Why are leftist so obsessed with morality?

Why are leftist so obsessed with morality?

because tax ation is theft

They have no inner standards of behavior or morals themselves (moral relativism), so they project that onto other groups, despite being distinctly amoral.

they want to be the alternative to dogmatic theology

It's only inherently leftist now because philosophy is taught in leftist institutions. If 20th century philosophy isn't specifically pro Marxism, it's usually pretty right wing.

leftist here, don't give a shit about morals or your feelings - in fact, religious morals in politics is a right wing trend, not left wing

why are rightists always going "why are leftists X?"

Brainlets have a problem where they like to challenge one spook with a different spook. For example, SPOOOOKY CAPITALISM is making individuals unequal. The answer, for brainlet lefties: SPOOOOOKY MORALITY.

Spooky morality is "cucked"? What's the answer? SPOOOOOOKY NATIONALISM?

What? They aren't at all. They're concerned with feelings and instincts, not any cohesive moral structure or lens. They constantly rely on emotional pleas, disingenuous sympathy, reframing stable and traditional institutions as secretly evil because they benefit everyone and not just "minorities."

How you can assert that leftists are obsessed with morality is baffling to me.

Additionally, both "right-wingers" and "left-wingers" are spooks and should be eliminated from our noggins.

They take pride in having this perceived moral high ground over rightist. They are certainly more moralist than most libertarians/conservatives.

The real question is why since they are so obsessed with it do they have none? They literally destroy what previous generations built that future generations can use for fucking Facebook likes. They are virtue signaling traitorous scum.

>strawman

You are missing the point. Leftists are obsessed with 'morality'. They think it is immoral for someone to be unequal. It isn't.

Objective morality is a spook. If inequality is present, inequality should be present. Inequality will always exist. What we should be thinking about is freedom, not equality.

Modern progressive morality: Equality = moral, inequality = immoral.

it's a ruse - there is no concern for morality, simply a dedication to the kind of "philosophical inquiry" (aka mental gymnastics) that hides under the guise of moral standing in an attempt to provide a semblance of comfort with the atrocious movements they require everyone to celebrate. it's all projection to disguise the utter amorality at the heart of the leftist project. morality is a tattered coat they yell loud enough about to believe they're doing something good, but in effect use as a weapon to silence dissent.

it doesn't have to make sense. not as though we're discussing thoughts or actions governed by any sort of reason here - its mostly power fantasies of the disenfranchised, left to smolder impotently in a spiritual void.

Because they can use it to control people who feel actual empathy.

Themselves have none - they dream of the day they can bathe in the blood of "capitalists" and "bourgeoisie" (bo-rzh-oo-a-zee)

It's the atheism

Yeah, you are right. Impotent individuals hold 'ressentiment' for the powerful and think it's wrong.

>HURR WE HELP THE POOR BROWN PPL :^(
>HAVE EMPATHY!! ;(
>THIS MOVIE NEEDS MORE DIVERSITY REPRESENTATION

Leftist are the moralist, not right wingers.

Leftist ressentiment.

they have none

Seems to me they're more obsessed with immorality. They're big fans of destructive hedonism masquerading as freedom. Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow you die.

>They think it is immoral for someone to be unequal.

No, they don't. There are no leftists who feel a moral compulsion to make their modern, Western country "become equal" with Somalia.

Bourgeoise are objectively shit though

i think we may mean different things by 'morality'.. and often the question is whether one's sense of propriety is product of their own experience or impressed upon them in whatever way. its not restricted to oversimplifications like left or right, where political ideologies have come to feel like sports teams or store-bought brands. ready-made things you don't have to unpack and understand so much as embrace for want of an identity/sense of community/etc.

geert lovink's 'electronic loneliness' comes to mind.

Idk if I could call Striner a leftist

it really does beg the whole question of equality vs progressivism at the intersection of neoliberalism/leftism.

lmao what?!
I've never met a moral leftist in my life.
Doing what makes you feel like a good person =/= being a moral person.

Sounds like freedom to me, my fellow authoritarian

yeah but have you considered that, at least for some people, the ideas of humanism are more than a way to feel good about themselves ranking highly on someone else's totem pole.

Because they're rotten on the inside.

DELET THIS

...

Because the people you consider 'leftists' are interested in helping their communities. That's why your average northern city is a haven for good quality health care, education, and general safety, while your average bible belt city is a haven for drug/alcohol abuse, teen pregnancy, and general poverty.

"American conservatism" has basically morphed into "hurr durr i'm gonna get mine and i dont care if you get yours", at the expense of their own communities. Stay in your shithole, but make sure you return those yankee subsidies that keep your town from slipping into 100% subsaharan africa territory.

>morals having anything to do with religion
If that were true you'd all be bible thumpers.

See:

And in my experience, most leftist you talk to buy into to some sort of retarded spooky objective morality.

I'd say it's more about how a psychopath finds it effective and useful to dress up in the clothing of "equality", but actually desires power and comfort and hence has zero genuine desire to reduce his country's living standard to the level of Somalia. The situation is explained fully by psychopathy and its methods of deployment and influence.

Nice try leaf, I didn't even get a bingo

Well, I'm not saying we should make that hedonism expressly illegal, but it shouldn't be encouraged and promoted.

They think it is immoral for people to be unequal within their own country. However, the progressive agenda has been hijacked by a sort of virtue-signalling habit of only addressing inequalities between minorities and the white man.

Obviously they don't want to be equal with Somalia. Within their own country, however, they always go after "equality issues" (usually not for the sake of actual equality).

This fpbp tbqh it's the best way to justify high taxes

Atheists mimic christian moral code

Because their morals aren't right

however arbitrary the terms, they serve a function in providing footholds for the conversation.

i don't think you make the case for how conventional understanding of morality isn't - and always has been - a debate on the interplay between universals and particulars. the left's fatal inconsistency is that it claims to celebrate particular struggles but only seeks to enforce a total moral worldview and attribute it universal standing. the right's view of morality has a necessary standard in recognition of 'free will' in the judeo-christian/hobbesnian sense that is both man's Fall and agency to live a life in accordance with what the right recognizes explicitly as universal virtue.

You know what's a "spook?" Rationalism. The idea that non-material entities should not impact your life is literal nonsense, since it itself is a non-material proposition. It is self-defeating, which is why nobody knows or cares about Stirner off of /leftypol/ and /lit/, where they only care about him as a meme.

Nationalism is the answer.

>They think it is immoral for people to be unequal within their own country.

Really? Well, that's quite bizarre. Why do they particularly set the boundary at their own country? So if rich people just split off the wealthy parts of town into a separate nation, the problem is solved?

Could it be that this "leftist feel moral goal X" is just an explanation you have fabricated on the spot in order to avoid the obvious fatal flaw in the "equality" narrative that nobody seeks to make their country "equal" to Somalia?

>Obviously they don't want to be equal with Somalia

Oh wow, OBVIOUSLY they don't want that! OBVIOUSLY, this is not an inequality that should be evened out! I mean, that is OBVIOUS, they simply feel a strong sense of morality and purpose on a WITHIN-COUNTRY basis. That must be the explanation. Not a lack of morality at all.

And they can do it without being christians.

>9. The two psychological tendencies that underlie modern leftism we call “feelings of inferiority” and “oversocialization.” Feelings of inferiority are characteristic of modern leftism as a whole, while oversocialization is characteristic only of a certain segment of modern leftism; but this segment is highly influential.

>24. Psychologists use the term “socialization” to designate the process by which children are trained to think and act as society demands. A person is said to be well socialized if he believes in and obeys the moral code of his society and fits in well as a functioning part of that society. It may seem senseless to say that many leftists are oversocialized, since the leftist is perceived as a rebel. Nevertheless, the position can be defended. Many leftists are not such rebels as they seem.

>25. The moral code of our society is so demanding that no one can think, feel and act in a completely moral way. For example, we are not supposed to hate anyone, yet almost everyone hates somebody at some time or other, whether he admits it to himself or not. Some people are so highly socialized that the attempt to think, feel and act morally imposes a severe burden on them. In order to avoid feelings of guilt, they continually have to deceive themselves about their own motives and find moral explanations for feelings and actions that in reality have a non-moral origin. We use the term “oversocialized” to describe such people.

>The leftist of the oversocialized type tries to get off his psychological leash and assert his autonomy by rebelling. But usually he is not strong enough to rebel against the most basic values of society. Generally speaking, the goals of today’s leftists are NOT in conflict with the accepted morality. On the contrary, the left takes an accepted moral principle, adopts it as its own, and then accuses mainstream society of violating that principle

got a source user?
I can't seem to find one

>religious morals in politics is a right wing trend, not left wing
this. /thread
nah. your just an idiot

???

But morality is a concept that comes from religion. The idea that by some kind of magic things objectively have virtue and lack of. Leftist have just adapted morality to be a religion of it's own.

It is all very spooky.

But you can really stop who encourages it or not. That's just up to people. Children should be brought up to be more critical thinkers and to become less weak minded adults.

agreed. it's a great deal of projection on behalf of narcissists.

>what is abortion

Nice spooks, nerd. How can they be missing morality when it does not exist?

They THINK it is immoral for people to be unequal. They are ACTUALLY being used as tools by other people, or acting to gain power themselves.

OBVIOUSLY they do not want to be equal with Somalia because that is OBVIOUSLY not an increase in their own power.

Seriously, nice spooks, Ahmed. It's been a while since I have conversed with a Brainlet :^)

Clearly a shill setup for comments like:
Which are bullshit.
>average northern city is a haven for good quality health care, education, and general safety

WTF do you get your stats faggot? California has the highest crime rates in america, not to mention rampant homelessness, gangs, and overall lawlessness

>"American conservatism" has basically morphed into "hurr durr i'm gonna get mine and i dont care if you get yours", at the expense of their own communities.

That's Neocons, who most of us hate with vitrol

>Listens to Metal, Video game music or no music at all
>Ever watched anime
>Still watches one or more american cartoons

A balanced cultural diet is key - too many arthouse films and you end up becoming a fucking snob and too many cartoons and you end up an infant in an adult's body. Your Bingo basically implies that if you watch "Twilight" instead of "Grave of the Fireflies", then you're not a loser.

Also
>Ever played his handheld in public.

Nigga, you must've had a shitty childhood - what's wrong with playing Gameboy on long flights?

See:

Left-wing moralist say the woman's fee fees come first.

Because that's the only way they can get people to listen to their bullshit.

agreed - to argue with a straight face that there isn't a religious tradition inherent in any western moral worldview and it's associated orthodoxy is intellectual dishonesty at best.

>25. The moral code of our society is so demanding that no one can think, feel and act in a completely moral way. For example, we are not supposed to hate anyone

This is where I feel a distinction is useful between the sheep, so to speak, and the organizers.

The organizers are trying to instil the imperative that "you must not hate".

But themselves not only intensely hate many groups, they are perfectly aware of it. They are aware of how much they hate right-wingers, they are aware of how much they hate those who oppose Islam, or those speaking about "white rights". They actively take steps to grow and enhance this hate, to spread such hate amongst the population.

But in other contexts, in the context of brown people, Islam etc., they rather instil the "you are not supposed to hate" maxim.

Hence many leftists, even those active in protests, would be called sheep, simply adhering to the disconnected and oxymoronic moral imperatives they have been fed. In context A they feel strongly that they must adhere to X, and in context B they must very much adhere to anti-X.

The true organizers are those without such moral feelings - the psychopaths - who fully understand moral compulsions, social control etc., and who are the ones to CREATE THE FEELINGS that you are "not supposed to hate" -- in the contexts where it is useful.

Is a professor at a university or a senior politician or writer really so stupid that he doesn't realize that "nazis are scum" is a hateful statement? Could it perhaps be that he actually knows this all along, but chooses not to deploy the anti-hate memes in those circumstances?

Top kek. What you really mean is that you create tiny urban areas with freakishly high costs of living so that all the poor people get pushed into ghettos, then live in tiny, shrinking enclosures of whiteness while the niggers and spics shoot each other in the street next door and pretend that that makes you our moral superiors. You pretend that your gated communities are representative of "leftism," but they aren't. The reality is that YOU have created the criminal hotspots that brutalize this country, and drive down our education and, indeed, our health metrics, and YOU deserve credit for them.

Also, top fucking kek at "yankee aid," where was the yankee aid when your nigger president shut down every oil and coal field in Pennsylvania, faggot? The destruction of the rural economy can be laid at your feet squarely, which is why you just got your criminal teeth based out of your disgusting faces in the last election.

Loving the superior attitude though. Get ready for 2018, kike. "interesting in helping their communities," that's why you've got Germany tier birthrates, right goy? You won't HAVE a community in a few years. You've done everything in your power to destroy California, which will be third world by 2030, and you've done everything in your power to drag the rest of us down with you. I'd rather live in the deepest, poorest most bumfuck outpost in Kentucky than in Oakland, and you'd better get used to Oakland, because that's your future.

Leftist egalitarianism derives from protestant christinsanity , mainly calvinism.

Thanks, it is good that we agree.

The final point is just to recognize that there is a term for this absence of feelings of morality and guilt -- namely psychopathy.

And that leftists have it, yet most other people don't. As a result, the latter can be manipulated and abused by the former.

>The reality is that YOU have created the criminal hotspots that brutalize this country, and drive down our education and, indeed, our health metrics, and YOU deserve credit for them.

Unsubstantiated. In the real world, right wing economic and crime/prison policies cause higher crime and unemployment rates.

How about I cut off your arms and legs, steal all your shit, and rape your mom? Would you care morality then?

it's a weird sort of incoherency at play in the logic underpinning their view when you consider the necessary interplay of essentialism vs social construct, and how one trumps the other in accordance with whatever point is needed to make.

that's where the selective hate quality of the left is so fascinating to me, because it assumes an essentialist culpability that transcends any supposed free will you have to then make choices that are "hateful."

in many ways, they're simply advocating for being those who get to choose 'the damned.'

There isn't much "turn the other cheek" in "execute the bourgeoisie" and "hang 100 landlords to spread terror"

And right-wingers are not?

they aren't, they're obsessed with submission. They don't care about being moral to white people or even asian people most of the time. They just want niggers and muslims to fuck their shit up.

HAHAHA. that's fucking hilarious.

>shut down every oil and coal field in Pennsylvania
I didn't know this user, got a source?
jesus the last 8 years have fucked this country up good and it's been going on since the first Bush presidency

Read a book dipshit. The reason universities are filled with leftists is because they're educated, and don't let Stone Age fee fees and simplemindedness dictate policy, unlike you hillbilly fags

Because they want to be self centered degenerates and still somehow have the moral high ground.

ITT: Sup Forumstard shills strawman up these imaginary people they call "leftists"

Are they?
Are you implying the "right" is completely unwarranted immoral, like that a good thing? It is degenerate and subhuman.
Why are (((shills))) always making "Why are leftists [blank]?" threads? And its always something bullshit, to boot.

This has nothing to do with left or right. This is a thing with people on the "left" and "right

Shills need to go back

>He said while posting Striner
If anything the right makes more moralistic arguments than the left

>they're simply advocating for being those who get to choose 'the damned.'

Indeed.

This part in particular is what makes the communist "plan" so absurd - specifically, that when an elite has been given all power - economic, social, cultural, judicial, military - it will then freely abolish itself. That is really the Big Lie of leftism. The personality types, the people, who seek out this form of power, are certainly not those who simply give it up. Not in a single country ruled by the far-left has there been a trace of the government abolishing itself. Such an enormous rationality gap can only be bridged by a momentous lie.

To some extent, it might also be a way for people who desire some form of "alpha" leadership role to gain power outside of the business world, though. I recognize that if someone feels the commercial sector is completely closed to them, and they can never become "number one" there, when being "number one" is their absolute inner imperative, then a revolution to topple everything with them at the head could be a fallback position.

Are communists obsessed with morality?

Leftists want to redistribute wealth, whether it's a good idea or a bad one in order to do that you have to make a hierarchical scale of values and needs to know what you have to redistribute to who, when and in which quantities. You need a shit ton of ethical judgments to do that

Can you gives an example without mentioning the evangelical voting block.

To redistribute wealth implies that the wealth was distributed in the first place, not created by people being more economically valuable than others.

Anyone have the excerpt from one of Stirner's works, where he admits to being a cuck? Because marriage after all is a spook :^)

Why is it that leftist faggots that argue that nationalism and race (even though it's biological) is a spook, yet they strive for egalitarianism and their own forced moral system? Why is it anarcho-communists and collectivists use the workings of Stirner, when he was an individualist anarchist?

the reasons universities are filled with leftists is because they've becomes self-congratulatory feedback loops of the same, bullshit poststructralist ideology for the past 40-50 years, and they exile and/or run anyone out who dares to disagree with fucking saussure and michel foucault. leftists of academia wouldn't know how to measure different critical paradigms if the words themselves bit em in the ass.

Is Paris Hilton economically valuable? Your assertion implies a meritocracy, which no one would argue exists

>muh Private property
>muh State
>muh nationalism
>muh ethnicity
>muh family
All spooks that the right uses to put above their self interest.

>If anything the right makes more moralistic arguments than the left

Yes, we do. Because we feel morality.

The big giveaway is the ultimate accusation of leftists: "POOR PEOPLE ARE NOT VOTING IN THEIR SELF-INTEREST" - which is apparently really bad.

But rich people caring only about money and acting only in their own self-interest is also really bad.

What's underlying this is simply an absence of morality - a highly materialist, robotic, insectile perspective. A desire for material goods at all costs.

She is valuable to her parents who need a heiress

Names can be economically valuable. Look at the Trump name. You also have artists who make a name for themselves, then spend 2 minutes splashing pain on a canvas to sell for 20k.

>The big giveaway is the ultimate accusation of leftists: "POOR PEOPLE ARE NOT VOTING IN THEIR SELF-INTEREST" - which is apparently really bad.
Funny how poor people should vote "in their self interest" but not white people

And yet useless to society. Isn't capitalism supposed to be about efficiency and those who meet the needs of others being rewarded for it? The average nurse is much more useful to society than a forex trader.

TT: Sup Forumstard shills strawman up these imaginary people they call "leftists"

Are they?
Are you implying the "right" is completely immoral, like thats a good thing? It is degenerate and subhuman.
Why are (((shills))) always making "Why are leftists [blank]?" threads? And its always something bullshit, to boot.


This has nothing to do with left or right. This is a thing with people on the "left" and "right

Shills need to go back

Leftists want to change the way wealth is accumulated. Redistribution of wealth doesn't solve the problem at all

>Why is it anarcho-communists and collectivists use the workings of Stirner, when he was an individualist anarchist?
Striner made excellent arguments against right wing stuff. In the end while he did criticize the left too, his ideas are not incompatible with leftism. Hell it is possible to have a Union of Egoists in Communism

>muh Private property
>muh State
>muh nationalism
>muh ethnicity
>muh family
These do not work against self interest.

Yes, imagine the shock.

There is something the right puts above their self-interest.

How stupid of them. How stupid to not take any action to maximise your self-interest, even at the expense of your nation, race and family.

Leftists recognize the importance of materialist thinking, and like silicon intelligences find such prioritisation of the other above oneself absurd. But, of course, a tendency in others they observe that it can be useful to exploit.

>muh State

What?

All of the others can be maintained in an anarchist society with MIGHT MAKES RIGHT though. No morality needed.

> when an elite has been given all power - economic, social, cultural, judicial, military - it will then freely abolish itself. That is really the Big Lie of leftism.

spot on. it's the divergence of western thought to privilege rousseau over hobbes that has allowed any modern justifications for it, in my opinion. leftism ignores the nature of man to its own peril every single time. there's a real will-to-power/masochism at the heart of it all.

No free markets are about voluntarily exchanging wealth
You are free to go start a commune in a "capitalist" society

they arent

Yeah you're not wrong, usually people call it like that I don't know any equivalent expression tbqh