Hopefully in your quest to "understand" communism, Marxism socialism etc. you'll get past the rank sophistry of the likes of James Lindsay.
This guy is not only wrong on just about every point he shoehorns into his ridiculous attempt to "explain communism" he is simply making shit up and pasting his ludicrous ideas atop various other ideas which he knows nothing about.
While capitalist savages are ravaging the planet, waging war everywhere you turn and wiping out large swaths of people through medical tyranny we turn to such hacks as Lindsay to point the finger elsewhere?
Maybe this clown can tell us how Blackrock is actually a commie front and Bill Gates is secretly reading Marx' Das Kapital in his quest to monopolize the planet?
Think about what passes for political discussion in either the narrow terms of the "left" or "right" websites or in the larger sense of politics in America or the EU, as a whole. What is the basis the most fundamental basis for debate? What is the common language of that "debate"?
You can fill in the gory details of the problem: on the one hand, anything goes; on the other hand anything is acceptable and must be accepted (in the name of tolerance). Opinions are personal, categories are arbitrary and foggy, and the only basis for commonality is a very loose and changing list of policy statements that could just as easily be their opposites. It is not just mysticism and pop-theories that are at issue. There is a century worth of slogans, assumptions, "facts" which are "well known" or "commonly known." Even simple logic is not required.
Yes, class perspective is the key to it but the political chaos extends so far that even that is tough to put your finger on in a practical way.
Materialism, "cold" pursuit of the "truth" for practical reasons, basic class partisanship, a method for determining what is correct and accurate and what is not, agreement on these methods and the history from which these are derived - these are the most rudimentary tools of a political movement.
Otherwise, everything just spins like water in a toilet bowl just to be dumped into the sewer and get piped into the Idea Treatment Plant only to go through the same cycle once again.
It ain't "philosophy", it's a common language and method very rigorously adhered to at a hundred different levels of sophistication but fundamentally starting with the soldiers' quote in John Reed:
"If you aren't for one class, you are for the other..."
"Communism seeks to fundamentally change the human soul and consciousness rather than merely redistribute wealth or reorganize economic systems. The goal is to transform people's understanding of their own nature, convincing them they are intrinsically social beings whose true identity is communist."
Good grief this is painful to read. I never knew of this guy and have read numerous uneducated "treatments" on Marx and communism but I don't recall one quite this psychotic and other-worldly 180 degrees off kilter.
Someone should tell this charlatan that the mode of production of material life conditions the general process of social, political and intellectual life.
It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines their consciousness. To say the same thing as the above, it is the social relationships in which people find themselves which determines their "nature" and not their "nature" which determines their circumstances. In turn, the social relations which determines peoples nature, are themselves a product of "the mode of production of material life".
This is not an opinion. It must be a simple statement of fact. To prove the opposite is daunting. How can people live with one nature for a million years and then switch to another for the last 5000 to 10000? And how do we then account for the simultaneous and unprecedented change in "the mode of production of material life"?
This same period saw the development of agriculture and industry, slavery, and the rise of civilization, all for the first time. Does a change in "nature", spontaneously change the way in which people live? Then, what changes their "nature"?
We don’t know much about the inside mechanisms of the “communist” states, other than second-hand stories and our own elaborations on the random snapshots that the media choose to relate. By “we”, I mean “we”, not the people who managed to flee their homelands and can provide more insight.
However, we can have a much deeper insight into certain developments in our own backyard. For example, how about our whole food supply system being controlled by 11 mega-corporations based in the US? Or, our whole media world being controlled by 6 mega-corporations based in the US? Or our whole financial system being controlled by 2 mega-corporations based in the US? How different are those from the similarly concentrated capitals of the communist reality?
Or our deeply professed religions like the cult of the successful entrepreneur, the “keep smiling” programming of the mind or the “fake it till you make it” denial of the actual circumstances? We have recently added the social media cult programming (deployed by one supposedly private initiative) and the smartphone ideology religion, both of which have already hijacked (and probably permanently compromised) our young generations. How different is this human cost, resulting in the mass of socially unfit people who will probably never contribute to the society? How different is the human cost which is the consequence of blanket poisoning of every person with fake or empty food and toxic household chemicals? How different is the human cost of providing “education” whose sole lasting effect is a lifelong debt and the absence of real work opportunities?
True, we are not dying right away. Instead, we are becoming overweight, chronically ill, physically unfit blobs perpetuating patterned days, with no deeper sense of purpose to our individual lives. The religions we have been given are not there for our salvation, though. Aren’t they more like a pre-formed grooves which hold us inside and are deep enough to discourage us from having a curious look outside? Isn’t this zombiefication our own version of the communist picture we are being shown?
I don’t mean elevating one over the other. All social structures exist for a reason, I guess. We may not understand or accept “their” reasons, because we have our own, and we value ours higher, obviously and reasonably. However... The laughter of the history is that the modern communism (whatever it means) is the product of our (Western) own making, through our own creators and agents, with our own money, supplies and resources, intricate labyrinths of diplomacy, politics, social engineering and economic incentives.
We have managed to spread it all over the place. Almost, if we don’t account for the last two standing: North Korea and Iran. Everywhere else, our dollars have become the top religion that determines literally everything. Was the collapse of the communism a deliberate development? Was it the reason why we have created the European Union, a replacement “they” white-stars block following the footsteps of yellow- or red-star “enemies”?
I like your examples, but then your use of the foggy "we" and "ours" muddles your picture. EE disn't create the RU! These nouns should stay in quotes, like "they", and be explained.
Right, I should have added one line to clarify: “we” in my comment means “not them” :-) So, when referring to the communist framework, “we” means those (Western) bankers and politicians who invented the concept, commissioned the writing of the manifestos, funded and managed the transformation of the former monarchies into a disrupted landscape of unaccountable, immune puppet rulers. We have been doing it recently to the Middle East, although under different pretexts. But the scenario template is the same and the outcome is the same.
On the internal frontline, we have been doing the same destruction everywhere in America by, among others, outsourcing the production of literally everything overseas.
One of the most important, perhaps the most important aspect of life is community. Life is defined by community. Living things are part of communities that cooperate and compete. Dead things don't cooperate or compete.
Communities also cooperate and compete. Families cooperate and compete. Sports teams cooperate to compete. Businesses and corporations cooperate and compete. Churches and religions cooperate and compete. Labour organizations cooperate and compete. Governments and government organizations cooperate and compete at local, state, country and international levels. Not only that, any large organization consists of multiple layers and each layer consists of sub-communities that cooperate and compete.
The concept of communism is often presented and enacted as "one big community" - with the power to diminish or kill cooperation and competition at many levels, even to make it illegal. This concept has many negative effects on individuals and communities.
The role of a democratic government should be to enable and facilitate healthy cooperation and competition at all levels - for the health of it.
You are absolutely wrong and unfamiliar with Marx's early work that made Consciousness the core of achieving his little 'c' vision of communism. Daniel Bell believed his early works had not been translated to English until the 50s and wrote that 'we' now understand true communism more than Lenin did. Bell was wrong. It had been translated at Oxford by the 30s but not widely distributed. They did have conferences on the translation though.
Look up Leszak Kolakowski too to get the true vision.
I can't wait for someone to write a post on Fascism 101... because no one will even know when it comes upon them until after it is too late. For those who want to learn more, I highly recommend this book "Blackshirts and Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism" by Michael Parenti
As with all governments, the bottom line is control, power, slavery, rape of your wealth and finally they will murder you. This is often subtle because they do not want the pitchfork crowd to revitalize and attack them.
The supposedly most free country on earth, the US, has been NO different since the Civil War. The grand movement toward socialism has wrecked the country.
Communism as a world force manifested late in the 18th century. It was a rising ideology that saw the collectivization of monetary power as an evil manifestation of social factions like gov't's and religions.
I'm not a big student of such things, but this is pretty basic. Your guest "subject" seems not accurately discussed here.
Lindsay has written about 6 books so far, research with footnotes the topics he lectures on. You should sample some of the books to understand where Lindsay is coming from. Forewarning: his books are complex.
As always, a thought provoking essay. If you don't mind, I'll point out a typo that is almost a Freudian slip (however without even the slightest psycho-sexual implications, so not). The Robert "Mueller" referred to in the article/interview is properly spelled "Muller". Although it's quite likely that special counsel Robert Mueller is a commie, he's not the same UN commie that was Robert Muller.
Yes, it seems to me that Theosophy and its offshoots -- Anthroposophy, as you mention -- are always getting appropriated by not only Satanic/Globalists but also, conveniently, by those ostensibly battling the Satanic/Globalist agenda. This way, any monistic or, even, perennialist kind of philosophy can be neatly packaged into the Communist/Globalist/Satanic lunch bag of reprehensible world views.
Your recent post on Communism and others on political matters indicate you are against Communism and any Collective that tries to control its members by force.
On my recent Substack posts I have been calling out two Canadian intellectuals, Mathew Ehret and Cynthia Chung for their not only condoning and whitewashing the Crimes Against Humanity by the CCP of China but of promoting them as the Multi-polar Savior of the Evil Western World.
You can read the Trio of Tyranny Lovers (I add their friend and fellow promoter of the CCP, Jeff Brown) own words and my curated evidence for the CCP’s Crimes Against Humanity here
MUSEUM OF CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY BY THE CHINESE COMMUNIST PARTY (CCP) MAO TO XI--Holding Ideologues Aiding and Abetting the CCP Morally Accountable. Nov 16, 2024
I hope you will join me outing these betrayers of Humanity since they appear on many supposedly freedom valuing platforms as my Substack articles target.
I have emailed you about this.
“All the problems of the man who fears for his humanity come down to the same question: how to remain free?” Stefan Zweig
> [Communism's] fundamental goal is the transformation of human consciousness to achieve a global metaorganism where humanity operates as a single collective being.
Probably in the late '80s it was, that someone was interviewing E.O. Wilson and asked him (the renowned entomologist and specialist in Formicidae social behaviors) what he thought of Marxism.
He replied in his soft Alabama drawl, without hesitation, "Great theory. Wrong species."
Marxists and communists have as their goal to rework nature and evolution, by any means necessary, from DEI to struggle sessions to gulags, to force conformity to their myths.
They are expert at using storytelling to tap into insecurity/whip up aggression in their audiences, who are selected or self-select for dependency. They are expert at using social psychology to twist that into grievance that gets projected onto others, the easier to sting them to death (both asserting the Hive on behalf of the Queen and feeding/discharging their own human aggression, recast as something transcendently heroic rather than murderous).
In academia and real life, of the thousands of Marxists I've encountered, I've never met one who wasn't as Ted Kaczynski described, and looking for openings to myrmidize. As he wrote in IS&IF:
"The two psychological tendencies that underlie modern leftism we call "feelings of inferiority" and "oversocialization." Feelings of inferiority are characteristic of modern leftism as a whole, while oversocialization is characteristic only of a certain segment of modern leftism; but this segment is highly influential. ...
"Leftists tend to hate anything that has an image of being strong, good and successful. They hate America, they hate Western civilization, they hate white males, they hate rationality. The reasons that leftists give for hating the West, etc. clearly do not correspond with their real motives. They SAY they hate the West because it is warlike, imperialistic, sexist, ethnocentric and so forth, but where these same faults appear in socialist countries or in primitive cultures, the leftist finds excuses for them, or at best he GRUDGINGLY admits that they exist; whereas he ENTHUSIASTICALLY points out (and often greatly exaggerates) these faults where they appear in Western civilization. Thus it is clear that these faults are not the leftist's real motive for hating America and the West. ...
"The leftist is not typically the kind of person whose feelings of inferiority make him a braggart, an egotist, a bully, a self-promoter, a ruthless competitor. This kind of person has not wholly lost faith in himself. He has a deficit in his sense of power and self-worth, but he can still conceive of himself as having the capacity to be strong, and his efforts to make himself strong produce his unpleasant behavior. But the leftist is too far gone for that. His feelings of inferiority are so ingrained that he cannot conceive of himself as individually strong and valuable. Hence the collectivism of the leftist. He can feel strong only as a member of a large organization or a mass movement with which he identifies himself."
Discussing Marxism in Philly punk circles in the '80s, and online later (InstaPunk e.g.), it always struck my eye as an early-industrial form of transhumanism. Seeking to make humans colonial insects. Drones for the queen. Workers for the hive. And somehow we were to believe that when the drones "had ownership," via "seizing the means of production," they'd a) have any idea what to do with it and b) wouldn't turn ownership over to the queen's managerial class (and secret police).
Whether this is any different from technocapitalism I'll leave to the judgment and disputation of readers who don't have to go outside and make firewood and kindling now.
When I first heard the Kamala quote I immediately thought it was a restating of Marx's "All that is solid melts into air" and that altering Consciousness can be used to create Decision Making and Action unburdened by ties to what currently exists.
As I mentioned in the Iserbyt interview it is why making education about dictating Conceptual Frameworks is so crucial. This is tied to the UN via ISCED, which is the US is tied to federally funded CEDS and implemented at the state and district levels. This also creates the Noosphere invisibly as I covered in my book on education.
Karl Marx was an economist first and foremost. Not a political theorist. But then no one in the USA ever gets to take a course in Marxism since it isn't taught! Not even to economic students in university.
Curious students of any age can read translations of Das Kapital on their own initiative. But few do, b/c USA is fundamentally a "survival of the most aggressive" in a techno-capital enviro. Lindsay has connected the dots on this issue and related issues. Some commenters here don't get that b/c they haven't done the requisite reading and reflection.
Hopefully in your quest to "understand" communism, Marxism socialism etc. you'll get past the rank sophistry of the likes of James Lindsay.
This guy is not only wrong on just about every point he shoehorns into his ridiculous attempt to "explain communism" he is simply making shit up and pasting his ludicrous ideas atop various other ideas which he knows nothing about.
While capitalist savages are ravaging the planet, waging war everywhere you turn and wiping out large swaths of people through medical tyranny we turn to such hacks as Lindsay to point the finger elsewhere?
Maybe this clown can tell us how Blackrock is actually a commie front and Bill Gates is secretly reading Marx' Das Kapital in his quest to monopolize the planet?
Think about what passes for political discussion in either the narrow terms of the "left" or "right" websites or in the larger sense of politics in America or the EU, as a whole. What is the basis the most fundamental basis for debate? What is the common language of that "debate"?
You can fill in the gory details of the problem: on the one hand, anything goes; on the other hand anything is acceptable and must be accepted (in the name of tolerance). Opinions are personal, categories are arbitrary and foggy, and the only basis for commonality is a very loose and changing list of policy statements that could just as easily be their opposites. It is not just mysticism and pop-theories that are at issue. There is a century worth of slogans, assumptions, "facts" which are "well known" or "commonly known." Even simple logic is not required.
Yes, class perspective is the key to it but the political chaos extends so far that even that is tough to put your finger on in a practical way.
Materialism, "cold" pursuit of the "truth" for practical reasons, basic class partisanship, a method for determining what is correct and accurate and what is not, agreement on these methods and the history from which these are derived - these are the most rudimentary tools of a political movement.
Otherwise, everything just spins like water in a toilet bowl just to be dumped into the sewer and get piped into the Idea Treatment Plant only to go through the same cycle once again.
It ain't "philosophy", it's a common language and method very rigorously adhered to at a hundred different levels of sophistication but fundamentally starting with the soldiers' quote in John Reed:
"If you aren't for one class, you are for the other..."
Nice! Yeah...anyone who thinks the rich are communists, don't understand "class warfare".
Lindsay says the following:
"Communism seeks to fundamentally change the human soul and consciousness rather than merely redistribute wealth or reorganize economic systems. The goal is to transform people's understanding of their own nature, convincing them they are intrinsically social beings whose true identity is communist."
Good grief this is painful to read. I never knew of this guy and have read numerous uneducated "treatments" on Marx and communism but I don't recall one quite this psychotic and other-worldly 180 degrees off kilter.
Someone should tell this charlatan that the mode of production of material life conditions the general process of social, political and intellectual life.
It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines their consciousness. To say the same thing as the above, it is the social relationships in which people find themselves which determines their "nature" and not their "nature" which determines their circumstances. In turn, the social relations which determines peoples nature, are themselves a product of "the mode of production of material life".
This is not an opinion. It must be a simple statement of fact. To prove the opposite is daunting. How can people live with one nature for a million years and then switch to another for the last 5000 to 10000? And how do we then account for the simultaneous and unprecedented change in "the mode of production of material life"?
This same period saw the development of agriculture and industry, slavery, and the rise of civilization, all for the first time. Does a change in "nature", spontaneously change the way in which people live? Then, what changes their "nature"?
Lindsay is a charlatan. I despise him.
We don’t know much about the inside mechanisms of the “communist” states, other than second-hand stories and our own elaborations on the random snapshots that the media choose to relate. By “we”, I mean “we”, not the people who managed to flee their homelands and can provide more insight.
However, we can have a much deeper insight into certain developments in our own backyard. For example, how about our whole food supply system being controlled by 11 mega-corporations based in the US? Or, our whole media world being controlled by 6 mega-corporations based in the US? Or our whole financial system being controlled by 2 mega-corporations based in the US? How different are those from the similarly concentrated capitals of the communist reality?
Or our deeply professed religions like the cult of the successful entrepreneur, the “keep smiling” programming of the mind or the “fake it till you make it” denial of the actual circumstances? We have recently added the social media cult programming (deployed by one supposedly private initiative) and the smartphone ideology religion, both of which have already hijacked (and probably permanently compromised) our young generations. How different is this human cost, resulting in the mass of socially unfit people who will probably never contribute to the society? How different is the human cost which is the consequence of blanket poisoning of every person with fake or empty food and toxic household chemicals? How different is the human cost of providing “education” whose sole lasting effect is a lifelong debt and the absence of real work opportunities?
True, we are not dying right away. Instead, we are becoming overweight, chronically ill, physically unfit blobs perpetuating patterned days, with no deeper sense of purpose to our individual lives. The religions we have been given are not there for our salvation, though. Aren’t they more like a pre-formed grooves which hold us inside and are deep enough to discourage us from having a curious look outside? Isn’t this zombiefication our own version of the communist picture we are being shown?
I don’t mean elevating one over the other. All social structures exist for a reason, I guess. We may not understand or accept “their” reasons, because we have our own, and we value ours higher, obviously and reasonably. However... The laughter of the history is that the modern communism (whatever it means) is the product of our (Western) own making, through our own creators and agents, with our own money, supplies and resources, intricate labyrinths of diplomacy, politics, social engineering and economic incentives.
We have managed to spread it all over the place. Almost, if we don’t account for the last two standing: North Korea and Iran. Everywhere else, our dollars have become the top religion that determines literally everything. Was the collapse of the communism a deliberate development? Was it the reason why we have created the European Union, a replacement “they” white-stars block following the footsteps of yellow- or red-star “enemies”?
May we live in interesting times...
I like your examples, but then your use of the foggy "we" and "ours" muddles your picture. EE disn't create the RU! These nouns should stay in quotes, like "they", and be explained.
Right, I should have added one line to clarify: “we” in my comment means “not them” :-) So, when referring to the communist framework, “we” means those (Western) bankers and politicians who invented the concept, commissioned the writing of the manifestos, funded and managed the transformation of the former monarchies into a disrupted landscape of unaccountable, immune puppet rulers. We have been doing it recently to the Middle East, although under different pretexts. But the scenario template is the same and the outcome is the same.
On the internal frontline, we have been doing the same destruction everywhere in America by, among others, outsourcing the production of literally everything overseas.
One of the most important, perhaps the most important aspect of life is community. Life is defined by community. Living things are part of communities that cooperate and compete. Dead things don't cooperate or compete.
Communities also cooperate and compete. Families cooperate and compete. Sports teams cooperate to compete. Businesses and corporations cooperate and compete. Churches and religions cooperate and compete. Labour organizations cooperate and compete. Governments and government organizations cooperate and compete at local, state, country and international levels. Not only that, any large organization consists of multiple layers and each layer consists of sub-communities that cooperate and compete.
The concept of communism is often presented and enacted as "one big community" - with the power to diminish or kill cooperation and competition at many levels, even to make it illegal. This concept has many negative effects on individuals and communities.
The role of a democratic government should be to enable and facilitate healthy cooperation and competition at all levels - for the health of it.
You are absolutely wrong and unfamiliar with Marx's early work that made Consciousness the core of achieving his little 'c' vision of communism. Daniel Bell believed his early works had not been translated to English until the 50s and wrote that 'we' now understand true communism more than Lenin did. Bell was wrong. It had been translated at Oxford by the 30s but not widely distributed. They did have conferences on the translation though.
Look up Leszak Kolakowski too to get the true vision.
I can't wait for someone to write a post on Fascism 101... because no one will even know when it comes upon them until after it is too late. For those who want to learn more, I highly recommend this book "Blackshirts and Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism" by Michael Parenti
As with all governments, the bottom line is control, power, slavery, rape of your wealth and finally they will murder you. This is often subtle because they do not want the pitchfork crowd to revitalize and attack them.
The supposedly most free country on earth, the US, has been NO different since the Civil War. The grand movement toward socialism has wrecked the country.
without socialism, capitalism would have died almost 300 years ago after the first recession in 1791.
The socialist USA Pres. FDR helped many get out of soup lines and back to work. Read US history
This dumbfounds me. Communism bred wokeness?
Uh ... no.
Communism as a world force manifested late in the 18th century. It was a rising ideology that saw the collectivization of monetary power as an evil manifestation of social factions like gov't's and religions.
I'm not a big student of such things, but this is pretty basic. Your guest "subject" seems not accurately discussed here.
The "collectivization of monetary power" dates back to Sumeria.
https://michael-hudson.com/2018/04/palatial-credit-origins-of-money-and-interest/
lack of actual READING classics on the subject matter helps with poorly written opinion pieces.
Lindsay has written about 6 books so far, research with footnotes the topics he lectures on. You should sample some of the books to understand where Lindsay is coming from. Forewarning: his books are complex.
As always, a thought provoking essay. If you don't mind, I'll point out a typo that is almost a Freudian slip (however without even the slightest psycho-sexual implications, so not). The Robert "Mueller" referred to in the article/interview is properly spelled "Muller". Although it's quite likely that special counsel Robert Mueller is a commie, he's not the same UN commie that was Robert Muller.
Closed Caption in youtube is often inaccurate. YT probably uses AI-mediated voice recognition to generate captions.
IMO, an attempt was made to appropriate Theosophy to Satanic/Globalist ends.
Theosophy in itself can be very beneficial, and its successor ANTHOPOSOPHY is a sublime contribution to humanity’s spiritual progress.
Yes, it seems to me that Theosophy and its offshoots -- Anthroposophy, as you mention -- are always getting appropriated by not only Satanic/Globalists but also, conveniently, by those ostensibly battling the Satanic/Globalist agenda. This way, any monistic or, even, perennialist kind of philosophy can be neatly packaged into the Communist/Globalist/Satanic lunch bag of reprehensible world views.
Hi Unbekoming
Your recent post on Communism and others on political matters indicate you are against Communism and any Collective that tries to control its members by force.
On my recent Substack posts I have been calling out two Canadian intellectuals, Mathew Ehret and Cynthia Chung for their not only condoning and whitewashing the Crimes Against Humanity by the CCP of China but of promoting them as the Multi-polar Savior of the Evil Western World.
You can read the Trio of Tyranny Lovers (I add their friend and fellow promoter of the CCP, Jeff Brown) own words and my curated evidence for the CCP’s Crimes Against Humanity here
MUSEUM OF CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY BY THE CHINESE COMMUNIST PARTY (CCP) MAO TO XI--Holding Ideologues Aiding and Abetting the CCP Morally Accountable. Nov 16, 2024
https://responsiblyfree.substack.com/p/museum-of-crimes-against-humanity
I hope you will join me outing these betrayers of Humanity since they appear on many supposedly freedom valuing platforms as my Substack articles target.
I have emailed you about this.
“All the problems of the man who fears for his humanity come down to the same question: how to remain free?” Stefan Zweig
I'd be wary of imputing any meaningfulness to anything coming out of Kamala Harris' mouth:).
> [Communism's] fundamental goal is the transformation of human consciousness to achieve a global metaorganism where humanity operates as a single collective being.
Probably in the late '80s it was, that someone was interviewing E.O. Wilson and asked him (the renowned entomologist and specialist in Formicidae social behaviors) what he thought of Marxism.
He replied in his soft Alabama drawl, without hesitation, "Great theory. Wrong species."
Marxists and communists have as their goal to rework nature and evolution, by any means necessary, from DEI to struggle sessions to gulags, to force conformity to their myths.
They are expert at using storytelling to tap into insecurity/whip up aggression in their audiences, who are selected or self-select for dependency. They are expert at using social psychology to twist that into grievance that gets projected onto others, the easier to sting them to death (both asserting the Hive on behalf of the Queen and feeding/discharging their own human aggression, recast as something transcendently heroic rather than murderous).
In academia and real life, of the thousands of Marxists I've encountered, I've never met one who wasn't as Ted Kaczynski described, and looking for openings to myrmidize. As he wrote in IS&IF:
"The two psychological tendencies that underlie modern leftism we call "feelings of inferiority" and "oversocialization." Feelings of inferiority are characteristic of modern leftism as a whole, while oversocialization is characteristic only of a certain segment of modern leftism; but this segment is highly influential. ...
"Leftists tend to hate anything that has an image of being strong, good and successful. They hate America, they hate Western civilization, they hate white males, they hate rationality. The reasons that leftists give for hating the West, etc. clearly do not correspond with their real motives. They SAY they hate the West because it is warlike, imperialistic, sexist, ethnocentric and so forth, but where these same faults appear in socialist countries or in primitive cultures, the leftist finds excuses for them, or at best he GRUDGINGLY admits that they exist; whereas he ENTHUSIASTICALLY points out (and often greatly exaggerates) these faults where they appear in Western civilization. Thus it is clear that these faults are not the leftist's real motive for hating America and the West. ...
"The leftist is not typically the kind of person whose feelings of inferiority make him a braggart, an egotist, a bully, a self-promoter, a ruthless competitor. This kind of person has not wholly lost faith in himself. He has a deficit in his sense of power and self-worth, but he can still conceive of himself as having the capacity to be strong, and his efforts to make himself strong produce his unpleasant behavior. But the leftist is too far gone for that. His feelings of inferiority are so ingrained that he cannot conceive of himself as individually strong and valuable. Hence the collectivism of the leftist. He can feel strong only as a member of a large organization or a mass movement with which he identifies himself."
Discussing Marxism in Philly punk circles in the '80s, and online later (InstaPunk e.g.), it always struck my eye as an early-industrial form of transhumanism. Seeking to make humans colonial insects. Drones for the queen. Workers for the hive. And somehow we were to believe that when the drones "had ownership," via "seizing the means of production," they'd a) have any idea what to do with it and b) wouldn't turn ownership over to the queen's managerial class (and secret police).
Whether this is any different from technocapitalism I'll leave to the judgment and disputation of readers who don't have to go outside and make firewood and kindling now.
Kazynski's manifesto was titled Industrial Society and its Future
Yes. IS&IF
For those who don't want the annoyance of youtube's ads, Lindsay's vid is available on his website New Discourses https://newdiscourses.com/2024/10/communism-1-0-theoretical-communism/
When I first heard the Kamala quote I immediately thought it was a restating of Marx's "All that is solid melts into air" and that altering Consciousness can be used to create Decision Making and Action unburdened by ties to what currently exists.
As I mentioned in the Iserbyt interview it is why making education about dictating Conceptual Frameworks is so crucial. This is tied to the UN via ISCED, which is the US is tied to federally funded CEDS and implemented at the state and district levels. This also creates the Noosphere invisibly as I covered in my book on education.
Karl Marx was an economist first and foremost. Not a political theorist. But then no one in the USA ever gets to take a course in Marxism since it isn't taught! Not even to economic students in university.
Curious students of any age can read translations of Das Kapital on their own initiative. But few do, b/c USA is fundamentally a "survival of the most aggressive" in a techno-capital enviro. Lindsay has connected the dots on this issue and related issues. Some commenters here don't get that b/c they haven't done the requisite reading and reflection.
Robin, is this your book?
https://www.amazon.com/Credentialed-Destroy-Education-Became-Weapon/dp/1492122831?crid=2WWHNQFJ5JO9L&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.Le5WMeR4fxXEz_ORpMSbYmBEQOAttnuz-MFuPbA4wwfGjHj071QN20LucGBJIEps.Ju-k9N0slElP4hclcfbHm5zpFP3R0fO9co0xktYB-AA&dib_tag=se&keywords=dr+robin+eubanks&qid=1733075375&sprefix=robin+eubanks%2Caps%2C127&sr=8-3
Yes.