I feel that I have a civic duty as a Marxist and communist to address the growing number of political fascists in my nation of the United States. Am I creating this thread to be hostile? No, actually I welcome the debate as I am an individual who likes listening to and discussing all belief structures. I always welcome political and philosophical debate with anyone really.
In many ways I am an unorthodox and alternative Marxist or communist thinker because in many ways culturally you could say I am very socially conservative myself. Here in the United States I grew up in the rural midwest where I understand the European American mindset very well being French and Spaniard myself growing up within a Catholic household even though I have converted to Buddhism for well over a decade now.
I understand some of these elements of political fascism. I also don’t like liberalism, radical feminism, Zionism, and unlimited mass foreign immigration either.
Nonetheless on those issues I see the variety of problems those things entails through a Marxist lens.
My biggest problem with political fascism here in the United States and elsewhere is its worship of the aristocratic billionaire class, its obsession with transhumanism along with eugenics, its libertarian economic capitalism, and its ideology pushing for ethnic racial civil war. Also, political fascism seems to be so entirely bourgeois with its bourgeois representative democracy. In many ways its the ultimate expression of petty bourgeois politics.
I still believe ethnic multiracial and multicultural coexistence is still possible where pushing for peace is a more admirable goal than divisive violence.
In this thread I welcome a debate of any kind with persons that have politically fascist views in a civil manner. Join me in a public political debate here if you desire to do so.
“I am fighting for my racial and ethnic sovereignty as a white European person where political fascism is the only organization structure listening to our ethnic grievances.”
I understand the mental sentiments, I truly do.
But understand it is the economic financial capitalism you have embraced since the end of the Cold War that has made mass foreign immigration possible at an international level. It has been a tool of destroying wages, collective bargaining power, and worker unions for decades now which is why the native European worker class has lost its former past glory on the verge of total extinction today while mass foreign immigration goes on unlimited.
Moreover, a majority of you political fascists are Christians and second after the international capitalists the Christian Church from a variety of denominations have been the biggest supporters of mass foreign immigration under the banner of Christianity. Try as you may there is no way getting around that historical fact.
I understand your anger for anti-whiteness the last several decades constructed by political liberalism and that no matter how liberals try to deny it they’re largely responsible for its existence. Anti-whiteness is wrong and I believe white European cultural ethnic identity should be allowed, I am a Marxist saying that. I believe all ethnic and racial cultural identities should be respected in a mutual manner.
Here is the problem my brother.
There is no way for you to “address the growing number of political fascists” without “being hostile”, because the direct answer to your “address” is… “why were you not addressing the growing number of insane liberals in the past 20 years”.
The extrapolation of your position is that, because one type of extremism is okay with you, while the other (which btw is increasing PRECISELY because of the extremism on your side of the aisle) is something we should be very concerned about.
Its tit for tat.
If you are fine with one side of the coin, you will have to hold the other too the same way everyone else had to hold marxists and liberals for the past 20 years while you demolished basically everything globally from borders to national security to culture to common sense and a 20 year long blanket list of other insanities.
Not only had people stomached it, they have had to clench their ass as you codified it into laws across half the planet.
So no.
You have no civic duty to address the shit that is coming because you failed to address the insane people on your side of the aisle.
The civic duty should have been preventing the imbalance in the first place.
I dont doubt the sincerity that you are not hostile.
But the topic is not structured in a way that would allow you to be not hostile. You are just unaware of it.
This is the beauty that is the cancer called politics.
You stand for something, it directly means you stand in opposition of others.
And its not the right that has been on the uptick for the past 20 years. The scales are now just balancing at this point.
The problem of the last 26 years I put fully on the shoulders of political liberalism as I am an anti-liberal communist and Marxist. That is how I describe myself.
You neoconservatives say Marxists and communists are responsible for all the world’s problems, in all reality it is the liberals.
That position i can respect. That can be debated in both direction, but then why not start from there?
Far right is just as bad as far left. All extremes will have bad outcomes, and the fact of the matter is that the current wave of increasing fascism is directly correlated to the utter insanity that has been allowed to fester on the left side of the aisle.
What can you do against it now?
Probably nothing.
If you gonna crack down on the far right, that will be a literal advertisement for them, because you create injustice, and injustice always sells.
The only way this can and could have been prevented is by keeping the balance.
And that boat has sailed years ago.
You could try to let things simmer down, but that would need the far left to be toned down, but ofc then they will view that as a call to arms as well.
There is no good decision once balance has already been lost.
Certainly as a communist I am going to have very different perspectives than a fascist, nonetheless that doesn’t mean those differences cannot be discussed in a civil manner publicly within debate.
Even opposition can respect each other politically in civil debate. At least I like to think that can happen.
Sure. But then that has to be done from a position of neutrality for a foundation.
We can both agree on the fact that extremism regardless of sides is bad. For everyone.
My goal as an unorthodox and alternative reforming Marxist or communist is to politically reform modern leftism.
I do not like modern leftism and I find it completely revolting hollowed out by decadent liberalism.
For me a new leftism needs to emerge and one that is stripped away from all liberal distortions. I am economically leftist but virtually conservative on everything else.
I believe this constant tribal infighting regarding humanity solves nothing and we will get nowhere as a species if this becomes the norm of our entire existence.
You have said this several times now, but never really elaborated on it.
Do you have any particular ideas in mind to avoid the classic traps of traditional marxism such as i.e. having the entire society become class locked, or people taking advantage of a system that takes cares of everyone regardless of performance?
It’s not just liberalism by itself that is responsible for foreign mass immigration, it’s capitalists utilizing political liberalism as a baseball bat that has weaponized global mass foreign immigration against the working class because for them all the peoples of the entire world are merely interchangeable parts or playthings for them to siphon money off of.
The fact of the matter is that under economic socialism or communism there’s no need for foreign mass immigration, it’s a phenomena out of liberal capitalism or liberal capitalist societies only.
Under a socialist market model all workers have adequate wages for themselves having enough money to start family households of their own where the national population becomes self sustaining. Foreign mass immigration becomes completely unnecessary after all of that.
The international billionaire class is the crux of the problem there as they’re the ones maintaining foreign mass immigration to begin with. The billionaire class is the only one that benefits from foreign mass immigration because it enriches itself through it and weakens entire nations overtime replacing government rule with a corporate one.
As a communist or Marxist I still believe in meritocracy, it’s just I believe in making healthcare, residential shelter, education, and on the job training more publicly accessible to people.
There’s no reason for poverty and homelessness in the modern era anywhere on earth.
This ties directly into my question about people who refuse to help themselves but will take every help they can get and then demand some more.
Can we please stop acting as if there are no parasites in society? I mean you acknowledge them at the top. People who hoard money and do not pay back in proportion with their earnings and wealth.
Could you address the same with those on the bottom as well? Because its the exact same type of person and behavior, and if unjust wealth distribution disturbs you on one end of the spectrum, shouldnt it do the same on the other?
Similarly, i am no fan of any kind of aid.
I am not in favor of free stuff of any kind. I already said this multiple times.
Human beings are not stupid. If they can live on without having to work or do anything, then they will. Welfare encourages the worst in humanity.
What should be handed out are opportunities for each and everyone in accordance with their abilities. Whether its a person with no arms or legs or the world’s most fit individual, the duty of the state and government should be to open up opportunities for everyone so they can sustain themselves BY THEMSELVES.
One should not feed the poor. One should make ABSOLUTELY sure that they can feed themselves, but thats where the line should be.
Those who cant take care of themselves at all should be taken care of. But those who can, should be by all means required to do so on their own.
What are your opinions on the situation of the United States where people either cannot afford education or on the job training and have to go into a lifetime of debt just to acquire either?
Yes, parasitism comes in many forms wealthy and poor alike. I have seen examples of both.
For me I believe in taking care of the mentally ill and even the drug addicts. The goal would be to try to rehabilitate both for those that can be.
For those that cannot be rehabilitated or refuse I would still provide them a place to live in my state with the basic essentials to survive but it wouldn’t be anything fancy.
Having people run around in the streets being a nuisance or just dying in the streets for all to see is not preferable. Keep them contained in a place where they at least have a place to lay their heads at night.
As for criminals my rehabilitation for them would be hard labor in national public infrastructure projects until the terms of their punishment is up assuming they don’t have life in imprisonment. More serious crimes capital punishment of course.
Ultimately public welfare should only be for the physically disabled, mentally impaired, and the elderly who have the right to live their golden years in peace.
In the end I believe government should provide everyone the most basic essentials and services especially if they cannot provide it for themselves. Beyond that as you say, people provide for themselves.
I do however believe in equalizing the playing field and making sure wealthy private interests do not capture government for themselves.
Government exists to serve all people from all backgrounds, not just the privileged few.
I believe in an intellectual, political, and philosophical caste of individuals that runs the government maintaining the majority of people are served beyond monied interests.
The collective public good must always be maintained.
You’ll also be pleased to know in my ideal communist and Marxist state traditional marriage is supported where every man has a wife to which every woman has a husband.
I believe traditional family households to be important for society where it should be supported.
Likewise, young people and young adults should be encouraged in education to excel in different kinds of professional careers.
An educated population is a productive, creative, and innovative one.
That holds only true when no alternatives are presented. When you give people an opportunity to feed themselves, they will do so.
On the other hand if you give them an opportunity to do nothing and still get along, even if “it wouldn’t be anything fancy”, you can rest assured that they will take it.
I view charity as a net evil, because every consequence of it is a negative outcome.
You do not help anyone with it. At best you prolong problems and suffering with it, at worst you enable parasitic lifestyles.
Helping takes effort. Charity takes nothing than some small change for people to make themselves feel good about their own virtue.
Sure. As i said, the one’s who cannot take care of themselves should be taken care of.
That is a duty of all governments and civilizations. One takes care of their own.
One thing to help understand my philosophical and political views of human nature is that where the liberal says human nature is naturally good, virtuous, or noble I believe the direct opposite of that.
For me human nature is naturally cruel, selfish, destructive, and chaotic where it is only through the institutions of the state can we cultivate a social environment that civilizes human beings forging them to become moral, ethical, virtuous, or cooperative. It is there that the institutions of the state becomes the most important aspect of human existence because if it doesn’t overnight humanity can fall back into primitive chaos very easily once again.
Any state or government that doesn’t concern itself with moral and ethical human consciousness of the population it governs invites in that primitive chaos of human nature that destroys entire civilizations.
Human beings are not born naturally free, in fact quite the opposite, we’re born slaves to our primitive base instincts, desires, or emotions. We only become free through the cultivation of the state from which all human civility derives otherwise we’re reduced to being primitive animals.
The majority of conflict and inequality has been in the pursuit of a personal or communal utopia, there is no evidence of utopia outside of assertions as that is what a utopia is a forceful assertion as to how things should or should not be.
