Category Archives: Capitalism

Suicide: The Ultimate Enigma

Becoming suicidal is often but not always indicative of mental illness. Philosophically, it simply means that you do not want to live anymore, and you don’t have to be nuts to feel way. Life’s hard for everyone, and at some point, a lot of people just can’t take it anymore and want to bail out or end the pain. Indeed, a person certainly feels no more pain after suicide.

People kill themselves for all sorts of reasons. Only 70% of suicides are clinically depressed. A lot of people commit suicide simply out of boredom, believe it or not. Some people seem to do it for absolutely no reason at all. It’s as if they did it for shits and giggles or as a way of trolling the human race. I suppose in a way, suicide is the ultimate troll. Suicides are trolling the whole damn world, every one of us.

Suicide is a mystery.

We have been studying it forever, and we still hardly know a thing about it. A man wrote a big book on suicide a while back, and at the end of the book he said he didn’t understand suicide any better at the end than when he had started.

Some countries have high suicide rates, and no one seems to know why. Other countries have low suicide rates, and no one knows why.

Hungary had high suicide rates under feudalism, monarchy, fascism, communism and now democracy. People killed themselves at the same rate in all systems.

The Japanese have always had a high suicide rate, and no one knows why. Impoverished North Korea has an extremely low suicide rate while next door ultra-wealthy Japan has a very high rate. There is no good explanation for the difference.

 

It may be cultural. Some societies may be more pro-suicide than others.

Anti-socialists like to say that Swedes have a high suicide rate. They claim that Swedish socialism gives people everything they need and maybe want, but it leaves them bored and unmotivated and hopeless to improve their lot, so they end it all. But all places on Earth at that latitude have a high suicide rate. It is so dark half the year that the sun only comes out for a few hours a day, and it is cold all the time. There are high suicide rates in Norway, Iceland, Finland, Estonia, Russia (especially Siberia), Alaska, Northern Canada, and Greenland. Anyway, the Swedes had a high suicide rate even before socialism. Other countries have an identical system to Swedish socialism, and they have low suicide rates.

Actually, the suicide rate was comparatively low in the USSR and Eastern Europe under communism. However, with the transition to capitalism in 1990, suicide rates skyrocketed over the next 10-15 years as did forms of slow suicide such as drinking oneself to death. So the Communism/socialism causes suicide theory seems to be washed up. If anything, suicide seems to be linked to capitalism a lot more than it is linked to socialism or Communism.

Nigeria is one of the most hellish and nightmarish places on Earth at least from my perspective, and from any point of view, it’s basically a shithole. In fact, it is probably one of the foulest shitholes on Earth. Yet Nigerians typically among the happiest people on Earth. They’re smiling amid the stinking, crime-infested, ultraviolent ruins, while the Swedes and Japs are blowing their brains out in lavish apartments drowning in luxury.

Go figure.

Bottom line is that a lot of human behavior is either not easily explained or simply doesn’t seem to make much sense at all. People feel however they do for whatever reasons they do, and it’s often hard to figure out why.

At the end of the day, human behavior is largely a mystery.

5 Comments

Filed under Africa, Asia, Canada, Capitalism, Culture, Economics, Eurasia, Europe, Finland, Hungary, Japan, Left, Marxism, NE Asia, Nigeria, North America, North Korea, Norway, Psychology, Regional, Russia, Siberia, Social Problems, Socialism, Sociology, Sweden, USA, USSR, West Africa

Something Conservatives Will Never Understand: Armed Leftwing Revolutions Only Happen in Horrible Countries

I will grant that Colombia is more rightwing than the US, but at least they have a great Left. Hell, the Left down there is actually armed for Chrissake! They have guns, bombs, RPG’s full battle uniforms, you name it, and they use their weapons all the time to kill the conservative police and army, who very much deserve it.

This shows what happens when your society goes too rightwing or when your rightwing goes too rightwing. Not only do you get a monstrous, fascist, usually murderous Right, but, just as sure as night follows day, you end up with a very radical Left that in many cases arms itself against the murderous Right.

Extremes beget extremes. Do you really need to read Marx to figure that out? Hell, I bet I could explain that to a 5th grader and they would nod their head in agreement.

But show me an American conservative anywhere who agrees with that statement. Nope, according to the US Establishment, the radical Left rises out of ether for no apparent reason at all other than sheer fanatical evil to overthrow the capitalism that their ideology orders them to blindly hate.

While the USSR was still around, it was a convenient White Whale for any stirrings of the radical Left.

Why is the Left armed to the teeth down there, killing people left and right? Well, Number One is just because they are evil. Idiots, but evil idiots.

Are they taking up arms for any reason? Of course not, there is never an indigenous reason for any Left revolution. Well, what’s the cause of it? Cuba! And the USSR! The Cubans and the Russians put them up to it! Oh God, what crap this is. But this is the ideology of the entire US political establishment and the entire US media for decades now. And it is the lunatic ideology of the vast majority of the American people since 1946.

We lie like this because the truth is hard to swallow.

The Communists were not stupid. The individual CP’s in various countries generally felt that only when the capitalist conditions in the country approached a truly horrorshow of a Hell would there be reason for revolution. Otherwise they would always try to take power by peaceful means. Many a CP ruled many, many times that the country was not in a revolutionary situation and hence taking up arms was not justified. I can’t tell you how many documents I have read that said X country was not in a revolutionary situation right now so taking up arms was illegitimate.

Taking up arms was always an extreme last resort for any CP in any country. And when people did take up arms in what was seen as a non-revolutionary situation, as with the Shining Path in Peru, the vast majority of the Left lined up with the state against the Marxist rebels. Nevertheless, even in those cases there were variables. Towards the end the situation in Peru had gotten so horrific with the war and the monstrous turn of the state into a murderous charnelhouse that a number of parties around 1992 declared that the country was now in a revolutionary situation and it was acceptable to take up arms. That is why a number of other groups took up arms in 1992 at the peak of the war.

In many cases, CP’s even cruelly denied help to local CP’s on the grounds that they were not in a revolutionary situation.

Every American hates North Vietnam and Ho Chi Minh, but he was a rational man and North Vietnam was a reasonable state.

After the cancelled elections of 1954 which were ruined by the US (the UN ordered elections in the country, and the US ordered South Vietnam not to participate), the South Vietnamese Communist Party (really the Viet Cong) tried to obtain power by peaceful means. They were not armed with a single bullet. Nevertheless, with strong US support, the South Vietnamese government murdered 80,000 unarmed South Vietnamese Communist civilians between 1954-1960.

All this time, the South Vietnamese Communists were asking for permission from North Vietnam to take up arms. The North consistently refused armed support, so 80,000 Communists died. This shows you how grave most CP’s thought the decision to take up arms was. Finally in 1960, the North gave the South permission to take up arms, and the war was on. As you can see, South Vietnam started the Vietnam War by killing 80,000 unarmed civilians with the enthusiastic help of the US. The Viet Cong actually took up arms in self-defense. They simply got tired of sitting in their villages and waiting for the government to come murder them. They decided that if the state was going to try to kill them anyway, they might as well pick up a gun and defend themselves against the killers.

If you study most Communist revolutions in the 20th Century, this was the case in almost every single one of them. The decision to take up arms was only a last resort when conditions in the country deteriorated drastically and in particular when all peaceful methods of change were blocked. In the 20th Century, Communists almost always took up arms grudgingly, as a last resort and typically in self defense.

If you had a decent country, you never had to worry about an armed Left rebellion. If you had a shithole, well, a Left revolution was definitely something to worry about. The conclusion here is that every country that had an armed Left revolution in the 20th Century basically asked for it and got what they deserved. It was the fault of the leaders of every one of those countries for making conditions so horrible that the Left took up arms in the first place.

2 Comments

Filed under Asia, Capitalism, Cold War, Colombia, Conservatism, Economics, Fascism, History, Journalism, Latin America, Latin American Right, Left, Marxism, Modern, Peru, Political Science, Politics, Regional, Revolution, SE Asia, South America, US, US Politics, USSR, Vietnam, Vietnam War, War

Alt Left: Max Weber Reloaded

Found on the Net.

American capitalism is a bad cocktail of Protestant unworthiness and an erotic hyperindividualism.

Genau, perfect.

More:

No, but as religion, especially Puritanical Protestantism, was the driving force, culturally, in the states (and I’m guessing the America’s tho I can’t really speak for Canada), it’s not to far off to say it was one of the primary influencers of capitalist thoughts about wealth, and the poor.

Yep. And this despite the fact that a number of the early Puritan colonies were actually socialist! The much more capitalist colonies tended to be down Virginia way.

And it’s more than just Protestantism, it is a particularly nasty type of pie in the sky when you die Protestantism with specific roots in the US. The predetermined nature of it and lack of social mobility is as bad as the Indian caste system. In fact, Calvinism is best seen as a uniquely American caste system.

Calvinism is a sect of Protestantism that glorifies work, this idea took root in the developing American culture as the persecuted Calvinists migrated to the New World. This culture is beneficial to capitalists.

Indeed.

And the brutally painful final diagnosis of America and Americans.

Yup, narcissistic Calvinist fuckheads, , that’s what they are when you strip everything away.

Ouch! That hurt. Also hit a nerve, and that makes a blow even more painful.

It’s not like religion created Capitalism, but the idea that one should work to justify their existence, that is more markedly expressed in US ideas than elsewhere, has its roots in Calvinism.

The Preterite and the Elect. Obviously the Trumps are the Elect. The 99% are pretty much the Preterite, whether they realize it or not.

Most of us are born in the footnotes and stay there until we die in the appendix. The plot just goes right on by without us as if we were not even there, but the whole time we think we are not only part of the story, worse, that we are actually not only starring in but authoring the very story itself, which is one of the primary delusions of the modern American citizen.

The show’s a fraud, but everyone is hoodwinked into thinking that not only are they isolated in that tiny spotlight of light on the stage, but worse, that we actually wrote the damned script of the play. And nobody gets it. They live this whole life with this charade and then die in arrogant ignorance.

Not only are we not in the spotlight, but we are nowhere even near the stage in first place. Perhaps we are in the theater, but if so, we are way up in the cheapest balcony seats.

Not only did not we not write the script, but worse, we don’t even know what’s really in it. We think the plot is one thing, but actually it’s another thing altogether. It’s the Great Con.

See: Weber, Max. 1913. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.

11 Comments

Filed under American, Capitalism, Christianity, Culture, Economics, History, Politics, Regional, Religion, Republicans, Socialism, US, US Politics, USA

“No One Cares What Your IQ Is. It’s What You Do with It That Matters.”

This is often heard in American society. I doubt if you will hear such a dumb comment in any other society on Earth because American society is probably one of the most viciously anti-intellectual cultures on Earth.

Now if you want to use such a statement as a warning to be extremely careful how you discuss IQ and in particular your own score assuming you know it, I agree that this is good advice. American society has a severe hangup about human intelligence, and this is shown by the rage and contempt with which discussions of IQ often arouse. Because after all, discussions of IQ are simply discussions of intelligence. If you hate IQ talk, then you hate discussing human intelligence. I would ask these people, “Why do you hate human intelligence so much? Is it because you are stupid? If you are not an idiot, then why hate human intelligence? Does that attitude even make sense?”

You can talk about IQ and even your own score in US society, but you need to be very careful about it. A lot of times it will go over well if you are cautious enough, but if not, you are guilty of committing a major social error in US society. And why be a social retard? A lot of us are screwed up enough that way. No need to pile it on and make matters worse.

Talented people are always interesting. There are plenty of fine athletes in high school and college who decided not to go into sports. They were still great athletes with excellent talent. There are people who can draw very well but don’t feel like using it. Likewise with music, writing, all sorts of things. All of this is interesting. I would love to hear about someone who had great artistic or musical talent who just decided they did not want to go that way and didn’t explore their talent. To me they would still be a very  interesting person, and indeed, I have known a number of folks like this.

Talent is laudatory whether it is “used” or not, and the whole concept of “using” your talent leaves a nasty capitalist taste in my mouth. It’s all about the money, isn’t it, greedheads?

There are many very goodlooking people who never went into acting or modeling. Do we pummel them over the head with this for not “using” their good looks? Of course not. No one has to use their natural gifts in any particular way, and it’s no crime to be the handsomest man on Earth who never did anything with it but use it to get women.

Due to our hatred of intelligence and intellectuals, it is only intelligence that is attacked as “worthless unless you do something with it.” No other talent is attacked this way. People who talk like this are showing how much hatred they feel towards human intelligence in general and intelligent people, especially highly intelligent ones, in particular.

High IQ people use their talent every day by necessity. They never give it up like lapsed athletes, artists, writers, etc. These people are very interesting to meet. High IQ people are fascinating whether they are “using” their talent or not. And what does “using it” mean anyway? Making a pile of money off of it. Not everyone is so mercenary!

My mother has a 150 IQ, yet she never “did anything with it.” So what! Why did she have to? She’s one of the smartest women I’ve ever met. Are we that greedy and mercenary that all talents must be converted into sleazy dollar bills?

Natural talents are interesting and praiseworthy no matter what use they are put to.

8 Comments

Filed under American, Capitalism, Culture, Economics, Intelligence, Psychology, Regional, USA

Polish Political Scientist on the Alt Left

This is a very important article, the first review of the Alt Left ever written by an actual expert on politics, in this case a Political Science professor. The only problem is that he lives in Poland and he wrote this article in Polish! He seems to support the Alt Left. He discusses both me and Rabbit, but most of the focus is on me. And why not? I am the one who started this whole mess after all.

Here it is translated in the best translation I could do.

Alt-Left

Dr Hab. Jarosław Tomasiewicz

02-10-2017

For a decade I have criticized the Polish Left for intellectual impotence expressed in the mindless import of foreign designs. CTRL + C, CRTL + V. It is such a vicious circle: the peculiar combination of geopolitical, historical, socioeconomic and cultural factors has left the Left in Poland (aside from some historical exceptions) a lone minority.

The feeling of isolation meant that the Left waited for outside help (“Moscow yesterday, today Brussels”); elevating “brotherly international solidarity” instead of concentrating on the workers at home deepened the alienation of the Left. Where, a hundred years ago, the Left flourished intellectually (Brzozowski, Abramowski, Luxembourg, Kelles-Krauz, Machajski, Hempel – and many, many others), nowadays, after decades of importing foreign ideas and attempting to implant them in Polish culture, the Polish Left has become intellectually sterile. Bringing the Polish Left to the role of translator of external trends, I see not only me – a “very strange figure” as one of the leftwing editors once called me – but also the Left-leaning generals.

But there is no need to repeat myself as my position on this is well-known. On the contrary – I will criticize the Native Left of the Vistula Backwater for remaining unaware of the latest cutting edge Left political programs from our brethren born in the homeland of the World Creative Class, that is, America.

This latest development followed this pattern:

In recent years, the Hipster Left, now pretending to be a Radical Left, has sunk in the warm sun of a Liberal Mainstream now dominated by the geopolitical system. It was safe to fight for progress behind the back of the liberal state – obviously not to seek any pure utopia ostensibly criticized for “errors and distortions”, but it was still considered less evil than the menace of populism.

The Left was kept in check by the “enlightened absolutism” of the European Union and America reasserting itself as as the keystone of the global order under the leadership of  the benign Uncle Barack. In this way, a phenomenon characteristic of the final days of empires emerged.

First, the Imperialist Left who finance social reforms in the metropolis of the First World profited from the Developed World’s hegemonic oppression of the periphery – the people in the Third World – and therefore was interested in maintaining the existing oppressive geopolitical order This situation was described well by Bernard Semmel.

Next, the toothless Mainstream Right, centered on maximizing corporate profits, could still attempt to launch a Cultural War but was instead generally pushed into a deeply defensive position due to the increasing domination of culture by the Cultural Left.

Finally, the Far Right was more interested in their hysterical, sensationalist, and conspiratorial media than in the real world .

Until one day a Demon returned from the the past.

An “Alt Right” appeared on the scene. “The Alternative Right”: alternative to the Mainstream Right. The phenomenon is otherwise uneven. This is not a reactionary neoliberal/neoconservative New Right whose last expression was the Tea Party. Alt Right is the rebirth of the hard-core “Old Right” – ethnopolitical, traditionalist, populist – in new postmodernist forms. A unique return to the roots. And it was the Alt Rightists who managed to beat the mainstream left in its own field: to win the support of the workers using non-cultural terms (Thomas Frank was a bit outdated) and economics. Workers from the Core Belt backed protectionism against globalism.

For the Left, who has already forgotten the anti-imperialism that once characterized it, this is a geopolitical earthquake like a reversal of the Earth’s magnetic poles. Suddenly there was no point of support, no reference point. The Left must find himself given the reality of this new situation. We need self-criticism, reorientation, and re-evaluation. Answer the question: What is to be done? The most popular answer is: What we have always done, only moreso. Purge the ranks, dig in their positions.

This is a bourgeois reaction frightened by the status quo. The bureaucracies of the safe zones become the universities and the liberal self-governments of the big cities. Rolling Stone Magazine describes the formation of the anti-Trump coalition . There will be pro-immigrant groups, environmentalists, feminists, sexual minorities, gun control advocates, and  interestingly, “true conservatives” (the neoconservatives) who are reluctant to support Trump. Did I miss anyone? Did you notice? One group I failed to mention is the unions. It seems that the Left has insulted the workers. Instead of Democrats meeting with union leaders, Trump meets with them.

However, not all American Leftists are carnal cult members, confident that the repetition of certain rituals will provide them with prosperity. Some believe that the challenge of Alt-Right requires a symmetrical response: to create an alternative to the Left mainstream harkening back to the forgotten foundations of the left. Opponents see the emergence of the Alt-Left phenomenon as a new embodiment of the alliance of extremes, “the place where Pat Buchanan meets Ralph Nader, ” although Alt-Leftists reject any form of cooperation with actual fascists, hardcore racists, and obsessive and conspiratorial anti-Semites. Proponents argue that this is a de facto return to the tradition of the Old Left – “the Left as it was from the Second World War to the counter-culture of the 1960’s.”

This implies first and foremost, the primacy of economics over culture, the primordial basis of superstructure, and a return to the Marxian thesis that “being forms consciousness.” Contempt for the poor and losers in capitalist society is condemned as one of the worst sins of all.

“We will be Left on economic matters [but] more Centrist on culture,” wrote Robert Lindsay, a leading Alt Left thinker.

This approach puts the Alt Left in opposition to both technocratic social democrats that have long since taken up neoliberalism while abandoning the working class on the Right and the “Cultural Left” on the other side of the political spectrum. The Alt-Left sees the Right as simply “traitors to the working class – our class enemies,” according to Lindsay. But it is towards the second group, which the Alt-Left sees as “rootless cosmopolitans,” that the Alt-Left devotes most of its polemical fervor.

Alt Left tolerates the Cultural Left as long as they are relatively quiet about their antagonizing views. The Cultural Left is criticized not for the legitimacy or direction of cultural change but rather for its extremism.

Lindsay writes:

Gay Rights – yes! Gay politics – no! Support and tolerance for biological homosexuals to live their lives as they wish in freedom and happiness. On the other hand, homosexuality should not be exalted or promoted […].

Women’s rights – yes! Women’s politics – no! The Alternative Left supports equity feminism while rejecting  the gender feminism of radical feminists who hate men.

According to Alt-Leftists, the “Identity Politics” promoted by the Cultural Left led to the replacement of class struggle with racial and/or sexual conflict. In this view, White people were evil…and anyone who was not White was automatically a saint. This meant not only that all Whites were part of a racist class but that they also all shared collective responsibility and guilt. Let us note that while class membership can be changed relatively easily, race or gender cannot, which makes any antagonism engendered by race or gender insurmountable.

Another aspect of the Alternative Left is internationalism, but here it is understood as anti-imperialism instead of cosmopolitanism. Lindsay emphasizes that the desire of people to have a national, ethnic or religious identity should be seen as a right that can not be interfered with. The result is an acceptance of  the multiculturalism of immigrants in the first generation but the promotion of assimilation in the next. On the one hand, extreme patriotism and Western imperialism are also criticized –  the Alt Left even singles out Bernie Sanders, as as a “Cold War liberal”. On the other hand, the view that “the West is pure evil” is rejected. The Alt Left detaches itself from both anti-Semitism and Radical Zionism, accepting anti-Zionists but also moderate Zionists.

The American Alt Left has been around for only little over one year (the site Altleft.com appeared in November 2015), and is a small movement made up of a number of different strands or wings.

One of Lindsay’s followers wrote:

Unfortunately, Alt Left attracts a wide variety of weird people, and each one has their own clichéd ideas for what Alt Left should be.

Well, beginnings are always difficult.

Should Poles mimic the Alt Left? No. It is enough to return to our native traditions, a matter-of-fact, homegrown analysis of reality – simply common sense. Swallows can be seen.

Dr Hab. Jarosław Tomasiewicz,.born in 1962, is a political scientist and researcher at the Institute of History of the University of Silesia, a journalist, and an author of a number of books in recent years, Terrorism against Political Violence: An Encyclopedic Outline (2000), Between Fascism and Anarchism: New Ideas for a New Era (2000), New National Democratic Party Groups in the Third Republic (2003), Evil in the Name of Good: The Phenomenon of Political Violence (2009) and National Revolution: The Nationalist Ideas of Social Revolution in the Second Republic (2012), as well as many magazine, newspaper and journal articles. He is a regular contributor to The New Citizen.

New Citizen 13
Publisher: Association of Citizens
Website: kooperatywa.org

3 Comments

Filed under Anti-Semitism, Anti-Zionism, Capitalism, Conservatism, Cultural Marxists, Democrats, Economics, Europe, Geopolitics, Immigration, Imperialism, Internationalism, Labor, Left, Liberalism, Nationalism, Neoconservatism, Neoliberalism, Obama, Poland, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Republicans, US Politics, USA, Vanity, Whites

Just Got Interviewed by Al Jazeera

Just got interviewed by a writer from Al Jazeera for an upcoming piece on the Alt Left . The real Alt Left, not this fake crap the conservatives refer to as Alt Left, which they mean the Hard Left, PC Left, SJW Left, or Antifa Left. The real Alt Left is opposed to all of those factions in one way or another.

I just counted up members of Alt Left sites on Facebook and there were over 18,000 members of groups that appeared to pushing real Alt Left ideas. On the other hand, I would probably renounce 50% or more of those people. Alt-Leftist Empire is the largest group with over 10,000 members, and I completely renounce them. These entryists have captured the movement and turned it into some sort of Cultural Left Libertarian Nationalism. Or something. Most support Trump and neoliberal capitalism. Supporting either is grounds for expulsion. No Alt Left person should support Trump except in a perverse way (accelerationism) and of course you can never support neoliberalism.

This movement is like a runaway train and it has gotten out of the hands of the people who started it in a very bad way, but a lot of political movements are probably like that.

So an article on me and the Alt Left, including quotes, should run in Al Jazeera fairly soon. Another may appear in Alternet at some point later. The author was not real friendly to the Alt Left, but I would not say he was extremely hostile either. I really don’t care how they portray us. In Hollywood they say all publicity is good publicity and that may well be true in politics also.

43 Comments

Filed under Capitalism, Cultural Marxists, Economics, Journalism, Left, Libertarianism, Nationalism, Neoliberalism, Political Science, Politics, US Politics, Vanity

Everything You Always Wanted to Know about Venezuela but Were Afraid to Ask

In 100% true facts, no bullshit. It’s all explained, right here. And like most everything else in Politricks nowadays, or maybe ever, most everything you read about this country called Venezuela is the product of some sort of a conspiracy.

I am starting to think that the Paranoid Model of World Politics and Conspiracy as Quotidian Model of Politics probably best represents Politricks in our modern era. The capitalists, the conservatives, and the rich are lying all the time. They’re lying. Why are they lying? They’re lying for the money. It’s all about the money.

It’s said that the lying is all about ideology, and in part this is true because a synonym for ideologue is liar. But what’s behind most if not all of the ideological lying is the money. The cash. The loot. The ducats. The bounty.

Follow the money. No matter whatever else you do, always follow the money.

With this guiding principle in mind, so much of the world will open up in front of your eyes, and a giant epiphany will slowly take hold where it all seems to crash together in one deafening cacophony of raw, brutal truth. You want to cover your eyes. You want to cover your ears. You want to run to your bed and pull the covers up and make the whole rotten world go away. But when you awaken after hours of cowardly retreat, the Sleaze Train will still be chugging along, and nothing will have changed. You can run but you can’t hide. The brutal truth of the commodification of near everything in our visible world is not something that can be shied away from. It’s there, punching you in the face all day long if you will only care to look up, take the blindfold off, and see.

Open up your eyes. No, I mean really open them up, not this blindness as sight thing we Americans have been doing our whole lives. Strip off the blinders. Open up your rear view windows on the political economics of daily life. Let yourself be blinded by the brutality of the vision. Stride forth, determined to make your way in the sewer of lies and sleaze. You can survive. You will be tainted (How can you not be?), but you will linger. Linger in slow wrenching agony at the debasing reductionism of daily life, where nearly all transactions reduce down to the level of a raw naked buck.

3 Comments

Filed under Capitalism, Capitalists, Conservatism, Conspiracies, Economics, Political Science, Politics, Regional, Scum, South America, Venezuela

Lies of the Capitalists: Capitalism Is Great Because of Competition and We Love Competition

The first part of the title is actually not a lie. Capitalism with vigorous or even extreme competition is quite a nice mode of development. It’s definitely great for consumers, offers great customer service, low prices and ferocious innovation and improvement of products. The attitude of a system with vigorous competition is not only the customer is always right but also adds to that I need to treat my customers better than my competitors.

So where’s the problem then? The problem is because the competition usually doesn’t last. As Marx noted and has been proven immaculately correct, capitalism tends towards monopoly over time as surely as day follows night. Vigorous competition is soon replaced by monopoly capitalism and Monopoly Capitalism is probably one of the worst modes of development known to mankind.

Every anti-monopoly business being harmed by a monopoly will turn pro-monopoly as soon as they get their own monopoly. And all businesses wish to be a monopoly. They all hate competition. There’s nothing a capitalist hates more than competition, which is part of the joke of capitalism, which sings the (granted, considerable) praises of robust competition, while all of the capitalists despise this very robust competition being crowed about.

Politicians and media outlets all claim to be pro-competition but they are all also pro-monopoly. The politicians are pro-monopoly because they are all whores for big business and are frankly taking open bribes from them. The media is pro-monopoly because the media only prints what its corporate advertisers want to hear (a pro-monopoly message) and also because most media outlets, as capitalists, of course long to be monopolies themselves. The fact that capitalists and their supporters rant and rave about how great capitalism is due to competition despite the fact that business and its paid propagandists all hate such competition is one of the worst lies of all of the capitalists.

 

 

 

6 Comments

Filed under Capitalism, Economics, Journalism, Politics

One Man Businesses Are Inherently Noncapitalist

Stalin Tonks: All this talk about donations and paywalls makes you sound like a capitalist, Robert. I am so disappointed in you.

First of all, I live in a capitalist country. You have to do what you have to do survive in whatever country you live in. If you want to survive in a capitalist country, you have to play by the rules of capitalism. And it’s not anti-socialist to be rich or to invest in or own businesses. For instance, the FMLN revolutionaries owned and invested in businesses, farms and ranches all over Latin America. All of the money went for revolution – guns, bombs, uniforms, supplies, wages for soldiers, etc. The father of the famous terrorist Carlos was a Venezuelan millionaire and Communist. That’s not a contradiction, and he doesn’t have to give all his money away. A Communist can be rich in a capitalist country. I would like to think he would do good things with his money though and not use it to rip off the people or exploit workers. Engels was a rich businessman.

I am not a capitalist. No exploitation, no capitalism. I am simply a worker selling his labor on the open market. All one man businesses are noncapitalist. It’s just one guy selling his labor on the market mostly to other workers. It’s workers paying other workers for some service. Also I am not marking anything up, although the profit motive and marking up products as a middleman is not necessarily capitalist and is completely compatible with socialism. I also feel that small businesses are an important part of a socialist country.

Anyway, I’m not really a Communist. I am just a socialist, and I am OK with social democracy where you have private businesses and even corporations and where up to 93% of the economy is private owned, as in Sweden for instance.

Democratic socialism allows a lot of capitalism in it. It just modified it and regulates it, and that is the socialist part as capitalists accept no limits whatsoever on their profits. Any state that limits the profits of Capital is automatically acting in a socialist manner. All regulation of business is inherently socialist. It has to be. Capitalists do not accept the state regulating their businesses to limit their profits in any way, shape or form. That’s their nature.

4 Comments

Filed under Capitalism, Economics, Government, Latin America, Left, Maoism, Marxism, Regional, Revolution, Socialism, South America, Venezuela

Obsession with and Rage Against the Incompetent, Lazy, Irresponsible and Failed: A Normative Value of US White Culture

In this country, you forget to close a door and your typical American yells at you: “Hey, you forgot to shut the door idiot! Shut the door dammit!”

You leave a door open in a Japanese house, and it is a different story altogether.

The reaction above is normal, proper and acceptable behavior in US White culture. That’s what your typical jerky White American would say because in America you are supposed to act like an prick in situations like this. It means you are not tolerating lazy, slacker in incompetent people or something.

Such people are bad for success in American ultra-capitalist society, and most White Americans are in a perpetual state of outrage over lazy, incompetent, ineffectual, irresponsible, stupid, foolish, slacker and basically immoral people when it comes to work and achievement.

Since all White Americans believe that “anyone can be successful if you try” and “everyone can get rich,” it follows that anyone who has failed in any way in life or in particular is poor, low income or lacking in money deserves their fate because they failed since they are idiots, fools, slackers, freeriders, leeches, or lazy, incompetent, irresponsible people. It’s people like this who are preventing your average White American from making it big. If it weren’t for the slackers and layabouts, we Whites would all be rich, didn’t you know?

Much of our idiot political culture is based on White outrage against these people.

There is probably no culture on Earth where “hatred for the lazy” is as extreme as it is in US White culture. It is an integral part of US White culture, and you will never understand America and especially its politics until you figure this out.

I know this because I have had this notion pounded into my head hundreds of thousands of times from just about every White person I ever met, including my own liberal mother and father, who would probably both be outraged if you suggested that they felt this way. All the friends I grew up with felt this way. All of their parents felt this way. Almost everyone in my parents’ generation (World War 2 generation) felt this way. I see White people writing about this every single day on the web countless times. I continue to meet White people who carry on like this in Meatspace, unfortunately even in the dating game, where White women like this are omnipresent. I toss any woman who carries on like this and absolutely refuse to date her. In fact, my dating profiles often say, “No Republican or conservative women! No exceptions!

Every time I pick up a paper there is some article or politician basically bitching about the weak, incompetent, ineffectual and  lazy. And undeserving. This last is important because in the US, these people are thought to be undeserving. Undeserving of what? Most White Americans will tell you undeserving of life! “You don’t work, you don’t eat!” I cannot count how many US Whites have told me this. While it may have been true in caveman days, we are rather beyond that now, are we not? Or do you think we still live in caveman days? Is that your proposition? What an odd belief.

While being a lazy leech means you are a rather lousy person, I hardly think it is deserving of the death penalty! When you say, “You don’t work, you don’t eat,” you are sentencing the lazy to death in effect! Do you realize that? Most murderers don’t even get the death penalty. Rapists and  torturers never do. Lazy people deserve the death penalty but torturers and rapists don’t? What?

 

Minority cultures are much more relaxed about this sort of thing for some reason, and they tend to feel that a given portion of the human race are lousy people of one sort or another (one Hispanic woman referred to them as “hustlers” and acted like their existence was simply a normal, typical part of quotidian existence), that they are as common as weeds, there is nothing you can do about it, and that these lousy humans are simply best avoided by a careful buyer of human relationships.

 

29 Comments

Filed under American, Capitalism, Conservatism, Culture, Economics, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Republicans, Sociology, US Politics, USA, Whites