Category Archives: Marxism

Why Rightwing Economics and White Racism Are So Closely Linked

There really needs to be an explanation for why America out of all majority-White countries is so wildly reactionary. We are far more rightwing than any other White country with the exception of the Baltics, although the British seem to be catching up to us.  

The Baltics have swung fanatically to the Right as an overreaction to their hatred of Communism and having lived under it for so many years. Two of these countries – Latvia and Estonia – are now suffering seriously from this reactionary lurch. A while back in Estonia, I believe they were saying that 1/3 of college educated Estonians had left the country in recent years in the aftermath of the economic crash the country underwent related to the US Mortgage Loan Crash in 2008. The more rightwing tended to suffer worse from the crash effected them. For instance, the Chinese market socialist system heavily protected the country from the ill effects of the crash. Having most banking in control of the state was essential to this protection. 

npd: Right-wing economics is a way to exclude yourself from the Jungle Indian primitives and descendants of plantation Africans.

It is presumed a White middle-class subject will attain the IQ-related success in life to afford a house in a suburban zip code too costly for NAM’s – who are mostly on the left side of the Bell Curve and lack the capacity to pay for a house in the suburbs.

Economics in the US since the 50’s have been designed to keep Negroes, Cholos and previously Dagos out of the neighborhood by dint of affordability.

28 Comments

Filed under Asia, Blacks, Britain, China, Conservatism, Economics, Europe, Hispanics, Left, Marxism, Political Science, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Socialism, USA, White Racism, Whites

An Antisemite of the Anti-Zionist variety

The Jews now say that there are all sorts of types of antisemites. They have a list of all of them, most of which do not apply to me. However, I am definitely an antisemite of a certain variety.  I am “an antisemite of the anti-Zionist variety.”

So the ((( ))) doesn’t mean Jew, it means pro-Israel. That’s why Bernie Sanders and Jill Stein don’t get ((( ))), and quite a few Gentiles do. Really a (((Gentile))) is just as bad as a (((Jew))), and a Gentile and a Jew minus parentheses are just as good as each other. Outside of Israel, I pretty much could care less about Jews.

I am progressive, and many Jews are a great part of our movement and always have been. I have searched for other reasons to hate these people, but honestly there is nothing there for me.

Sure, they are a bit aggressive, and there is the “loudmouthed Jew” stereotype, but they are not all like this. I grew up with Jews, and my family had Jewish friends who were not like this. They were some of the most honest people I ever met. Anyway the belligerent, somewhat sociopathic Jew stereotype (for which there is some validity) only applies to Jewish men. Most Jewish women are very sweet and nice and they are quite nurturing. They’re also good fucks contrary to stereotype. I had a Jewish girlfriend for 5 1/2 years, and I almost married her. I also almost converted to Jewdism due to her. Now I am not sure I want to convert, as Jewdism is all wrapped up in Israel, and when it comes to Israel, my views are not much different from Saddam Hussein’s.

Jews are all over the place. On any question, you pretty much have Jews all over the map on it taking every and any side you can take.

Antisemitism has always been rightwing.

The argument is the Jews are purveyors of filth and modernity, but Gentiles would do the same, and Jews don’t do it to weaken us, they simply do it to make a buck.

I asked a Jewish multimillionare (Bronfman) this question. I said,  “Are you guys putting out all this porn to weaken us? Come on, be honest. I don’t care what you think.” He laughed and said, “I’d admit if it we were doing that, but really we’re just in it to make a buck. My family runs hotels, and the porn channels in the hotels are extremely profitable.”

The decline in culture has hit the Jews pretty badly themselves, as many of them have fallen sway to the general degeneracy that they supposedly promote. So they are weakening their own if they are doing this.

The other argument is Jews as purveyors of Communism, socialism, Leftism, and in general of all of the progressive movements we now think of as the Cultural Left. These leftwing Jews have other motivations, mostly being a light unto nations to bring progress into the world for the Gentiles. It is a bit insulting, as it implies that we can’t do it on our own, but maybe we can’t, and we need their help. I mean Gentiles left to their own devices quickly end up electing Hitlers, Reagans, Trumps, Thatchers, Pinochets, Christianis, D’Aubussions, Banzers, Francos, Salazars, Mussolinis, Streussners, Quislings, Rios Montts, Trujillos, Bautistas, Alfonsins, Harpers, and other monstrosities.

I could care less if the motivation is somewhat insulting. If they want to lead the way to progress, so be it. As far as Jews as Commies, well I am pretty much one myself. As far Jews leading the modern progressive movements, I supported all of the various Liberation movements of the 1960’s and was a hippie, a movement led by Jews. So the hatred of progressivism and liberation and subsequent antisemitism is just reactionary crap.

Another argument is that the Jews are a bunch of crooks, white-collar criminals.

This is true to some extent, but the Jewish non-businessmen I have known were quite honest. In fact, I feel I could go over to their house, give them $300,000, assure them that holding it was not illegal, ask to come back in 4 months and get the money back, whereby I would give them $10,000 for their trouble. I am certain that when I returned, these Jews would give me the whole thing back without even stealing a nickel. Plus these Jews probably wouldn’t ask me how I got it, whereas these uptight Gentiles might freak on that.

At one point, there was indeed a split between Europeans (often Northern European) ways of doing business such as the gentleman businessmen of the Great Lakes region and the town businessman of early Germany who were honest if only to keep peace in the town.

These town businessmen reported that everything would be fine until some Jews came in, started being crooked and soon ran the Gentiles out of business and then monopolized the place.

The Germanic businessmen of say Minnesota in the late 1800’s simply had a sort of Germanic honor code for doing business where profits were often split up by various town businessmen, and there was not a lot of people running each other out of business. Instead of that, there was market division.

There was also a typical Germanic efficiency, politeness and decency where a man’s word was his honor, and a handshake was as good as swearing on Bibles. In fact, in these places, Gentile businessmen who acted like crooks were quickly outed, boycotted and even prosecuted. The family name became mud, and they were cursed and avoided on the streets as outcasts. The wealth of the family was often ruined, as they had more or less dishonored their family names similar to the Northeast Asian codes of moralistic honor, guilt, shame and outcasting.

These Germanic businessmen were appalled at the Jewish businessmen moving into their state because their business tactics were so low and cunning. Also the Jews tended to bring some Organized Crime. You can actually find old newspapers from the 1890’s Great Lakes Area discussing this sort of thing.

The problem with this Jews as White Collar liars, cheaters and thieves analysis is that modern business has become so “Judaized,”‘ particularly the New York businessmen like Trump whose style is “ultra-Jewish,” that the Gentile businessmen nowadays are as much liars, cheaters and thieves as the Jews or maybe even worse.

I would rather be ruled by the Jewish Rich than by the Gentile Rich. The Gentile Rich are Donald Trumps, the Jewish Rich by Sulzbergers, nasty but still preferably to the Trumps, as rich Jews are quite a bit more progressive than rich Gentiles and surely less inclined to fascism.

Another argument is that Jews are not alone in being lying, cheating, thieving businessmen.

Indians have the same reputation, and theirs is actually much worse than Jews, as Jewish crooked businessmen are often nevertheless politically liberal. Indian white collar crooks have all of the bad qualities of Jews and none of the good  qualities, which are considerable.

The Chinese also seem to be some pretty sharp and harsh businessmen. They seem to be just as bad as Jews or even worse, as when they obtain an elite status such as in the Philippines, they quickly destroy the country by turning it into a banana republic tin pot dictatorship. They are quite similar to Latin American White Rich. Actually they are worse, as the Filipino Chinese ruling class in Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines are actually out and out criminals. I mean as in Organized Crime criminals. Like that. Jews in the US don’t go in for that much these days, though they did 75 years ago.

So if Chinese and Indians have all of the bad qualities of Jews and none of the good qualities, why hate Jews? What’s the point? I suppose you could hate Jews, Chinese and Indians, but now you hate nearly half the human race, and for what Godly purpose? Capitalists are pretty much crooks the world over, as capitalism turning to Organized Crime is about as inevitable as the transformations to Fascism or Modern Feudalism that it is nearly a Law of Political Science as the other Marxist maxims are.

The main argument nowadays is a racial one and has been for some time now: Jews as destroyers of the White race.

First of all, I doubt if they are, as I know some pro-White Jews who call themselves White Europeans and wish to live in White European societies, as these are the best ones. They also think that it was Jews who substantially made White European societies as pleasant as they are, and they are correct. Jews I have known, especially from Detroit and New York, were quite racist against Blacks, much more openly racist than most Gentiles. I am not a White nationalist and I could care less about the White race, so I do not care about “Jews as enemies of the Aryan race” arguments, never mind the extremely nasty history of this argument. And this argument is extremely rightwing.

There are religious arguments against Jews purveyed by both Muslims and Christians. I am not a Muslim, so I could care less about their beefs with the Jews. Anyway, Muslims act as bad as Jews or probably a lot worse. Christian antisemitism has always stricken me as rather retarded. Why should I hate Jews because a bunch of Jews killed another Jew, my hero, who happens to be the greatest Jew that ever lived? I would have to hate my hero too. And for the first 100 years, my hero’s religion was open to Jews only.

My point here is that there is that antisemitism is a rightwing movement and has always been so. Leftwing antisemites are few and far between despite the hysterical rants of paranoid Jews. In fact, when Leftists or Communists go antisemite, they start going rightwing fairly quickly afterwards, either converting to a hardline form of Islam or becoming into or making alliances with rightwing White racist antisemites. It seems when people go hard antisemite, they naturally turn rightwing. The former leader of the Red Army Faction, an antisemite, has now gone extreme rightwing. There are many more cases of this.

Bottom line is there is just not much in antisemitism to appeal to any Leftist or progressive, so why should we move that way? Antisemitism is an inherently rightwing philosophy. Why shall the Left take this reactionary politics up then?

The exception of course being some shitty little country, in which case I am very much against that tumorous growth in the Levant and honestly would not mind if it vanished from the Earth. This makes me “an antisemite of the anti-Zionist variety,” a mantle I am quite proud to take up.

Leave a comment

Filed under Anti-Semitism, Anti-Zionism, Asia, Asians, Capitalism, Capitalists, Chinese (Ethnic), Christianity, Conservatism, Crime, Culture, East Indians, Economics, Europeans, Fascism, Germans, Indonesia, Islam, Israel, Jewish Racism, Jews, Latin America, Left, Liberalism, Marxism, Middle East, Midwest, Minnesota, Organized Crime, Philippines, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Religion, Republicans, Scum, SE Asia, Socialism, South Asians, Thailand, The Jewish Question, US Politics, USA, White Nationalism, White Racism, Whites

Judith Mirville on the Perils of Braziliafication for the Jews

Very nice comment from Judith Mirville showing that if Jews are promoting Braziliafication in the hopes that it will be good for the Jews, they may be sorely mistaken.

That will prove to be an especially bad move: in a Brazilified society such as Brazil, the various cultures of that multiculturalism cannot agree together safe onto one point: the Jews are the main responsible for the present state of affairs, even people such as the Japanese of Belo Horizonte, the German of Porto Alegre, the Negroes from Bahia and the White Trash rednecks of the chaparral of Sertão can agree on that.

I am now practicing Portuguese, listening to various videos to study various local accents and slangs, and everybody is inveighing against Jews each one for their different reasons.

The Negroes accuse them of having organized the slave trade, which in the specific case of Northern Brazil was true. The rednecks of Sertão accuse them of having geared the whole musical culture of Brazil towards hedonistic and then gay values.

The well-to-do Portuguese of São Paulo accuse them of having subverted the monarchy to install a de facto British colonialism in the form of a Republic as well destroying the military regime which was the last rampart against the tide of Cultural Leftism everywhere in the intelligentsia. The Germans there are of a type that was never morally bullied into repentance for WWII.

And the Japanese, though not big haters of Jews, all want them to be put back into ghettos for practical reasons and accuse them of having organized the whole of Western colonialism in non-White countries and robbed Asia of its traditional technological superiority and intelligence by programming so many other Whites beyond their real innate capacity to feel inventive and superior.

It comes to no mystery that cultures in an multicultural environment tend identify with their most reactionary elements, and therefore are more inclined to look for a culprit or archetypal symbol of evil from without. And it turns out that in Brazil the most rabid antisemitic movements are decidedly multicultural chic, not White Power, especially since the traditional White racism of Brazil claimed that the core of the nation was made up of mythical Jewish ancestry.

The Extreme Left to Center Left culture that still refuses most the conspiracy-justified antisemitism is monocultural non-Catholic Portuguese (mildly anti-Black de facto, though praising mulatto women for their supernatural beauty but only in their own role of providers of sentimental entertainment), and they are the ones who communicate the least with other cultures in their own country and prefer to communicate with other White nations in the world (France for the culture, the Anglo-Saxon countries for business) than with their own co-nationals of different hues.

All great antisemitic bouts of the past started out in rather multicultural environments. Austria, for instance, used to be the most multicultural part of Europe, and further back in time, you can find Spain and Portugal, which at one time used to be the most diversified countries: in both cases, mythical antisemitism could develop unchecked for being the only political language common to so many diverse groups even though not the ideal one to that many individuals.

How do the Jews let that happen to the point of loving it as it may seem?

That is very simple: first, as you put it, their intelligence is grossly overrated. They are emotion-driven more than many others. It must also be known that Jewish identification with the intellectual superiority of openness of mind is a very recent and atypical thing in the course of history. That identification began only as a byproduct of the Enlightenment culture and only among Jews that wanted to get free of their traditional ghetto culture, which turned out into a majority at a certain point.

Before that point, intellectual curiosity was far more severely repressed in Jewish culture than in Christian culture, the rabbis had far more tolerance of and liking for magic: even the study of too much geography was deemed dangerous. The general morality among them used to be that one must as an individual make plans for the day, as a family for the week, and as a Jewish community for the year, but NEVER beyond, since all promises of the preceding years were to be overridden at each Rosh ha Shanna. What is good for Jewish prosperity this year only is the real good, the rest is goyish daydreaming.

Even if the consequences of what is done this year are evidently ultra-negative for your own descendants, such as destroying the environment or installing a future millennial totalitarian regime just to make sure your tiny few talents are employed and well-paid, that is none of your business as a Jew. You must think of those descendants as of imaginary non-Jewish beings.

When for instance you adopt Communism as a Jew, the important thing is to enjoy a higher life through it and also a good relationship with many non-Jews for a few years’ space at most. You must not inquire too seriously about the ultimate consequences of your ideological choice. It is a fashion among many others to have to dress your own brain and others as well as their bodies according to a taste that sells right now.

If it turns out that by so doing you will progressively install a Nazi-like regime first courting and then turning against you, so be it, que sera sera, that was God’s intention for you to bring it about. It is a culture based on the principle of pure prostitution and on the faith that such an attitude alone can bring about joyful survival to a group: they are actually not so racist towards strangers provided they share that very same mentality.

27 Comments

Filed under Americas, Anti-Semitism, Asians, Austria, Black-White (Mulattos), Blacks, Brazil, Brazilians, Christianity, Colonialism, Culture, Europe, Europeans, History, Japanese, Jews, Judaism, Latin America, Left, Marxism, Mixed Race, Political Science, Portugal, Portuguese, Race Relations, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Religion, Sociology, South America, Spain, The Americas, White Racism, Whites

Latin American Politics Finally Comes To America

I guess Chile has their version of the mighty keyboard warrior like the US. No shortage of white shit for brains running around say they’re going get rid of all the Jews and blacks.. then you have a fair number of blacks running around saying they’re going to get rid of their white oppressors.. etc. Totally delusional twats. Maybe rightists are a serious problem in Chile but I don’t consider YouTube comments a proper gauge of sentiment and support.

I have been engaged off and on in deep study of this region since 1989. 28 years.

You don’t understand Chile. You don’t understand Latin America.

Really the entire rightwing down there is exactly like this. The rich, elite Whites’ basic attitude in almost every country down there is “All Communists must be killed.” And Communist means anyone even slightly left of center. A huge % of the population in Chile is still pro-Pinochet, and this is precisely how they think.

The Left stages marches and protests all the time, often is support of Allende. Rightists, of whom there are many supporters still meet them and there is wild street fighting. Rightists then stage marches often in support of Pinochet. The Left shows up and there is wild street fighting.

Did some searches.. looks like the bigger demonstrations were over education and state (or lack of it) support. Seem to follow the US model – most of the protests are peaceful but then you have “the hooded ones” raising a ruckus. I couldn’t find anything that indicated there were large counter protests by rightists – not saying that didn’t happen but I just couldn’t find them If you have a link or links I’ll take a look.

Ok, well I think I may have read this some time ago. I do remember reading it, but it could have been a while back. It could well have been years ago, or a decade or more ago. But at one time in recent history, this is how it was.

Perhaps the Left vs. Right riots have quieted down in recent years, but that’s the way it was not long ago.

Protests in Chile have historically been far more riotous and violent than demos in the US. There’s not really any comparison. Anyway, violent riots on the US Left are a relatively new phenomenon. Trump is a corrupt, vicious, evil ultraright dictator ruling in a typical Latin American model. All of the Latin American Right is exactly like Donald Trump. That’s why the Left is so violent down there. Trump has succeeded in finally bringing Latin American ultraright fascism to America. So it follows that we are following the Latin American model in that the Left has grown militant, and Left demos now often turn riotous and violent just as they do in Latin America.

This sort of thing is so predictable that you can write near mathematical laws of political science predicting it. A nation can only go so far to the extreme right and it can only become unequal to a certain level. Once it passes that level, it has crossed some sort of Rubicon and now in most any nation you automatically get a militant, riotous and violent Left. It’s as close to a law as the sort you can get in mathematics and physics.

In Chile, the Indians are treated horribly and engage in continuous demonstrations which usually turn into riots.

I was following Latin American politics a lot on the Net a few years back, and most demos in Chile seemed to turn into the typical Latin American demonstration -> riot progression. Most demos in Latin America turn riotous from my observation, at least in Venezuela, Peru, Chile, Bolivia, Brazil, and even Mexico. The conditions are so insanely unequal down there that any working class demo quickly turns into a riot.

Violence, riots, coups, extremes of Left and Right politics, lack of democracy and extreme instability are typical of the entire region and now we are importing precisely this model to the US.

I am leaving out Argentina, but the Argentine Right was recently calling for a military coup against Kirchner.

In Paraguay, a legislative coup threw out the leftwinger.

A legislative coup just threw out Rouseff, the left president of Brazil.

There have been many coup and quasi-coup attempts in Venezuela. You could well say there has been a continuous coup since 2002.

In Colombia, yes, left demos usually turn violent or riotous. On the other hand, if you are on the Left down there, you can be murdered by the government at any time.

There was a military coup in Honduras, and now anyone on the Left can be killed at any time. Death squads have killed over 1,000 people.

A US coup removed Aristide in Haiti. The new US installed government quickly murdered 3,000 people.

Why the commenter is trying to polish this Latin American turd is beyond me.

96 Comments

Filed under Americas, Amerindians, Argentina, Brazil, Caribbean, Central America, Chile, Colombia, Conservatism, Fascism, Haiti, Hispanic Racism, Honduras, Latin America, Latin American Right, Left, Marxism, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Republicans, South America, US Politics, Venezuela

Look What Happens When You Let Women Run the Show

Yee: This is just male chauvinist nonsense. Either rule will work when you enforce it, people learn to adapt. Taliban and Saudi societies are so difference from the Philippines, still people in these places live a normal life.

As for the rulers themselves, as long as they’re good at organizing things, it’s will work. This is the main quality that required to run a society. Females actually are better.

Depends. Are the women ruling according to the rules and mores of women or according to the rules and mores of men. Look what happens when you let women make the law. Prohibition was put in by women. Women’s long-term activism was the only reason that Prohibition was passed at all. Although it came one year after women were given the right to vote, Prohibition was a societal change that was made by the rules and mores of women. All over the world, whenever alcohol is made illegal or restricted, it done most of the time by women.  The result of Prohibition? Total chaos.

That’s what happens when you let women make the rules. And in Communist insurgencies, typically Maoist ones, they often put women in charge of the local village and town governments. What’s the first thing they do? Over and over I have read that the first thing they do is make alcohol illegal. Result of making alcohol illegal?

Chaos.

Sweden is governed according to the rules and mores of women. That’s why it is a nightmare state for men.

Female rulers are fine. You can have an all-female government for all I care. But they must govern according to the rules and mores of men, not women.

Look what happened in California when we let women make the rules. The state of California just voted that on all university campuses, you must have affirmative consent for every sex act. Like you want to kiss her, you have to ask, “Can I kiss you?” You want to touch her tits? You have to ask her, “Can I feel your tits?”

Guess who put those rules in?

Women.

What is the result of this stupid-ass “affirmative consent” nonsense?

Chaos.

Those are the sort of lunatic rules and laws that you get when you let women run the show and govern according to the rules and mores of women. According to the rules and mores of women, that idiot affirmative consent rule is 100% rational. That’s how women actually think. They think a rule like that is completely reasonable and sensible.

19 Comments

Filed under California, Europe, Gender Studies, Government, Higher Education, Law, Left, Local, Maoism, Marxism, Regional, Social Problems, Sociology, Sweden, USA, West, Women

Female Rule Doesn’t Work, and Men Are Necessary for Any Societal Achievement

Betty: It’s right that the reaction of these women is exaggerated but to say that they are incapable of running a country is plainly wrong. All war, chaos and problems were and are caused by male presidents like Hitler, Erdogan, Trump, etc. So it’s rather males being drama queens.

Saying that all women would make these memes illegal just because SOME have that point of view is almost equal to saying that all Muslims are terrorists because ISIS members consider themselves Muslims.

On top of that, many years ago when women weren’t allowed to work they were controlling a whole household of like 10 kids while cooking and cleaning every single day without help. So I’d say women are very capable of running a society or country, as for example Maria Theresia reigned Austria instead of her husband, which went perfectly fine.

Women can govern in partnership with men but countries must be ruled by the laws and mores of men. Women are free to help us run countries only as long as those countries are run according to the rules of men.

If you let women govern according to the rules and mores of women, things will fall apart pretty quickly. A lot of Communist groups put women in charge when they took over small rural villages. It was always a catastrophe. The first thing women do when they get in charge is make prostitution, gambling and booze illegal. Those are the three things that men need to make like tolerable enough so they don’t kill themselves, and those are the first things women outlaw. Thanks a lot, ladies. This rule does not work very well. Men are not very happy, but really no one is very happy. Things rapidly become pretty chaotic.

Sweden is currently being ruled by women. It’s under Female Rule – I mean women ruling according to the rules and mores of women along with a bunch of Beta cuck men helping them. It is not going well. The men are leaving in droves to go to Thailand to grab Thai brides because they have had it up to here with Swedish women.

Maria Teresia, many queens, and Thatcher all governed according to the rules, laws and mores of men. That’s not even Female Rule. That’s called Male Rule with Female Rulers – Women governing according to the laws, rules and mores of Male Rule.

Female Rule is when women impose their worldview on society. As long as the male rules of society are kept intact, women are free to take any government position they wish.

There are societies in Africa that are essentially under Female Rule. The men have just said, “The Hell with it, we’re done, here, you ladies take over. Have fun.” Women hold most of the power in these places. There is little violence or crime and actually there are not even a lot of serious disputes. These are sort of peace love dope hippie- type societies.

On the other hand, not much gets done in this places. They tend to stagnate and cruise in stasis. In particular, there is not much education because I suppose most women are just not interested in that. A lot of stuff that needs to get done never gets done, and everything gets put off. So you have societies without a lot of serious conflict, but on the other hand, there is little advancement.

I think women want to find a happy place and just be relaxed and go with the flow there rather than deal with the sturm and drang of continuous progress.

Personally I do not believe women can run societies, or if they do, they have to do so in partnership with good men or according to the rules of good men.

I feel that men are essential for any societal advancement. Women are free to help us men in societal advancement, but if you put them in charge, it’s just not going to work. Women just can’t run societies. There’s nothing wrong with that. Women can’t do everything, you know. So there’s some stuff they can’t do well? So what? There are plenty of things that women are great at. They should focus on those.

85 Comments

Filed under Africa, Austria, Britain, Europe, Gender Studies, Government, History, Left, Man World, Marxism, Masculinism, Politics, Regional, Sociology, Sweden, Women

US Style Conservatism Is Hated All over the Planet

Tulio: The Philippines sounds more rightwing than the US right now. Their bloodthirsty, murderous ultra-nationalist despot is rather popular.

Middle East countries are conservative.

I don’t think Americans themselves are nearly as rightwing as the government. When they are polled, they seemed to be more center-left. From what I understand, most Americans support gay marriage, most believe climate change is a real threat, most support increasing the minimum wage, most believe in upholding Roe v Wade, most want to protect the environment, most now want marijuana legalized, I’ve even heard that most believe in universal health care now.

On the actual issues when polled a la carte, most people aren’t rightwing. Many Republicans however have been brainwashed into thinking that any Democratic president will turn America into Venezuela under Chavez. They bring up Venezuelan socialism all the time and accuse the Democratic party of wanting to be like Latin American socialism, which is bullshit of course. The progressives in the Democratic party look at European social democracy as a model, not Venezuela or Cuba.

Show me anywhere on Earth where US Republican Party style conservatism is popular. Duterte says he is socialist, and he got elected President. Sound like a Republican to you. He has a good relationship with the New People’s Army, an armed Maoist revolutionary group. He had an excellent relationship with them when in government in Mindanao. Still think Duterte is a Republican.

Yes, Middle Eastern countries are conservative (as are many countries), but that is just social conservatism. Social conservatism barely matters. Conservatism is only important in economics and in nothing else. Show me one Middle Eastern country anywhere where US-style conservatism is popular. One, one, one.

Venezuela is just a case where they tried to put in European social democracy, but the elite down there is so fanatically reactionary that they fought it at every turn, mostly recently completely blowing up the whole economy via sabotage, which their leaders have even confessed to. So Venezuela is what happens when the capitalist opposition opposes social democratic reforms with all their weight. I don’t see how Chavez was trying to do anything different than say Norway for instance. That seemed to be his model.

Social democracy or democratic socialism in one form or another is simply the way of almost the entire world. The whole planet runs on variations of this system or in some cases such as China, even further Left than that. China is far to the Left of social democracy.

265 Comments

Filed under Asia, Capitalism, China, Conservatism, Democrats, Economics, Government, Latin America, Left, Maoism, Marxism, Middle East, Philippines, Political Science, Politics, Regional, Republicans, SE Asia, Socialism, South America, US Politics, USA, Venezuela

New Radio Show Contains a Discussion of Me

Here.

I will have more to say about this later.

Robert Stark talks to Ryan Englund about the SJW Riots

Robert Stark, co-host Pilleater, and Rabbit talk to Ryan Englund. He blogs at Samizdat Chronicles.

Topics:

The The UC Berkeley antifa/SJW Riots against Trump and Milo.
The parallels between Milo’s colorblind Civic Nationalism compared to the Alt Left and Rabbit’s Identitarian Alt Left.
How Fox News and other mainstream conservatives outlets have described the rioters as Alt Left, and how that contributes to SJW entryists into the Alt Left.
Alt Left founder Robert Lindsay disowns the Left Wing of the Alt Right over Trump and calls for an Alliance with the PC/SJW Left against Trump and the Republican Party.
Ryan’s point that there cannot be an Alt Left/SJW Alliance.
Ryan’s critic of SJW’s antifa from a classical Marxist perspective.
Ryan’s article Are You Tired of Winning Yet? on Trump’s performance, both the good and bad aspects.
Trump’s accomplishment stopping the Trans Pacific Partnership and his immigration policies.
Trump’s plutocratic cabinet and talk about repealing financial regulations.
Trump’s foreign policy, his saber rattling against Iran, and how the combination of Trump’s friendliness to both Israel and Russia has divided the neocons.
Saudi Arabia and the Petrodollar.
The Dakota Access Pipeline, oil nationalization, and alternative energy.
Romantic racism, and how it has affected the environmental and antiwar movements.
Social Credit, and the Alberta Social Credit Party.

Leave a comment

Filed under Asia, California, Conservatism, Cultural Marxists, Economics, Environmentalism, Eurasia, Geopolitics, Government, Higher Education, Immigration, Iran, Israel, Left, Marxism, Middle East, Nationalism, Neoconservatism, Neoliberalism, Political Science, Politics, Racism, Regional, Republicans, Russia, Saudi Arabia, US Politics, USA, Vanity, West

Some Descriptions of the Alt Left on the Net

The Alt Left is just the Alt Right, except they like Mao way more than they like Hitler.

Sort of correct.

The Alt Left are basically Alt Right Communists.

Sort of right.

The Alt Left is the left wing of the Alt Right.

Sort of, yes.

Ultra-brocialists.

Exactly.

I would imagine an “Alt-Left” would go beyond and be above that, putting class struggle over identity politics without using “class above all else” to shut down any debate over racism/sexism/etc. A Left that didn’t think accusing people of racism is enough to dissuade them from voting Trump/UKIP/Le Pen/et al but actively sought ways to persuade those with racist tendencies to not be racist.

A Left that was able to inform the working class that the Alt-Right and Far-Right are bad news for the working class as a class – as well as the well-documented ways they are bad news for various oppressed demographics. Finally, above all else, a Left that rejected the loopy elements of Identity Politics (as commonly found in academia particularly in the US but an issue in the UK as well, especially with the NUS) and injected some much needed rationality into the debate.

Perfect.

Aren’t the Alt Left just social democrats who are critical of immigration? Something like that.

Immaculate.

Seems like there are already people self-describing as the ‘Alt-Left’ in the sense of being the ‘leftwing of the Alt-Right’ — from what I’ve seen, social democratic on economic matters, very hostile when it comes to Identity Politics, feminism, etc., occasionally antisemitic.

Probably one of the best definitions so far.

There’s definitely a return to imagined Christian values/hetero nuclear family at core …you could have an Alt-Left that did that too I guess if you really wanted.

There are Alt Left people pushing exactly this. And anyone into traditional morals or traditional values with Left economics would absolutely be welcome here.

I think the Alt Left is the left wing of the Alt Right. That is how it seems to me anyway. Where the Alt Right embraces fascism, they embrace concepts like Maoism.

That’s about it.

Having said that, I think there’s space for some form of Leftism that is skeptical of both market and state but doesn’t sign up to any of the current far Left ideologies. And has good memes.

Sort of, yes.

Again, it’s just a liberal guy who is a White Nationalist. It’s basically the leftwing of the Alt-Right as the blog itself says or some kind of lite version of Nazbol with emphasis on the Naz and not a whole lot of Bolshevism.

Discussing Rabbit’s page. Nazbol Lite is a pretty good way to describe Rabbit, too.

Class Left is better. Or Classical Libertarians. Or Class Realists.

Classical Libertarians no; Class Left and Class Realists are both perfect. We are “class reductionists.”

Workerists.

Precisely.

We’re back to “we want a UKIP of the left” again.

A UKIP of the Left would not be a bad thing. It would seem to be an Alt Left project.

6 Comments

Filed under Anti-Racism, Britain, Christianity, Civil Rights, Conservatism, Cultural Marxists, Economics, Europe, Fascism, Labor, Left, Liberalism, Libertarianism, Maoism, Marxism, Political Science, Politics, Racism, Regional, Religion, Republicans, Socialism, US Politics, White Nationalism

Alt Left on the Net: Someone Gets Us Right

Here.

A: Ugh. Yes. And don’t even get me started on the motherfuckers who are glad Trump won because they think if it REALLY gets worse, people will rise up and there will be a revolution. But not this “incremental progress” pussy bullshit.

A REAL revolution. You know, the kind that makes their dicks hard.

They are almost always straight white dudes.

How very brave of them to sacrifice thei- er, I mean, minorities’ well-being in the name of The Revolution.

Good luck getting any Muslims, POC, LGBT+ people and women to march with you backstabbing assholes. They’ll all be too busy trying to stay the fuck alive, healthy and functional in this incoming hellscape you’ve voted them into. Or not voted, as it were.

In any case, fuck all the way off, get your head out of your ass, start fucking LISTENING for a change, then get *off* your ass and then maybe you’ll be forgiven.

B: Yeah, that ideology is called “accelerationism” and it’s a hackneyed idea from Marxism. It is literally a Bolshevik ideology: “the worse, the better.” It yielded Stalin. Can’t believe this idea has adherents in the 21st Century.

You are dead right that it’s an irrational form of machismo rather than a legit program of change. It’s a Che Guevara t-shirt, not a plan.

In 100-plus years, Marxism has literally accomplished next-to-nothing in America except a presidential assassination and a few cushy academic jobs for its more bougie adherents. By contrast, the Civil Rights movement (and its offspring, women’s liberation and gay liberation) has accomplished quite a bit. But the masculinist, so-called “alt left” wants to put those folks’ concerns in 2nd place and run a fantasy cosplay class-based “revolution” centering white men who love Fight Club. Or, in the case of the older guys, their fantasy is a 1930s/1940s WPA mural come to life … with Jim Crow and Japanese-American internment camps just out of the frame.

The more fact-based and sanity-based model of political change in modern democracy is the Overton Window. I pray we still have a modern democracy in which to apply it.

This comment here:

But the masculinist, so-called “alt left” wants to put those folks’ concerns in 2nd place and run a fantasy cosplay class-based “revolution” centering white men who love Fight Club. Or, in the case of the older guys, their fantasy is a 1930s/1940s WPA mural come to life … with Jim Crow and Japanese-American internment camps just out of the frame.

Describes us very well. Almost perfectly in fact. The Alt Left are not much MRA’s as masculinists. But then we are feminists too in a sense. Masculinists as in equal rights for men, and feminism as in equal rights for women. Surely there was a patriarchy in the past, but the Alt Left doubts that is extant much anymore and in some ways, we now have a matriarchy as the women and their wuss/White knight/Captain Save-A-Ho/male feminist allies rule society in some respects and they use their rule to attack men. In that sense, in some ways, men are an oppressed class nowadays being abused by an oppressive Matriarchy.

So we are brocialists or even ultra-brocialists. That does not mean so much that we are sexist pigs but more that we are ordinary guys, regular, normal guys who act like normal masculine heterosexual men. The Alt Left is “socialism for the regular guy.”

The part about the Alt Left being a 1930’s WPA mural come to life and that this model is being pushed by some of the older Alt Left men, is completely right on. This is absolutely what we are pushing. I do not know about any other older Alt Left men, but I am an older Alt Left man and this is indeed my vision.

It’s seldom that anyone on the Net gets us right.

32 Comments

Filed under Civil Rights, Economics, Feminism, Gender Studies, Left, Marxism, Masculinism, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Socialism, US Politics, Whites