What is the western sociopolitical economic system and how does it work, both in theory, and in practice?
Both overtly (the System), and covertly (its Shadow)?
I had this idea before.
The idea was that while both sides of the political aisle, left and right, were extremely corrupt, ran by organized crime (the worst scum, child and fentanyl traffickers, lower on the chain of being than maggot shit, much lower), I had this idea that the ruling class were going to start using the left a lot more than the right because the left served their purpose more, would get them more wealth, power and mindcontrol over the masses in the long run than the right.
I no longer believe that.
I think the ruling class are going to continue using the left and right roughly equally.
So this thread begins with a bit of a concession.
I was wrong about that, was listening to too much rightwing propaganda.
On the surface the system is ‘liberal democracy’.
Liberal democracy invariably ends up having a left/progressive/tender wing and a right/conservative/tough wing, and several factions within each wing.
But just beneath the surface we live in an illiberal oligarchy.
The oligarchs, not the constitution, nor the people, largely decide what acceptable progressivism and acceptable conservatism are.
If the masses get out of line, move too far left, right or not far enough (or outside the left-right paradigm altogether), they will usually be brought to heel, one way or another.
They will be canceled, doxed, detained or even assassinated if need be.
The basic idea behind this fake liberal democracy of theirs is the masses have freedom of choice.
The choice is pretty simple, platform A or platform B.
Nuance is largely not tolerated, you’re either wholly with A or B.
Of course in practice there’s little difference between A and B anyway.
The mean between A and B is what the oligarchs are comfy with, what they want.
(Virtually) all parties and politicians are bought and blackmailed by the oligarchy.
They serve their interests and values, not the interests and values of the masses.
This system is great for the oligarchy because it gives the masses the illusion of choice.
So long as the masses believe everything is largely a product of their choice, they won’t revolt.
This brings stability to society.
This stability has made the west relatively strong, along with its science, tech and access to resources, but other regions of the world are catching up with us in all sorts of ways, which is leading to a massive clash between the west and the rest/developing world.
Voting is probably mostly if not wholly useless.
Firstly, the masses are pretty retarded, for example most of them genetically modified themselves without question.
People like that are cows, simple as that, and so they will always vote the way they’re told to vote, never for 3rd parties and independents with grassroots funding.
Fortunately for all of us a handful of courageous truckers saved us all from total enslavement.
We may not be so lucky next time.
Ultimately our constitution is just paper, it can’t and won’t save us from total enslavement, the only thing that will is mass noncompliance.
Cows will always comply, so it’s up to human beings, of which there aren’t many, to save all of us, cows and people alike.
Voting is like astrology.
Political parties are like talisman, lucky charms or astrological signs.
Your vote is but a drop in ocean, virtually inconsequential.
Then we have to wonder how much voter fraud there is.
Why would child and fentanyl traffickers rig everything else but voting?
And so voting is probably bullshit.
Maybe it was somewhat legit decades ago, but now that everything has gone electronic, probably bullshit.
The idea that you can write your idols name down on paper, submit it, and this will magically affect your life somehow, is akin to sorcery/witchcraft.
It is simply theatre, a mass cult we’re brought up in, nothing more.
Ultimately things come down to mass noncompliance, like they always have.
When the kings and popes of yore’s shit got intolerable, we threatened them, that’s how it’s always worked, if history can be trusted (which it can’t, since academia is not ours, it belongs to the ruling class), and so that’s what seems to have the most chance of working in the future.
Since the masses are indolent (that’s in part what makes us the masses, we’re not go-getters like the ruling class), this ensures we will only ever organize and revolt when shit gets way out of hand, like we’re on the verge of starvation or total enslavement.
As for the great reset/NWO, it’s here already, we’ve been living in the great reset since the British, French and American revolutions, when absolute monarchy was replaced with ‘liberal democracy’ (illiberal oligarchy in practice).
The great reset is just a continuation of this old reset, a further development, not anything wholly new.
It’s simply a more heavy handed ‘liberal democracy’/illiberal oligarchy.
Our oligarchs got a good thing going, they don’t want to change the fundamentals of this thing, just fine tune them, tweak them, make it more authoritarian and export it to Russia, China and the rest of the developing world by force.
The real ideology, if they have one at all, of our ruling class may be called global corporatism.
The global economy is rigged so a handful of investment companies like BlackRock and Vanguard always come out on top.
It is BlackRock and Vanguard who decide what mass/popular culture is.
Culture that isn’t approved by them is subculture.
It is global corporatism that matters to these people rather than progressivism or conservatism.
Whether we have the neoliberalism of the right or the social liberalism of the left, there will still be plenty of corporate welfare, reg/tax loopholes only the 0.1% can exploit and banksterism.
They don’t mind conservatism, actually, so long as it’s a global conservatism.
It’s really anti-nationalism that’s important to them, not anti-conservatism.
Conservatism can be compatible with globalism because conservative values are fairly, pretty universal around the globe, for example Christian, Islamic and Hindu values aren’t all that different in practice: don’t lie, cheat and steal, get educated, work hard, take care of your family and so on.
The other thing besides global corporatism the ruling class are really into is scientism/technocracy.
Science and tech give our ruling class powers over us previous rulers could only dream about.
They help them build the infrastructure of our enslavement.
And of course science and tech is manipulated by them, they have the vast majority of surplus wealth, power and so scientific funds.
Our oligarchs gave us the ‘liberal democracy’, and they gave us ‘the science’ too.
Science is something they largely came up with, to serve their ends, not something the masses came up with.
The masses still have various folk beliefs about the natural world and folk remedies for illnesses.
These things are marginalized by mainstream science, not necessarily because they don’t work, but necessarily because they don’t fit in with the elite’s agenda and monopoly on science and medicine.
Science is not neutral, if the majority or even a plurality of scientists share the same morals, dogmas, values and interests, that bias will be reflected in their work.
If the majority of funds are coming roughly from one place, the ruling class, the science will serve the subjective interests and values of the ruling class.
Science isn’t neutral but one more battleground between the rulers and ruled.
Of all the conservative politicians out there, none of them are really nationalists.
The most nationalist conservative may want to tighten up border security a bit, but none of them want to stop mass immigration, they’re all pro-mass immigration because for them, white black brown, Christian Muslim Buddhist, it’s all the same, and so you can have your conservative values to some extent, so long as you compromise with progressive values in the manner they want you to, and so long as it’s a universal conservatism.
So in summary, on the surface we have liberal democracy with a left/progressive/tender wing and right/conservative/tough wing, but in reality it’s an illiberal technoligarchy with only one wing: global corporatism.
They are above the law.
They engage in drug and human trafficking.
The economy will be rigged in their favor, whether under the left’s social democracy or the right’s neoliberalism.
The border will either be left wide open, or the gates will be so wide it won’t really matter anyway.
The military will continue to expand this system to the rest of the world by force until nuclear war renders all to ash.
They set the parameters of acceptable values at the state level, the masses have little-no say over what sort of values are promoted by the state.
And so things will probably just go on like this for decades or even centuries until the façade of society can’t be maintained and things completely collapse, and if man survives, civilization will likely begin again and we’ll do it all over again.
So to summarize briefly, on the surface the form of government our ruling class espouses is liberal democracy.
The ideology they espouse is progressive conservatism.
It’s a progressive conservatism that’s compatible with liberal democracy and so we may call it a liberal democratic progressive conservatism.
But just beneath the surface their form of government may be called technoligarchy (portmanteau of technocracy, rule by technical experts, and oligarchy, rule by a few, or the wealthy).
And their ideology may be called global corporatism.
So this is what I’m going to call them from now on, they’re not really liberal democrats, progressives or conservatives, they’re technoligarchs and global corporatists.
You could also call them neofeudalists.
And so the real choice/dichotomy, is not so much between left and right but between establishment and anti-establishment.
If you’re pro-establishment than in actuality you’re a technoligarch and global corporatist no matter what you may think you are.
If you’re pro-establishment than you’re very limited in what sort of beliefs and values you can choose from, personally and politically.
But if you’re anti-establishment the choices are potentially limitless.
Gloominary.
I think the lack of response to this is agreement.
Right, it’s like that Leonard Cohen song.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gxd23UVID7k[/youtube]
There’s a lot of dichotomies in politics.
It goes without saying the biggest one is left/right.
Some dichotomies are easy to fit within left/right, others are difficult or impossible.
Corporatism is interesting.
What’s the opposite of corporatism?
Communism, socialism, capitalism or some other ism?
No one claims to be a corporatist in the Anglosphere, not the right nor the left, yet corporatism rather than socialism or capitalism dominates.
While there may be benign forms of corporatism, at least in theory, in practice ours is a blatantly malicious form.
So that’s why it’s interesting, no politician claims to be a corporatist, yet nearly all of them are corporatists, and so corporatism is the covert, underlying fiscal philosophy of the Anglosphere, and the world.
Globalism is also interesting.
It’s opposite could be nationalism, or localism.
As with corporatism, no politician claims to be a globalist, yet nearly all are in favor of sociopolitical economic globalization, of unparalleled demographic transformation.
Trump, Meloni and a few other politicians on the right, and even a few on the left oppose globalization…a bit, some of its details, but no one opposes it fundamentally.
They might put the breaks on it, a little, slow it down, or put a halt to it in a couple areas, but no one is up there talking about putting a halt to most or all of it, or reversing it, and so to me, that makes them all globalists.
What relevance will the nation state have say a century from now when Britain, France or Germany is just 25% white and Christian, many nonwhites not assimilating culturally (and economically)?
Brexit was a reverse of globalization, but it seems to be something the masses and only a handful of politicians pushed for, not something the ruling class as a whole wanted, unless they’re hiding what they want.
But apart from Brexit, much of the world seems to be running to supranationalism rather than away from it, bringing us closer to world government.
Scientism/Technocracy is another interesting one.
Technocracy isn’t really a left or rightwing idea.
But increasingly it’s playing a big role in our world, from climate and covid alarmism, to transhumanism, from the merger of Ai, banking, big brother, big tech and social credit (ESG and DEI), to drones and robot police.
Few claim to be technocrats, yet technocracy keeps expanding, and fewer are up there opposing it.
Technocracy then appears to be one of those hidden consensuses they all share but few publicly talk about.
There is little-no mainstream conversation about technocracy, is it good, bad, is there such a thing as too much?
It just keeps expanding unfettered.
Some of the richest and most powerful NGOs like the WEF openly advocate it.
The WEF exerts a tremendous influence, its head Klaus Schwab claims most of Trudeau’s cabinet is on board with the WEF’s technofeudal agenda.
I think it’s terms like these: global corporatism and technocracy, that should dominate our discourse and understanding of things (also terms like human and drug trafficking, by the elite, because it’s obviously happening) rather than say, identity politics, which both the left and right can’t seem to get enough of.
Here’s a list of 10 binaries I think are important for understanding politics (I put a star by which side of the binary I think our ruling class as a whole falls on in practice):
[b]Society
Populist/Elitist*
*Authoritarian/Liberal
*Progressive/Conservative
Government
Democrat/Oligarch*
*Autocrat/Republican
*Technocrat/Theocrat
Economics
Socialist/Corporatist*
*Statist/Capitalist
Foreign Policy
*Globalist/Nationalist
*Militarist/Noninterventionist[/b]
Members of our political class often refer to themselves as liberal, progressive, conservative, democrat or republican, occasionally as populist or nationalist, but none of them use the other terms to describe themselves.
The other terms which also have a star beside them are as follows:
[b]Elitist
Authoritarian
Oligarch
Technocrat
Corporatist
Statist
Globalist
Militarist[/b]
Are these leftwing terms or rightwing?
Some strike me as more leftwing, like globalist, others as more rightwing, like corporatist, but no mainstream politician would use any of them to refer to themselves and their allies, they would only use them to refer to their opponents.
And so I think it’s these terms that best describe the political class as a whole.
Populist, liberal, progressive, conservative, democrat, republican, nationalist, these are largely just facades they wear.
They project, what they accuse their enemies of being, is what they are.
Hypocrisy and cryptocracy, more than anything else, is what characterizes modern western politics.
Premodern politics may have been cruder, but they were also more honest.
These 8 terms:
[b]Elites
Authoritarians
Oligarchs
Technocrats
Corporatists
Statists
Globalists
Militarists[/b]
can be combined in various ways.
3 of my favorite are:
[b]Authoritarian Elites
Technoligarchs
Global Corporatists[/b]
And of these 3 I like Global Corporatists best, along with Neofeudalists.
So that’s what I’m going to call these people and think of them as, not as liberals, progressives, conservatives, democrats or republicans.
So the real question is, what are we going to do about global corporatism, if anything?
The culture war swings back and forth between progressives, liberals and conservatives, along with the economic war.
Either way, the underlying global corporatism is rarely if ever addressed.
Sometimes conservatives win to some degree, putting progressives on the defensive, with liberals somewhere in the middle, sometimes progressives win, putting conservatives on the defensive, with liberals somewhere in the middle.
Sometimes it’s a dead heat.
There was a sort of liberal progressive consensus after the new deal, then a liberal conservative consensus after Thatcherism/Reaganism.
Right now it’s a dead heat, but for better or worse, once Millennials and Gen Z become the dominant voter in about 2028, we could see a new, more illiberal progressive consensus, as these two generations are more leftist than boomers and xers.
Even as Millennials and Gen Z age, they’re still significantly more leftist than boomers and xers were at the same age, more so culturally than fiscally, but fiscally too.
Basically I’m an anarchist now.
‘Our democracy’ is a farce.
One vote or small donation out of millions is a drop in the ocean.
Voting is probably largely if not wholly rigged anyway, especially now in the digital age.
Most if not all parties and politicians are bought and blackmailed by our oligarchs anyway.
Both the left and right are largely ran by global corporate fascists.
They differ little from each other, and where they differ most is on rhetoric and cultural matters, which matter least.
The left is a bit more likely to get us into WW3 with Russia but the right is a bit more likely to get us into WW3 with China.
Despite nearly 3 decades of open internet, from 1993-2017, most people still won’t give 3rd parties and independents a chance, and even they may all be bought over or under the table and blackmailed too.
The masses are useless, only total socioeconomic collapse could snap them out of it, if that.
Instead the masses are being pitted against each other rather than against the oligarchs, libtard corporate fascists versus contard corporate fascists.
So yea I’m an anarchist without adjectives now, but you won’t catch me with anarcho-punktards getting paid by Soros to throw molotovs at Trumptards in the streets, instead I will be keeping a low profile in small towns, waiting for the libtard corporate fascists and the contard corporate fascists to kill each other off
Humanity does need a great reset, just not the one the WEF wants.
It’s time to start over, this civilization ain’t worth salvaging and fixing.
The only question is how much time does it have left, years, decades?
_
The world has had enough of this high-level fighting over resources that these people will not be alive to continue to reap the benefits from, anyway… when they’re dead.
Pointless…
Boring…
Doll…
Uninventive…
Unimaginative, on what to do with themselves and their lives…