/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

This thread will detail some of the changes made to the site in the past year, as well as our plans for the future.

New i2p Address
As requested by several users, and in accordance with our general ethos of encouraging online anonymity, leftychan now has an i2p address which can be found here:
http://leftychmxz3wczbd4add4atspbqevzrtwf2sjobm3waqosy2dbua.b32.i2p or http://leftychan.i2p/

Moderation Changes
* New spam filter - Thanks to the hard work of our dev and admin Zer0-, leftychan now has an effective countermeasure against the automatic bot spam that plagues alt-chans. Dubbed as the 'spam noticer', the implementation of this system has led to a dramatic fall in malicious advertisement threads being posted to the site.
* New mods & dev - In order to better cover european and asian timezones, two more mods have been voted onto the team. These are sindikat, who has previous moderation experience, and jon, who is also acting as a dev and has made many valuable contributions in this capacity.
* Removal of Zul - In line with the rule that if a mod is inactive for over 15 weeks their status as a mod is called into question, Zul was voted off the mod team.

New Roulette Board
>>>/777/
After some discussion, we decided on /k/ as the new roulette board theme, replacing /CHAD/. Archived threads from previous roulette cycles can still be viewed here >>>/roulette_archive/
Any suggestions for future roulette board rotations are welcome.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

Hello /leftypol/, we noticed an under-appreciation for the theory that upholds our political ideologies: As such, we have decided to revive the reading sticky! This thread will be dedicated to the sharing, discussing, and general banter about various leftist thinkers, theories, and political outlooks.

But, other than that, we believe there are other important reads that must be addressed, especially, for beginners and those just now getting into leftism.

Don't forget to check out >>>/edu/ for more reading and discussion!

———————
Common Right Wing Talking Points Debunks
——————–

Check out the /edu/ thread at
https://leftychan.net/edu/res/5576.html

Also see the relevant leftybooru tag
https://lefty.pictures/post/list/debunk/1
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

In 2024, somebody posted a clip of a somebody making the point that a trans woman whi didn’t disclose their gender transition status before having sex with a man was being deceptive and thus was raping him, which some leftists found to be controversial: https://xcancel.com/secondbyfarce/status/1852772181073445357

Some here may find the position of the guy in the video to be disconcerting and triggering, but within the context of consent in sexual intimacy, he is right since he is merely applying the logic of rape-as-lack-of-consent to its logical conclusion.

Because let’s face it: Consent, as pointed out by figures such as Harry Hay and Michel Foucault, is just liberal contract theory as applied to sex, and a contract is made void if you enter under it under false pretenses, and let’s not pretend that contracts are made in a vacuum, as whether a contract is or isn’t valid isn’t a neutral judgement made by an impartial figure, as much as being done by the powers that be (e.g., the state) under dominant or bourgeois cultural diktats.
So unless you think consent shouldn’t be absolute when it comes to sexual relations, then a trans woman having sex with a cishet man without disclosing “her” pre-transition gender is rape as much as sex by deception is rape, and neither are criminalised even in the most feminist countries like Norway, Sweden, Iceland, Denmark, the USA, Canada, Australia, the UK, and France. So what does it say about consent theory if not even the most feminist countries on Earth criminalised sex by deception as rape?

Then of course, there’s the issue of the AoC, a draconian and absolutist bourgeois piece of legislation used by the capitalist bourgeoisie to morally discipline the working class into anti-proletarian bourgeois morality since the days of William T Stead’s infamous yellow press journalism. In this case, a person under the magic age line cannot (legally) consent to sex with someone above the magic age line. Common idealist talking points often allude to an inconsistent and arbitrary notion of “mental maturity” that is heavily subjective depending on who uses it, whilst obfuscating the meat of the issue: It’s not that people below the magic age line are incapable of being willing sexual and/or romantic partners, it’s just that the state decided that the magic age line makes the willingness of the Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

Continued from
>>491673

Bottomtextbottomtext

https://www.jstor.org/stable/20098724

Many dismiss scientific racism as blatant lies, and while I can under that point since more often than not such faulty science is used to reify and justify inequality, I do think there’s a place for racialism (i.e., the acknowledgment that humanity is sub-divided into different biological taxa known as races) in communist thought as opposed to racism (the notion that biological racial differences justifies oppression).

Indeed, in Soviet history “scientific racism” as a discipline was widely adopted in the USSR, with Craniometry being widely used as a way to measure differences between races, and the Linnean system of racial classification was en vogue across Soviet history even long after Sweden abandoned it.

And this legacy remains in the form of Russian and Chinese anthropologists being more likely to believe in the concept of races as being rooted in biology compared to their western counterparts: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15666627?dopt=Abstract

Now: Yes, race is a social construct, but only insofar that “subspecies” is as shown by how taxonomists in the field of zoology can’t agree on which subspecies should be counted as a separate species or not (e.g., the Dingo), considering how both race and subspecies are ultimately based on genetics, which is a material reality.

One of the first and most important who tried to deny the existence of human races on a genetic level is certainly Richard Lewontin.

In 1972, following his studies, Lewontin stated that "about 85% of human genetic variability is due to individual differences within populations and only 15% is due to differences between different populations or ethnic groups". With this he comes to the following conclusions:

Racial classification has no genetic or taxonomic significance
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

this fuckin piece of shit this no good fuckin walking genocidal goiter with hair & teeth
if this piece of shit showed up in my neighborhood I'd shove him in a garbage pail and throw it off the nearest cliff
I'm embarrassed to have even saved his pic for this thread I'm gonna immediately delete it after I post this

What do you think of him, /leftypol/?

BOLIVIA ELECTION THREAD
Menshevick implosion edition

This sunday is the election in the land that as Rome didn't called itself Romulus had to call itself Bolivia instead of Bolivar.

You can’t be a communist and support the AoC. It’s impossible. Why? Let us analyze the question dialectically. To start no communist should be using rhetoric about the Epstein affair other than in a completely self-interested way to delegitimize the system. Why? Because revolution is not a dinner party. It requires red terror. The foundation of the dictatorship of the proletariat is red terror. Red terror must be like the air we breathe. Can you really be angry about the age of consent and Epstein while practicing red terror? It’s only possible while using it as prop to manipulate the most cattle-like normies, the most alternatively petit-bourgeoisied or lumpenized segments of the proletariat. But the limits very soon become apparent. The weepy soccer mom evangelical moralism that leads people to grand emotional outpouring over Epstein’s sexual relations with teens is incompatible with the titanium spine required to practice red terror. Red terror requires hard and ruthless new men who will do anything to destroy the class enemy— this cannot be reconciled with weepy pseudo-Christian moralism that leads he average normie to have psychosexual emotional meltdowns over the fact that some Jewish guy had sex below the magic age line. If you search your heart you know this to be true(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST - No more pedo false flag threads. No more derailing threads with this. Also, you can literally read what Epstein did & who he was, we have a thread about it.)

Well if you really think about it is it that different from having sex with a girl from ED twitter? People want to deny or moralize but I think this is fine. A true leftist understands that some people have to be forced to be free. And, anyways, doesn’t seem to be that different from ED twitter. A starving woman in a relationship with a pedophile (Russian) where both have a rape fetish (Jewish in her case)? That’s just an IRL version of ED twitter and ya the context and the location makes it a bit dicey/problematic. But when you think for more than five minutes it doesn’t seem quite as bad of as abnormal as you might think at first glance.