'Liberals'/'Leftists' in America

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: 'Liberals'/'Leftists' in America

Postby Marionumber1 » Sun Nov 06, 2022 6:11 pm

DrEvil » Sat Nov 05, 2022 2:56 pm wrote:Except in this case a truce would involve your neighbor getting half your lawn and a lifelong promise never to go to any of the pubs frequented by the asshole friend (but you can come to your neighbor's pub. He's got cheap vodka!). If you can come to an agreement where you get to keep your property and can go about your life as you see fit (and yes, that includes hanging out with your asshole friend) - great, otherwise it doesn't really sound like a good deal, does it?

It's as Joe said, regardless of how the fight started, they're in the fight right now, and they have a right to defend themselves. The reason the asshole friend is just standing by and landing the occasional punch is a) what you said, and b) anything more and there's a good chance the neighbor goes in his house and gets his rifle. And even if the friend is a complete and utter piece of shit (which he is, and I would like nothing more than seeing him get the shit kicked out of him), isn't an occasional blow better than no help at all? Would it be better if he got his friend/stooge in a fight and then just left?


If the stakes are a street fight, it's more akin to your neighbor getting your motorbike or something. It's not technically "right" that you should have to give it up: it's worth a lot, you had so many great times on it, and this was your only ride to work. But most people would agree that if you constantly act like an asshole who antagonizes someone into a fight for no reason, you don't get some moral high-ground to whine about the ensuing outcome, and should feel lucky to walk away, period. You act like the only "good deal" is one where you get absolutely everything you want and the neighbor gets nothing.

When you're on the ground getting the shit kicked out of you, your body will surely tell you that it might be better idea to make some concessions so you can still walk away. But then your dickhead friend is there next to you, egging you on and telling you to get up, you two can still take your neighbor down. He doesn't seem nearly as fazed by the fight as you are (recall he's letting you take most of the punches), nor does he seem to care much what's happening to you: he just wants you to get up and keep going at it with your neighbor. Still, this friend is a great manipulator who got his hooks into you 8 years ago, and you trust what he says against your own better judgment. You're confident that if you stick it out long enough, you will manage to beat your neighbor in the end; though you ignore the real possibility of ending up with your legs so broken that you can no longer ride your motorbike anyway.

I don't think any sensible analysis of this situation would hold that your dickhead friend is seeking to get you the best outcome. Obviously I can't speak for everyone: some people might want to stay in the fight hoping they can win outright. But if you recognize that your "friend" has been manipulating you for a long time, how do you know if that's really what you want vs. what your friend wants? It definitely looks as though your friend is just using you to settle an old score with your neighbor. Sure, you might rationalize it as saying that your friend is staying more on the sidelines so the neighbor doesn't think it's an unfair 2-versus-1 and get their rifle. However, your neighbor isn't dumb: they realize that your "friend" is using you to tag-team them, and there's a good chance that if their situation goes south, they'll get the rifle regardless.

As BelSav pointed out, this is getting further and further away from a sensible analogy for a geopolitical situation. Ultimately we have a calculation between people's lives and division of land amongst two nations. I can say that my worldview is by far most concerned with preserving people's lives, and that's what I think is the top priority to advocate for. Certainly this isn't just about land ownership, it's about sovereignty and national identity, but Ukrainians have already had a large part of that taken from them post-Maidan: it's a question of whether the US or Russia is doing the determining.

Joe Hillshoist » Sat Nov 05, 2022 6:49 pm wrote:But if I was an ordinary Ukrainian I might want to keep fighting cos fuck those bastards. They've killed my mates, family members, blew up my favorite pub and some of my favorite musos and they will lose eventually. All invasions fail these days. Its the lesson of conflict post ww2. Asymmetric warfare always favours the little people. Its just a matter of how much it hurts on the way to winning.

Rationally I dunno why the Ukrainians would want to do the US' dirty work on that front but once the war starts that sort of rational thinking goes out the window.


The issue is that we don't truly know what "the Ukrainians" want, independent of what the US/NATO are pushing. Ukraine's government has, for the past near-decade, effectively been controlled by the same cabal that staged the 2014 coup. Propaganda mills run by CIA cutouts and local anti-Russian oligarchs were pivotal to the coup as well as Zelenskyy's election, and are no doubt in overdrive these days. Influential fascist groups threaten/attack civilians and even politicians (all the way up to Zelenskyy himself) to keep everyone in line with a belligerent attitude towards Russia. Zelenskyy's secret police has more recently made this repression an official state policy, to the point of arresting numerous antiwar people as traitors. So when I hear how Ukraine (as a whole) wants to keep fighting to defend itself, that they're freely accepting US help rather than being led into a Pyrrhic victory at best, I question on what basis anyone can assert that to be true.
Marionumber1
 
Posts: 374
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 12:42 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'Liberals'/'Leftists' in America

Postby DrEvil » Sun Nov 06, 2022 6:26 pm

Joe Hillshoist » Sun Nov 06, 2022 3:49 am wrote:
Marionumber1 » 05 Nov 2022 17:47 wrote:
Joe Hillshoist » Fri Nov 04, 2022 9:09 pm wrote:Have you ever been in a fight?

Like a serious one with people who wanted to hurt you?

Once the fight starts then things like "who started it" don't matter. All that matters is not getting your head kicked in.

You can worry about which of your dickhead mates started it tomorrow, if we all avoid hospital.


Well, imagine if the fight started because your dickhead friend convinced you to start constantly harassing your much larger/stronger neighbor, getting right up in their face while hurling verbal abuse and faking swings at them, and after a while your neighbor finally snapped and started beating you up. Now you've got into a full-on fight that you never really wanted in the first place, but thankfully your dickhead friend will step in whenever you're getting pummeled a bit too hard and score a few blows on the neighbor to soften them up. For the most part, though, they're content to sit on the sidelines and watch you two fight it out. Oh, and did I mention that your dickhead friend has an old grudge against your neighbor dating back to high school, so there's a part of you wondering if they deliberately got you to provoke a fight because of that? It's almost as if he's using you as a meat shield to get the neighbor tired and distracted so he can more easily get some hits in by himself. With that in mind, which of these is the most sensible conclusion:

  • Damn, my "friend" isn't really a friend at all; and instead of us continuing to beat on each other, I should see if I can come to a truce with my neighbor
  • Fuck my neighbor; he shouldn't have attacked me no matter how much of a prick I was being, and I know he was always wanting to fight me anyway, so let's keep swinging at each other until one of us gets knocked out! With my friend in my corner, I'm sure my neighbor will be the first to go down if we work together!

Your last sentence makes the case for seeking a negotiated end to the war, rather than have the West continue supplying arms and "intelligence" to keep fueling it. The main argument against seeking a diplomatic solution is that doing so is bad because it doesn't make Russia take enough of a loss. Framing it as you have: worrying more about who's most guilty for the fight than avoiding further casualties.


I wouldn't describe that as the situation but its close.

My point is it doesn't matter when you are in a fight. Deal with that first. Either win it or get to a situation you can run away from it. And your friend is a dickhead remember, not someone you should really count as a friend. Not someone you can really trust to have your back. But that doesn't mean the guy you are punching on with is any good either.

And I'm all for a negotiated end to this war tomorrow. Cos less people will die.

But if I was an ordinary Ukrainian I might want to keep fighting cos fuck those bastards. They've killed my mates, family members, blew up my favorite pub and some of my favorite musos and they will lose eventually. All invasions fail these days. Its the lesson of conflict post ww2. Asymmetric warfare always favours the little people. Its just a matter of how much it hurts on the way to winning.

Rationally I dunno why the Ukrainians would want to do the US' dirty work on that front but once the war starts that sort of rational thinking goes out the window.


That's the question. I'm not saying the Ukrainians should fight to the last man, just that they should fight for how long they want to, not however long the peanut gallery asking for negotiations between Russia and the US, as if Ukraine didn't even exist or have a say in the matter, want to. And before anyone says "but they is really America", no they're not. People aren't fighting just because there's an American puppet in the presidential palace, they're fighting because Russia invaded their country. That sort of thing tends to piss people off. See also: every other military invasion ever.

Or to use the angry neighbor analogy again: your neighbor just moved his fence ten feet on to your property, and the rest of the neighborhood is now asking you to be reasonable and sit down and come to an understanding about it. Most people would respond with, sure, as long as you move your damn fence back where it should be first, then we can talk.
"I only read American. I want my fantasy pure." - Dave
User avatar
DrEvil
 
Posts: 3981
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:37 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'Liberals'/'Leftists' in America

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Mon Nov 07, 2022 6:14 am

Marionumber1 » 07 Nov 2022 08:11 wrote:The issue is that we don't truly know what "the Ukrainians" want, independent of what the US/NATO are pushing. Ukraine's government has, for the past near-decade, effectively been controlled by the same cabal that staged the 2014 coup. Propaganda mills run by CIA cutouts and local anti-Russian oligarchs were pivotal to the coup as well as Zelenskyy's election, and are no doubt in overdrive these days. Influential fascist groups threaten/attack civilians and even politicians (all the way up to Zelenskyy himself) to keep everyone in line with a belligerent attitude towards Russia. Zelenskyy's secret police has more recently made this repression an official state policy, to the point of arresting numerous antiwar people as traitors. So when I hear how Ukraine (as a whole) wants to keep fighting to defend itself, that they're freely accepting US help rather than being led into a Pyrrhic victory at best, I question on what basis anyone can assert that to be true.


I know of Ukrainian punks and alternative musos killed fighting, who were happy to fight beforehand. But i do generally agree with the jist of your bolded comment.

There are Ukrainian anti Putin, pro fighting people who were posting video of Ukrainian Nazis killing people they considered deserters etc. But the few of those tweets I saw and briefly followed (I don't do twitter so I don't really follow people on it for more than a day or two) were anti Russian and anti Nazi. (Plenty of Nazis and far right racist scum in Russia and Putin is happy to get their support when it suits him, or he wants someone killed.)

Those people seemed more considered and still prepared to fight till they dropped. A few stopped posting too.
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 10594
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'Liberals'/'Leftists' in America

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Mon Nov 07, 2022 6:22 am

DrEvil » 07 Nov 2022 08:26 wrote:
That's the question. I'm not saying the Ukrainians should fight to the last man, just that they should fight for how long they want to, not however long the peanut gallery asking for negotiations between Russia and the US, as if Ukraine didn't even exist or have a say in the matter, want to. And before anyone says "but they is really America", no they're not. People aren't fighting just because there's an American puppet in the presidential palace, they're fighting because Russia invaded their country. That sort of thing tends to piss people off. See also: every other military invasion ever.

Or to use the angry neighbor analogy again: your neighbor just moved his fence ten feet on to your property, and the rest of the neighborhood is now asking you to be reasonable and sit down and come to an understanding about it. Most people would respond with, sure, as long as you move your damn fence back where it should be first, then we can talk.


I'd be more inclined to trust your opinion on this given you're a lot closer to ordinary Ukrainians than I am.

This is the scene from the movie I referred to earlier. The guy called Nev(ille) is Ukraine, the guy called Chopper (with the moustache) is Russia.
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 10594
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'Liberals'/'Leftists' in America

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Mon Nov 07, 2022 6:23 am

Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 10594
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'Liberals'/'Leftists' in America

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Mon Nov 07, 2022 6:45 am

Notice how Nev, when he's in the car, is telling the guy who shot him that he's fucken dead. He has a bullet in his guts and may not even make it thru the night but all he cares about is making sure that guy knows that he, or someone else, will be coming for him.

If I was in Nev's shoes I wouldn't care if my rivals (tho not enemies) the Painters and Dockers were gonna sell me guns cheaply to go after a guy they hated who is now a mutual enemy. I'll take whatever guns people are offering me once I'm out of hospital and on my feet again. I don't care who's supplying the guns or whatever shit they've pulled beforehand. They haven't shot me. Unlike that other prick.

I know its a poor analogy.

Buit ask yourself this ... do you think there are Ukrainians who haven't been affected by this invasion? Who haven't suffered or lost something. It might be money, a job or some property. maybe even their homes.

But it might be friends or even family, maybe their eleven or six year old daughter.

These are some lyrics from a song by faithless, written in 2007:

Key in the door
The moment I've been longing for
Before my bag hit the floor
My adorable children rush up
Screaming for a kiss and a story
They're a gift to this world
My only claim to glory
I surely never knew sweeter days
Blows my mind like munition
I'm amazed


.... chorus etc ...

One bomb
The whole block gone
Can't find my children
And dust covers the sun
Everywhere is noise, panic
And confusion
But to some another fun day in Babylon
I'm going to bury my wife
And dig up my gun
My life is done
So now I'm going to kill someone...
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 10594
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'Liberals'/'Leftists' in America

Postby Marionumber1 » Mon Nov 07, 2022 2:23 pm

Joe Hillshoist » Mon Nov 07, 2022 2:45 am wrote:I don't care who's supplying the guns or whatever shit they've pulled beforehand. They haven't shot me. Unlike that other prick.


This isn't quite applicable to the US/Ukraine dynamic. It'd be more like saying "They haven't shot me, but they arranged for me to get shot by that other prick to draw me into fighting the prick for them". The US did everything in its power to set Ukraine up in this position to begin with, and as far as the US power structure is concerned, they'd love for Ukrainians to continue getting killed indefinitely while fighting Russia. That is why I fail to see their "aid", which is solely motivated towards prolonging the war with no end in sight, as help.

No, I don't doubt that there are many ordinary Ukrainians who sincerely want to keep fighting. I'm sure that Russia's conduct in this war has produced a natural reaction to defend against a brutal invader and to avenge friends/family who have been killed. (Of course, much of the devastation in Ukraine is also produced by the Ukrainian government's own callous policies toward civilians, and some false-flag attacks made to appear Russian in origin.) The question is, how long are Ukrainians going to continue for and who's controlling the answer to that question?

A de-escalation seems unlikely to come from Ukraine's government, which has effectively been a US/NATO puppet ever since the 2014 coup (with Zelenskyy's 2019 election bearing the fingerprints of the same coup plotters). How about from the civilians? Well, the brutal way that (CIA-influenced) Ukrainian state security and the associated neo-Nazi groups have been treating anyone with a dissident opinion on Russia is well-documented. So if Ukrainians do reach (or already have reached) the point where they'd rather go for a negotiated settlement, how likely is that to come out in this climate?

If dissent has been suppressed to this point, we don't/won't know if Ukrainians would rather start negotiating for peace (or at least it will be much harder). So if the decision for Ukraine to "want" a continued war has been indefinitely made for them by the US stay-behind network, and the US and their allies are continuing to pump "aid" so that what they "want" remains indefinitely feasible, how is this "aid" not just keeping Ukraine in the line of fire indefinitely?
Marionumber1
 
Posts: 374
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 12:42 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'Liberals'/'Leftists' in America

Postby Belligerent Savant » Tue Nov 08, 2022 2:27 pm

.

Another apt example of 'liberals'/'leftists' in America:

Image

Here's a screenshot with a better view of Luke Skywalker in all his glory:

Image

https://twitter.com/FiorellaIsabelM/sta ... 9ZaG1C1TVg
User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 5267
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'Liberals'/'Leftists' in America

Postby stickdog99 » Fri Nov 11, 2022 8:22 pm

More UK oriented, but I did not want to start a new thread.

Why Did the Left Fail So Utterly to Resist the Global Biosecurity State?

The question that continues to confuse socialists almost to the same degree that it delights their political opponents is why the Left today – not only in the U.K. but across the West – continues to collaborate so willingly and unquestioningly with the authoritarian programmes and regulations of the emerging Global Biosecurity State. As the imminent implementation of Digital ID, Central Bank Digital Currency, Universal Basic Income, Environmental and Social Corporate Governance criteria (ESG), Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response, Social Credit, Smart Cities, and all the other programmes of Agenda 2030 are demonstrating, the New World Order being forced upon us outside of any democratic process is capitalist in its economic infrastructure, fascist in its governmental, juridical and ideological superstructure and totalitarian in its aims. So why do those who, however mistakenly, self-identify as of the political Left continue to be its noisiest and blindest cheerleaders?

If, by the Left, we mean in the U.K. the Labour Party and those trades unions, political organisations and pressure groups that advocate voting Labour every time there’s an election, then the U.K. Left has little or nothing socialist in its principles, politics or practices. For those of us who read its policies and oppose its actions in town halls and local authorities, Labour is irrefutably and even openly a party whose political philosophy is founded in the principles of neoliberalism. This is, perhaps, most demonstrably evident in its collusion in the marketisation of human needs such as housing and the financialisation of those markets by global capital. Moreover, anyone who has knocked around the Left as I have also knows that, whatever its so-called ‘Left-wing’ elements and organisations argue between elections, when it comes to supporting or opposing the policies and practices of Labour in government at municipal or local authority level, they all toe the party line, keep silent and vote Labour.

It has come as no surprise to me, therefore, that the U.K. Left, including not only Labourites but the wide diaspora of people who call themselves ‘Leftists’ and even ‘socialists’, have become fervent ideologues of the biosecurity state. But it’s not, as the followers of Friedrich Hayek argue, because of the inherent authoritarianism of socialism that leads it to impose a totalitarian social model at the first opportunity. There is (it can’t be repeated too often) little or nothing socialist – in the Labour Party nothing, in its affiliates and fellow travellers little – about the policies or practices of the U.K. Left. Even those small groups and independent organisations that are openly critical of Labour have adopted the U.K. Left’s almost universal support for biosecurity restrictions, remain indifferent to the immiseration and suffering of the U.K. working class they are causing, and steadfastly refused to join the millions of U.K. workers who protested against their imposition in the spring and summer of 2021. They instead uncritically accepted and adopted the Government and corporate media’s dismissal of those workers as ‘far-Right conspiracy theorists’.

Undoubtedly, the political naivety of the Left disposed it to welcome the imposition of the regulations and programmes of the biosecurity state in March 2020 as the triumph of the common good over government incompetence and ‘Right-wing’ greed. But that was nearly three years ago, and naivety has become bad-faith and denial in the face of the vast apparatus of global biosecurity that’s been constructed around, between and within us. That doesn’t mean, however, that the Left now regrets its collaboration, which of course continues today, or that it hasn’t obstinately confined its protests to the erasure of our rights and freedoms being enacted by the wave of new legislation introduced in 2022 on the back of 582 coronavirus-justified Statutory Instruments, without admitting any relationship between them. The betrayals and duplicities of the Left are legion, but many socialists are still asking how it came to this.

What all the Left shares – and the origin of its otherwise inexplicable collusion with the implementation of the U.K. biosecurity state – is a decades-long infiltration by the neoliberal ideologies of multiculturalism, political correctness, identity politics and, most recently, the orthodoxies of woke. In some organisations, the infiltration is marginal and exists, under the umbrella of ‘intersectionality’, in an uneasy and usually unexamined co-existence with the slogans – if not the practices – of socialism. In others, such as the Labour Party and its affiliates, what socialist principles they may once have had have been entirely replaced by the values and orthodoxies of these relatively new ideologies, which have manifested themselves in such youthful, energetic and well-funded movements as Momentum, Black Lives Matter, Extinction Rebellion, Just Stop Oil and now the masked-up, jacked-up advocates of the Global Biosecurity State. These are all (whatever they may say themselves) pro-capitalist movements, hostile to the working class – which they consistently and casually denounce as ‘racist’ – and directly if not openly opposed to socialism. It’s by their principles that the Left has operated for some time in the U.K. as in all the former neoliberal democracies of the West.

It can’t be long before we see a similar movement, funded by the same or even more powerful billionaires, formed to support the next stage in the U.K. biosecurity state. This includes the adoption of a Universal Basic Income for those impoverished by lockdown, spiralling inflation, rising energy prices and the mass digitalisation of white-collar jobs by the Fourth Industrial Revolution. And like its predecessors, this movement of the Covid-faithful will claim a position on the U.K. Left by criticising the Conservative Government’s response to this or the next ‘crisis’. In doing so, it will help create an even greater consensus among U.K. youth and ‘liberals’ in the middle-classes for increased online surveillance, stricter laws, harsher sentences, more intrusive technologies of public control and greater police powers to enforce them. As we saw most publicly in the counter demonstrations organised across Canada during the blockade against vaccine mandates in February 2022, the Left didn’t hesitate to align itself with the Government of Justin Trudeau and the riot police he deployed, denounced truckers as ‘white supremacists’ and every other insult in the woke handbook, while waving placards telling working men and women facing unemployment and destitution at the hands of the biosecurity state to ‘check their privilege’.

This largely middle-class, neoliberal Left, which today constitutes a homogeneous force of compliance across the biosecurity states of the West, did not suddenly become devotees of the restrictions and programmes imposed due to a justification of a major threat to public health that never existed. On the contrary, the Left is the Church in which these Covid-faithful have been raised, their guiding religion and cultic practices formed by the same radically conservative beliefs. To state again what should be obvious to all: no-platforming, cancel culture, misogyny disguised as trans-rights, policing of speech and opinion, and all the other symptoms of this woke ideology did not emerge from a politics of emancipation, class struggle or wealth distribution. They emerged from, and are advocates for, authoritarian practices of censorship, suppression of debate and punishment of non-compliance that are culturally inseparable from the technologies of surveillance and control developed by finance capitalism to police and protect its borders. These are not the borders between the nation states that finance capitalism straddles like a colossus and across which the Global Biosecurity State now controls our movements to a degree hitherto unimaginable to the children of multiculturalism. They are rather the borders between, on the one hand, the international corporations and offshore jurisdictions through which global capital flows, and on the other, scrutiny by and accountability to what remains of the public sector in those nation states.

Far from the Left being, as some have claimed, under some form of collective hypnosis or programming – presumably from the propaganda of the Right – it is from the Left that we hear the most Puritanical demands for displays of public virtue, for the harshest punishments to be imposed on unbelievers in the new faith of biosecurity. There is a direct line of ideological influence between the Black Lives Matter slogan that ‘silence is violence’, the ‘rebels’ groomed by Extinction Rebellion and Just Stop Oil offering themselves for arrest, and the ideologues of ‘Zero-Covid’ denying human rights to those who refuse to comply with the dictates of the Global Biosecurity State.

Just as, for the past century and more, trades unions under Labour’s duplicitous leadership have repeatedly sacrificed U.K. workers to the interests of U.K. capital, so the Left has handed over U.K. youth to the U.K. biosecurity state. To claim that this corporate, technocratic, authoritarian, repressive, violent and totalitarian ideology has anything in common with the emancipatory aims of socialism shows just how little the ideologues of the Left know or care about socialist politics, socialist principles or socialist practices, except insofar as it exists to suppress any organisation that attempts to enact them.

Indeed, with such willing compliance from the Left, is there any need anymore for the ideologues of capitalism to extol its supposedly unique ability to defend our freedoms? The declarations of a New World Order made at the concurrent meetings of the World Economic Forum and the World Health Organisation this May strongly suggest not. As an ideological principle, ‘freedom’ is well and truly off the political agenda today. Fascism – although, as Orwell predicted, imposed under another name (‘biosecurity’, ‘Net Zero’, ‘stakeholder capitalism’ etc.), no longer under the authority of a sovereign leader but of new international technocracies like the World Economic Forum and World Health Organisation, and in this country appearing in a slimy Anglicised form — is the new common good to which all of us are being compelled to sacrifice our human rights, our privacy, our bodily autonomy, our freedoms. And the truth the Left continues to refuse to face up to is that none of this could have been achieved with such speed and ease without its collaboration.

But is that all? Can so momentous a historical failure, which may one day equal that of the failure of the Left to defeat the rise of fascism a century ago, be attributed entirely to the ideological erasure of socialism not only from the parliamentary parties and political organisations of the Left but also from the ideology of its membership and fellow travellers? If the psychological structure of fascism is the pull between an almost childlike obedience to the imperious forms of authority that operate above the law, and a visceral hatred of the impoverished, the diseased, the ostracised and the criminalised, what can we say about the psychological structure of the Left in the West in 2022? Is the Left now, in effect, fascist? And if it is, was Hayek right, after all, about socialism being a stepping stone to fascism?

The answer to both these questions must be ‘no’: not only because the past 40 years of neoliberalism in the West have witnessed the outsourcing of public services to the private sector and deferral of economic policy to central banks and international financial institutions; but also because the division of the political spectrum on which Hayek’s argument rested into Left and Right – with social democrats and socialists, respectively, one and two steps to the Left, and liberals and conservatives one and two steps to the Right – no longer has any descriptive purchase on the political paradigm of the Global Biosecurity State.

The orthodoxies of woke ideology have been employed by self-styled ‘liberal democracies’ under some of the most authoritarian and anti-working-class governments in recent history – including those of Boris Johnson in the U.K., Emmanuel Macron in France, Mario Draghi in Italy and Karl Nehammer in Austria – in order to subordinate the Left to the Global Biosecurity State. ‘Subordinate’ is perhaps the wrong word, because, at the same time, notionally Left-wing governments – including those of Pedro Sánchez in Spain, António Costa in Portugal and Magdalena Andersson in Sweden – as well as Left political parties in opposition such as U.K. Labour, have been just as ready to embrace the Global Biosecurity State on the woke principles of safety, censorship and a paternal state. And, of course, liberal and conservative governments – including those of Olaf Scholz in Germany, Mateusz Morawiecki in Poland, Alexander de Croo in Belgium, Mark Rutte in the Netherlands, Sanna Marin in Finland and Kyriakos Mitsotakis in Greece – have long since made woke orthodoxies the foundation of their political platforms, and rapidly deployed them in their opportunist response to the coronavirus ‘crisis’.

This unity of response by the notionally politically differentiated governments of European nation states, together with their willing subordination to the new technocracies of global governance, has demonstrated – hopefully once and for all – that Left and Right no longer exist as positions within the new biopolitical paradigm of the West.

One could argue that they haven’t for some time. Tony Blair, the former Prime Minister of the U.K. and one of the West’s most influential ideologues of neoliberalism, whose New Labour party did so much to close the Overton Window, replaced Left and Right with what he called ‘Open and Closed’, with the former in favour of neoliberalism, multiculturalism and globalisation, and the latter with protectionism, cultural conservatism and anti-immigration. In this new political spectrum, in which so-called ‘openness’ more accurately describes the ideology of the Left, the socialist values of political emancipation, economic equality and wealth redistribution have been removed altogether, with the middle-classes enjoined to openness and the working class dismissed as closed. Of course, with the current revolution of Western capitalism into the Global Biosecurity State, ‘open and closed’ have taken on very different meanings, with the ‘open’ advocates of neoliberalism now demanding lockdown, the imposition of ‘vaccine’ passports as a condition of travel and mandatory medical intervention as a condition of employment, and the ‘closed’ workers defending their rights and freedoms.

Indeed, insofar as the residual polarity between Left and Right has served to divide opposition to the biosecurity state, with compliance depoliticised as obedience to medical ‘measures’ issued by supposedly non-political technocratic advisory boards (whether SAGE or the WHO), the collaboration of Left and Right has facilitated the imposition of the biopolitical paradigm of the state. Just as Hayek’s The Road to Serfdom allowed neoliberals to reduce politics to economics – most famously expressed in Thatcher’s slogan that “There Is No Alternative” (TINA) – the sanctimoniously repeated mantra of the Covid-faithful that the coronavirus crisis is ‘above politics’ is the dream of a post-political totalitarian world in which, whatever party is elected to administer its dictates, the state and its powers remain at the disposal of the same international organisations of global governance.

The Left of today, therefore, is not fascist, but neither is it socialist in any recognisable sense of the term. As the more than two-and-a-half years since March 2020 have demonstrated more clearly than any other recent event in the history of the West, the Left is a residual but still functioning political form of the power of the nation state to assimilate, through the spectacles of parliamentary democracy and street protest, the potentially subversive elements of society into the homogeneous political order, in order to protect the productive forces of the economy from the increasingly frequent crises of finance capitalism. The coronavirus ‘crisis’, and the collaboration of the Left in constructing the Global Biosecurity State, is the demonstration of this function.
stickdog99
 
Posts: 6316
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 5:42 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'Liberals'/'Leftists' in America

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Sat Nov 12, 2022 7:44 am

Marionumber1 » 08 Nov 2022 04:23 wrote:
Joe Hillshoist » Mon Nov 07, 2022 2:45 am wrote:I don't care who's supplying the guns or whatever shit they've pulled beforehand. They haven't shot me. Unlike that other prick.


This isn't quite applicable to the US/Ukraine dynamic. It'd be more like saying "They haven't shot me, but they arranged for me to get shot by that other prick to draw me into fighting the prick for them". The US did everything in its power to set Ukraine up in this position to begin with, and as far as the US power structure is concerned, they'd love for Ukrainians to continue getting killed indefinitely while fighting Russia. That is why I fail to see their "aid", which is solely motivated towards prolonging the war with no end in sight, as help.


You might not see it as help. But you're in the US not central/eastern Europe. There is historical bad blood between Russia and Ukraine that goes way further back than the US even existing.

We've all known Putin said that "Ukraine in NATO means war" or wtte for decades. But so did Ukranians yet they seemed okay with the ongoing US and NATO integration exercises. Honestly, I;m not there so i really don't know anything about it.

No, I don't doubt that there are many ordinary Ukrainians who sincerely want to keep fighting. I'm sure that Russia's conduct in this war has produced a natural reaction to defend against a brutal invader and to avenge friends/family who have been killed. (Of course, much of the devastation in Ukraine is also produced by the Ukrainian government's own callous policies toward civilians, and some false-flag attacks made to appear Russian in origin.) The question is, how long are Ukrainians going to continue for and who's controlling the answer to that question?

A de-escalation seems unlikely to come from Ukraine's government, which has effectively been a US/NATO puppet ever since the 2014 coup (with Zelenskyy's 2019 election bearing the fingerprints of the same coup plotters). How about from the civilians? Well, the brutal way that (CIA-influenced) Ukrainian state security and the associated neo-Nazi groups have been treating anyone with a dissident opinion on Russia is well-documented. So if Ukrainians do reach (or already have reached) the point where they'd rather go for a negotiated settlement, how likely is that to come out in this climate?

If dissent has been suppressed to this point, we don't/won't know if Ukrainians would rather start negotiating for peace (or at least it will be much harder). So if the decision for Ukraine to "want" a continued war has been indefinitely made for them by the US stay-behind network, and the US and their allies are continuing to pump "aid" so that what they "want" remains indefinitely feasible, how is this "aid" not just keeping Ukraine in the line of fire indefinitely?


My country should be considered a US puppet, but our leaders get elected on the back of domestic issues but if a country like China invaded us because of our relationship with the US it would take alot for me to want to negotiate for peace on their terms, which is what Russia will expect.
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 10594
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'Liberals'/'Leftists' in America

Postby JackRiddler » Sat Nov 12, 2022 3:00 pm

Joe Hillshoist » Sat Nov 12, 2022 6:44 am wrote:You might not see it as help. But you're in the US not central/eastern Europe. There is historical bad blood between Russia and Ukraine that goes way further back than the US even existing.


I'd argue against this. It goes that far back in their respective projections of what parts of history from centuries ago they want to claim as part of their national myth-constructs.

To whom today belongs, or to whom today can blame be given, for the Byzantines and Turks, the Vikings, the Kievan Rus, the conversions to Christianity, the Golden Horde, Muscovy, the Cossacks, the Polish-Lithuanian federation, etc. etc.? Who were the "Ukrainians" as opposed to "Russians" in all these times? Who were they in all the entities that held different parts of what are called Russia and Ukraine today? Neither category existed in ways resembling current understandings. I'd say a "Russian"/"Ukrainian" dichotomy can't be credibly posited as something that extends continuously to the present, with centers on the regions as currently bordered, until the mid-1700s. And in the times since it's been subject to transformations and breaks. There have been times and places in modern Ukr territory full of people having little sense of belonging to any national category other than the "people from here." There have been third groups indigenous to the region for centuries (Jews, for example) suddenly discovering they've been defined as foreigners and enemies by one side or another. This is not to say it hasn't been bloody the whole time, it has. It's not to imply that specific entities and leaders aren't responsible for specific atrocities they committed. But the older history can't be accurately sorted into current categories of R and U retrospectively. That's what the national fabulists on each of the two current sides are doing.

.

PS- How did this land in this thread?
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15988
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'Liberals'/'Leftists' in America

Postby Belligerent Savant » Thu Nov 17, 2022 1:37 pm

User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 5267
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'Liberals'/'Leftists' in America

Postby Belligerent Savant » Sat Dec 03, 2022 9:14 am

Image

Image
User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 5267
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'Liberals'/'Leftists' in America

Postby stickdog99 » Sun Dec 04, 2022 6:51 pm

Image
stickdog99
 
Posts: 6316
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 5:42 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'Liberals'/'Leftists' in America

Postby stickdog99 » Fri Dec 09, 2022 5:09 pm

Image
stickdog99
 
Posts: 6316
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 5:42 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 37 guests