Why are no in-depth left-wing political commentators?

Why are no in-depth left-wing political commentators?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=Fs8guTJRbP4
youtu.be/tEYy3ycuWFw
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

There are no in-depth left-wing political ideas. It's entirely based on feelings and emotions.

Cenk uygur
Noam Chomski

I could list more, but you might not be able to handle commentary from people who aren't deranged cult leaders.

>It's entirely based on feelings and emotions.
You seem to be confusing leftism for reactionary conservatism. It's a common mistake for rightwing brainlets.

Well there's Kyle Cuckinski and David Cuckman.

>in depth
>left wing
Nar mate

Leftism rots the brain. Over the past several decades there has been a "progressive" degeneration of the Left's ability to formulate complex thoughts. This has particularly advanced with the rise of postmodern cultural marxism, which denies the very existence of truth, and political correctness, which replaces logical discourse grounded in empiricism with muh feelz. The Left attacked the root of the tree of Western knowledge, severed itself, and now withers on the vine.

Did you forget the "there"? Its because you need facts to go in depth on a subject. You cant discuss a movie without watching it or knowing the plot or the actors or the background for it.

The left is as deep as a shadow. Look at Oprah, the Queen of the Left. No substance, nothing but feels.

But feelings beat arguments, always.

>unironic Armenian Genocide Denier namedrop
>Spells Chomsky wrong

Is this bait?

Are you really implying that the modern conservative party is more "in depth" than a left wing party? Is this a joke? Conservatism is as shallow as a kiddy pool and only appeals to those that are mentally impaired and can't accept change. Fool.

Cenk Uygur is shit-tier. He couldn't even call the election right. Noam Chomsky has a reasonably well-developed description of narrative control, although prescriptively he's extraordinarily confused, and he's very much of the old left. The contemporary academic climate makes it impossible for anyone like him to rise.

Shill thread. Sage, report, and move on.

because the west is phallo logo centric
the left doesn't believe in dialog because it's just a tool of oppression
listen to jordan peterson
sort yourself out

Sargon of Akkad?

got u famalam

Any form of extreme ideology holds to emotion more than rationality. Both far sides are cancerous.

>He couldn't even call the election right.
He was under the false pretense that Americans weren't as dumb as one would expect. They proved anyone with an IQ over 90 wrong.

Is this before, during or after he posts about gay interracial porn?

>in-depth
>Cenk

Well, you tried.

Sam Seder is pretty god-tier. he unfortunately is cucked on islam/race stuff but hes amazing at econ issues and destroying lolbertarians

Right-wing talk is popular because it's counter-culture.

huh?

>He was under the false pretense that Americans weren't as dumb as one would expect.
Irrelevant. There were plenty of indications that Trump would win and plenty of people figures it out, meaning regardless of why Trump won, Chomsky's predictive power was stumped.

>tfw patiently waiting for Molly to finally name the Jew and join the alt-right/white nationalist cause

>Right-wing talk
Not what we mean by "in-depth."

Do you think Stefan is a in-depth political commentator lmao

because real left wing is still taboo after the communists were defeated and left-wing-lite is not for people to think because they dont actually have any viewpoints beyond 'everything should be great and everyone should get along'

>left-wing

You see them on the evening news regurgitating their blue pilled nonsense every day, if you explore it in any depth obviously you uncover the lies that hold the cathedral together.

>libertarianism calls for corporate tyranny
>business world would never let that happen
>can't live without powerful nanny state

youtube.com/watch?v=Fs8guTJRbP4

Explain this "Chomski" fail.

its not his fault liberals dont know what liberal means

For the same reason there's no White History Month.

Pretty much

because the corporate media has the money and they perpetuate shitlord ideas like "liberals are leftists" when clearly liberals are laissez faire corporate capitalists, which mean when they redefine words they can win certain arguments and talking points

also the cold war and mccarthyist witch hunts did a number on the baby boomers

The pic makes it too obvious.

...

g8 b8 m8. Are you implying that accepting change regardless of the context makes you intellectually superior? Let's get all the niggers and other minorities out of America then. That's change right?

>implying Sup Forums is (((conservative)))
Sup Forums concerns itself with preserving the white race, by any means. (((Conservatives))) only care about moneybags.
t. George Lincoln Rockwell

save you replies for a bait that tries

except dialectic materialism is the opposite of ideology because it's based reality, science based argumentation.

Because the left is shallow

Ummm...try again sweetie ;)

All left-wing ideology stops making sense once you have to start thinking in depth about it.

Because are no arguments

Leftists are too busy having sex to listen to some boring idiot drone on and on in a monotone about things over which we have no control.
>come up to my level

>left-wing
>depth

that isnt a tank and the fact you're calling it one triggers me

Jonathon Pie
Tim Pool
Quinton

Pie especially, one of my favorite commentators in general, not just on the left.

I'm pretty sure you've already told me this, I'll change it later. What should I call it?

This post has to be a fucking joke

>implying dialectic materialism is based on science/reality in any way
Hegelian dialectics was BTFO a millennium before Hegel existed. Marxism was proven wrong when worker's lives and working conditions improved under capitalism/fascism so that revolution was unnecessary. Marx predicted Britain would be communist and a society like Russian couldn't be and he got BTFO.

Face it, dialectic materialism is a failed historical theory that was disproven a few decades after it's author's pitiful demise.

I'm saying people like Quinton who will literally only cover Youtube drama are still better than Molyneux

It's hard to get in-depth when you only worry about superficial things like race, heritage, etc

...

an assault gun, or a STuG

this I bait just ban him

This is true. Today's left has no solid guiding principles or beliefs. Thats why when ever someone asks for a substantial leftist thinker you get Chomski or some other 60s era fossil.

The modern left is a coalition of like a dozen different movements that don't really know where they want to go anymore. If they can find and coalesce around a coherent ideology for the 21st century the left might become a dynamic political movement again.

Our boy Richard Dawkins

I watch these people to understand people who are my opposite, there are to many people on Sup Forums that just don't understand the people on the other side, like all the posters people were trying to make during election, people wanted more stuff like draft our daughters and most people coudn't come up with anything because they didn't understand their enemy well enough to subvert them

Yes. There is no rational defense for a mondern leftist position.

Get in the oven.

>ifunny meme

It's coming. His video in Immigration in the Netherlands talked about how crime and welfare use were higher among second-generation immigrants extensively.

While it's not explicitly race-realist... it's implicitly HBD.

Moreso than anyone on the left.

>dawkins
>political commentator

Obama's speechwriters have a podcast where they talk about politics. Called Pod Save America. During the election it was Keeping it 1600. They are pretty insufferable, but it's a good representation of modern day liberalism.

Because they have been given a free helicopter ride from pinochet.

...

Noam Chomsky is controlled opposition

Good boy

Fuck this faggot Lemon needs to be gassed. Have you ever actually seen his interviews? He brings right wing ideologists on to interview then when they start spouting facts all he does is talk over them with nonsense not listening to them at all yet somehow people think hes intelligent.

Case in point:

youtu.be/tEYy3ycuWFw

Remember Ami Horowitz from 2 weeks ago?
Sure the percentages he had weren't COMPLETELY correct as far as sexual assault. But he didn't even get a chance to explain because all Don Lemon did was bring up statistics from worldwide percentages including and primarily the US. Interrupt Ami at every sentence and then act all smug.

This is why there are no in depth liberals. Because they all do shit like this.

Tl;dr
There are no in depth liberals because they don't like to discuss. Liberals are communists who hate free speech

Are you implying that Stefan is an in depth right-wing commentator? If so, please kill yourself. Fucking brainlet.

This.

The fact that they don't produce philosophically challenging figures on social media platforms is intrinsic to the mindset and definition of left-wing.

To have a left-wing mindset is to have been indoctrinated by legacy media at a young age. Television, movies, music, etc. And nothing else to contrast that experience. You therefore have an inordinate amount of respect for authority. There is the pseudo-paradox wherein the art communities of the Left are supposed to be anti-authority, but in reality the entire left-wing platform requires constant intervention by government authorities to run the individual's life; even the art community itself is one big government sponsored program.

To be left-wing is to be awed by heirarchical structures. They are awed by abstract notions like "coolness," "inferiority," "superiority," "normality," "hipness." "Everything is awesome," basically sums up their philosophical view of the world, their state of denial. And for them, social media is a platform to act out these concepts for everyone else to see and appreciate and approve.

To be a real philosopher on social media, and by real I mean challenging and upsetting to the existing institutions of government and culture, is "uncool," "unhip," "weird," and "unnecessarily upsetting." Everything is awesome after all.

Everything is awesome. So why challenge it? Shut up and enjoy the ride.

This.

>There are no in-depth left-wing political ideas.
What you meant to say was:
>Hi guise, I'm retarded.
Read some books. There is more to leftism/liberalism than Sup Forums would suggest. Transgendered bathrooms aren't a leftist ideology, stop attacking this leftist strawman. It makes you look retarded and will be the rights ultimate undoing

is any man more based than Pinochet?

because their arguments are always
>the right is rich and evil and own everything.
all of that statement is leftist beliefs outside "feelings" and "emotions"

The right are not pushing any agenda whatsoever to support the mentally ill trannies. The left are. Try again.

Leftists having sex is counterintuitive because leftists are failures at life.

>dialectical materialism is based in reality

dude lol there's nothing more to life than people's material needs, nobody fights for anything else lmao XD

What the fuck are you on about?
>legacy media
Stopped there. Thats some PJW tier autism. Stop getting your political commentary from YouTubers. You'll be calling books 'legacy writing' next and disregarding everything that was ever written down.

>Cenk uygur
>people who aren't deranged cult leaders.
they are the same thing

>controlled opposition
That is a spook.

>Cenk 'Actually dumber than Alex Jones' Uygur
>Noam 'Pol Pot dindu nuffin' Chomsky.

literally not an argument

It isn't a leftist issue, though they are trying to gain votes through it. I recall trump holding an 'LGBT for Trump' sign. Is he left wing now?

>Read some books.
What you meant to say was:
>Indoctrinate yourself.
Like I'm going to willingly open myself to the poison of leftist media.

The left-wing platform is a platform that requires itself to be understood by Hispanics and blacks in the US, groups which have an average IQ range of 80-90.

When your platform largely caters to that audience it needs to be soupy and dumbed down.

Right-wing, libertarian, and anarcho-capitalist communities are almost completely white-Americans, who have an average IQ of 102-105, as seen in American states where it's still largely white-only like the Northeast and North-Midwest. We have more flexibility in our philosophical outreach.

It is an argument. Stop dismissing things you don't like as 'non arguments'.

He's a sophist, also under all this vague political commentary lie pretty dangerous ideas like defooing, turning blind to any sort of criticism, etc.

>There is more to leftism/liberalism than Sup Forums would suggest
The deepest leftism ever gets is Marxism, which has been scientifically proven wrong.

>claims to hate SJW collectivism and bullying
>tacitly supports the harassment of anyone who calls out his little clique when they sell out, gaslights them and pretends he doesn't have any vested interest in the case.

And if anyone says Shoe or Armoured Skeptic, I swear I'll grab something from Alan's snackbar

You are already indoctrinated I'm afraid. You can read things you disagree with, unless you are a retarded ideologue of course. Why are you so scared of being wrong?

>Salty fake liberals want their circlejerk
Sargon is more liberal than you'll ever be mate
>Everyone I dont like is harassing me

Hard to put feels into rational thoughts

Feels never equate to common sense

>You'll be calling books 'legacy writing'
But there is a "Legacy Publishing"- e.g. William F. Buckley and Irving Kristol served as gatekeepers against deep and unique Right-Wing thought in lieu of giving a platform to the patter of Reagan sycophants.

>Triggered by words.

The only conclusion leftism can come to is Marxism. This has been proven to be a steaming pile of idiocy. I do not read your books because they all come to the Marxist conclusion, thus have nothing of value.

Because they don't need to go in-depth on anything. Their entire ideology is based on appeals to emotion and for the most part blatant lies and manipulation.

Gays aren't a leftist issue either because leftist don't have any actual issues other than Muh hurt Feelings, Muh Emotions, Muh oppresshun.

Leftists are children who jump from one ideology to the next, dropping the old in favor for the new as soon as they see a chance for more power and influence. This is why the left always aligns itself with the worst people in Human History and why the Left no longer cares about the LGBT community because muslims seemed like a better leveraging tool.