I have been haunting the internet since 1998 ladies and gentlemen, I was around for 9/11, I endured the 2007 financial crisis, and I lived through the psychological warfare years of Covid19. I’ve watched the standard of living go down for the average working class American since 1998 and I’ve seen the horrors of deindustrialization in the rural portions of the nation and along with the empty abandoned factories within its cities.
You know what I’ve learned through all of this? The current leftist politics in this nation centered around cultural identity bullshit is just that, it’s all bullshit. Your John Lennon is dead, you hippies didn’t change anything, and you naive wishful thinking social utopians made everything so much more worse for everybody, you changed nothing.
For the last twenty five plus years in this nation we should of had an economic revolution, we should of demanded better wages or compensation from Wallstreet, we should of demanded more workers rights, we should of demanded a better quality of life for all Americans. We didn’t get that the last twenty five years, did we?
Instead we got twenty five years of queer rights, racial antagonisms, bitter radical feminists, fucking pronouns, and stuff like whether or not if a man cuts his dick off if they’re a fucking woman!
The United States deserves a better socialist and leftist political movement, those of us who represent the real authentic political left must demand one, first we must abandon the political liberals completely! Liberalism is a failed political ideology and movement, it is too politically inept to tackle on present day republican neoconservatism.
Let a new leftist political, economic, and intellectual movement spring up to take up where liberalism has failed!
The Left is for equality and against inequality—that’s all “Left” means in this context. So why just be for economic equality and against economic inequality? If you are to be consistent, you should be an intersectional leftist.
All these forms of inequality really began about 5,000 years ago:
“[…] in the first states in ancient Mesopotamia, the historical region around the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in what is now Iraq, Syria and Turkey. […] The elites in these early societies needed people to be available to produce a surplus of resources for them, and to be available to defend the state—even to give up their lives, if needed, in times of war. […] Over time, young women were expected to focus on having more and more babies, especially sons who would grow up to fight.
[…W]ritten records from that time show women gradually disappearing from the public world of work and leadership, and being pushed into the domestic shadows to focus on motherhood and domestic labour.” (Angela Saini, “How did patriarchy actually begin?”)
Here’s a visual representation of how it developed and how it may end:
@Zeroeth_Nature
I am an old school Marxist and communist, that puts me more left than most liberal democrats. I am also a conservative socially and culturally despite being an economic leftist.
The concept of patriarchy or intersectionality to me are laughable modern revisions.
Yes, ever since the times of ancient Sumeria the tyranny of human imposed government has gotten worse every thousand years.
Karl Marx tried to ratify that with his writings at the turn of the 18th century in the west, but unfortunately the out of control capitalists squashed that movement in this hemisphere. Now however with Late Stage Capitalism the entirety of economic capitalism is in its death throws which brings us to our current juncture.
Hold your ground and don’t intersect nothin’, Mr. A. The post-structuralists try to water marxists down with that shit all the time. Keep your eye on the planks only!
Traditional Marxism and communism mixed with a bit of cultural social conservatism, the post structuralists, Fabians, Zionists, liberals, and all the usual other assholes can eat my ass.
They can shove their obnoxious identity politics up their asses, it’s economic class warfare or bust.
The big 4 (marx, engz, lenz, and trotz) would designate you as a variation of marxizt-leninizt. That’s a phase in the process of the becoming of the marxizt state, not its end termz. Eventually, you gotta interact and exchange with other racez, or you’ll end up competing againzt them for resourcez. So you might as well enter the next phaze - the organization of an international proletariat - and start working on making peace with the mexicans and arabs and black peoples. I mean, it’s gonna come down to it eventually. If you have a country over here that worships Zomuul (made em up) and they have some oil you need, wtf are you 'sposed to do? Naw, you gotta get in good with them way before you need that oil. So you integrate them ASAP so that they’re part of the custodial borg proletarian class keepers of the erf.
National Socialism can only be a brief immature phase of a historical movement toward marxism if it’s anything at all.
Most people laugh at the thought especially modern liberals of all the white Caucasian European people dying off the planet entirely, it is because they believe in the delusional position of racial or ethnic justice. They believe in the divisive position of racial redistribution, I don’t care for such an absurd position myself. I am all about economic redistribution, the race or ethnicity of people I don’t care about at all, it should be the liberation of all people, the liberation of everybody.
It never occurs to these liberals the negative ramifications or consequences of North America becoming identical to Central and South America.
It never occurs to them the consequences of all of modern Europe resembling northern Africa or the Middle East.
It never occurs to them the consequences of Australia or New Zealand coming to resemble southeast Asia. Be careful what you wish for, but of course they never think seriously about what they’re asking for. These short sighted liberal capitalists never think seriously about the long lasting consequences of the future, their entire belief structure revolves around short term gains because they all have massive ideological tunnel vision.
In some instances what has happened to European nations or cultures is self injurious due to the embrace of toxic economic capitalism, in other instances it is because of hostile outside agitators.
I have no problem with an international proletariat movement, I do have a problem with the belief in world government or those that would try to abolish nationalism everywhere. My entire philosophical and political belief system revolves around national independence but a world where different nations work together in mutual exchanges. The idea of a single world government is completely abhorrent to me.
Isn’t this just another way of saying that, your whole born-again Buddhist thing notwithstanding, you still think you’re superior to at least half the population just because you happen to have a dong?
I remember when Jakob and I were talking about the dearth of great minds on ILP, many years ago, and he told me he was actually quite impressed with James… I was like, ‘Seriously? James L Walker?’ And he was like, "No, no, of course not. No, James S Saint!"
It’s interesting, they did a study between young men and women recently, most men said the thing they wanted most of all was marriage and a family. When the females responded to that same survey they answered money or cash.
The thing about women in terms of sexual biological identity they constantly go out for resources, domination, money, and power, there are of course some rare exceptions to the general rule but a woman’s sexuality especially in her prime younger reproductive years revolves around a sort of sexual capitalism marketplace and the dynamics of competitive male power. Female sexual capitalism of course rejects that which they view as inferior lesser men showing psychologically that sexual discernment is based on power rejecting the weaker.
The whole narrative that women or females are historically oppressed I don’t buy into whatsoever, it seems quite the opposite, women thrive in an environment of male oppression or inequality of men oppressing other men. Human female sexuality is the political status quo in that it exploits the inequality of men for its own well being and self preservation.
Let me know if I need to repeat myself, I wouldn’t want any false Echoes to present themselves.
This is completely disregarding the fact that there’s also a hierarchy among women; and, moreover, that all of this only applies in a hierarchical (patriarchal etc.) society.
Of course most men want marriage: they want to own a woman themselves (and not just any woman, but one from at least relatively high up in that hierarchy).
And what about the high libido women in their “prime younger reproductive years” tend to have? You’re an ignoramus if you think it’s just about “resources, domination, money, and power” for them.
I will say this much, however. I think man is equally the victim of toxic masculinity. After all, it is men who poison, and are poisoned by, themselves and each other.
By the way, was Echo Wendy or Natalie? I mistook those for one another, and they still seem to be the same type to me, though Natalie’s probably more intelligent.
I was married to a multi m, who was older than me and on reflection he was a lot like my own father.
It wasn’t his money that attracted me, I was totally smitten with his style, physicality and intelligence.
When we divorced, the judge in his summing up, made a point of saying, the wife continued working throughout the marriage, while the husband continued to add to his fortune.
I was naive (in the beginning) but soon learned about the wiles of a consummate philanderer.
Women would call him, write to him, dine with him, I gave up eventually and left him.
There were times I was afraid during the process and court case of the divorce, with his words “you will regret leaving me”.
A majority of women want those prized male thoroughbred specimens at the top as the pinnacle of male human achievement, the security of wealth, the intoxicating charisma, the presence of established power everywhere they go, the perfect physique afforded to the life of the leisure class, and established confidence of a life in extreme opulence.
But when the women find themselves at the top, they discover its lonely there, because being a man at the top of the social sexual pyramid a woman is completely exposed in being completely disposable for on any whim he can replace her whenever he wants trading her in for a new one when he becomes bored.
The kind of physical and mentally romantic attachment she’s looking for in a man can only be found in the lesser inferior pool of men that through scarcity are more appreciative of what they have in life, but she cannot lower her standards to be with the lesser stock of men.
Men are the sexual proletariats and women the sexual capitalists, it’s lonely at the top of the social sexual pyramid for the few men at the peak of their vast accumulated sexual capital look at women just as they do with any other kind of common property, but ironically it is the women who allow themselves to be objectified this way, the sexual primordial instincts of crazed nymphs that understand the value of human power dynamics along with their place within it.
Yes, there is a hierarchy to females or women also. It is a lot more different however to the hierarchy of men.
Failure for a woman means a lifetime of resentment and begrudgingly relying on others for help to survive. Failure for a man is self annihilation, exile, and death, the consequences not quite the same in terms of severity.
But even amongst the lowest ranks of females as I observed in my wandering vagabond days, the same overlaying psychology is at work, men are mere resources for women to sexually exploit, sex for food, sex for street drugs, sex for a warm secure place to sleep, and sex to live in a van with some random man to get away from the outside weather elements. The overlaying sexual behavior pathology of women is always the same, what can I get from a man? What can that man do for me? How can I control him with my feminine wiles? What can I sexually exchange? Does he even have the capital investment or material resources to deserve my physical body for reproductive purposes?
But bro, men are doing the same thing: what can i get out of this relationship with Rebecca.
What pisses guys off 'n makes em misogynists is the fact that women control when and with whom does there happen sexy-time while the men sit in the DMV style waiting room for their number to be called.
My brothers, we are suffering the effects of a punctuated sociological evolutionary leap. Yesterday we were legally entitled to simply grab a bitch and today we have to jump through more hoops than a whole family of dolphins at SeaWorld just to get some pussy.
So, let’s be clear. We are all sexual capitalists… only the Musks and the Bezos are almost exclusively female.
Except for the fact that more men are not married or having any kind of sexual relations whatsoever in this crony financial economic capitalist environment where fertility rates are the lowest they have ever been statistically recorded in history. Women aren’t complaining about this by comparison, purely a modern male phenomena only.
Under this economically financial most corrupt capitalist environment in human history it matches that women’s sexuality is completely capitalistic where sexual reproduction is only afforded to the most dominant, wealthy, or powerful of men in society where a majority of other men are losing out on the sexually reproduction race altogether having no sexual access whatsoever. The sexual marketplace, just another capitalist monopoly of exploitation by powerful men within society and the majority of females whose own sexuality is psycho biologically capitalistic as well. The relationship between female biological hypergamy and financial economic capitalism is real.
This also why western governments are worried about the rise of nihilistic terrorism, a majority of men feeling they have no purpose or meaning in their lives where they come to hate all of society altogether overtime. Basically what happens when you turn the majority of your workforce into lifetime male celibates. [Modern politically charged feminism and its unintended or intended consequences.]
People will probably read my last couple of posts here and think I hate women or females, not true, I think very highly of a few women it’s just that overall I don’t have a very high opinion of a majority of females. To that I make it no secret my utter contempt or disdain for a majority of them.
My only olive branch for womankind is that there is an extreme small minority of women that I can respect like my wife for instance. Literally fell in love with me when I had nothing and wanted to be with me for just being myself. Women like that who can transcend beyond their petty primitive instincts are a rare jewel, a man can go their entire life without ever meeting a single woman like that where if men do find a woman like that for themselves they be wise to never let them go. But yeah, I look at a majority of women as being dumb savage animals slaves to their primitive biological instincts where I make no apologies for it.
Coming across virtuous, spiritual, truthful, trustworthy, and honest women these days is an extremely rare event. It’s becoming more rare with each passing generation especially within our current era.
This is an exaggerated impression of the level I am talking about. Millionaires are common today. It is more like a comfortable secure existence, not necessarily glamorous.
Then there is the nouveaux rich (which carries the connotations of being uncultured) and the old money that often comes into play.
In my case the driving force was the resemblance to my father, that unconcsciously I was drawn to, (with hindsight).
