Search results

Protestantism, islam and later atheism are themselves results of certain material reality and not its cause. You keep conflating cause and effect all the time, it's a big misstep for someone claiming to be a materialist (as I understand). You may as well say that you wouldn't have atheism...

I do agree about traditionalists and cuckservatives being complete morons who can't grasp the development of technological process though

And the Collected writings of Ayatolla of Cumeini or what's his face

I don't think that guy has read much of anything, except Hegel, of course.

Yeah, they did do that. And for good reasons. Mussolini was a pussycat compared to almost any communist regime.

You do know that Mussolini came from a working class family and started out as a socialist, right? And, lo and behold, he was named after this guy - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benito_Ju%C3%A1rez

It's not always the case though. There's always been two main currents within far right - traditionalist and modernist.

So you basically agree that the modern left, the ones we have today, are stooges of the system?

That last bit is what you are perceiving as revolution: In this respect, the soft managerial elite appears to be virtually unique in human history. Almost all elites and ruling classes of the past have acquired strong interests in preserving the social, economic, political, and cultural...

As far as Lenin is concerned, I recommend this books "Wall Street and The Bolshevik Revolution" - https://ia600205.us.archive.org/23/items/WallStreetTheBolshevikRevolution/WallStreetTheBolshevikRevolution.pdf A pinch of salt needed, but its still pretty good.

BTW, the hatred for radical right stems from the fact that it's the only political movement the system cannot incorporate within itself. I mean, it's fashionable and normal to display the symbols of radical left, sickles and hammer, Lenin t-shirt - whatever, it threatens nobody. But why can't...

I do see this though and I would also wholeheartedly agree with Thatcher and Reagan being agents of dissolution, I have no qualms with that. It's just that my interpretation of what is "left" and what is "right" is rather different; at this point in history they are only useful as vaguely...

It's true, that's why I'm a moderate centrist; I have no clue who are the radical nazis or whatever meant to be. I'm not even a very political person like some here seem to be. If anything, it's the people on the left who seem increasingly unhinged and envelpoed in all sorts of magical thinking.

Basically, the left were played and now they are too ashamed to back-pedal, which is more to do with basic human psychology.

I think it is plain to see that immigrants won't be the revolutionary cadre of tomorrow, the revolutionary subject or whatever.

Even for a left-wing person it dosen't make sense to support mass immigration since it creates endless labour reserve army which only benefits capitalist class and managerial apparatus. That self-destructive thinking only starts with Marcuse, if you read Kalakowski's "Main Currents in Marxism"

Strict immigration controls do wonders, don't they? Which is exactly the point I made here countless times. Me presonally, I'm a moderate centrist by any historic standart, a pragmatist.

Or countries like Denmark, Finland or Iceland - very centrist countries.

No, my examples would be Salazar or Lee Kuan Yew. Not Stalin.

I'm just a humble pragmatist really; a centrist.