Why does the left wing have so many personality cults?

[zarus tathra]

So many -isms and Men of Wisdom. Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Bakhunin, they always need some Elder, some Holy Book, to rally behind. Why? Supposedly, the "left" is about equality. Isn't equality a fairly simple idea? One that doesn't need too much explication or coordination? How is it possible for someone to write thousands of pages on the subject of equality, or for people to form ginormous Kafkaesque bureaucracies to make it "work?"

[Shiranu]

Weird, I consider myself pretty far to the left in belief (in practice I would say left-middle is more practical to do), and I have never read many of these "holy books" or been a disciple of Marx, Che or whoever. Most people I know who have similar view points generally haven't either; it's more looking at what works/what is morally right and thinking that is what should be implemented.

That said, I don't think the left "needs" these philosophers and writers any more than the libertarians "needs" Ayn Rand and Ron Paul, or the right whoever they "look up to". They simply wrote books that people agree with and generally explained concepts more eloquently than the average man, therefor their quotes are used to convey those ideas. Just like I would quote Richard Dawkins or Carl Sagan when it comes to a field of science they wrote about... they convey ideas more efficiently and beautifully than I necessarily could. Hell, you could say atheists have a cult of personality when it comes to people like Carl Sagan and I think it would be about as accurate as your opening statement.

Also; >mfw you implied Stalin = leftist.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

It's probably easier to understand the language as opposed to right wing terminology like 'trickle down' which is a euphemism for legal robbery.
AS IF Reagan bullshit doublespeak and MCARTHYISM  don't have their own cult followers.

[zarus tathra]

At least we can all agree that personality cults are a red flag.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

Judy Garland had a cult following.  Are you suggesting that somehow being a fanatical fan of Judy Garland is up there with say...Stalin?  :-k

[SGOS]

So many -isms and Men of Wisdom. Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Bakhunin, they always need some Elder, some Holy Book, to rally behind.

Some people have become brainwashed by the right and believe left idolizes guys like the above.  Actually, except for the occasional wacko, the left does nothing of the sort and considers Marx, Lenin, and Stalin to be opportunistic assholes, not heroes, but that's not the image the right wants you to have of the left.  So they repeat the lies over and over again until dumb ass voters believe the left are avid disciples of the worst leaders in history.

As for Elders and Holy books, they are in no more abundance on the left than the multitude of the right wing sweethearts like Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck, and Ann Coulter that stir up the idiots on the right into an dangerous orgasmic frenzy.

[Shiranu]

...and considers Marx... to be opportunistic assholes...

Eh?

Not sure I agree with that, since he only theorised about it and didn't base a country on (if we want to consider Leninism and Stalinism even remotely) communism.

[Jason78]

We can all be equal.  Though it can be said that some people are better at things than others, through either natural talent or just working really really hard at it.   And when those people write down their knowledge in books, if you're interested in that field, shouldn't you study them?

Is your problem that the subject matter is politics?  You seem to have taken it to a single dimension and polarised it into a left view even though there are examples of the same thing on the right.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

Uhmm..drugs r bad.. OK?  [-X

[hillbillyatheist]

I'd like to add that folks who blindly follow any ideology are as bad as folks who blindly follow certain people.

There's people who will just blindly agree with a position because its what their team believes, or try to fit everything through their ideological lens.

Thats why you get people who always think free market solutions are bad, or that government solutions are always bad, etc without looking at each thing on its own.

its easier to just have a kneejerk ideological cookie cutter answer.

[mykcob4]

So many -isms and Men of Wisdom. Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Bakhunin, they always need some Elder, some Holy Book, to rally behind. Why? Supposedly, the "left" is about equality. Isn't equality a fairly simple idea? One that doesn't need too much explication or coordination? How is it possible for someone to write thousands of pages on the subject of equality, or for people to form ginormous Kafkaesque bureaucracies to make it "work?"

Leftist are thinkers and conformity to a social norm isn't a trait of a thinker. BTW you left out some really great leftist like Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, John Locke, Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison....,etc!

[zarus tathra]

There's a passage from a book called "Are you transhuman?" and they advise you never to read a book that's longer than like 100 pages. It's a bit extreme, but there's some truth to it. I mean, scientific papers are rarely more than like 25 pages long. Unless you're writing a math textbook or something, there's very little justification for making something that big.

[Shiranu]

That is rather stupid advice...

[zarus tathra]

Its really not. Buy a random book from Amazon and I guarantee you it will be >90% fluff. Buy a book on politics and it'll be more like 99%.

[josephpalazzo]

There is a basic misunderstanding: when people say we are all equal, that is meant as, equal before the law. As individuals, we are anything but equal. When people speak of inequality, this is in regard to income earning. It's a political issue that can be resolved with... well yes, political will. None of this has anything to do with personality cult.