—“it is a basic belief of aristocrats that base peoples are liars. “We who are truthful” – that is what the nobility of ancient Greece called themselves.”— Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil, p154
Source date (UTC): 2018-08-22 01:02:00 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1032070347728859137
—“it is a basic belief of aristocrats that base peoples are liars. “We who are truthful” – that is what the nobility of ancient Greece called themselves.”— Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil, p154
Source date (UTC): 2018-08-21 21:01:00 UTC
—“Q: I’m unsure of why Curt Doolittle grouped Rothbard and Mises with Marx, unless they were actually faux anti-Marxists?”– Matthew Genack Answer by Eli Harman They weren’t faux anti-marxists. They were sincere anti-Marxists. But what they offered in its place was justificationary pseudoscience, same as Marxism, differing in the details and conclusions, but not fundamentally in the methods.
—“Q: I’m unsure of why Curt Doolittle grouped Rothbard and Mises with Marx, unless they were actually faux anti-Marxists?”– Matthew Genack Answer by Eli Harman They weren’t faux anti-marxists. They were sincere anti-Marxists. But what they offered in its place was justificationary pseudoscience, same as Marxism, differing in the details and conclusions, but not fundamentally in the methods.
WHY INCLUDE ROTHBARD AND MISES WITH MARX AND MARXISTS?
—“Q: I’m unsure of why Curt Doolittle grouped Rothbard and Mises with Marx, unless they were actually faux anti-Marxists?”– Matthew Genack
Answer by Eli Harman
They weren’t faux anti-marxists. They were sincere anti-Marxists. But what they offered in its place was justificationary pseudoscience, same as Marxism, differing in the details and conclusions, but not fundamentally in the methods.
Source date (UTC): 2018-08-21 15:03:00 UTC
WHAT DOES AN ARMY LOOK LIKE?
by Eric Best
The left was once scattered and relatively powerless, though not as much as the true right today, since there weren’t the same societal and… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=283290085601222&id=100017606988153
Source date (UTC): 2018-08-21 14:20:54 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1031909010549743616
WHAT DOES AN ARMY LOOK LIKE?
by Eric Best
The left was once scattered and relatively powerless, though not as much as the true right today, since there weren’t the same societal and institutional pressures keeping them from organizing and acting. They had sources of funding and support both foreign and domestic to lessen the risk they faced. An important fringe leftist in the 60’s would have, for instance, an unassailable position in a University and a circle of admirers among the upper class. Even if a majority of Americans would find them detestable (if they knew who they were), they would not lose their job and more importantly, would not be outcast from their part of society. It took them decades to get where they are now, having taken over so many institutions that their ideology and worldview is now the default.
We can’t imitate them because we don’t have 50 years to do it and the social dynamic is totally different. Everyone knows what they can do as an individual in their own life to be better and prepare (i.e. stop being a NEET sperging out uselessly on the internet) but 1 million individuals even of quality do not make an army. What is the first real step to organizing seriously? What does it look like?
Source date (UTC): 2018-08-21 10:20:00 UTC
THE CORRECT ANSWER —”Who is driving social Marxism across the globe, and why?”—- If you mean Cultural Marxism, then that was the third generational failure of the Ashkenazi Jews: 1 – Labor Communism (Marx), Generation 1 2 – State Socialism (Trotsky/Lenin/Mao/(Many), Generation 2 3 – Academic Cultural Marxism (The Frankfurt School: Adorno et al.). Generation 3 4 – But upon the failure of all three the French supplied Postmodernism (Derrida, Foucault), and all the university, media, and state actors that had over-invested in the three generational failures of marxism converted to postmodernism. Postmodernism states that there is no truth, no science, no reason, only power, and as such, by use of ideology, propaganda, academy, and media, the ‘Revolution’ against meritocracy (western civilization) can be achieved by the power of words and voting instead of by ideas, science, reason, and achievement. It’s worth noting that The French (always europe’s enemy) had the most authoritarian government in Europe prior to its revolution, the most authoritarian after the revolution, and remains the most authoritarian in Europe today. With Rousseau providing the authoritarian arguments. Arguments that were first copied by the (timid) Germans, then the Rebellious Ashkenazis (Marxists). And horridly implemented by the Soviets, the Maoists, and the Cambodians. And still the cause of South American and Indian poverty. 5 – If we look at the chief propagandists in the west, it’s single women, immigrants, the lower middle class, lower class, underclass, and American jews. As always since American jews are superior competitors in verbal presentation, they provide a disproportionate influence in Entertainment, Entertainment Media, News, Pseudosciences, and Propaganda. (This is easily measured by random sampling of authors of daily propaganda.) Note: Read Paul Fussel’s “Class” for an improvement on marxist class theory. It’s Fussel’s categories I refer to, because they roughly reflect (a) occupational hierarchy, (b) IQ hierarchy, and as such, they match the data. “Defectors” One thing I did not expect was that while the majority of white americans are of german decent (not english), the germans are MUCH LESS likely to serve the country in the military, and the burden is HEAVILY born by the Anglo – Scotts-Irish demographics. Likewise, the Germans and the Puritans of New England are more likely to ‘defect’ into marxism, socialism, postmodernism, and the Scandinavians of the north central even more likely to defect. Note: a friend counsels that the ‘defect’ has been on the continent forever, and goes back to Heraclitus. So the ‘defect’ we see in German Americans, if not all but anglo-scots-iris (southerners). And therefore the question is, what is this defect, and how do we name it operationally? (Really)
THE CORRECT ANSWER —”Who is driving social Marxism across the globe, and why?”—- If you mean Cultural Marxism, then that was the third generational failure of the Ashkenazi Jews: 1 – Labor Communism (Marx), Generation 1 2 – State Socialism (Trotsky/Lenin/Mao/(Many), Generation 2 3 – Academic Cultural Marxism (The Frankfurt School: Adorno et al.). Generation 3 4 – But upon the failure of all three the French supplied Postmodernism (Derrida, Foucault), and all the university, media, and state actors that had over-invested in the three generational failures of marxism converted to postmodernism. Postmodernism states that there is no truth, no science, no reason, only power, and as such, by use of ideology, propaganda, academy, and media, the ‘Revolution’ against meritocracy (western civilization) can be achieved by the power of words and voting instead of by ideas, science, reason, and achievement. It’s worth noting that The French (always europe’s enemy) had the most authoritarian government in Europe prior to its revolution, the most authoritarian after the revolution, and remains the most authoritarian in Europe today. With Rousseau providing the authoritarian arguments. Arguments that were first copied by the (timid) Germans, then the Rebellious Ashkenazis (Marxists). And horridly implemented by the Soviets, the Maoists, and the Cambodians. And still the cause of South American and Indian poverty. 5 – If we look at the chief propagandists in the west, it’s single women, immigrants, the lower middle class, lower class, underclass, and American jews. As always since American jews are superior competitors in verbal presentation, they provide a disproportionate influence in Entertainment, Entertainment Media, News, Pseudosciences, and Propaganda. (This is easily measured by random sampling of authors of daily propaganda.) Note: Read Paul Fussel’s “Class” for an improvement on marxist class theory. It’s Fussel’s categories I refer to, because they roughly reflect (a) occupational hierarchy, (b) IQ hierarchy, and as such, they match the data. “Defectors” One thing I did not expect was that while the majority of white americans are of german decent (not english), the germans are MUCH LESS likely to serve the country in the military, and the burden is HEAVILY born by the Anglo – Scotts-Irish demographics. Likewise, the Germans and the Puritans of New England are more likely to ‘defect’ into marxism, socialism, postmodernism, and the Scandinavians of the north central even more likely to defect. Note: a friend counsels that the ‘defect’ has been on the continent forever, and goes back to Heraclitus. So the ‘defect’ we see in German Americans, if not all but anglo-scots-iris (southerners). And therefore the question is, what is this defect, and how do we name it operationally? (Really)
‘To understand Marx, one should use the following dictionary: Yahweh = Dialectical Materialism The Messiah = Marx The Elect = The Proletariat The Church = The Communist Party The Second Coming = The Revolution Hell = Punishment of the Capitalists The Millennium = The Communist Commonwealth’ – Bertrand Russell