To start off with, it should be noted that those worthies of Conservatism Inc. are open-borders immigration, globalist neo-liberal wolves in conservative sheep's clothing. Kudos to the America First Groypers for calling out and exposing these frauds at Turning Point USA. Conservatism can still be a recognizable and safe for normie brand as well as useful allies in combating the left in the culure wars and breaking the power of the managerial/deep state. Provided it first is purged of the liberals and grifters that have infested it since the 1980's.
That being said, there is another type of neo-liberal globalist that perhaps manages to delude himself that he is in fact a bona fide "conservative". This would be the white glove academic who dwells in the ivory tower and so securely isolated in an academic bubble universe where anyone to the right of Leon Trotsky or Mao Zedong is seen as a hard-right-wing conservative in the faculty lounge. These neo-liberal poseurs are part of what the Z Man refers to as the cloud people. A very insightful and metaphorically precise term.
This sort of pseudonymous academic conservative, in a spirit of collegiality, will studiously refrain from attacking his more far left colleagues or if he does, then as a matter of honor and sense of fair play will attack anyone on the right with even more vigor. Must keep up appearances: High standard of honor, dedicated to principles, being "fair and balanced" and a really spiffing chap, you know.
The academic neo-liberal like all other species of liberal, views communists and socialists as really rather noble fellows who deserve special consideration in a harsh and reactionary world. Moreover, the leftists especially deserve greater deference in regards to free speech that those unwashed (and perceived as uneducated and unintelligent) plebeian troglodytes of the right who cause eggheads in their cloud citadels to clutch their pearls and hyperventilate.
So as exhibit 'A' in our exploration of the liberal with an identity crisis and enemy identification problems we have this article from FEE, Foundation for Economic Education written by Lawrence W. Reed entitled "The Palmer Raids: America’s Forgotten Reign of Terror", January 3, 2020
As previously noted, Reed pedantically clings to a sense of honor and fair play with an adversary who was, and whose ideological descendants still are, the sworn enemies of our nation and constitutional republic. Must keep up appearances, you know, granting leftist enemies carte blanche with the first amendment of a constitution they will shred if they get the chance and who never miss an opportunity to deny the hopelessly idealistic Reed, his neo-liberal cohorts and all to their right the same freedom of speech. Labeling anything, anybody to the right of Joseph Stalin says as "hate speech" and demanding their firing from their jobs, de-platforming and censoring.
Moderation in the protection of liberty is no virtue and only a fool fights an opponent according to rules and restrictions that the opponent, who fights to win at any cost, will ignore or break at every turn. Worse, the leftist will not only hide behind our bill of rights while plotting their revolution, but will turn it around to attack us. The first amendment may protect our freedom of speech but it does not protect the enemies of this country who wish to overthrow it the freedom to pursue this goal unhindered. In the end, there is no nobility or honor in losing while misguidedly clinging to idealistic principles. Reed may not believe real the threat posed by the American leftist devil, but the devil believes in him.
Reed goes on about how the leftists in the 1910's were mistreated and arrested for no good reason. So even if anarchists, communists and socialists did a few bombings, just a few, mind you, and not mentioned by Reed for some strange reason, riots, vandalism and murders, well dash it all, man! That's no excuse to violate the sanctity of our constitution! Just because our sworn enemies are trying to instigate a violent revolution that would kill untold numbers of innocent people to usher in a blood thirsty dictatorship of the proletariat is no excuse for us to abandon the moral high road of doing nothing to protect our republic and her people. So we must make doubly sure we rigorously and scrupulously follow the bill of rights and all laws our leftist brethren spit on! Our very honor and virtue depend upon this!
But let's make no mistake here. Wilson did not implement this so-called "red scare" (leftists always love to play the victim when they get caught) out of a love of country and constitution. No, he only wanted to push the foreign immigrant leftist rageheads out of the way so he could more gradually institute his own more gentlemanly progressive dictatorship led by his fellow eggheads. That he would have been doing his country a long-term service in trying to crush the American left was simply an unintended side effect.
Finally, Reed ends his essay with the rather risible observation that "[i]t’s hard to find any lingering trace of the “subversive” work the Palmer Raids were ostensibly intended to combat." (my emphasis)
I suppose communist created labor unions like the AFL-CIO, aren't around anymore and the early 20th century communists' "red diaper babies" all gave up mommy and daddy's dream of revolution as a bad job. Concepts like "free love" pushed by leftists of the late 19th century which led to modern teen pregnancy and single mother families and that also was used by 60's New Left to systematically destroy institutions like the nuclear family and the church leave any discernible trace or harm to our culture or society. Or could their ideological and/or literal blood descendants like Saul Alinsky, among others, cause any damage to society today. Nor the incessant haranguing of early 20th century leftists against free enterprise and private property, cloaked in the mythomania of "worker's rights", "fairness" "justice" make socialism popular with today's youth can't be seen from the windows of academia's and think tank's ivory towers in the clouds. Nope, Lawrence, nothing to see here.
Woodrow Wilson certainly was a progressive twat who began the process of demolishing the constitution and ushering in the managerial state but it's highly debatable whether it was worse than the damage done to American society and culture by the American Communist Party, self-proclaimed anarchists like Antifa and the demented leftist radicals of the Democratic Socialists of America- all the ideological grandchildren of those early 20th century communists and anarchists. As I see it, it's like debating whether being fatally poisoned from arsenic or cyanide is worse.
For in the rarefied atmosphere of think tanks and FEE, all that can be seen is open immigration, illegal immigration and H1-B visas provide cheap labor for American businesses accepting that the tabula rasa model of humans means identical, internationally interchangeable meat puppets. That free trade globalism leaves transnational corporations free to set up shop in countries with lax environmental laws and cheap local labor which translates to fatter dividends, increasing stock prices and a happier Wall Street.
To lads at FEE, this is all they can see and it's all good for them and their interests.
Showing posts with label Progressivism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Progressivism. Show all posts
Friday, January 3, 2020
Thursday, June 13, 2019
Civic Nationalism Failure: Nation of Immigrants as a Cover for Plundering Invaders
From the New York Times: Why Should Immigrants 'Respect Our Borders'? The West Never Respected Theirs by Suketu Mehta
This must be one of the most wretched pieces of calumny and tortured logic to be printed by the New York Times and this is a high bar to cross indeed. Well, Suketu is apparently unaware of the old adage that two wrongs do not make a right. Not surprising as Suketu Mehta is not of American or western European descent and therefore does not have any tradition or understanding of western liberal democracy. This opinion piece proves he (or she or it) is as bad as the European colonialists of generations past if not worse despite the scoundrel's sanctimonious drivel.
The most immoral and intellectually bankrupt excuse for invasion and open theft is to redress some alleged past crime by victimizing people in the present, even if the victim only approximately shares the skin tone of the accused past villain. The crimes of the past committed by long dead people against other long dead people belong in the pages of history books not in the most recent pages of the New York Times as a feeble excuse for plunder by third world invaders. It is wrong and inexcusable to punish people who have committed no crime to benefit people who were never the victim. Assuming it is even provable that an actual crime had been committed in the first place instead of the fractured fairy tales spewed by the Cathedral.
So whatever happened to this judged by the content of our character, not by the color of our skin business? Judging people according who they are and their deeds, not who their ancestors were?
And isn't the nation of immigrants through our magic dirt supposed to produce patriotic, liberal democracy loving "new Americans" just like past generations who flowed through Ellis Island?
So whatever happened to our "nation of immigrants", a nation based on high-falutin' ideals, not a people, where the poor, huddled masses simply yearned to be free and would be proud and grateful to be let in and called "Americans" in good standing? No matter our race, creed, culture or ethnicity, we're all "Americans", united in this multicultural nirvana and will all live together happily ever after. We'll make E Pluribus Unum great again!
It appears that flowery, good feels rhetoric was part of a long range strategy to gradually introduce a new caste system where specific identity/grievance groups would be given special protected status. In other words, high caste people with a special set of rights and privileges to make up for past wrongs with no definition of when or under what conditions will the grievance finally be assuaged. When the wrongs will have finally been righted and we can all get on with this judged by the content of our character in the multicultural nirvana business. All part of incrementalism, the classic leftist strategy. But start it slowly, with a reassuring, peaceful face that tells us what we want to hear, simply wants to be treated fairly and remedy a present wrong or problem then gradually step it up to demands, accusations and obligations.
Many Americans were encouraged at first by the friendly, reassuring face of the nation of immigrants thing as they recall their sainted ancestors who passed through Ellis Island as was used to sell the 1965 Hart-Celler Act then. With no limiting principles ever given, the line used has morphed from "we just want to work hard and have a better life" into "we demand you let us in and give us free stuff because you owe us for some transgressions or other committed in antiquity". Suketu Mehta here represents this angry, demanding face of the nation of immigrants and this is the only logical trajectory the civic nationalism /propositional nation dogma could have taken. Suketu and others who follow his line of gibberish are simply cashing in on the immigrant side of the identity victim/grievance politics game.
There is one other thing as an aside:
To make this all multiculturalism work, to unite different identity/grievance groups, including the latest crops of immigrants legal or illegal, of otherwise competing interests and end goals, the white supremacist devil must be created as a unifying object of hate. One cannot avoid the news of the recent congressional hearings about it and veritable deluge of news stories about the rise of daemon white supremacism of which the spectral evidence is overwhelming.
Thus the Identity Marx god has declared blood libel to be righteous and shall be pursued from all time past and forever into the future by the angels of the left. The cargo cultist followers shall answer all objections with heart string tugging sob stories,false comparisons and buhwahddabout deflections when the sob stories are questioned and the false comparison bluffs are called. Failing that, the cultists will berate all unbelievers and heretics as racists and nazis. For the Marxist/Marxian thesis will cease to exist without an antithesis to struggle against and if the antithesis does not already exist, the high priests of Identity Marx will invent one. However, I digress.
This NYT opinion piece should prove civic nationalism, the propositional nation and diversity is our strength were lies all along. The failure of civic nationalism was either a feature of the program, not a bug or it achieved certain goals and the collateral damage is a matter of indifference to our ruling class. A story for another time.
But a few last words regarding opinion piece author, Suketu Mehta: It appears to have escaped this prodigy's notice that he (or she or it, whatever) and other third worlders have benefited from, if indeed profited handsomely from technology which we Americans and Europeans invented, that Suketu and his ilk themselves or their ancestors had no hand in inventing. Roads, hospitals and modern medicine, railroads, schools, etc. that were built for them by their former colonizers have certainly benefited them.
So in light of this, I counter that we Americans owe third worlders who agree with this NYT piece absolutely nothing and that includes entry into our country. As there is no more colonialism to whine about, you should all return to your own home countries and work to improve the conditions there yourselves. Maybe invent your own new technological advances while you're at it.
Donald Cavaioli
This must be one of the most wretched pieces of calumny and tortured logic to be printed by the New York Times and this is a high bar to cross indeed. Well, Suketu is apparently unaware of the old adage that two wrongs do not make a right. Not surprising as Suketu Mehta is not of American or western European descent and therefore does not have any tradition or understanding of western liberal democracy. This opinion piece proves he (or she or it) is as bad as the European colonialists of generations past if not worse despite the scoundrel's sanctimonious drivel.
The most immoral and intellectually bankrupt excuse for invasion and open theft is to redress some alleged past crime by victimizing people in the present, even if the victim only approximately shares the skin tone of the accused past villain. The crimes of the past committed by long dead people against other long dead people belong in the pages of history books not in the most recent pages of the New York Times as a feeble excuse for plunder by third world invaders. It is wrong and inexcusable to punish people who have committed no crime to benefit people who were never the victim. Assuming it is even provable that an actual crime had been committed in the first place instead of the fractured fairy tales spewed by the Cathedral.
So whatever happened to this judged by the content of our character, not by the color of our skin business? Judging people according who they are and their deeds, not who their ancestors were?
And isn't the nation of immigrants through our magic dirt supposed to produce patriotic, liberal democracy loving "new Americans" just like past generations who flowed through Ellis Island?
So whatever happened to our "nation of immigrants", a nation based on high-falutin' ideals, not a people, where the poor, huddled masses simply yearned to be free and would be proud and grateful to be let in and called "Americans" in good standing? No matter our race, creed, culture or ethnicity, we're all "Americans", united in this multicultural nirvana and will all live together happily ever after. We'll make E Pluribus Unum great again!
It appears that flowery, good feels rhetoric was part of a long range strategy to gradually introduce a new caste system where specific identity/grievance groups would be given special protected status. In other words, high caste people with a special set of rights and privileges to make up for past wrongs with no definition of when or under what conditions will the grievance finally be assuaged. When the wrongs will have finally been righted and we can all get on with this judged by the content of our character in the multicultural nirvana business. All part of incrementalism, the classic leftist strategy. But start it slowly, with a reassuring, peaceful face that tells us what we want to hear, simply wants to be treated fairly and remedy a present wrong or problem then gradually step it up to demands, accusations and obligations.
Many Americans were encouraged at first by the friendly, reassuring face of the nation of immigrants thing as they recall their sainted ancestors who passed through Ellis Island as was used to sell the 1965 Hart-Celler Act then. With no limiting principles ever given, the line used has morphed from "we just want to work hard and have a better life" into "we demand you let us in and give us free stuff because you owe us for some transgressions or other committed in antiquity". Suketu Mehta here represents this angry, demanding face of the nation of immigrants and this is the only logical trajectory the civic nationalism /propositional nation dogma could have taken. Suketu and others who follow his line of gibberish are simply cashing in on the immigrant side of the identity victim/grievance politics game.
There is one other thing as an aside:
To make this all multiculturalism work, to unite different identity/grievance groups, including the latest crops of immigrants legal or illegal, of otherwise competing interests and end goals, the white supremacist devil must be created as a unifying object of hate. One cannot avoid the news of the recent congressional hearings about it and veritable deluge of news stories about the rise of daemon white supremacism of which the spectral evidence is overwhelming.
Thus the Identity Marx god has declared blood libel to be righteous and shall be pursued from all time past and forever into the future by the angels of the left. The cargo cultist followers shall answer all objections with heart string tugging sob stories,false comparisons and buhwahddabout deflections when the sob stories are questioned and the false comparison bluffs are called. Failing that, the cultists will berate all unbelievers and heretics as racists and nazis. For the Marxist/Marxian thesis will cease to exist without an antithesis to struggle against and if the antithesis does not already exist, the high priests of Identity Marx will invent one. However, I digress.
This NYT opinion piece should prove civic nationalism, the propositional nation and diversity is our strength were lies all along. The failure of civic nationalism was either a feature of the program, not a bug or it achieved certain goals and the collateral damage is a matter of indifference to our ruling class. A story for another time.
But a few last words regarding opinion piece author, Suketu Mehta: It appears to have escaped this prodigy's notice that he (or she or it, whatever) and other third worlders have benefited from, if indeed profited handsomely from technology which we Americans and Europeans invented, that Suketu and his ilk themselves or their ancestors had no hand in inventing. Roads, hospitals and modern medicine, railroads, schools, etc. that were built for them by their former colonizers have certainly benefited them.
So in light of this, I counter that we Americans owe third worlders who agree with this NYT piece absolutely nothing and that includes entry into our country. As there is no more colonialism to whine about, you should all return to your own home countries and work to improve the conditions there yourselves. Maybe invent your own new technological advances while you're at it.
Donald Cavaioli
Tuesday, June 4, 2019
Hostile Identity Politics and Advocating Scarcity: The Engine of the Progressive Left's Own Destruction
If one were to live in a steadfast denial of reality and think with a woefully short time preference, the most preposterous and fatuous ideas that appeal to one's vanity would be accepted as the work of genius without question. These fabulous ideas would then need to be implemented without delay as such individuals typically have some difficulty with delayed gratification. This succinctly describes the progressive emoter, the social justice warrior, the liberal "stuff white people like" types. In a few words, modern day pharisee.
To deny reality is to go to war with reality eventually to lose. This is common sense but there is always someone who thinks he can win this war. Just as there is always someone who believes that the laws of thermodynamics are nonsense and it is possible to build a perpetual motion free energy machine made from unobtainium. Of course, these are the supporters of the Green New Deal. This program is intended to make energy more scarce and more expensive in the hopes of collapsing industrial civilization and destroying capitalism which will of course, mean many millions of deaths. But hey: In the end the watermelons fervently believe they will create a low-tech socialist version of the Shire populated world wide by 500 million to 1 billion of elite leftist cloud people.
Well, in reality it's not likely most modern leftists bugmen will survive the collapse of modern civilization. They already have a hard enough time eking out their meager dysfunctional existence on a cornucopia of psych meds and have to tweet to each other looking for someone else to assault or murder a 16 year old high school kid. They can't even do their own dirty work and even the ones who try, just screw it up. What sort of survival skills including the will and ability to effectively use violence (at least in self-defense), some planning intelligence, physical and psychological strength does a SJW who advocates such a passive-aggressive method of genocide bring to the table? Others more violence prone and psychologically and physically tougher will see them simply as food animals.
Even the ruling class and elites can only survive as long as their cordons of armed men have a use for them and that won't be for long. The elite and especially the ruling class are people of empty words and meaningless gestures, not at all true people of action, so they will not survive in a Darwinian environment for long on their own.
Then there's identity politics. Really, how much more blatantly stupid can it be for white SJW/SWPL people to jump on the white nationalist is nazi, white people bad bandwagon. Do any of them really believe that their pretending to be oppressed by self-identifying as otherkin "people of color" a la Rachel Dolezal will fool people of color? Nope, you will be on the chopping block as well as the deplorables and no amount of virtue signalling or avowed hatred of your own people will save you. If modern industrial civilization crashes and there are no bugmen left alive to hear it, does it make a sound?
Besides, once the white daemon and his supernatural force of white privilege is vanquished, who among the various identity groups will rule as nobody wants to be second fiddle in the game of power. What will become of the almost rans? If history is any guide, then the answer is ethnic cleansing and that can become quite messy.
So a word of advice to lefties: Don't rock the boat with your fatuous environmentalism or stir up people against each other as it won't work out well for you if you succeed. If it were only you paying the price for your imbecility, I wouldn't care but your idiocy will adversely affect me and many other innocent bystanders. So as this advice is given in self-interest, it will benefit you too. And in any case, you'd better pray that modern civilization lasts longer than you do.
However, worse than the true believing fool is the cynic who uses the promise of a saccharine utopia, driven by weaponized sob stories as a vehicle to power and demonizes even the slightest opposition. This type of sociopath doesn't care who gets hurt in his quest for power, including his own SJW followers. The left has long loved the "provocation", intentionally starting a violent confrontation then when the target of attack fights back, lie down, cry and play the victim. Or the leadership plays the victim on behalf of whatever leftist follower was injured or killed. What good can be said of people who use their followers as expendable pawns with such depraved indifference? What sort of moron would willingly follow such people?
This brings us finally to "normalization", the process by which the aforementioned sociopathic revolutionary leader employs to put an end to the revolutionary phase and begin his reign. This means that his agitators, former street muscle and various other useful idiots are no longer necessary and will be liquidated. It's often been noted that the rank and file wannbe revolutionaries more often than not end up as the body in the ditch rather than the commissar. Just ask Ernst Rőhm.
So even if the left wins, it eventually loses.
Donald Cavaioli
To deny reality is to go to war with reality eventually to lose. This is common sense but there is always someone who thinks he can win this war. Just as there is always someone who believes that the laws of thermodynamics are nonsense and it is possible to build a perpetual motion free energy machine made from unobtainium. Of course, these are the supporters of the Green New Deal. This program is intended to make energy more scarce and more expensive in the hopes of collapsing industrial civilization and destroying capitalism which will of course, mean many millions of deaths. But hey: In the end the watermelons fervently believe they will create a low-tech socialist version of the Shire populated world wide by 500 million to 1 billion of elite leftist cloud people.
Well, in reality it's not likely most modern leftists bugmen will survive the collapse of modern civilization. They already have a hard enough time eking out their meager dysfunctional existence on a cornucopia of psych meds and have to tweet to each other looking for someone else to assault or murder a 16 year old high school kid. They can't even do their own dirty work and even the ones who try, just screw it up. What sort of survival skills including the will and ability to effectively use violence (at least in self-defense), some planning intelligence, physical and psychological strength does a SJW who advocates such a passive-aggressive method of genocide bring to the table? Others more violence prone and psychologically and physically tougher will see them simply as food animals.
Even the ruling class and elites can only survive as long as their cordons of armed men have a use for them and that won't be for long. The elite and especially the ruling class are people of empty words and meaningless gestures, not at all true people of action, so they will not survive in a Darwinian environment for long on their own.
Then there's identity politics. Really, how much more blatantly stupid can it be for white SJW/SWPL people to jump on the white nationalist is nazi, white people bad bandwagon. Do any of them really believe that their pretending to be oppressed by self-identifying as otherkin "people of color" a la Rachel Dolezal will fool people of color? Nope, you will be on the chopping block as well as the deplorables and no amount of virtue signalling or avowed hatred of your own people will save you. If modern industrial civilization crashes and there are no bugmen left alive to hear it, does it make a sound?
Besides, once the white daemon and his supernatural force of white privilege is vanquished, who among the various identity groups will rule as nobody wants to be second fiddle in the game of power. What will become of the almost rans? If history is any guide, then the answer is ethnic cleansing and that can become quite messy.
So a word of advice to lefties: Don't rock the boat with your fatuous environmentalism or stir up people against each other as it won't work out well for you if you succeed. If it were only you paying the price for your imbecility, I wouldn't care but your idiocy will adversely affect me and many other innocent bystanders. So as this advice is given in self-interest, it will benefit you too. And in any case, you'd better pray that modern civilization lasts longer than you do.
However, worse than the true believing fool is the cynic who uses the promise of a saccharine utopia, driven by weaponized sob stories as a vehicle to power and demonizes even the slightest opposition. This type of sociopath doesn't care who gets hurt in his quest for power, including his own SJW followers. The left has long loved the "provocation", intentionally starting a violent confrontation then when the target of attack fights back, lie down, cry and play the victim. Or the leadership plays the victim on behalf of whatever leftist follower was injured or killed. What good can be said of people who use their followers as expendable pawns with such depraved indifference? What sort of moron would willingly follow such people?
This brings us finally to "normalization", the process by which the aforementioned sociopathic revolutionary leader employs to put an end to the revolutionary phase and begin his reign. This means that his agitators, former street muscle and various other useful idiots are no longer necessary and will be liquidated. It's often been noted that the rank and file wannbe revolutionaries more often than not end up as the body in the ditch rather than the commissar. Just ask Ernst Rőhm.
So even if the left wins, it eventually loses.
Donald Cavaioli
Wednesday, January 2, 2019
The Angels and Devils of the Left
Previously I've described the left emoter's rejection of reason and his emotional flowchart to explain how he can take often contradictory positions. Let's now explore the how and why of the Marxist/Marxian "good guys" and "bad guys". From this we gain some insight on the workings of the progressive left and formulate testable theories that can make reliable predictions especially in regards to us in Queens and New York City. It's always good to understand why things happen as they do and to have an idea as to what could happen next, read the summary and conclusion.
Summary:
All Marxist and Marxian ideologies are based on Marx's material dialectics of the conflict between a stark, binary dichotomy of an antithesis (the good guys) and the thesis (the bad guys). In all cases, the thesis and antithesis are dealt with not as individuals but as groups and these groups are assumed not to have any moral agency. This means that characteristics of being good or evil depends on what group (thesis or antithesis) one belongs to and individual actions cannot change this immutable quality. It means the bad guys are born bad and act bad, cannot do anything other that victimize the good guys and can never do anything right or good. It also means that the good guys are always good no matter what they do, cannot act in their own best self interest and are therefore always helpless victims who can never do any wrong. Hence, the emotional good feels for the good guys with endless puerile excuses for any and all of their bad behavior and mindless hate for the bad feels caused by the bad guys. This leads the leftist to regard the emotional pain of his bad feels to be worse than physical pain which is used to fully justify the leftist's physical assault on those who have hurt his feelings by mere speech the leftist finds hurtful.
It's sort of like a secular humanist Calvinism where one is fated from birth to go to Marxist heaven or hell and nothing can be done to change one's destiny. Marxist/Marxian ideologies are, in fact, a materialist religious cult whose promises of higher status and equality of outcome despite ability and merit is irresistible to low performance, low competency and low social status types. For further reading on the subject, the Bloody Shovel blog has a post with more details on the socialist personality type called Biological Leninism found here. It's a long read but very insightful and worth the time.
Modern progressive leftists have abandoned the old orthodox Marxist concept of proletarian worker good guys (regardless of race or ethnicity) antithesis versus bourgeoisie capitalist oppressor bad guys (again regardless of race or ethnicity) thesis for identity grievance/victim group good guys antithesis versus white Christian heterosexual men oppressor bad guys thesis. The group lack of moral agency, immutable good or evil based on group membership still holds true. Forget the old left-right socio-economic politics, it's all identity interest politics now.
In the old orthodox Marxism, there was only one angel group and one devil group but identity politics have now complicated the angel group with a plethora of identity victim/grievance group angels. Therefore, rather than debate how many victim angels can dance on the head of an oppressed group pin, the angels have been stratified into an ever shifting caste hierarchy as different groups jockey for the position of more victim than thou.
So just as in Orwell's Animal Farm, all animals are created equal but some animals are more equal than others.
Going Forward:
Then where does this leave white European descended liberals and progressives? Nominally in charge as they usually were, at least for the present, as this identity devil was created by progressive ruling class types to hamstring potential opposition by building a coalition of identity grievance groups they believed were easier to manipulate and control. But the white prog rulers have overestimated the power of their unfulfilled promises of Equality Utopia and the ambitions and tribalism of the victim identity grievance groups. So that is now changing with the recent elections of identity group politicians who appeal to, and support the interests of, only their own identity groups such as Michigan Democrats Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar and New York Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Eventually, the old white liberal progressive leadership will be replaced by new identity groups at first in coalitions but later to fragment in victimhood status mongering, ideological purity spirals and tribalism until one group emerges to rule supreme.
The Old Ruling Left's Downfall:
It is interesting to note the level of obsequious virtue signalling among white liberals and progressives and in voting for identity grievance group candidates as if it will magically check their white privilege and innate racism and earn brownie points as "woke" goodwhites with the other identity groups that they hope will favor them accordingly. This was a factor in Ocasio-Cortez's election with white millennial residents of Sunnyside and Astoria engaging in just such obsequious virtue signalling in addition to a generational distaste for "boomers" such as incumbent Joe Crowley. It's a purely emotional choice for the rank and file progressives.
But what the white liberals and progressives forget is that having designated white Christians of European descent as the devils responsible for all evil, that for all their most unctuous virtue signalling and repudiations of Christianity, they are still white and in the eyes of the Identity Marx god, still permanently stained with the original sins of white privilege and racism. Thus they are innately and irredeemably evil. In the end, nothing will save them and even if they subscribe to the notion of feeding others to the identity politics crocodile when eventually the croc will get around to eating them too. This also applies to Jewish liberal progressives as they appear as white and therefore just as guilty of the sin of whiteness as any Christian. Negative, antisemetic stereotypes in common culture would just add more fuel to the fire. So despite some protestations as being somehow "people of color", actual people of color will not accept them as such, not even as honorary people of color, as skin pigmentation is inescapable.
So for what started for the old white rulers of the progressive left as a vehicle for permanent power will eventually be the engine of their own downfall.
Conclusion:
The leftist always emotes and will use what intellect they have to justify irrational or contradictory positions and always needs an enemy against which to define themselves. However, it's more than just the dopamine rush of good feels, these people in fact need an enemy to struggle against. Otherwise they cannot define themselves as a thesis with a messianic mission to save the world and suffer an existential meltdown in realizing what purposeless nobodies they are. Thus the lost, broken soul is perpetually at war with anyone and any cause will do. But what the leftist themselves never realize is that after destroying all other enemies, the movement, still needing enemies, will turn in on itself in a cannibalistic frenzy of purity spirals. The goodthinker and good follower of today will be the cast out of heaven for whatever new sin du jour to become the devil of tomorrow. The leftist never seems to grasp from history that he is more likely to become the zek in the camp or the body in the ditch rather the commissar or apparatchik living it up in the socialist paradise. Especially after whatever part the leftist played in the revolution is no longer needed and will be disposed of.
To my fellow New Yorkers and neighbors in the borough of Queens, bear all this in mind and be careful what you choose. In Progressivism, position and leadership is given, not earned, based on ideological purity, identity and personal loyalty to party leadership. Competence and ability do not even come into play with all that entails in the operation of the city which is something you can all see for yourselves as we slouch towards Idiocracy. The party leaders, electeds and bureaucratic apparatchiks view themselves as the high priests and warlords of this holy progressive crusade. In following the managerial state model, they become socially and culturally isolated from the people over whom they govern so whatever programs or plans they implement, it is for the benefit of themselves or their chosen vassals, not us. If the city's programs go against you in some way, understand that this is either a feature of the program and not a bug or it's callous indifference to the unintended consequences because "the cause" is more important than any mere pleb and his problems. This is why I say Mayor de Blasio is in fact a true man of the left as he fits this pattern. To all those who whine how he is not "muh real progressive", remember what I've just written about the cause being more important than individual plebs and their problems. To those of you who harken back to the progressivism of Teddy Roosevelt, get over it. The Marxist and Marxian leftists have co-opted the term and wear it and the term liberalism like a skin suit. It's not your grandpa's progressivism or liberalism, it's their terms now.
It's time to think heuristically, jettison modern liberalism and progressivism and go back to a smaller, less powerful central government model.
Donald Cavaioli
.
Summary:
All Marxist and Marxian ideologies are based on Marx's material dialectics of the conflict between a stark, binary dichotomy of an antithesis (the good guys) and the thesis (the bad guys). In all cases, the thesis and antithesis are dealt with not as individuals but as groups and these groups are assumed not to have any moral agency. This means that characteristics of being good or evil depends on what group (thesis or antithesis) one belongs to and individual actions cannot change this immutable quality. It means the bad guys are born bad and act bad, cannot do anything other that victimize the good guys and can never do anything right or good. It also means that the good guys are always good no matter what they do, cannot act in their own best self interest and are therefore always helpless victims who can never do any wrong. Hence, the emotional good feels for the good guys with endless puerile excuses for any and all of their bad behavior and mindless hate for the bad feels caused by the bad guys. This leads the leftist to regard the emotional pain of his bad feels to be worse than physical pain which is used to fully justify the leftist's physical assault on those who have hurt his feelings by mere speech the leftist finds hurtful.
It's sort of like a secular humanist Calvinism where one is fated from birth to go to Marxist heaven or hell and nothing can be done to change one's destiny. Marxist/Marxian ideologies are, in fact, a materialist religious cult whose promises of higher status and equality of outcome despite ability and merit is irresistible to low performance, low competency and low social status types. For further reading on the subject, the Bloody Shovel blog has a post with more details on the socialist personality type called Biological Leninism found here. It's a long read but very insightful and worth the time.
Modern progressive leftists have abandoned the old orthodox Marxist concept of proletarian worker good guys (regardless of race or ethnicity) antithesis versus bourgeoisie capitalist oppressor bad guys (again regardless of race or ethnicity) thesis for identity grievance/victim group good guys antithesis versus white Christian heterosexual men oppressor bad guys thesis. The group lack of moral agency, immutable good or evil based on group membership still holds true. Forget the old left-right socio-economic politics, it's all identity interest politics now.
In the old orthodox Marxism, there was only one angel group and one devil group but identity politics have now complicated the angel group with a plethora of identity victim/grievance group angels. Therefore, rather than debate how many victim angels can dance on the head of an oppressed group pin, the angels have been stratified into an ever shifting caste hierarchy as different groups jockey for the position of more victim than thou.
So just as in Orwell's Animal Farm, all animals are created equal but some animals are more equal than others.
Going Forward:
Then where does this leave white European descended liberals and progressives? Nominally in charge as they usually were, at least for the present, as this identity devil was created by progressive ruling class types to hamstring potential opposition by building a coalition of identity grievance groups they believed were easier to manipulate and control. But the white prog rulers have overestimated the power of their unfulfilled promises of Equality Utopia and the ambitions and tribalism of the victim identity grievance groups. So that is now changing with the recent elections of identity group politicians who appeal to, and support the interests of, only their own identity groups such as Michigan Democrats Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar and New York Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Eventually, the old white liberal progressive leadership will be replaced by new identity groups at first in coalitions but later to fragment in victimhood status mongering, ideological purity spirals and tribalism until one group emerges to rule supreme.
The Old Ruling Left's Downfall:
It is interesting to note the level of obsequious virtue signalling among white liberals and progressives and in voting for identity grievance group candidates as if it will magically check their white privilege and innate racism and earn brownie points as "woke" goodwhites with the other identity groups that they hope will favor them accordingly. This was a factor in Ocasio-Cortez's election with white millennial residents of Sunnyside and Astoria engaging in just such obsequious virtue signalling in addition to a generational distaste for "boomers" such as incumbent Joe Crowley. It's a purely emotional choice for the rank and file progressives.
But what the white liberals and progressives forget is that having designated white Christians of European descent as the devils responsible for all evil, that for all their most unctuous virtue signalling and repudiations of Christianity, they are still white and in the eyes of the Identity Marx god, still permanently stained with the original sins of white privilege and racism. Thus they are innately and irredeemably evil. In the end, nothing will save them and even if they subscribe to the notion of feeding others to the identity politics crocodile when eventually the croc will get around to eating them too. This also applies to Jewish liberal progressives as they appear as white and therefore just as guilty of the sin of whiteness as any Christian. Negative, antisemetic stereotypes in common culture would just add more fuel to the fire. So despite some protestations as being somehow "people of color", actual people of color will not accept them as such, not even as honorary people of color, as skin pigmentation is inescapable.
So for what started for the old white rulers of the progressive left as a vehicle for permanent power will eventually be the engine of their own downfall.
Conclusion:
The leftist always emotes and will use what intellect they have to justify irrational or contradictory positions and always needs an enemy against which to define themselves. However, it's more than just the dopamine rush of good feels, these people in fact need an enemy to struggle against. Otherwise they cannot define themselves as a thesis with a messianic mission to save the world and suffer an existential meltdown in realizing what purposeless nobodies they are. Thus the lost, broken soul is perpetually at war with anyone and any cause will do. But what the leftist themselves never realize is that after destroying all other enemies, the movement, still needing enemies, will turn in on itself in a cannibalistic frenzy of purity spirals. The goodthinker and good follower of today will be the cast out of heaven for whatever new sin du jour to become the devil of tomorrow. The leftist never seems to grasp from history that he is more likely to become the zek in the camp or the body in the ditch rather the commissar or apparatchik living it up in the socialist paradise. Especially after whatever part the leftist played in the revolution is no longer needed and will be disposed of.
To my fellow New Yorkers and neighbors in the borough of Queens, bear all this in mind and be careful what you choose. In Progressivism, position and leadership is given, not earned, based on ideological purity, identity and personal loyalty to party leadership. Competence and ability do not even come into play with all that entails in the operation of the city which is something you can all see for yourselves as we slouch towards Idiocracy. The party leaders, electeds and bureaucratic apparatchiks view themselves as the high priests and warlords of this holy progressive crusade. In following the managerial state model, they become socially and culturally isolated from the people over whom they govern so whatever programs or plans they implement, it is for the benefit of themselves or their chosen vassals, not us. If the city's programs go against you in some way, understand that this is either a feature of the program and not a bug or it's callous indifference to the unintended consequences because "the cause" is more important than any mere pleb and his problems. This is why I say Mayor de Blasio is in fact a true man of the left as he fits this pattern. To all those who whine how he is not "muh real progressive", remember what I've just written about the cause being more important than individual plebs and their problems. To those of you who harken back to the progressivism of Teddy Roosevelt, get over it. The Marxist and Marxian leftists have co-opted the term and wear it and the term liberalism like a skin suit. It's not your grandpa's progressivism or liberalism, it's their terms now.
It's time to think heuristically, jettison modern liberalism and progressivism and go back to a smaller, less powerful central government model.
Donald Cavaioli
.
Monday, December 10, 2018
The Managerial State's Great Robber Baron Swindle
In summary:
I've long noticed that many, if not most, of the leaders of the early twentieth century progressive movement came from the wealthier classes of Americans and others like Al Smith being a New York City Tammany Hall politician. An organization within the Democrat party not known for honest dealings to put it mildly.
The obvious question which should be asked is why would rich people be so concerned with the plight of the poor and working class? One cannot truly know what is in the minds and hearts of others but an indication may be found by observing their actions and the consequences of those actions. My own admittedly cursory examination of the subject shows some evidence that self-interest, detrimental, perhaps even intentionally so, to the interests of those for whom ostensibly this progressive enterprise was undertaken, was the true motivation. Others may have been motivated by promoting new, sciency-sounding crank economic and social theories like the efficiency movement that either did not work as advertised or caused unintended consequences.
Nevertheless, we may note the stated intentions and goals, but always in the end, must judge by the actions and results. We must be able to distinguish between words and deeds to understand intent and motivations and know who is really the boss and who is just the employee.
Recall the old adage that if something to too good to be true, it probably isn't so beware of those who promise to do good things in return for power and always look closely for the strings when discerning who the puppet is and who is the true villain.
Postulated Motivations:
It is natural for we humans to want to protect whatever power or wealth we have, no matter how great or even humble, and to ensure that power and wealth is transferred to our own genetic descendants. But the greater the wealth and power, the greater the drive to protect them from outsiders.
To the old money elite and ruling class, the industrial revolution in the light of a laissez-faire political and economic system brought a new breed of nouveau riche entrepreneurs who hailed from the lower classes into prominence that could topple the old guard from their thrones. The lower orders seeing this might forget their station and reach for the brass ring as well as a growing middle class with more potential threats from which to contend with. Not to mention new strains of socialism and anarchism imported from Europe that were starting to make trouble.
The old guard rulers were no fools. Knowing that wielding a naked iron fist to protect their interests by enforcing a social caste hierarchy could prove disastrous. Therefore a soothing velvet glove that the masses would find palatable and cooperate with had to be found to cover the iron fist. Even more to the point where the working and middle classes would eventually, voluntarily agree to remain within their respective classes. Then some means must be found of co-opting or managing the socialists making them into useful tools for the ruling class. What that velvet glove would be follows.
Further in detail:
My theory is that the progressive movement primarily operated by the old money ruling class establishment of the late 19th, early 20th century had as one of its goals to completely stifle all social mobility as a means of protecting their own wealth and power from potential challengers. Therefore, they rather cunningly couched their machinations in the honeyed tones of concern for the poor and workingman, appealing to their ignorance, vanity and envy by castigating those troublesome upstart nouveau riche whom they termed "Robber Barons" and then smeared them as the most odius of villains solely responsible for any all the problems of the poor and working class. But not to worry, the old money rich would come to the downtrodden's rescue.
Thus the ruling class connived the electorate into giving more power to the growing managerial government to redress the working man's grievances on his behalf. The poor, the ruling class promised, would benefit from the unfairly gained wealth of these Robber Barons which would be redistributed to the poor as some form of justice. Or at any rate simply taken away. Although many of these Robber Barons, really entrepreneurs, themselves who rose to success and wealth from humble beginnings is forgotten in the righteous mania to punish them for the sin of success and make examples of those who dare to buck the system by following the entrepreneurial example.
That successful entrepreneurs is proof that a classless, laissez-faire system where success for anyone is possible or at worst, there would be jobs available with the prospect of social mobility, competitively priced goods that are more affordable for the poor and an overall higher standard of living makes no never mind. For there is no appeal more powerful than an appeal to the most base of human instincts such as envy, greed and the mind numbing emotionalism of an evil to be vanquished, a war on poverty to be fought or existential threat to be destroyed. Why, these Robber Barons somehow amassed their ill gotten fortunes by plundering the poor when not trying to outright kill the poor by pollution, dangerous working conditions or shoddy products. Why, the modern progressive liberal thinks, who wouldn't want to kill their employees and customers? That would be obviously and absurdly counterproductive.This can only be liberal projection for whom violent fantasies are a not so guilty pleasure.
All this is not to say that those entrepreneurs labeled as Robber Barons were perfect angels, nor is all legislation regarding trusts, working conditions and pollution unnecessary. The State and the laws and their enforcement mechanisms are a necessary evil and is charged by the citizenry to act in their best collective interests. Otherwise a stable, healthy and prosperous society would not be possible.
But no system is perfect. Too much of a good thing can turn bad if the citizenry in a constitutionally limited republic or democratic society grow lethargic and do not use due diligence and common sense in exercising their rights and responsibilities as citizens. Power should be granted to leaders grudgingly, only as much as necessary for the problem at hand and after it is fully demonstrated to be absolutely necessary with the proviso that it can be taken back.
It is indisputable that nobody who ever got rich through licit free enterprise had ever made anyone else poor. Or that a potentially dangerous industrial work environment be shown as excessively hazardous, with only a few exceptions, with noticeably higher percentages of worker injury that fully excludes worker error must be noted.
For what motive management would have to want to murder their own employees or customers for that matter and explain why factory owners and management would knowingly poison the air that they themselves breathe and water they themselves drink as all of this makes no rational sense.
In the end analysis, according to the prevailing pop culture history, the sins of the Robber Barons were they got rich, they were mean and they were racists. The former two is the noise of cognitive dissonance and the latter is at best irrelevant and at worst complete nonsense. But all in all, it worked. This nostrum of homicidal maniac capitalists is still today unthinkingly accepted as irrefutable fact. The Robber Barons were held up as an unspeakable evil that must be shunned and thus discouraged any of the lower classes from following their example. The lesson taught was that it is more moral and good to remain a poor and powerless victim in your own social class after all.
Methods and results:
The lesson was the carrot of superior morality but a stick was still needed to reinforce it.
The income tax is a means by which the working class would find it difficult to accumulate or pass much of the wealth the accumulated to their heirs that would be capital enough to start a business that would potentially pose a threat to already established corporations who already exist with the approval of the political establishment. The income tax was sold and accepted as "making the rich pay their fair share". But consider that at the time of the passage and ratification of the 13th Amendment in 1913, the rich then were apparently not effective in stopping it despite their apparent wealth and presumptive power and today the already very rich wholeheartedly support the progressive income tax and that they not only pay their fair share but amazingly enough, they say they do not pay enough. This is even as they fight tax bills in court with IRS and refuse to instruct their accountants to limit deductions to increase their tax bill. It's the actions that count, not the words.
Excessive government regulations that create further barriers to the upstart requiring more capital to comply with regulations as well as the cost of lawyers and consultants to help navigate byzantine regulations. All of this was sold to the working man as necessary for his safety, to maintain some kind of unspecified fairness and to punish those mean capitalists for being dour misers.
However, the most potent method is the negative aura that surrounds all business people as mean, greedy capitalists who are always exploiting their workers for their dirty profits, polluting the planet, etc- so you don't want to be that guy. Being poor is much more praised and seen as more virtuous so it is better to stay in your respective socio-economic class, or else.
New Deal, Same Old Con:
It really makes no rational sense but it made some kind of emotional sense to the masses of workers who in the 1930's enthusiastically gave the political managerial ruling class all the power it craved (and more), even to their own detriment, for the vicarious pleasure of watching their New Deal rulers make a show of punishing the corporatists and heart-warming fireside chats that made the workers feel better or something or other.
But make a show was all it was. Behind the scenes, a new relationship between the growing managerial capitalism, banks (and even academia) and the growing managerial state was taking shape in the grim shadow of the second world war. Once having reached the top, the already successful were ready to kick the ladder down behind them and that suited the managerial state just fine as long as they were willing pay the piper (who called the tune) to be allowed to dance.
And the Beat Goes On...
For the corporations and banks, the obligatory political donations, paying prominent politicians exorbitant speaking fees and lobbyist gifts to buy influence with the political establishment are now simply the cost of doing business. Wisdom would suggest that if you can't beat 'em, join 'em and there's no point in fighting a battle you can never hope to win. Especially if you have no army of your own.
For the political managerial establishment, it is easier to control a handful of large corporations than hundreds of thousands of smaller businesses and as well line their pockets in the process. Therefore, it is in the managerial state's own interest to keep the business herd well culled and perhaps well abed with. All in all, it was a match made in heaven....sort of.
However, this relationship was and is largely kept from the plebs of working and middle classes. Corporations and banks were and still are made out to be a sort of Neo-Robber Barons but now serve as sock puppet villains to misdirect the public's attention away from who was really pulling the strings. But what corporation or bank complained? After all, it's better to be a sock puppet villain in managerial state hell with a few privileges and profits not enjoyed by the proles rather than a victim of unfettered competition in a free enterprise heaven. For example, today, Silicon Valley tech corporations, not only dutifully pay tribute to their political overlords for the usual perks and privileges, but receive federal tax dollars as virtually paid federal employees and carry out a censorship and de-platforming reign of terror on behalf of governments, of the United States and others. The tech companies do the dirty work and take the blame but they get to keep the money and monopolies in return. Phaemon's dog was right.
All the while all concerned pretend this be the actions of private business. Sorry folks, capitalism and all that, you know, and being a "free" country nothing your government can do (when the tech giants censor and de-platform gov't designated targets). Or, don't worry folks, we'll haul the scoundrels up before a congressional committee and really yell at them (when banks obey regulations and the CRA making sub-prime loans to stay in compliance). Even if you're set up by the managerial state to be the bad guy everybody hates, there's the compensation of limited competition, government contracts, golden parachutes, and receiving government bailouts for being "too big to fail" for all of which the managerial state pushes the blame off on their sock puppet villains- a small price to pay. Yes, Phaemon's dog was genius after all.
And the general public, ever on the scent for new Robber Baron rascals to hate just lap it up and never notice the sly, skillful hand of the managerial puppeteer at work.
Neo-Feudalism and Final Victory
Make no mistake, it really isn't a partnership of equals, it is, in fact, a feudal relationship of lord and tithe paying crony capitalist vassal. Whereas the vassal may conduct his own affairs to some degree and have influence in court, the lord exercises the real power and has the final say and the vassal is, in the end, obedient to his lord's command. The difference between power and influence is a significant distinction that should not be overlooked.
To demonstrate who in fact holds the whip hand, there are always the federal attack dogs of the Security and Exchange Commission with its vague insider trading laws for naughty Wall Streeters. The FBI, who could prosecute the recalcitrant miscreant for vague racketeering laws or lying about crimes the FBI cannot prove said miscreant committed along with sundry process crimes. If the federal government needs flimsy or even contrived evidence, it has plenty of phone records and e-mails to look in to create probable cause. If all else fails, there's always Congressman Swalwell's nukes. If the lord can giveth, then the lord can sure as hell taketh away or vaporize your ass.
It is truly then, better to be the sock puppet villain in the hell of negative public perception than to be cast into the void, financially ruined, end up doing time in the federal pen and thus figuratively share Palinurus' sad fate. Whereas Phaemon's dog always eats well even if he does sometime get rapped on the nose to keep the masses happy.
The managerial state has now reached the comfort level where the old velvet glove can now sometimes be safely taken off, the iron fist revealed there for all to see, and when used on designated "bad people"such as the insidious Orange man, the masses are now so well trained as to believe it as a victory for themselves and cheer heartily never thinking that same iron fist could as well be used on them. Nobody ever thinks themselves as bad people.
In Conclusion:
Lesson learned as now it is well known by all that the nail that sticks up will be hammered down by the velvet gloved iron fist of the ruling class and not only is there little recourse but that the masses will cheer as the nail is driven down. The ruling class might have had to let a few newcommers in, here and there, over the years, made accommodations with other global power brokers but overall, they succeeded in not only in cementing their hegemony but have succeeded in freezing almost all social mobility, diminishing the wages and living standards of the working class and reducing the size of the middle class. Mission accomplished...for now.
Donald Cavaioli
I've long noticed that many, if not most, of the leaders of the early twentieth century progressive movement came from the wealthier classes of Americans and others like Al Smith being a New York City Tammany Hall politician. An organization within the Democrat party not known for honest dealings to put it mildly.
The obvious question which should be asked is why would rich people be so concerned with the plight of the poor and working class? One cannot truly know what is in the minds and hearts of others but an indication may be found by observing their actions and the consequences of those actions. My own admittedly cursory examination of the subject shows some evidence that self-interest, detrimental, perhaps even intentionally so, to the interests of those for whom ostensibly this progressive enterprise was undertaken, was the true motivation. Others may have been motivated by promoting new, sciency-sounding crank economic and social theories like the efficiency movement that either did not work as advertised or caused unintended consequences.
Nevertheless, we may note the stated intentions and goals, but always in the end, must judge by the actions and results. We must be able to distinguish between words and deeds to understand intent and motivations and know who is really the boss and who is just the employee.
Recall the old adage that if something to too good to be true, it probably isn't so beware of those who promise to do good things in return for power and always look closely for the strings when discerning who the puppet is and who is the true villain.
Postulated Motivations:
It is natural for we humans to want to protect whatever power or wealth we have, no matter how great or even humble, and to ensure that power and wealth is transferred to our own genetic descendants. But the greater the wealth and power, the greater the drive to protect them from outsiders.
To the old money elite and ruling class, the industrial revolution in the light of a laissez-faire political and economic system brought a new breed of nouveau riche entrepreneurs who hailed from the lower classes into prominence that could topple the old guard from their thrones. The lower orders seeing this might forget their station and reach for the brass ring as well as a growing middle class with more potential threats from which to contend with. Not to mention new strains of socialism and anarchism imported from Europe that were starting to make trouble.
The old guard rulers were no fools. Knowing that wielding a naked iron fist to protect their interests by enforcing a social caste hierarchy could prove disastrous. Therefore a soothing velvet glove that the masses would find palatable and cooperate with had to be found to cover the iron fist. Even more to the point where the working and middle classes would eventually, voluntarily agree to remain within their respective classes. Then some means must be found of co-opting or managing the socialists making them into useful tools for the ruling class. What that velvet glove would be follows.
Further in detail:
My theory is that the progressive movement primarily operated by the old money ruling class establishment of the late 19th, early 20th century had as one of its goals to completely stifle all social mobility as a means of protecting their own wealth and power from potential challengers. Therefore, they rather cunningly couched their machinations in the honeyed tones of concern for the poor and workingman, appealing to their ignorance, vanity and envy by castigating those troublesome upstart nouveau riche whom they termed "Robber Barons" and then smeared them as the most odius of villains solely responsible for any all the problems of the poor and working class. But not to worry, the old money rich would come to the downtrodden's rescue.
Thus the ruling class connived the electorate into giving more power to the growing managerial government to redress the working man's grievances on his behalf. The poor, the ruling class promised, would benefit from the unfairly gained wealth of these Robber Barons which would be redistributed to the poor as some form of justice. Or at any rate simply taken away. Although many of these Robber Barons, really entrepreneurs, themselves who rose to success and wealth from humble beginnings is forgotten in the righteous mania to punish them for the sin of success and make examples of those who dare to buck the system by following the entrepreneurial example.
That successful entrepreneurs is proof that a classless, laissez-faire system where success for anyone is possible or at worst, there would be jobs available with the prospect of social mobility, competitively priced goods that are more affordable for the poor and an overall higher standard of living makes no never mind. For there is no appeal more powerful than an appeal to the most base of human instincts such as envy, greed and the mind numbing emotionalism of an evil to be vanquished, a war on poverty to be fought or existential threat to be destroyed. Why, these Robber Barons somehow amassed their ill gotten fortunes by plundering the poor when not trying to outright kill the poor by pollution, dangerous working conditions or shoddy products. Why, the modern progressive liberal thinks, who wouldn't want to kill their employees and customers? That would be obviously and absurdly counterproductive.This can only be liberal projection for whom violent fantasies are a not so guilty pleasure.
All this is not to say that those entrepreneurs labeled as Robber Barons were perfect angels, nor is all legislation regarding trusts, working conditions and pollution unnecessary. The State and the laws and their enforcement mechanisms are a necessary evil and is charged by the citizenry to act in their best collective interests. Otherwise a stable, healthy and prosperous society would not be possible.
But no system is perfect. Too much of a good thing can turn bad if the citizenry in a constitutionally limited republic or democratic society grow lethargic and do not use due diligence and common sense in exercising their rights and responsibilities as citizens. Power should be granted to leaders grudgingly, only as much as necessary for the problem at hand and after it is fully demonstrated to be absolutely necessary with the proviso that it can be taken back.
It is indisputable that nobody who ever got rich through licit free enterprise had ever made anyone else poor. Or that a potentially dangerous industrial work environment be shown as excessively hazardous, with only a few exceptions, with noticeably higher percentages of worker injury that fully excludes worker error must be noted.
For what motive management would have to want to murder their own employees or customers for that matter and explain why factory owners and management would knowingly poison the air that they themselves breathe and water they themselves drink as all of this makes no rational sense.
In the end analysis, according to the prevailing pop culture history, the sins of the Robber Barons were they got rich, they were mean and they were racists. The former two is the noise of cognitive dissonance and the latter is at best irrelevant and at worst complete nonsense. But all in all, it worked. This nostrum of homicidal maniac capitalists is still today unthinkingly accepted as irrefutable fact. The Robber Barons were held up as an unspeakable evil that must be shunned and thus discouraged any of the lower classes from following their example. The lesson taught was that it is more moral and good to remain a poor and powerless victim in your own social class after all.
Methods and results:
The lesson was the carrot of superior morality but a stick was still needed to reinforce it.
The income tax is a means by which the working class would find it difficult to accumulate or pass much of the wealth the accumulated to their heirs that would be capital enough to start a business that would potentially pose a threat to already established corporations who already exist with the approval of the political establishment. The income tax was sold and accepted as "making the rich pay their fair share". But consider that at the time of the passage and ratification of the 13th Amendment in 1913, the rich then were apparently not effective in stopping it despite their apparent wealth and presumptive power and today the already very rich wholeheartedly support the progressive income tax and that they not only pay their fair share but amazingly enough, they say they do not pay enough. This is even as they fight tax bills in court with IRS and refuse to instruct their accountants to limit deductions to increase their tax bill. It's the actions that count, not the words.
Excessive government regulations that create further barriers to the upstart requiring more capital to comply with regulations as well as the cost of lawyers and consultants to help navigate byzantine regulations. All of this was sold to the working man as necessary for his safety, to maintain some kind of unspecified fairness and to punish those mean capitalists for being dour misers.
However, the most potent method is the negative aura that surrounds all business people as mean, greedy capitalists who are always exploiting their workers for their dirty profits, polluting the planet, etc- so you don't want to be that guy. Being poor is much more praised and seen as more virtuous so it is better to stay in your respective socio-economic class, or else.
New Deal, Same Old Con:
It really makes no rational sense but it made some kind of emotional sense to the masses of workers who in the 1930's enthusiastically gave the political managerial ruling class all the power it craved (and more), even to their own detriment, for the vicarious pleasure of watching their New Deal rulers make a show of punishing the corporatists and heart-warming fireside chats that made the workers feel better or something or other.
But make a show was all it was. Behind the scenes, a new relationship between the growing managerial capitalism, banks (and even academia) and the growing managerial state was taking shape in the grim shadow of the second world war. Once having reached the top, the already successful were ready to kick the ladder down behind them and that suited the managerial state just fine as long as they were willing pay the piper (who called the tune) to be allowed to dance.
And the Beat Goes On...
For the corporations and banks, the obligatory political donations, paying prominent politicians exorbitant speaking fees and lobbyist gifts to buy influence with the political establishment are now simply the cost of doing business. Wisdom would suggest that if you can't beat 'em, join 'em and there's no point in fighting a battle you can never hope to win. Especially if you have no army of your own.
For the political managerial establishment, it is easier to control a handful of large corporations than hundreds of thousands of smaller businesses and as well line their pockets in the process. Therefore, it is in the managerial state's own interest to keep the business herd well culled and perhaps well abed with. All in all, it was a match made in heaven....sort of.
However, this relationship was and is largely kept from the plebs of working and middle classes. Corporations and banks were and still are made out to be a sort of Neo-Robber Barons but now serve as sock puppet villains to misdirect the public's attention away from who was really pulling the strings. But what corporation or bank complained? After all, it's better to be a sock puppet villain in managerial state hell with a few privileges and profits not enjoyed by the proles rather than a victim of unfettered competition in a free enterprise heaven. For example, today, Silicon Valley tech corporations, not only dutifully pay tribute to their political overlords for the usual perks and privileges, but receive federal tax dollars as virtually paid federal employees and carry out a censorship and de-platforming reign of terror on behalf of governments, of the United States and others. The tech companies do the dirty work and take the blame but they get to keep the money and monopolies in return. Phaemon's dog was right.
All the while all concerned pretend this be the actions of private business. Sorry folks, capitalism and all that, you know, and being a "free" country nothing your government can do (when the tech giants censor and de-platform gov't designated targets). Or, don't worry folks, we'll haul the scoundrels up before a congressional committee and really yell at them (when banks obey regulations and the CRA making sub-prime loans to stay in compliance). Even if you're set up by the managerial state to be the bad guy everybody hates, there's the compensation of limited competition, government contracts, golden parachutes, and receiving government bailouts for being "too big to fail" for all of which the managerial state pushes the blame off on their sock puppet villains- a small price to pay. Yes, Phaemon's dog was genius after all.
And the general public, ever on the scent for new Robber Baron rascals to hate just lap it up and never notice the sly, skillful hand of the managerial puppeteer at work.
Neo-Feudalism and Final Victory
Make no mistake, it really isn't a partnership of equals, it is, in fact, a feudal relationship of lord and tithe paying crony capitalist vassal. Whereas the vassal may conduct his own affairs to some degree and have influence in court, the lord exercises the real power and has the final say and the vassal is, in the end, obedient to his lord's command. The difference between power and influence is a significant distinction that should not be overlooked.
To demonstrate who in fact holds the whip hand, there are always the federal attack dogs of the Security and Exchange Commission with its vague insider trading laws for naughty Wall Streeters. The FBI, who could prosecute the recalcitrant miscreant for vague racketeering laws or lying about crimes the FBI cannot prove said miscreant committed along with sundry process crimes. If the federal government needs flimsy or even contrived evidence, it has plenty of phone records and e-mails to look in to create probable cause. If all else fails, there's always Congressman Swalwell's nukes. If the lord can giveth, then the lord can sure as hell taketh away or vaporize your ass.
It is truly then, better to be the sock puppet villain in the hell of negative public perception than to be cast into the void, financially ruined, end up doing time in the federal pen and thus figuratively share Palinurus' sad fate. Whereas Phaemon's dog always eats well even if he does sometime get rapped on the nose to keep the masses happy.
In Conclusion:
Lesson learned as now it is well known by all that the nail that sticks up will be hammered down by the velvet gloved iron fist of the ruling class and not only is there little recourse but that the masses will cheer as the nail is driven down. The ruling class might have had to let a few newcommers in, here and there, over the years, made accommodations with other global power brokers but overall, they succeeded in not only in cementing their hegemony but have succeeded in freezing almost all social mobility, diminishing the wages and living standards of the working class and reducing the size of the middle class. Mission accomplished...for now.
Donald Cavaioli
Saturday, December 8, 2018
The Liberal Emoter's Inconsistency and how He Squares that Circle
Ever have a debate with a liberal progressive and notice that whatever argument you present, no matter how well reasoned or proofs provided, their response is to ignore it and act as if you said something completely different? Or how they could argue against something in one case and situation and in another case, same situation, and either turn a blind eye to it or justify it contradicting their previously held position.
The reason why is simple. The progressive liberal did not actually read or listen to you in the normal sense of determining the main idea of the paragraph or follow the reasoning. No. They skimmed through and only picked out words and phrases that emotionally triggered them just as in any given situation, they only consider how they feel about it, not what they rationally think about it.
The liberal progressive does not think or reason, they emote, and their reactions and positions are based on a set flow chart of approval for who they feel is always good and disapproval for who they feel is always bad.
There are those whom the progs collectively view as good and support for whom demonstrates the liberal prog's virtue to his fellows and maintains their status in the liberal progressive herd cult. Those whom the progs collectively view as bad must be always condemned and castigated no matter the facts and circumstances, even if the bad guy does some good, also to maintain their status in the progressive group as a good person.
When the "bad guys" do something the progs collectively do not like and it is the worst evil ever perpetrated in human history and cannot be condemned harshly enough. But if the "good guys" do something bad, in fact the same action as would be in the "bad guy" case, then it must be good but only in the "good guy's" case.
It's all feels, image and keeping in the good graces of the progressive herd. Thought, reason, logic and intellectual consistency never enters the equation. The approval of the herd and the good feels of belonging to the herd cult in good standing and being seen as dedicated to an approved cause greater than the individual liberal progressive is all that matters.
So even if logically inconsistent to the point of mind destroying cognitive dissonance, the liberal progressive shifting positions and goal posts makes a weird sort of consistency when analyzed this way.
However, let's get back to the liberal progressive response to a reasoned argument not having any bearing or relationship to said argument.
When confronted on these non sequiter responses, the progressive liberal will hide behind a response of you using "dog whistles", saying one thing but secretly saying whatever the prog imagines you really mean, requiring an absurd, convoluted cryptography to discern. In fact, the prog has no acutal response and knows on some deep level his position or argument is patent nonsense. The "dog whistle" retort only makes for a puerile pseudo-intellectual cover for a flimsy, poorly thought out position.
What this really means is that on some level, the liberal progressive actually understood what you said and meant but his emotional programming overrode logic. He therefore uses the "dog whistle" dodge to square the circle between reason and emotion. After all, the liberal progressive ideology is perfect, the liberal prog is super smart (one gets a free 30 points added to one's IQ just for joining!) and thus is never wrong as well as always being on the right side of history- no matter what facts and reality itself says. How can they lose?
In the end, we must admit it is useless to argue from a position of fact and reason with an ontological emoter of the left and instead should concentrate on attacking the flaws of their ideological cult. Not to convince or convert the leftist/liberal/progressive which is near impossible and only rarely happens, but to sway the moderate normies away from supporting the goals and agenda of the prog cult.
Donald Cavaioli
The reason why is simple. The progressive liberal did not actually read or listen to you in the normal sense of determining the main idea of the paragraph or follow the reasoning. No. They skimmed through and only picked out words and phrases that emotionally triggered them just as in any given situation, they only consider how they feel about it, not what they rationally think about it.
The liberal progressive does not think or reason, they emote, and their reactions and positions are based on a set flow chart of approval for who they feel is always good and disapproval for who they feel is always bad.
There are those whom the progs collectively view as good and support for whom demonstrates the liberal prog's virtue to his fellows and maintains their status in the liberal progressive herd cult. Those whom the progs collectively view as bad must be always condemned and castigated no matter the facts and circumstances, even if the bad guy does some good, also to maintain their status in the progressive group as a good person.
When the "bad guys" do something the progs collectively do not like and it is the worst evil ever perpetrated in human history and cannot be condemned harshly enough. But if the "good guys" do something bad, in fact the same action as would be in the "bad guy" case, then it must be good but only in the "good guy's" case.
It's all feels, image and keeping in the good graces of the progressive herd. Thought, reason, logic and intellectual consistency never enters the equation. The approval of the herd and the good feels of belonging to the herd cult in good standing and being seen as dedicated to an approved cause greater than the individual liberal progressive is all that matters.
So even if logically inconsistent to the point of mind destroying cognitive dissonance, the liberal progressive shifting positions and goal posts makes a weird sort of consistency when analyzed this way.
However, let's get back to the liberal progressive response to a reasoned argument not having any bearing or relationship to said argument.
When confronted on these non sequiter responses, the progressive liberal will hide behind a response of you using "dog whistles", saying one thing but secretly saying whatever the prog imagines you really mean, requiring an absurd, convoluted cryptography to discern. In fact, the prog has no acutal response and knows on some deep level his position or argument is patent nonsense. The "dog whistle" retort only makes for a puerile pseudo-intellectual cover for a flimsy, poorly thought out position.
What this really means is that on some level, the liberal progressive actually understood what you said and meant but his emotional programming overrode logic. He therefore uses the "dog whistle" dodge to square the circle between reason and emotion. After all, the liberal progressive ideology is perfect, the liberal prog is super smart (one gets a free 30 points added to one's IQ just for joining!) and thus is never wrong as well as always being on the right side of history- no matter what facts and reality itself says. How can they lose?
In the end, we must admit it is useless to argue from a position of fact and reason with an ontological emoter of the left and instead should concentrate on attacking the flaws of their ideological cult. Not to convince or convert the leftist/liberal/progressive which is near impossible and only rarely happens, but to sway the moderate normies away from supporting the goals and agenda of the prog cult.
Donald Cavaioli
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)