Institutions, Transformations, and Insurrections

When you believe that your opposition, is in fact your mortal enemy, is fundamentally evil, and will stop or destroy everything you want and believe to be right... Well, then you can justify absolutely anything to yourself, in obstructing, resisting, opposing, damaging, and trying to remove or destroy that opposition. 

We have been in an escalating cycle of this for decades... Since LBJ at least... Maybe even since FDR... and we are at the point now, where the left believe that literally anything is justifiable, in order to give themselves the power to do what they believe is right... Including literally beating people in the streets. 

This was the goal of the critical school, and Gramsci, and the comintern operations against the capitalist west for the last 100 years... and it has succeeded in creating a completely unhinged left, and the failure and destruction of societal norms and institutions... Most of which the left have been gaining increasing control over for decades, and they have had essentially complete control over many of them since the late 90s. 

This is the point at which the criticalists and Gramscians, believed that they could induce the total collapse of the western capitalist order, and that the people would inevitably flock to socialism... They literally believed it was a scientific and historical inevitability, that socialism was functionally the next stage in the "perfection" of man and society. 

Except that's not happening... leaving aside a relatively small minority of zealots and idiots... Because most peoples lives are actually pretty good, and getting better not worse... Though if you listen to Democrats and the media we live in hell manifest on earth... Unless they're in charge of course.

Instead what is happening, is the majority of people are disconnecting from the institutions around them, and just trying to live their lives, which leaves the institutions to the zealots and the deluded... Until those zealots impinge on the peoples lives in ways they find intolerable, at which point they fight back... witness Virginia... 

This is not a good or stable state to be in... But it's also not the tinderbox of near civil war many believe it to be. It could progress to that, but only if either things actually get to be as bad as the zealots say it is, or those now corrupted and failed institutions attempt to impinge too far on normal peoples lives in ways they will not tolerate, and will violently fight back.... At which point, there should be a big collective gasp for air, and realization that something is seriously wrong and has to change.

... That's the point where we either get a mass reform movement of our institutions, or we get a civil war... which itself is such a mass reform movement, resorting to violence because the people believe it is the only way to effect the necessary change. 

If you look at the policies of the major parties... 

One side wants to completely change everything about this countries culture, institutions, and economy, because they believe the way things are is so bad and wrong that it must be changed completely... and they will precipitate that literally apocalyptic event (look up what the word apocalypse actually means) rather quickly if they can... because their zealots believe they will win (they won't, but zealots never believe they won't win), and then get to rebuild the nation in their chosen image... 

...The other side... not so much...

International Buck Like Funnies Day

Today is May First, May Day as it were, and by some folks calendars this is "International Workers Day" or some other such shite.

See the Chicago Haymarket riots occurred on this day in 1886, and ever since then commie trade-unionists, including the entire soviet union (who made it one of their major holidays), have claimed it as their own.

Fuck You Commies

This day is Bealtaine, a joyous celebration of life, fertility, and birth (well, technically speaking Bealtaine is the exact astronomic midpoint between the vernal equinox and summer solstice, which falls on the 5th, 6th, or 7th depending on the year, but it's a useful stand-in).

Yes folks, May Day is all about the nookie.

Hell one of the traditional celebrations of may day involves dancing around a giant symbolic cock, wrapping it with ribbons, drinking heavily, and then going off and screwing like mad (funny how those things coincide isn't it).

Personally, I'd much rather celebrate a good rogering and a swelling belly than memorialize a bunch of commies starting a riot and then killing millions over the next 120 years.

So I say:

FUCK YOU COMMIES,
TAKE BACK MAY DAY

Authoritarian, Libertarian, Anarchist

Over at Eric Raymonds place, there is a discussion going on in comments about how pro-war libertarians and muscular minarchists (like Eric, and myself) are "objectively right wing".

Of course this idea is being promulgated by self identified marxists, who are also writing things like the following:

"Soviet communism (which isn’t Marxism) is a different beast. It is not an opposition to the left-brained self-talking brutality of the West but rather just a different version of it; in fact, by narratising the development of these two forms as a “struggle” or “war” in which one must emerge victorious and set the standard for the world, as was done in the Cold War between U.S. capitalism and Soviet communism, you stand a good chance of extending the life of either or both forms of barbarism. Think “1984″ and you will get the picture.


Nazism – fast burn – deadly
Soviet communism – medium burn – deadlier
Murkan capitalist hegemony – slow burn – deadliest?


Or if you prefer, think of the difference between a virus such as Ebola which quickly kills its victim and one such as HIV which works slowly, leaving its host just as dead but giving it enough time to spread surreptitiously and infect many more hosts, insuring its longevity. And then consider how the Murkan model has been successfully propagated throughout the rest of the world – Europe, Japan, India, China, and now the Middle East. If capitalistic squandering of natural resources continues apace, then we’re looking down the barrel of a bodycount in the BILLIONS:


http://www.dieoff.org


If anything the Marxists were optimists. They recognised the gross injustices of capitalism but expected the underclasses to be more aware, and more capable of revolution, than they turned out to be, and underestimated the effectiveness of the contrivers of American governance.


Comment by Jeff Read — Thursday, September 8 2005 @ 5:01 pm"

It will never cease to amaze me how so many intelligent people can be so utterly stupid.

There are only three political philosophies:

1. The collective has rights, and those rights are superior to the rights of the individual

2. The individual has rights, but also responsibilities to the members of the collective. The collective has no rights, and those responsibilites owed to it's members are at best equal to the rights of the individual.

3. The individual has all rights which are superior, and no responsiblities

Fundamentally, that's all there is to it. I personally believe that if YOU believe in 1, or 3, no matter how smart you are, you're an idiot.

Anarchy and collectivism (3 and 1 respectively) are fundamnetaly wrong. Collectivism requires the subjugation of human freedom to the will of the collective in all things. I believe that this is objectively evil. Anarchy inevitably results in the total subjugation of the weak by the strong, which is also objectively evil.

If you believe in a "balance" between 1 and 2, you're wrong as well, because there is no balance between the two. Collectives do not have rights. Individuals have rights, and responsiblities are owed by individuals to the members of a collective. There are no collective rights.

If you believe in a balance between 2 and 3 you're wrong, there is no balance point. Either you owe responsibilities to the members of the collective, or you don't.

And no, I'm not going to softpedal this and say "this is my opinion". I believe that what I have said is objectively true, and not subject to opinion. My first principle is that the unwilling subjugation of human liberty is always objectively evil; unless it is to prevent an individual from transgressing upon the fundamental liberties of others.

I cannot comprehend how any other first principle could be correct.

If you are arguing from a different first principle, stop right now, because no useful discussion can occur between individuals who share different first principles on a subject; except as relates to those first principles themselves.

Now, try and convince me my first principle is wrong.