like idek wtf you'd have to do to actually get authleft lmao besides say some shit like "yeah we should kill literally everyone and gay people are bad"

  • AcidSmiley [she/her]15•3 years ago

    This is a fairly fundamental dichotomy of the left ever since Marx's early writings. But if you think both an empirical analysis of the world rooted in materialist thought and a utopian critique of power rooted in moralist idealism are equally valid, you're simply smack dab in the middle of that axis, so this isn't really a problem.

      • AcidSmiley [she/her]17•3 years ago

        maybe i don’t understand what utopian means here.

        Yeah, i think that's it. Utopian in Marxist jargon means something completely different than how it's commonly used. A utopian socialist does not believe in revolutionary struggle, but believes that the idea of a classless, moneyless, stateless society is so just and appealing in itself that you just need to argue for it persuasively enough and the ruling class will see the error of their ways and adopt these virtuous ideals. Scientific socialists also want a moneyless, classless, stateless society, they just think that such a society has to be brought about against the utmost resistance of the ruling class and make the case for such a society not on moral grounds, but based on historic materialism.

          • AcidSmiley [she/her]9•3 years ago

            that seems like more of a revolutionary/reform dichotomy, though.

            To a degree it is, but the main point is that utopian socialists argue for such a society on moral grounds ("it's good and just not to exploit people"), whereas scientific socialists leave morals out of that entirely and argue that capitalism will at some point collapse under its inherent contradictions.