User:Harrystein/sandbox/text/Draft principles

From Leftypedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Every investigation must decide for itself how to sift the relevant information from the irrelevant. In the sciences, data which is peer-reviewed and follows the proper principles for its field is usually held to be the most reliable. However, in the "soft sciences" or "humanities", these frameworks often must be developed and applied by the authors themselves, creating tools that vary from functionalism and postmodernism to source criticism and paleography. Historians and political authors vary in their rules for determining how trustworthy a given source is, how much weight to assign to different types of data, and which source to trust in the event of a disagreement.

However, academics are not created in a vacuum. They are produced by society itself, and their entire lives from preschool to post-grad have prepared them for their real task: defending the current state of affairs. After these academic filters come even more filters: media, government, and culture all play a role in how this information makes its way into the average person's brain. These "filters" produce what Marxists call ideology, an ambient set of beliefs that permeates everything you say and do. Indeed, the most egregious form of bias is the bias of the "unbiased" – those who consume and reproduce this ideology without the faintest idea they are doing so.

"It is difficult for me to imagine what 'personal liberty' is enjoyed by an unemployed person, who goes about hungry and cannot find employment. Real liberty can exist only where exploitation has been abolished, where there is no oppression of some by others, where there is no unemployment and poverty, where a man is not haunted by the fear of being tomorrow deprived of work, of home and of bread."[1]

We hold that media outlets in capitalist countries, both private and state-owned, have an inherent bias created by their objective interests. Be it the advertising and profit considerations of private media or the direct role of the government in the research and funding of state-owned news, every source is affected. Even institutions which are considered highly neutral or unbiased, like the BBC and AP News, are constrained by this mechanism. And ultimately, this means that Wikipedia and other sources that emphasize "mainstream consensus" as a determining factor structurally inherit this bias, effectively becoming yet another source which repeats or even amplifies the propaganda of whatever media Wikipedia has already declared to be "reliable". On top of these filters, Wikipedia adds its own:

  1. Sources, and info, that are corroborated by several mainstream sources are more acceptable. Sources that themselves are well received in mainstream media and by government outlets are acceptable by default.
  2. Sources which are associated with groups that are already held in poor regard by Western media outlets, such as Russia, China, and other rival states, "terrorist" groups of any background, and even international organizations, are often only added with qualifications, whereas European state media is often taken at face value.
  3. Most importantly, information should be interpreted through the liberal worldview that underlies organizations like the United Nations and the International Court of Justice. This worldview is centered around concepts like:

and other human rights as defined by those organizations and by authors in the liberal tradition, including national self-determination, due process of law, multiparty elections, technocracy and "scientific" policy-making, et cetera. Liberal organizations, especially Wikipedia, uphold these abstracts as metrics by which to measure the causes and movements of the past and present - as goals for their own sake rather than as tools to bring about what Karl Marx called the real liberation of mankind: food, shelter, fulfillment, belonging, and reconciliation with nature and with humanity as a whole. Liberalism has lost its way as an ideology. Having already destroyed the oppressive societies of the past, liberal rights are now the unassailable foundation of a new moral system which has become invisible and taken for granted, a system which was itself created alongside the development of liberal capitalism in order to justify the society that was emerging. Examples of this phenomenon abound on Wikipedia, such as in the "Criticism" sections of pages about major leftist leaders or on pages that tally the "death toll" caused by the overtly political communist movement while ignoring the billions killed by the social murder of the "apolitical" liberal world order. Liberals choose to ignore and censor the truth in favor of a world in which "freedom" has already been achieved, and all real injustices, inequities, and wars are always the fault of the enemies of liberalism.

This is how Wikipedia's own axioms turn it inescapably into a clone of Western media and, thereby, a mouthpiece for the elites. But any serious inquiry, in science or the humanities, cannot survive with no principles at all. A true alternative, then, would first require an alternate set of axioms, or fundamental principles, by which the propriety of a conclusion drawn from a given source is determined. The objective of Leftypedia is to develop a new alternative to the real hegemony that the internet, conceived as a forum of ideological freedom, has in fact only replicated. To this end, we lay out these principles.

Definitions

This site welcomes users of all stripes who are interested in contributing to the study of leftism. However, in order to maintain some cohesion, users who disagree with certain principles are considered guests first and foremost. Before we begin, some definitions are in order.

I. Social change and revolution

  • Social change is an innovation in the way that people carry out their lives with respect to other people. Status, culture, and rights are often radically changed as a given society transforms itself through the centuries.
  • Revolution is an abrupt form of social change which typically involves force, suspension of the existing laws, and a chaotic period of social experimentation which results in a new "society", or set of social relationships. It is important to note that the concept of revolution has remained ill-defined since the "type species", the 1789 French Revolution, made the term ubiquitous. Defining and explaining the phenomenon of revolution is one of the tasks of Marxism.

II. Marxism

  • Marxism, in the most common sense of the word, is a holistic political, economic, historical, and philosophical worldview which holds, very broadly:
  1. That the turmoil of human history is the result of material forces, from geography and minerals to machinery and population density, interacting with and shaping human endeavors;
  2. That this collision manifests itself most sharply in the form of seismic social revolutions, which usher in new relationships between the material and the human;
  3. That the current form of our society, in which massive private production for sale and profit is by far the most common source of the things we make, use, and eat, is inherently unstable, destructive, and detrimental to human life and indeed all life; and
  4. That this society, even as it destroys itself, continues to develop the technological and material groundwork for its own end by a social revolution which should and must lead to the abolition of private property and money in favor of a collective, classless, and moneyless social and economic form of organization known as communism.
  • [outline of marxist economics, historiography??]
  1. asdf
  2. asdf
  3. asdf
  • Economists and other academics who accept only some of these principles are typically known as Marxians.[verification needed] Revolutionaries and political organizers who reject some principles, whether they claim that Marx was in error or has simply become outdated, are known (often pejoratively) as revisionists. Hence, these principles are here for the purpose of separating Marxism from variants and related views which are influenced by Marx.[needs copy edit]
B. What is a definition of revisionism?
i. Principles of Marxism that cannot be contravened, or else you become "marxian" or "marx-influenced":
a) Contradictions of capitalism:
◦ Inherent antagonisms that make the system irresolvable, self-destructive, and anti-human:
▪ Worker and Boss
▪ Collective and individual production

III. Imperialism and war

Imperialism is not just a political or social ideology, or simply a form of chauvinism. In broad terms, imperialism is a policy which maintains and exploits a developmental disparity between two countries through peaceable or violent means. The British Empire violently smashed the well-developed textile industry of India to force it into dependency;[citation needed] the United States supported reactionary governments for decades which left Central America a backward region overflowing with migrants; Belgian and American interference in the Congo Crisis paved the way for the bloodletting and mass destabilization of the "African World War".[citation needed] Leftists hotly debate the economic nature of imperialism, as well as its implications for the way forward. This plurality of viewpoints, including discussion of unequal exchange and the question of whether Soviet, Russian, or Chinese foreign policy has ever constituted a form of imperialism or "social imperialism", is welcome on Leftypedia in order to promote knowledge and healthy critique. What is not allowed, however, is denial of the real force that United States and western Europe, through organizations like NATO, the IMF, the World Bank, and the CIA, have constituted in promoting global underdevelopment, discord, and poverty for the past eighty years. This ignorance of real imperialism is the essence of American deviations such as "anarcho-Bidenism" and "anarcho-NATOism". These positions are based on ideal considerations rather than a material analysis of the real forces which bring about progress for humanity.

Principles

  • Leftism and Marxism: Ultimate objective is to further these studies, and add science and philosophy in accordance with Marxist and anarchist objectives.
  • Non-sectarian: Strive to balance different tendencies or leftist "sects", and allow their positions as long as they are fairly stated. Strive to treat their citations and sources by an equal and fair standard.
  • Anti-capitalism: This includes anti-imperialism.
  • Skepticism: Combine a healthy doubt of hegemonic sources with support from verifiable, credible alternatives.
  • Ease of access and editing: Make site easy to edit, discuss, and also easy to understand and apply the rules and procedures. Easy to approach the mods. Also include accessible pages with links to tools for editing.
  • Not politically correct: Oppose superficial liberal analyses of social problems and aim to document all leftist viewpoints. To exclude these positions is to erase them, and thereby to fail to scrutinize and improve our own views.
  • Not politically incorrect: Uphold basic etiquette and respect for others while allowing criticism. Contributors who take issue with "politically correct" content are allowed to voice their objections, and those who have objections to politically incorrect content must always voice theirs respectfully. Personal accusations of bigotry should be avoided.

These principles do not define what each article must lean towards, or a bias every page must hold. Leftism is a real movement and not a set of doctrines to uphold. Leftypedia is intended for critical debate and discussion of historical facts for the improvement of the science of revolution, and input from even our enemies is allowed to some extent.

Aims

Our aims can be summarized in seven main points. We want Leftypedia to be:

  1. An easily accessible resource for socialists of all stripes to locate well-researched arguments and information on politics, history, and modern issues.
  2. A platform for interested leftists to collaborate and develop original discourse on issues relevant to fellow proletarians and socialists alike.
  3. A reliable and balanced source of news and information to help leftists better comprehend and refute the propaganda and fabrications of bourgeois media, including about working class struggles or foreign "enemies" of imperialist states.
  4. A platform for leftists to synthesize, exposit, and critique the writings of notable socialists, using detailed sources and quotations, to innovate on past experience and to advance the science of socialism.
  5. A space for leftists to elaborate on their contentions with other socialist tendencies in order to better inform and expand the worldview of others.
  6. A space for socialists to take advantage of the collaborative nature of the MediaWiki format to compile detailed, informative articles on praxis and other topics relevant to leftist activism, all in one place and continuously expanding.
  7. A space for leftists to easily create and share detailed polemics and essays for others to engage with their views.

Rules

I guess this section is for strict rules and no-nos. I don't really know what would go here that doesn't belong in etiquette and guidelines. Maybe well-defined penalties for certain offenses?

Etiquette and guidelines

Constructive input

This site is first and foremost a space for leftists to share with leftists. However, both leftists and non-leftists are expected to contribute in a respectful and constructive manner. Controversial, polarizing, or sectarian edits are allowed, so long as the content follows all of the following:

  • On-topic for the page
  • Open to discussion, criticism, and revision

And at least one of the following:

  • Well-sourced
  • Clearly argued

If you contravene these criteria your edits are subject to being overwritten or removed. Non-Marxists are welcome here, but lazy editing is not. "Pro-Nazi" positions, as in facts that happen to support nazi or anti-communist narratives, are not banned per se, and a certain perspective on a page towards/against a leftist angle is not banned per se. However, disruptive editing and rule manipulation may be considered bad faith if used in combination with consistently pro-rightist editing. Reactionism and liberalism, or any other kind of non-leftist positions are not banned per se, as we will endeavour to allow and encourage people of other political philosophies to explore leftism through /leftypol/ so long as they follow the rules contained herein. However, non-leftist users are ultimately to be considered 'guests' and thus will be removed if they prove a nuisance or disrupt the normal functioning of the site.

FAQ

What is this site for?

WIP section!

  1. Ease of access: Leftypedia is intended to be far easier than Wikipedia to get into, and our rules should be easy for

Why not just edit Wikipedia?

Some leftists believe that editing Wikipedia to fight liberals and propagandists on their own turf is worthwhile, and we support them in their endeavor. However, going against the grain on Wikipedia takes serious knowledge of the unspoken rules, rituals, and loopholes of the site as well as the grit to fight against an army of liberals who have too much free time – or are literally on someone's payroll. In contrast, as noted above, we hope Leftypedia will be easy to edit. Leftists edit Wikipedia in order to fight the enemy; they should edit Leftypedia in order to share with their comrades. This wiki's explicit aims, de facto editor base of leftists, use of original research, and frankly, opposition to the blatant propaganda and censorship on Wikipedia are what set it apart from other wikis and make the project worthwhile.

There are tons of other alt-Wikis out there, including ProleWiki. Why should I use yours?

Most alt-Wikis define themselves only in opposition to Wikipedia, calling themselves "unbiased" sources which only reproduce "the truth". In reality, all this means is that the real bias which undoubtedly underlies the community is implicit rather than explicit, and the clear methodology of Wikipedia is often replaced with undefinable "common sense". ProleWiki is one of the few popular Wiki projects [that I know of] which exists on an explicitly leftist and Marxist basis. However, Leftypedia is very different from ProleWiki. While ProleWiki has a specific ideological position and set of topics that they choose to focus on – namely, certain anti-Western countries; the history of American imperialism; and the theory of Marxism–Leninism – Leftypedia has a broader focus on all topics of note to a studious leftist, including history, philosophy, economics, and science, making it a true encyclopedia. The internet needs a resource for leftists of different stripes to discuss and catalogue their knowledge. Leftypedia does not hope to attain the breadth of short, obscure articles on ProleWiki; rather, we want to create a core number of deep, insightful pages about the Marxist worldview and network between the vast number of leftist spaces on the net.

What do you do when two users disagree? How do you prevent it from dissolving into sectarianism?

See our policy on resolving disagreements. [and on [sectarianism]????] As a rule of thumb, users who are not party to a disagreement (for example, non-Maoists in a discussion internal to Maoism) should try to reconcile two versions into one text, usually allowing each viewpoint their own section or paragraph. Relying on quality sources, preferably written by leftists, also helps to eliminate liberal viewpoints which are not encouraged on the site. While this has not actually been tested in the most extreme cases, it seems to have worked well for disputes over issues like Dengism, COVID policy and the like, and we think these cases are actually good examples of the working of this site's fair but strict policy.

When not only analyses but basic facts are disputed, either a third party should help evaluate the sources, or the two different sources should be cited with a precise page number or website so that a casual reader can check both and draw their own conclusions. It is clearly naïve to say that all disputes of fact can be resolved in this way; this is where discussion should go to the Talk page and a compromise worked out. If both users are unhappy with the compromise, the last resort is to create separate pages to write out disagreements. Theoretical examples of contentious topics that might deserve their own space include "Trotskyist critiques of Stalin", "Nature of Chinese capitalism", "Verified atrocities of the Stalin-era Soviet Union", or "Personal life of Leon Trotsky". The point is that the reader should know they are getting into something spicy.

Finally, the Essay namespace, when it is up and running, will serve as a place for leftists to expound on their ideas without the inhibition of the normal Wiki space. Users will(?) be free to link to their own Essay from the "See also" section of the relevant Wiki page(s), like linking to a page about China at the bottom of the China article itself (but typically not in the article).

Can I post content which triggers the commies?

As previously noted, feel free to post content which goes against these ideological principles, so long as your arguments are well-sourced and productive, and so long as you are ready to support your argument. Just keep in mind that you do not have a right to "free speech" on this site.

Retrieved from "https://wiki.leftypol.org/index.php?title=User:Harrystein/sandbox/text/Draft_principles&oldid=20752"