=4HLK4kNP5J0

You're projecting, like every other mentally ill liberal.

Check yourself into a mental institution while you still have the chance for it to be voluntary.

Why not choose a rational belief system: like Communism?

It works pretty well in StarTrek.

is that why the pound STERLING has retained its original value

What is it that upsets you so much about our monetary system?

I'm genuinely interested.

Sterling has collapsed againt the Euro since June - down nealry 20%. It hasn't faired much better against the dollar.

As a person he certainly was left-wing. One of his friend said he called himself a communist. But his work has no place on the right-left spectrum.

>Check yourself into a mental institution

Sorry, Reagan took those away.

Does communism satisfy that human need for the divine? Even if it did work and satisfy the material needs of a person that person is still incomplete. As a life long atheist I still understand that man has a desire for something more than the material, we have a spiritual component that must in some way be satisfied.

"Religion" serves that psychological and sociological niche. You don't need God but you need something to fill that role.

Depends which "left/right" spectrum you're using.

>Does communism satisfy that human need for the divine?

St. Marx?

Will that do?

Who said I was upset?

You're projecting again.

It's really not healthy.

I know. That's why we're flooded with mentally ill lefties.

Damn shame, but these things happen when you elect california progressives.

Well, I showed you where money comes from. I guess my job is done.

How you feel about it is outside my control.

>yfw the right will never have anyone this based

There is no such thing as communism. It's always described in the vaguest terms. Marx was very good at analyzing capitalism but his vision of communism lacked consistence. My feeling is that most communist thinkers seem to think we'd just improvise once we get there. Somehow the spontaneous masses would magically make a system that works.

Ironically what Marx called "utopian" socialists tried hard to describe in minuet details how their systems would work. Somehow Proudhon's proposals seem a lot more concrete than anything Marx wrote.

Matt Yglesias is center-left, pretty good

I agree, all modernist projects are doomed because they don't define what is human. Or, if they do, it's a warped idea. They make no account for our capacity for depravity and love.

Unfortunately, humans self destruct.

I like Bakunin's and Proudhon's ideas.

>Does communism satisfy that human need for the divine?

It can. In the 50-60s in my country the communist party had mass appeal and was lived as a quasi-religion by its followers. Then this guy and everything that came along with him came and communism died. Our communist party had already become a liberal soc-dem party focused on gay rights and immigrants before the fall of the USSR.

You realize advancements come from building off existing arguments right? When you don't understand something it can sound like bullshit, and it makes you feel smart because you disagree with scientists.

why there are so many marxists then? Assume they are ignorant, ok, but they are very real.

I think it was the colonial experiance that came back to haunt the French left. It was the "other" who returned to destroy modernism.

Obviously not, OP. You have to be a reactionary piece of shot or else you're lefty trash. After all, all my problems can be blamed on entire demographics, as I'm such an intellectual.

Try Nom Chomsky.

>It can. In the 50-60s in my country the communist party had mass appeal and was lived as a quasi-religion by its followers.

That is a good point, although I worry very much about using politics to fill that spiritual need. It turns what used to be simple political disagreements into religious disagreements. What used to be solved with compromise become impossible because people refuse to alter their beliefs.

personally I have found a mix of christian and buddhist teachings along with psychology and some philosophy help fill the void but I doubt that would work for everyone

>why are the so many Marxists then

There aren't.

Marxists mostly exist in the imaginations of the right wing.

I'd recommend that you read the John Gray book black Mass, apocalyptic Religion and the Death of Utopia - it outlines how revolutionary and utopian movements are firmly rooted in Judeo christian religion despite appearing to be a rejection and replacement, details how such movements are doomed to failure despite their claim to be scientific and rational also.

From his point of view he's right. There are still very many nominally Marxists in academia in Latin countries. They have lost much of their influence in favor of the liberal left though.

Ah, didn't notice the flag,

Yes, Marxist analysis is still big in South America. Mainly to provide a critique of Neoliberal Capitalism.

There aren't many millennial Marxist cargo cult movements left. Are ""Shinning Path" still going?