An actual populist uprising will take place outside of all this electoralist bullshit. Krystal and Saager are decent journalists but they epitomize why reformism fails. I like the way they constantly bash neoliberals but the FDR nostaglism gets a bit old. I’ve noticed that virtually the full-range dissident economic opinion buys into this nonsense, including Dengists like Caleb Maupin, “anarchists” like Noam Chomsky and his acolytes, the spectrum of do-gooder left-liberals and social democrats (Krystal, Bernie, AOC, Kulinski, Pakman, the Jacobin boys), all the way over to economic nationalists like Saager and Tucker Carlson. The shared line is “Maybe this neoliberalism thing has gone too far, maybe we should turn back the clock to the New Deal paradigm!” The exception seems to be the “Let’s go back to the Gilded Age!” libertarians (we’re in the new Gilded Age now, guys).
This video featuring a group of Marxoids/Berniebros from The Jacobin is a perfect illustration of how the mainstream economics debate pitting “socialism” versus “capitalism” represents a false dichotomy that should be discarded. Both Ron/Rand Paul fans and these Jacobin guys need to go back and read their nineteenth-century anarchist, utopian, and socialist literature on Proudhonian and other forms of actual anti-capitalist, anti-statist economics. All of these folks are a more than century behind the learning curve.
The primary disagreement that I have with orthodox, American-style libertarians is their deification of characters like Bezos, Musk, Gates, Sam Walton, etc as idealized Nietzschean supermen. This is a recurring theme I have seen among Randians (the worst), Catoite neoliberals, and Rockwellian paleos alike. These characters are simply the Henry Fords, John D. Rockefellers, Andrew Carnegies, etc of the present time (and, yes, I know a lot of libertarians idealize the robber barons of the Gilded Age as well). But, in reality, these guys are simply the royalty and aristocracy of modernity, the neo-Medicis. Fortunately, there are an-caps like James Corbett who will call this stuff out.
The takeover of public health that we have documented in How Bill Gates Monopolized Global Health and the remarkably brazen push to vaccinate everyone on the planet that we have documented in Bill Gates’ Plan to Vaccinate the World was not, at base, about money. The unimaginable wealth that Gates has accrued is now being used to purchase something much more useful: control. Control not just of the global health bodies that can coordinate a worldwide vaccination program, or the governments that will mandate such an unprecedented campaign, but control over the global population itself.
I’m glad to see that anti-voting sympathies are rising on the Left.
By Beatrice Phi
At the ballot box in November, Americans will have to choose between Donald Trump — the Republican incumbent — and “not Donald Trump,” the Democratic challenger. Despite the fact that they overwhelmingly voted for our former vice president in their primary, the Democrats are afraid of running the actual Joe Biden against Donald Trump: a Wall Street lackey with an unsavory record in the Senate and Tara Reade’s claims of sexual assault. Although they’re probably right that Joe Biden is marginally better than Donald Trump — a comparison that gets hazier with every new headline — the Democrats have utterly failed in salvaging some greater appeal that Joe Biden has. Just like how the Republican Party gritted their teeth as they fell in line behind Donald Trump in 2016, the Democratic Party’s best candidate in 2020 is someone who struggles to even clear the bare minimum and is wholly undeserving of the Oval Office relative to his qualified and charismatic competitors. In other words, all our democracy has to offer voters is two commensurable evils, and our job come November is to vote for the candidate with the least amount of sexual assault allegations; now that is what I call democracy!
I used to know a Vietnam War combat veteran who would say, “Yes, I was an atheist in a foxhole.” Someday I will have to write a piece called “Yes, I was an anarchist during a pandemic.” Given that most people regard Libertarians as the “Republican Throwaway Party” (a label that is often not unfair) it’s no wonder libertarians are so disliked. Libertarians are probably only about 5% of the US population even by the most generous estimate (using the “economically conservative, socially liberal” label).
Conventional libertarian economics always ends up getting co-opted by the Republicans (“socialism for the rich, market discipline for everyone else”), and many libertarians are more than happy to play along with that (“Wal-Mart Uber Alles”). Regrettably, those libertarians who are not Republican bootlickers often go the other way and become a parody of left-wing anarchism. I’ve often said the left-anarchists are a parody of what Rush Limbaugh would imagine the Democrats to be, and “left-libertarians” (like the C4SS crowd) are a parody of left-anarchism.
Whatever else could be said about Kevin Carson’s SJWish loopiness, his basic economic paradigm is correct, i.e. attacking the state means recognizing the way in which the state creates a socioeconomic ruling class, and establishes concentrations of economic power that generate the economic conditions that socialists criticize (which is merely the historic anarchist position).
By Peter Nicholas
“America vs. Socialism” was the theme of the Conservative Political Action Conference last month, though as fights go this one was pretty one-sided. An anti-socialist message thrummed through the halls while the crowds celebrated free-market capitalism over $4 cups of coffee and $20 chicken-salad sandwiches wrapped in cellophane.
As the panelists likened socialism to a disease, an actual disease, the coronavirus, shadowed the gathering. One participant would later test positive for the pathogen, touching off a scramble that sent four lawmakers (and counting) who attended into precautionary self-quarantine.
The milquetoast reformists are growing in number. The DSA seems to have a mixture of good ideas (like rent strikes) combined with the usual statist-reformism and SJW loopiness.
Whenever I discuss politics with Republican-leaning friends and relatives, I will often find that I agree with their criticisms of liberals and the left, but they will then be shocked to hear me say that the problem with liberals and the left is not that they are “too radical” but that they are not radical enough. But what does liberal and left opinion consist of? The Democratic Party (left-wing of the ruling class), social democrats (left-wing of the middle class), SJWs (the religious right of the left), Antifa (skinheads of the left), and actual Marxist-Leninists (“red national socialism”). IQ-related challenges aside, the “sovereign citizens” and David Icke fans are far more “radical” than any of the shit that passes for liberal or left opinion.
By Elaine Godfrey
Abby Harms was laid off from their job at a Denver board-games store the same day that the city went into lockdown. Within days of filling out a petition for laid-off service workers, Harms (who identifies as nonbinary) got an unexpected call from the local chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America. Did they need food or help getting groceries? Assistance filing for unemployment? Did Harms want to participate in a rent-cancellation campaign? To the last proposal, Harms eagerly agreed, and soon they were a dues-paying member of the DSA.
“I felt like I was doing something productive out of this whole nightmare,” the 32-year-old Harms, who says their politics have always been far-left, told me. “I had a purpose and something to fight for.”
Membership in DSA chapters around the country has surged in the past eight weeks. An estimated 10,000 people have joined since March, bringing the group’s total membership to roughly 66,000, according to internal figures. Enrollment fluctuates month to month, but the DSA hasn’t seen numbers like this since the election of Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in 2018, a spokesperson said.
Gandhi: Politics, Economics and the Backlash
By Keith Preston
- Gandhi as Spiritual Godfather of the Indian Independence Movement
- Critics of Gandhi and the Conservative Hindu Backlash
Early Life and the Beginnings of Gandhi’s Radicalism
Mohandas K. Gandhi originated from India’s business caste and grew up amidst Vaishnovite and Jain influences. From youth onward, he was a devout vegetarian and even belonged to an association for vegetarians during his time studying law in London. Gandhi began his adult life as an Anglophile, once referring to Great Britain as “the land of poets and philosophers”. His radicalization began when he went to practice law in South Africa and experienced the discrimination against the Indian community to be found there.
He became active in the struggle for Indian civil rights, initially arguing that because Indians were British subjects, they were entitled to the “full rights of Englishmen” recognized by British law. After beginning his struggle in South Africa, he moved his efforts to India itself and began organizing poor farmers and workers against oppressive taxation and discrimination. Following the massacre at Punjab, Gandhi came to believe that Indians would require full independence from Great Britain in order to be assured of their human rights. Over time he would completely abandon his initially favorable view of the West, eventually remarking that Western civilization “would be a good idea,” implying that he regarded Westerners as barbarians.
Satyagraha and the Philosophy of Non-Violence
Gandhi’s views on non-violence are widely misunderstood, particularly among Westerners. The evidence refutes the ideas that Gandhi was a conventional pacifist, as pacifism is commonly understood. Indeed, Gandhi was highly critical of efforts by the British to deprive Indians of “the right to bear arms”. His support for the British war effort in World War One was justified in part by his desire to see the right of Indians to possess arms restored. As he stated in his autobiography:
In the Ottoman Empire, a millet was a separate legal court pertaining to “personal law” under which a confessional community was allowed to rule itself under its own system. After the Ottoman Tanzimat reforms, the term was used for legally protected religious minority groups, similar to the way other countries use the word nation. The word Millet comes from the Arabic word millah and literally means “nation”. The Millet system of Islamic law has been called an example of pre-modern religious pluralism.
Democrats: “We suck so bad we can’t even beat Donald Trump.”
Orange Man goes full Star Wars.
President Trump leads first unfurling the flag of the United States Space Force. The flag will stand in the Oval Office alongside other service branch flags
Krystal and Saagar discuss reports that China is threatening to sanction lawmakers who have been critical of the country’s handling of the coronavirus.
It’s funny how milquetoast social democrats like Bernie and AOC and outright hucksters like Lizzie the Scamster are still considered too much by the bankster-friendly MSM.
No issue with that, Joe.
Krystal and Saagar watch Joe Biden’s MSNBC interview where he states, “If you believe Tara Reade you probably shouldn’t vote for me.”
Her shamelessness is almost refreshing in its own way.
Nixon: “I am not a crook.”
Hillary: “I’m a crook. So what?”
Way to get co-opted, Alexandria. That didn’t take long.
Sanders is an illustration of why social democrats fail. They treat topics like state repression and imperialism as peripheral issues as opposed to what they think really matters, which is more free stuff.