Champagne Socialism

For discussions of culture, politics, economics, sociology, law, business and any other topic that falls under the social science remit.

Champagne Socialism

Postby Gloominary » Thu May 06, 2021 12:22 am

I see a new elitism emerging (well it's not new really, rather an acceleration in the direction we've been heading for the last several decades), with a leftwing face, out of both the neoconservative and neoliberal movements, as a reaction to both the resurgence of rightwing populism and to a lesser extent the resurgence of leftwing populism in the late 10s.
The same people behind the neolibcons, that is the banksters, multinationals and deep state, are behind it.

Militarily it's hawkish, altho it wears the mask of the dove.
Politically it's autocratic, plutocratic and technocratic, absolutist and authoritarian, altho it wears the mask of liberal democracy.
Fiscally it's champagne socialism.
In theory it favors progressive taxation, but in practice the overclass pays none of the taxes and big business is underregulated while the upper, middle and working classes pay all the taxes and small businesses are overregulated.
Corporations receive superlative welfare while the poor receive subsistence.

They claim to be fighting 'misinformation', 'climate change', 'pandemics', 'patriarchy' and 'white supremacy'.
In truth they want an increasingly dumbed-down, infertile and sick population totally dependent on pharmaceuticals, divided against and isolated from one another, incapable of thinking for and organizing itself.

I believe the elite know the masses are beginning to get fed up with them, so rather than spend the next several decades fighting grassroots reformists and revolutionists, they intend to lead the revolution 'against themselves', trade in our slowly decaying, increasingly illiberal and undemocratic, crony capitalist and authoritarian order lead by them, for a champagne socialist and totalitarian order also with them at the helm.
And if we don't start practicing noncompliance and supporting 3rd parties and independents, they'll get their way, that is if socioeconomic collapse isn't inevitable.
This'll lead to the rise of one big or a series of small woke totalitarian autocracies/technocracies in North America, Western Europe and Australia, with the plutocracy, as usual, pulling the strings behind the scenes, altho perhaps they'll get devoured too in the end.
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3780
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Champagne Socialism

Postby Fixed Cross » Thu May 06, 2021 1:03 am

Socialism has always been the ideology of unbridled egoism, in the best cases, self-esteem; the USSR launching Sputnik, and Gagarin, were great triumphs of the spirit (in my private value system)
it has always used the proclamation of emancipatory ideals to mask, or simply to decently dress, the basic selfish impulse that was behind it.

Having grown up amidst Communists who fought in WWII and became allied with Moscow on high levels as well as amidst basically only communists and socialists, Amsterdam in the 80s was at least 80 percent red in general, I know Communists, specially the hardliners, as totems of righteous self-esteem. They take what they want and find reasons to justify it. Pure materialism in that sense, there is no ideal besides acquisition. There is no notion of production, there is only acquisition and securing. Production is taken for granted - which is why the ideology rises during the rise of the machines. The more work is done by machines, the more credit people demand for it - they have ever more time to think about their needs.

Now, almost all the work is being done by machines, and the people are demanding more respect, reverence, adulation and obedience than any god has ever demanded of a people.



In the analysis;
What is lacking is actual self-valuing logic; what is lacking is the Other; the actual person you're supposedly representing but from whom you're actually stealing. Communists are essentially a clan whose intended takeover of the world-resources is formulated so as to produce a physiological ecstatic anxiety of sorts, a feeling of radical entitlement and togetherness in this entitlement; a feeling which excludes anyone who might have something you want.

It ultimately to funnel wealth upward and create a radical selfish populace. Not surprising from a philosophy which primary tenet is literally mass-entitlement and the proposed means is basically 'anything goes'.
Last edited by Fixed Cross on Thu May 06, 2021 1:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
The strong act as they may, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Summary of Value Ontology - Magnanimous 5 Music - The Magickal Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 11745
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Champagne Socialism

Postby promethean75 » Thu May 06, 2021 1:20 am

"Pure materialism in that sense, there is no ideal besides acquisition. There is no notion of production, there is only acquisition and securing. Production is taken for granted"

Somebody other than fixed cross attempt to explain in different words what u think he means there.

G'head, give it a shot.
promethean75
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5054
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: Champagne Socialism

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Thu May 06, 2021 1:46 am

promethean75: Pure materialism in that sense, there is no ideal besides acquisition. There is no notion of production, there is only acquisition and securing. Production is taken for granted"
Somebody other than fixed cross attempt to explain in different words what u think he means there.
G'head, give it a shot."

K: I read both post multiple times and I still can't make sense of them given
what I know to be communism....the posts reflect on the psychological make
up of communists, but not on the actual political beliefs of communist...

for example one of the primary beliefs of communism, is that the state owns
the means of production....... if you don't have that in communism, you
don't have communism.. it is something else.. which is why I am not a communist,
I don't hold to the state owing all the means of production....I don't hold to a top
down economy, I hold to a bottom up economy... which is why I am a liberal democrat...
and an anarchist.. I hold that the more people hold the reign of power, the better off
everyone is.... so I hold out for democracy, not the pretend shit we have now,
but true, real democracy in which "government is of the people, for the people,
by the people"

not as America is now, "government is of the corporation, for the corporation and by
the corporation"

just as real communism has never been tried, nether has real democracy ever been tried....
some day perhaps, but it certainly hasn't happened yet...

Kropotkin
PK IS EVIL.....
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10085
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: Champagne Socialism

Postby Gloominary » Thu May 06, 2021 2:00 am

promethean75 wrote:"Pure materialism in that sense, there is no ideal besides acquisition. There is no notion of production, there is only acquisition and securing. Production is taken for granted"

Somebody other than fixed cross attempt to explain in different words what u think he means there.

G'head, give it a shot.

He's basically saying socialism is the epitome of amoralism, or at least shortsightedness, that they don't care about who 'produced' or 'rightfully' owns a thing, only about seizing it for themselves.
Fixed is an absolute libertarian, I'm not.
I'm only against champagne socialism.
I'm in favor of moderate, grassroots/populist socialism.
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3780
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Champagne Socialism

Postby Fixed Cross » Thu May 06, 2021 2:14 am

Gloominary wrote:I'm only against champagne socialism.
I'm in favor of moderate, grassroots/populist socialism.

In my country these are the same. More or less. It's a small rich country.

For example, compared to C-Socialism, in favor of Communism as it was, which is a form of Patriotism, antiglobalism. In the US no such thing exists as patriotic Communism, in the Netherlands it was mostly what Communism was - things actually favoring the worker (aside from being the resistance against the Germans in the war) meaning no excessive immigration, no dictates by Nato or the EU, also they prevented abolishing of education on Greek and Latin, as the Socialist prime minister wanted in his egalitarianism, anti elitism.

Names...

Am I an absolute libertarian?
If I thought the world could go back - I am a Constitutionalist in as far as the USA goes, as I think there lies its greatest self-valuing integrity.
Im really a Nietzschean though. I like boldness. I like the enterprise of the founding fathers. I dont believe any creator gifted those rights other than them - I believe they, as masons, secretly meant themselves as the creators of the citizens as such.

Really though when all is said and done I think the first and second amendment are going to prevail world wide.
The strong act as they may, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Summary of Value Ontology - Magnanimous 5 Music - The Magickal Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 11745
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Champagne Socialism

Postby promethean75 » Thu May 06, 2021 2:38 am

"He's basically saying socialism is the epitome of amoralism, or at least shortsightedness, that they don't care about who 'produced' or 'rightfully' owns a thing, only about seizing it for themselves."

Very nice. Exactly what I got. I wanted someone else to say it so I could expand on it. I am venturing my theory here that getting Marxism so assbackwards (or not at all) in one's own concepts of production and value and ownership and property, is no mere misunderstanding only, but an unconscious result of the rationalization (in ur boy freud's sense) involved in defending the class one is in when one knows (though denies) it's uselessness in theory as well as reality.

It's the thing where the guy has to sink with his ship rather than give up and jump for it.

It's the thing where if u were to admit u were wrong, you'd risk your counterpart liking u even less... because now, not only r u wrong, but ur a wuss, too. One of those situations.

A muhfucka gotta stick to his guns y'all and the barbarium is no exception here.
promethean75
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5054
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: Champagne Socialism

Postby Mr Reasonable » Thu May 06, 2021 7:17 am

i think biden wants to tax the corporations. trump gave them tax cuts.
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.


Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 29894
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: Champagne Socialism

Postby Gloominary » Thu May 06, 2021 3:35 pm

Conservatives, Libertarians and Progressives spend too much time attacking one another, and not enough taking a good, hard look at their own unrepresentatives.
The overclass, the oligopoly have been around for a while, at least a couple of centuries.
They buy the politicians.
Conservatives are suppose are to fight crime, drugs, terrorism, the deficit, cut taxes, slash spending, protect jobs, things of that nature, but do they do those things?

It's not a war on, but a war for, crime, drugs and terrorism.
The deep state works together with certain cartels to oligopolize arms, drug and human trafficking.
They work with certain terrorists to help overthrow governments they don't like, that is governments not subservient to them.
When they're through cutting taxes on the rich and slashing spending on the poor, they spend tons of money they don't have on these fake wars, and on corporations, all while protecting the banksters, inflating the deficit.
They leave the borders wide open and allow jobs to be outsourced.

The bottom line is both republicrats and libcons are a fucking joke.
Again, it's time to start practicing noncompliance, support 3rd parties and independents.
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3780
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Champagne Socialism

Postby Gloominary » Thu May 06, 2021 4:39 pm

All that being said, I see the oligopoly distancing themselves from conservatism and even liberalism, the two dominant ideologies in the Anglosphere for the last century or two, and embracing progressivism.

Of course these're just masks they wear and we won't get anywhere unless we don't comply with their corruption and support dissidents at every level, county/municipal, state/provincial and federal, executive and legislative.
Even if dissidents often don't get elected, the more votes they get, the more pressure we put on mainstream politicians to adopt some of our policies.

Yea I see the oligopoly distancing itself from conservatism, in part because of the rise of rightwing populism, but also just because that may be the way the world is heading, or at least the way they want it to.
I can see progressivism and liberalism become the two dominant ideologies for the next century or two, rather than conservatism and liberalism.
I can see conservatism trading status with progressivism, becoming the 3rd wheel with little chance of winning, and so more freedom to be its authentic self like progressives had, be the 3rd, fuck you vote to the status quo.

As society moves away from conservatism to progressivism, the oligopoly will sink its talons into it and it'll grow ever more corrupt.
It'll become less preoccupied with holding the banksters and corporations accountable and more with stupid shit like holding Christians, conservatives, men, whites, gas guzzlers, meat eaters, the unmasked and the unvaxxed 'accountable'.
Just as conservatives had their gangs beat the shit out of hippies, punks and so on, progressives will have theirs beat the shit out of conservatives, at least in progressive neighborhoods where they dominate.

Western civilization started out ultra conservative, then we had this period of liberal democracy and moderation.
I think ultimately it will culminate in a progressive totalitarian dictatorship before total collapse, but all this may take several centuries to fully unfold.
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3780
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Champagne Socialism

Postby Gloominary » Fri May 07, 2021 12:47 am

I'm not a fortuneteller, but I like to speculate.
Of course I could be wrong, but for better or worse, I think conservatism and libertarianism are on their way out, at least for Normerica, Western Europe and the near future.
DJT, Bolsonaro and so on could be the last hoorah, but 1st, a little history:

While there were lots of little, premodern republics in Renaissance Italy and elsewhere in Europe, the 1st modern constitutional monarchy was born in the UK in 1688 and the 1st modern republic in the US in 1776.
The political paradigm back then was conservatarianism (republicans) versus classical liberalism (democrats).
Conservatarianism was a marriage between conservatism and classical liberalism or libertarianism.

Like classical liberals, conservatarians believed in constitutional democracy as opposed to absolute monarchy, in free speech, the right to bear arms, due process, equality before the law, the rule of law...
Fiscally, both believed in capitalism, as opposed to feudalism.
However, conservatarians were national capitalists, for protectionism as well as state banking and infrastructure, whereas classical liberals were global capitalists, for free trade.
Socially is where they differed most.
Conservatarians imposed traditional values like don't drink, do drugs, prostitute yourself and so on, classical liberals didn't impose traditional values.

This was the dominant political paradigm in the Anglosphere in the 19th and early 20th century.
Then classical liberalism evolved into modern liberalism.
Modern liberalism is basically a compromise between classical liberalism and the more radical social democrats and democratic socialists (progressives).
1st, modern liberals just embraced some aspects of progressive economics in the 30s, but increasingly since the 60s they began embracing some aspects of progressive environomics and socionomics too.
So for the last several decades, we've been in this conservatarian versus modern liberal paradigm.

Conservatarians had a lot in common with classical liberals.
They had quite a bit in common with modern liberals too, especially before the 60s, but that was then.
We're entering a new era in the 2020s, where liberals embrace most aspects of the progressive agenda.
Conservatarians are backlashing, and I believe we'll see a final showdown between them before the end of the century, that is if conservatarians don't become mostly irrelevant, altho they'll almost certainly continue to do well in certain regions like the South, the prairies and so on.

Both sides are incredibly corrupt, and we'll bring out the best in both by supporting competent 3rd party/grassroots/independent/populist candidates.

If I'm right, and there's a final showdown between them, I believe progressives will win, because we just keep on modernizing, which isn't necessarily a good thing, and because democracy has a life span and conservatarians are loyal to it and the constitution, progressives aren't, increasingly for them right makes might or vice versa.
Athenian democracy lasted about 300 years and the Roman republic about 500.
I don't see our constitutional monarchy lasting beyond 2088 and your republic beyond 2076.
The woke dictatorships probably won't last more than a century or 2 before collapsing into a new dark age.
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3780
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Champagne Socialism

Postby WendyDarling » Fri May 07, 2021 2:50 am

Gloominary wrote:I'm not a fortuneteller, but I like to speculate.
Of course I could be wrong, but for better or worse, I think conservatism and libertarianism are on their way out, at least for Normerica, Western Europe and the near future.
DJT, Bolsonaro and so on could be the last hoorah, but 1st, a little history:

While there were lots of little, premodern republics in Renaissance Italy and elsewhere in Europe, the 1st modern constitutional monarchy was born in the UK in 1688 and the 1st modern republic in the US in 1776.
The political paradigm back then was conservatarianism (republicans) versus classical liberalism (democrats).
Conservatarianism was a marriage between conservatism and classical liberalism or libertarianism.

Like classical liberals, conservatarians believed in constitutional democracy as opposed to absolute monarchy, in free speech, the right to bear arms, due process, equality before the law, the rule of law...
Fiscally, both believed in capitalism, as opposed to feudalism.
However, conservatarians were national capitalists, for protectionism as well as state banking and infrastructure, whereas classical liberals were global capitalists, for free trade.
Socially is where they differed most.
Conservatarians imposed traditional values like don't drink, do drugs, prostitute yourself and so on, classical liberals didn't impose traditional values.

This was the dominant political paradigm in the Anglosphere in the 19th and early 20th century.
Then classical liberalism evolved into modern liberalism.
Modern liberalism is basically a compromise between classical liberalism and the more radical social democrats and democratic socialists (progressives).
1st, modern liberals just embraced some aspects of progressive economics in the 30s, but increasingly since the 60s they began embracing some aspects of progressive environomics and socionomics too.
So for the last several decades, we've been in this conservatarian versus modern liberal paradigm.

Conservatarians had a lot in common with classical liberals.
They had quite a bit in common with modern liberals too, especially before the 60s, but that was then.
We're entering a new era in the 2020s, where liberals embrace most aspects of the progressive agenda.
Conservatarians are backlashing, and I believe we'll see a final showdown between them before the end of the century, that is if conservatarians don't become mostly irrelevant, altho they'll almost certainly continue to do well in certain regions like the South, the prairies and so on.

Both sides are incredibly corrupt, and we'll bring out the best in both by supporting competent 3rd party/grassroots/independent/populist candidates.

If I'm right, and there's a final showdown between them, I believe progressives will win, because we just keep on modernizing, which isn't necessarily a good thing, and because democracy has a life span and conservatarians are loyal to it and the constitution, progressives aren't, increasingly for them right makes might or vice versa.
Athenian democracy lasted about 300 years and the Roman republic about 500.
I don't see our constitutional monarchy lasting beyond 2088 and your republic beyond 2076.
The woke dictatorships probably won't last more than a century or 2 before collapsing into a new dark age.


A dark age for what’s left of the masses is what the global communists want, but a 7 billion population is probably more like 5 billion in actuality and reproduction’s collapsing just in time for the corporate technocrats to gobble up water rights, farm lands, and other resources for their ultimate power plays. Are masses even necessary now that machines handle 70-80% of the work loads? Good thing the Mnra vaccines are sterilizing future generations so the wealthy won’t have a rough time using their drones to hunt down and exterminate the last worthless remnants of the modern masses, those pesky terrorists. And that folks is the cheery side of the street.
User avatar
WendyDarling
Heroine
 
Posts: 9544
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Dance Floor

Re: Champagne Socialism

Postby Gloominary » Fri May 07, 2021 5:42 am

Fixed Cross wrote:
Gloominary wrote:I'm only against champagne socialism.
I'm in favor of moderate, grassroots/populist socialism.

In my country these are the same. More or less. It's a small rich country.

For example, compared to C-Socialism, in favor of Communism as it was, which is a form of Patriotism, antiglobalism. In the US no such thing exists as patriotic Communism, in the Netherlands it was mostly what Communism was - things actually favoring the worker (aside from being the resistance against the Germans in the war) meaning no excessive immigration, no dictates by Nato or the EU, also they prevented abolishing of education on Greek and Latin, as the Socialist prime minister wanted in his egalitarianism, anti elitism.

American social dems were patriotic tho from FDR to JFK.
After the assassination of JFK, the civil rights movement, the draft, the immigration act and 2nd wave feminism during the 60s, they, particularly west and northeast coast dems, became less patriotic, which incrementally drove a lot of Southerners and some Midwesterners, their ol' base, away from dems to reps.
Nonetheless dems remained somewhat patriotic, that is until her highness Shillary lost the election.
With the mainstreaming of critical theory, 4th wave feminism/'me too', the Russian collusion hoax, the covid hoax and the Antifa-BLM insurrection/'anti-racism', it's clear to me the democratic party as a whole, as well as the neocon faction of the republican party, hate America and want to destroy it.
Meanwhile reps haven't been this patriotic in some time, in part thanks to DJT.

Really though when all is said and done I think the first and second amendment are going to prevail world wide.

I can't say I share your optimism, I think republicanism reached its zenith both in America during the post-ww2 era and around the world, it's been in decline ever since.
But hey, I hope I'm proven wrong.
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3780
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Champagne Socialism

Postby Gloominary » Fri May 07, 2021 3:09 pm

WendyDarling wrote:
Gloominary wrote:I'm not a fortuneteller, but I like to speculate.
Of course I could be wrong, but for better or worse, I think conservatism and libertarianism are on their way out, at least for Normerica, Western Europe and the near future.
DJT, Bolsonaro and so on could be the last hoorah, but 1st, a little history:

While there were lots of little, premodern republics in Renaissance Italy and elsewhere in Europe, the 1st modern constitutional monarchy was born in the UK in 1688 and the 1st modern republic in the US in 1776.
The political paradigm back then was conservatarianism (republicans) versus classical liberalism (democrats).
Conservatarianism was a marriage between conservatism and classical liberalism or libertarianism.

Like classical liberals, conservatarians believed in constitutional democracy as opposed to absolute monarchy, in free speech, the right to bear arms, due process, equality before the law, the rule of law...
Fiscally, both believed in capitalism, as opposed to feudalism.
However, conservatarians were national capitalists, for protectionism as well as state banking and infrastructure, whereas classical liberals were global capitalists, for free trade.
Socially is where they differed most.
Conservatarians imposed traditional values like don't drink, do drugs, prostitute yourself and so on, classical liberals didn't impose traditional values.

This was the dominant political paradigm in the Anglosphere in the 19th and early 20th century.
Then classical liberalism evolved into modern liberalism.
Modern liberalism is basically a compromise between classical liberalism and the more radical social democrats and democratic socialists (progressives).
1st, modern liberals just embraced some aspects of progressive economics in the 30s, but increasingly since the 60s they began embracing some aspects of progressive environomics and socionomics too.
So for the last several decades, we've been in this conservatarian versus modern liberal paradigm.

Conservatarians had a lot in common with classical liberals.
They had quite a bit in common with modern liberals too, especially before the 60s, but that was then.
We're entering a new era in the 2020s, where liberals embrace most aspects of the progressive agenda.
Conservatarians are backlashing, and I believe we'll see a final showdown between them before the end of the century, that is if conservatarians don't become mostly irrelevant, altho they'll almost certainly continue to do well in certain regions like the South, the prairies and so on.

Both sides are incredibly corrupt, and we'll bring out the best in both by supporting competent 3rd party/grassroots/independent/populist candidates.

If I'm right, and there's a final showdown between them, I believe progressives will win, because we just keep on modernizing, which isn't necessarily a good thing, and because democracy has a life span and conservatarians are loyal to it and the constitution, progressives aren't, increasingly for them right makes might or vice versa.
Athenian democracy lasted about 300 years and the Roman republic about 500.
I don't see our constitutional monarchy lasting beyond 2088 and your republic beyond 2076.
The woke dictatorships probably won't last more than a century or 2 before collapsing into a new dark age.


A dark age for what’s left of the masses is what the global communists want,

By dark age, I meant civilizational collapse and anarchy, which's not what I think they want.
They want world government, a totalitarian dictatorship/technocracy, and I think they may get some semblance of it for a while in North America and Western Europe before it collapses and much of civilization with it.

but a 7 billion population is probably more like 5 billion in actuality and reproduction’s collapsing just in time for the corporate technocrats to gobble up water rights, farm lands, and other resources for their ultimate power plays. Are masses even necessary now that machines handle 70-80% of the work loads? Good thing the Mnra vaccines are sterilizing future generations so the wealthy won’t have a rough time using their drones to hunt down and exterminate the last worthless remnants of the modern masses, those pesky terrorists. And that folks is the cheery side of the street.

I think we're still necessary, because there's still so many jobs machines can't do, but they figure they don't need 90% of us.
I believe much of civilization will collapse and we'll have to start over like we had to at least a couple of times before, that neither the libertarians, nor the totalitarians will get what they want in the end.
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3780
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Champagne Socialism

Postby Fixed Cross » Fri May 07, 2021 3:36 pm

I think only the pagans and scientists will get what they want. That is to say, Monotheism has revealed itself as a mere historical ploy, as far as religion is concerned a bizarre mistake, a religion that does nothing to produce divine results - a religion that only exists to bind the vast, weak majority of people to a tyrannical and usually irrational regime -- at this point monotheism is transmuted into popular socialism. Its essence is the psychology of Messianism - the feeling that, if everything is destroyed and plunged into chaos, a savior must appear.

I mean non Jewish Messianism.

Hebrew Messianism was replaced essentially with Zionism when an Ashkenazi rabbi who may well be my ancestor, proclaimed some centuries ago that it wasn't necessary to wait for the arrival of the Messiah to start taking back the old land. The existence of the state of Israel basically makes of the collective Jewish efforts to take back their land a "Messiah" - the People have delivered themselves.

If only the Christians were capable of following that example! But for Christians, Deliverance means freedom from the very psyche itself - for Jews it just meant freedom from exile, home-coming. Jews thus as pagans (as well as scientists), as indeed they aren't actually monotheists. 11 Gods I know of: Ein Soph, Eheieh, YHWH, Elohim (itself a plurality), El, Elohim Gibor, Jehovah Aloah Va Daat, YHWH Tsebaoth, Elohim Tsebaoth, Shaddai El Chai, Adonai.
The strong act as they may, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Summary of Value Ontology - Magnanimous 5 Music - The Magickal Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 11745
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Champagne Socialism

Postby Fixed Cross » Fri May 07, 2021 3:55 pm

Gloominary wrote:
Fixed Cross wrote:
Gloominary wrote:I'm only against champagne socialism.
I'm in favor of moderate, grassroots/populist socialism.

In my country these are the same. More or less. It's a small rich country.

For example, compared to C-Socialism, in favor of Communism as it was, which is a form of Patriotism, antiglobalism. In the US no such thing exists as patriotic Communism, in the Netherlands it was mostly what Communism was - things actually favoring the worker (aside from being the resistance against the Germans in the war) meaning no excessive immigration, no dictates by Nato or the EU, also they prevented abolishing of education on Greek and Latin, as the Socialist prime minister wanted in his egalitarianism, anti elitism.

American social dems were patriotic tho from FDR to JFK.
After the assassination of JFK, the civil rights movement, the draft, the immigration act and 2nd wave feminism during the 60s, they, particularly west and northeast coast dems, became less patriotic, which incrementally drove a lot of Southerners and some Midwesterners, their ol' base, away from dems to reps.
Nonetheless dems remained somewhat patriotic, that is until her highness Shillary lost the election.
With the mainstreaming of critical theory, 4th wave feminism/'me too', the Russian collusion hoax, the covid hoax and the Antifa-BLM insurrection/'anti-racism', it's clear to me the democratic party as a whole, as well as the neocon faction of the republican party, hate America and want to destroy it.
Meanwhile reps haven't been this patriotic in some time, in part thanks to DJT.

I used to loathe the Republicans, and feel slightly eerie about the Democrats. It has never occurred to me to respect the American right until DJT, who is of course really very liberal in the sane sense, began to campaign and was hilariously honest about his country. "You think our country is so innocent?"; unimaginable to hear that from the mouth of any previous leader. They all had to keep up the presence that the US was killing out of perfect innocence, a concept invented by Christians. At the same time as being honest about the not-so innocent nature of the US, DJT actually stopped nearly all of the oh so savory sanctimonious killing of foreigners the US had decadently been relishing for so many decades, as the rabbi announced during his inauguration.

Really though when all is said and done I think the first and second amendment are going to prevail world wide.

I can't say I share your optimism, I think republicanism reached its zenith both in America during the post-ww2 era and around the world, it's been in decline ever since.
But hey, I hope I'm proven wrong.

I really mean more as a long terms de facto consequence of having exhausted the entropy implicit in the closed systems of globo-fascism, 'universal monotheism'. All these great systems the autistic technocrats are conceiving of are perfectly impossible and must collapse simply because of how physics, how existence works, in that it cant endure closed systems. So, Im talking about specifically the 1st and 2nd amendments, not about any kind of blueprints for statecraft such as we see in the rest of the constitution. As I conceive possible long term futures, it will simply not be viable to restrict the speech of earthlings nor their capacity to defend themselves in local disputes. I think this realization will eventually be reached no matter the path taken, no matter the degree of destruction. As it is simply the most logical outcome, in the same way that I logically expect water to end up downhill, whatever paths it happens to take.
The strong act as they may, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Summary of Value Ontology - Magnanimous 5 Music - The Magickal Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 11745
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Champagne Socialism

Postby Gloominary » Fri May 07, 2021 4:48 pm

For me, one of the most interesting things in all this is how liberalism has evolved over the years in America and the 'Commonwealth'; the British Empire.
Liberalism has come in 3 waves.

The 1st wave or classical liberalism began in 1688 with the Glorious Revolution and 1776 with the American Revolution and lasted till the ascendance of the Labor Party in 1922 and FDR's New Deal in 1933.
The 2nd wave or social democracy began in 1922 and 1933 and ended with her highness Shillary's defeat at the hands of DJT in 2016.

In my view, social democracy was at its best from FDR's new deal to the ascendance of JFK.
Fiscally it was moderate and socially it was still classically liberal, conservative and patriotic.
Somewhat understandably things took a turn for the worse after JFK's assassination.
This is when liberals began questioning, and trading in some, but not all of their socially liberal, conservative and patriotic values for socially progressive values.
The Commonwealth went through a similar phase.

With the ascendance of Bill Clinton after the Reagan, Thatcher and Mulroney revolution, liberals became more fiscally conservative but remained socially progressive.

Throughout all this, liberals remained moderate, with one foot firmly planted in classical liberalism, conservatism and patriotism, and the other in progressivism, but that all changed in 2016.
Ever since then, liberals, and neocons; fake conservatives, went completely batshit; 4th wave feminism/'me too', the Russian collusion hoax, the covid hoax and the Antifa/BLM insurrection.

If the 1st wave of liberalism in the Anglosphere was classical liberalism, the 2nd social democracy, I'd characterize the 3rd as corporate Marxism or woke corporatism, a synthesis of corporatism, Marxism, critical theory, Malthusian environmentalism and germaphobia.
It's plain to see liberals have been radicalized.

Their new agenda (actually the oligopoly have been at this for over 2 centuries, they've gradually taken over liberals and conservatives and replaced them with neolibs and neocons, it's just DJT took a few steps towards ousting some of the neocons from the republican party, there was no parallel ousting of neolibs from the democratic party, henceforth the democratic party is their new favorite and they're accelerating their agenda), is agenda 2030, the great reset, the green new deal.
If paleoconservatives don't reign liberals and neocons in at some point, either that or secession, I believe we will lose our republics before the end of the century.
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3780
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Champagne Socialism

Postby Gloominary » Fri May 07, 2021 9:26 pm

What is Corporate Marxism?
It's akin to corporate fascism, corporate fascism's leftwing counterpart.

In the 20th century, Marxist revolutionaries took over what later came to be known as the 2nd world.
Most of these countries were socioeconomically underdeveloped before the takeover, they weren't liberal democracies.

Marxism in theory is democratic state socialism, Marxism in practice is autocratic state capitalism.
Contrary to Rousseau's political theory, there's no such thing as absolute democracy, without free speech, the right to bear arms, due process, equality before the law, the rule of law, at least some semblance of individual liberty, private property and so on, there can be no democracy, nor equality and fraternity, instead you get guys like Oliver Cromwell, Napoleon Bonaparte, Joseph Stalin and Mao Zedong.

In any case, why would the corporations want to relinquish all their wealth and power to any state, whether it be a 'democratic state socialist' or autocratic state capitalist one.
Why would the corporations adopt Marxism, what's in it for them?
The answer is they're Marxists in exactly the same way as the pope, bishops and cardinals are Christians or in other words, they're not really Marxists.
They're corporatists 1st and foremost, on the inside, Marxists 2nd, on the out.
They're just using Marx to eliminate their competition.

These're their aims:

Militarily it's hawkish, altho it wears the mask of the dove.
Politically it's autocratic, plutocratic and technocratic, absolutist and authoritarian, altho it wears the mask of liberal democracy.
Fiscally it's champagne socialism.
In theory it favors progressive taxation, but in practice the overclass pays none of the taxes and big business is underregulated while the upper, middle and working classes pay all the taxes and small businesses are overregulated.
Corporations receive superlative welfare while the poor receive subsistence.

They claim to be fighting 'misinformation', 'climate change', 'pandemics', 'patriarchy' and 'white supremacy'.
In truth they want an increasingly dumbed-down, infertile and sick population totally dependent on pharmaceuticals, divided against and isolated from one another, incapable of thinking for and organizing itself.


Corporate Marxism is a synthesis of corporatism, Marxism, critical theory, Malthusian environmentalism and germaphobia.
I believe Corporate Marxism will become the preeminent form of totalitarianism in the 21st century.
Left unchecked, I can see it taking over America, and the west, in much the same way Marxism took over Russia, and the east.
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3780
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Champagne Socialism

Postby encode_decode » Fri May 07, 2021 10:16 pm

Gloominary wrote:In truth they want an increasingly dumbed-down, infertile and sick population totally dependent on pharmaceuticals, divided against and isolated from one another, incapable of thinking for and organizing itself.

Yes. This is an ideal circumstance for them.

=D>
I will build a nerdlike structure in 2021
User avatar
encode_decode
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1854
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
Location: Nebula

Re: Champagne Socialism

Postby Fixed Cross » Fri May 07, 2021 10:58 pm

Gloominary wrote:For me, one of the most interesting things in all this is how liberalism has evolved over the years in America and the 'Commonwealth'; the British Empire.
Liberalism has come in 3 waves.

The 1st wave or classical liberalism began in 1688 with the Glorious Revolution and 1776 with the American Revolution and lasted till the ascendance of the Labor Party in 1922 and FDR's New Deal in 1933.
The 2nd wave or social democracy began in 1922 and 1933 and ended with her highness Shillary's defeat at the hands of DJT in 2016.

In my view, social democracy was at its best from FDR's new deal to the ascendance of JFK.
Fiscally it was moderate and socially it was still classically liberal, conservative and patriotic.
Somewhat understandably things took a turn for the worse after JFK's assassination.
This is when liberals began questioning, and trading in some, but not all of their socially liberal, conservative and patriotic values for socially progressive values.
The Commonwealth went through a similar phase.

With the ascendance of Bill Clinton after the Reagan, Thatcher and Mulroney revolution, liberals became more fiscally conservative but remained socially progressive.

Throughout all this, liberals remained moderate, with one foot firmly planted in classical liberalism, conservatism and patriotism, and the other in progressivism, but that all changed in 2016.
Ever since then, liberals, and neocons; fake conservatives, went completely batshit; 4th wave feminism/'me too', the Russian collusion hoax, the covid hoax and the Antifa/BLM insurrection.

If the 1st wave of liberalism in the Anglosphere was classical liberalism, the 2nd social democracy, I'd characterize the 3rd as corporate Marxism or woke corporatism, a synthesis of corporatism, Marxism, critical theory, Malthusian environmentalism and germaphobia.

Nicely refined, I like it.

It's plain to see liberals have been radicalized.

As have conservatives, in reaction.

Their new agenda (actually the oligopoly have been at this for over 2 centuries, they've gradually taken over liberals and conservatives and replaced them with neolibs and neocons, it's just DJT took a few steps towards ousting some of the neocons from the republican party, there was no parallel ousting of neolibs from the democratic party, henceforth the democratic party is their new favorite and they're accelerating their agenda), is agenda 2030, the great reset, the green new deal.
If paleoconservatives don't reign liberals and neocons in at some point, either that or secession, I believe we will lose our republics before the end of the century.

If I play the devils advocate or the cynic, I wonder if you really ever truly had it - I wonder if the People have at any point been truly prepared to stand their ground.
But, personally, I see plenty of signs that you do have it.

Ive been prognosticating a giant legislative event end 2023-throgh 2024, since 2011, when I developed the notion of self-valuing logic and started looking for interesting nodes in the future, and Ive consistently said that in order for such an event to occur, a social-political crisis of unparalleled degree must be ongoing on Earth by then.
The strong act as they may, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Summary of Value Ontology - Magnanimous 5 Music - The Magickal Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 11745
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Champagne Socialism

Postby Gloominary » Fri May 07, 2021 11:23 pm

In the aftermath of WW1 and the depression, liberal democracy, especially in continental Europe, was hanging by a thread.
Whereas the Commonwealth and America were making moderate reforms to liberal democracy with the ascendancy of the Labor Party in the former, Teddy Roosevelt's square deal and FDR's new deal in the latter, in 1917 Marxists took over Russia and in 1933 anarchists nearly toppled the Spanish government.
That was the far left, as for the far right, the fascists came to power in Italy in 1922 and the Nazis in Germany in 1933.

I mention all that because I believe we're about to go through a similar era.
History never repeats but often rhymes.
The Thatcher/Reagan era to 2016 was like our gilded age, where some people got filthy rich while many were left in the dust.
People are losing confidence in liberal democracy again.
Increasingly we're going to see them turn to reformers and revolutionaries, some left of center and others far left, some right of center and others far right.
Many of these reformers and revolutionaries will have ulterior motives, be controlled by special interests.

One of the things that interests me most this time around is how radicalism appears to be coming to America most of all.
Another is how big business and the upper classes are embracing Marxism when historically they embraced either (crony) capitalism or fascism.
If big business and the upper classes overwhelmingly embrace the far left this time around, will the working classes overwhelming embrace the far right?
Will we see upperclass leftwing fascists (socially far left, fiscally far right) square off against working class rightwing communists (socially far right, fiscally far left)?
That'd be one of history's great ideological reversals.
Another would be if left, and rightwing radicals took over the Commonwealth and America this time around rather than continental Europe and Russia.
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3780
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Champagne Socialism

Postby Fixed Cross » Sat May 08, 2021 1:00 am

Im glad someone made the connection between the Trump movement and grassroot Communism. The name-game distracts very much from the essential conflicts.

America in its design is in part a commune-ism, but with a suprastructure of Enlightenment based Romantic logic.
The strong act as they may, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Summary of Value Ontology - Magnanimous 5 Music - The Magickal Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 11745
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Champagne Socialism

Postby obsrvr524 » Sat May 08, 2021 1:44 am

I think too many labels - and a bit too scrambled and conflated.
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #1

              You have been observed.
    Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
    It's just the same Satanism as always -
    • separate the bottom from the top,
    • the left from the right,
    • the light from the dark, and
    • blame each for the sins of the other
    • - until they beg you to take charge.
    • -- but "you" have been observed --
obsrvr524
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3596
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: Champagne Socialism

Postby Fixed Cross » Sat May 08, 2021 2:18 am

He's coming from different paradigm, from the one that has suffered the most damage; the classicist interpretation of politics in terms of priority hierarchies of virtue and merit.
It still makes sense, but there is an underlying war that is less virtuous and code-like, and more instinctive and fearful/fearsome. Its only now that we are feeling the absence of God, now that the shine of technology has turned dark on us.
The strong act as they may, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Summary of Value Ontology - Magnanimous 5 Music - The Magickal Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 11745
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Champagne Socialism

Postby Gloominary » Sat May 08, 2021 2:36 am

Capitalism is becoming increasing crony.
The oligopoly, the ones most responsible for its corruption, are going to try and incrementally replace it with what I'm terming corporate Marxism or leftwing fascism, which'll appear good to the naïve.
All mainstream academia, media and politics are beholden to the oligopoly.
We oughta turn our backs on the establishment, but who do we turn to?
As our socioeconomies decline, extremists such as anarchists and rightwing communists will offer alternatives.
While constitutional democracy is very far from perfect, I think it's the most viable system we have to date.
It needs renovation, not demolition.
My suggestion is support competent, grassroots/populist reformers, whether they're conservatives, libertarians or progressives.
People who don't take handouts from big business.
People who're ignored or hated by the establishment.
Preferably 3rd parties, independents and people from working or lower middleclass backgrounds.
Myself I'm a national populist, fiscally center left and socially center right.
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3780
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Next

Return to Society, Government, and Economics



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot]