Cucked anti-ID Left

by Serban V.C. Enache

I employ the word “cucked” with the meaning: person, group, or movement who was defeated in a particularly ridiculous manner.

In this RT piece ‘Obsession with extreme PC behavior is a hindrance to the progressive movement,’ the author writes the following:

“This is not to say that it’s unimportant to respect an individual’s preferences when it comes to things like using preferred pronouns — but the left needs to realize it can do all that without becoming a caricature of itself.”

Even when they criticize the Identitarian left, they still try and disculpate themselves. It’s quite sad to see women and men having been reduced to pansies by PC culture. I also like some of the stupid leftists in the comments section, insisting that the only left they recognize is Marxism, and insisting that what the Scandinavians have is “socialism.” What those countries have is social democracy! Those countries still have usury, rent-seeking, private property, and idle shareholders. I don’t think any of these gits read Das Kapital [I know I didn’t in my foolish days as a loud mouth, stupid SJW] or any criticism of Karl Marx’s ideas that didn’t stem from republican and market libertarian outlets. Proudhon is a good place to start on that.

When the so-called progressive leftists [social democrats] criticize ID politics, but then end up adopting the same PC idea – they are betraying the fact that what really pisses them off is not the ridiculous and arbitrary PC culture, but that it garners bad PR with voters at grassroots, limiting their ability to obtain votes. There is no progressive left in the West! They’re all cucked to the Nth degree. The only socialist systems, during the 20th century, which proved viable from an economic perspective, were two: [German] National Socialism and National Communism. I don’t care how much it upsets people across the political spectrum, facts are facts. The Nazis took a battered, humiliated, starving Germany and in 5 years time transformed it into a military and economic superpower, the nr 1 superpower in the world at the time. To sum up the ‘magic’ formula: stopping land and financial speculation + deficit spending to develop the real economy.

National Communism closely resembles German National Socialism, except for a few things. Its social policy wasn’t based on eugenics and it had full collectivization. That’s pretty much it. National Communism had nothing to do with the deranged anarchist, feminist, liberal, libertarian, globalist discourse we see on the left today. The USSR didn’t practice or promote free trade or free movement of labor between itself, its satellite states, or partner nations. Homosexuality was decriminalized, but sexual ‘exploration’ [of any type] wasn’t pushed on children. National Communism had none of this gender-fluid nonsense, hedonism, super-abortion propaganda, or misandry. And even though state atheism was the norm, state authorities and media treated God and the Church with a lot more respect than today’s media and culture, and the family was protected. The Soviet system of National Communism would have succeeded by an entirely different order of magnitude, had its political elites not abandoned the Nation-wide Automated Economics Control System [OGAS] project in favor of Liberman’s [market profitability] reforms. Once the communist block nations adopted [Western-inspired] market reforms and or [Western-approved] austerity plans, the rot was firmly set in.

I wish to quote a line from a Romanian movie from ’71 – back when Ceausescu was signalling his change in country affairs, promoting nationhood [instead of denigrating it like the left does today] and leaving behind the dark days of Bolshevism and foreign governance. First, some background to the movie scene. During a party assembly, an engineer [original member of the party and loyal] is attacked by the organization’s ideologues for speaking against the construction of a new factory. The engineer in question cites technological and logistical arguments to justify his position. But that doesn’t satisfy the sycophants and the regional chief. After being grilled with straw men and ad hominems, the engineer is asked how is socialism to be achieved and if he believes that the individual member of the party has to abide by the majority’s decision. He answers, “Socialism is built through the application of the highest conquests of science and through the people’s heroism and sacrifice. Yes, a party member must accept the majority’s decision. But in matters of science, the notion of a majority is without sense!”

In conclusion, as far as so-called left-wing politics go, there’s nothing cheaper than a social democrat trying to rebrand social democracy into socialism. The former is establishmentarianism, and today it suffers a lot from mental illness, greed, materialism, outright hypocrisy and cowardice – just like their mainstream ideological counterparts, but to a higher degree. Actual socialism, on the other hand, is revolution, either via coup d’etat or civil war; but it sure works when put into action right. Politically incorrect, but true.

The Duran: Discussing AOC+3

RT CrossTalk host Peter Lavelle and The Duran’s Alex Christoforou discuss the ANTIFA terrorist who was killed Saturday by Washington state police as he attacked a local Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention center. He was seen in a recent CNN program that critics say glorified a radical, left-wing movement. Willem Van Spronsen, 69, sent a manifesto to friends the day before the assault in which he wrote, “I am Antifa,” and now he has now been ‘martyred’ by ANTIFA members, while CNN aired and promoted a program that glorified the radical ANTIFA member. Van Spronsen appears to have been part of a May 5 episode of CNN’s “United Shades of America” with W. Kamau Bell.

My comment: What we’re seeing with contemporary liberalism and the so-called progressives is a consequence of decades-long efforts by the Western Establishment to erode working class politics, working class conscience, and effectively demoralize the vast majority of the population.

The secret services [via proxies] spent trillions of dollars across the decades, during and after the Cold War, to fragment the Left and any inclusive narrative that puts class and class issues above anything else. Under the mass insanity of ID politics, a woman “of color” that’s rich is ‘more oppressed’ than a white person that’s poor; and the former individual, of course, cannot be privileged. Indeed, this ideology of insanity insists that only whites are capable of racism, while “people of color” aren’t and cannot be. Dialog and debate are seen as heresy. It is not only immoral, according to their beliefs, to “give a platform” to someone who expresses divergent views, but dangerous too. So shaming, censorship, and [inevitably] violence are seen as lawful and justifiable methods to achieve the “proud social justice warrior’s” goals. Again, I encourage readers to pick up The Cultural Cold War, by Frances Stonor Saunders.

Picture of Frances Stoner Saunders

Below is a review by M. A. Krul to entice potential readers:

“Most people are probably aware that the CIA sponsored a lot of activities, legal and extralegal, in the war against the Communist bloc known as the Cold War. But it is perhaps less well-known to what extent the CIA was involved in sponsoring, bribing and suborning writers, musicians, actors and intellectuals to agitate against the Soviet Union and its allies, as well as communism and Marxism in general. In particular the CIA-run organization “Congress for Cultural Freedom” and its flagship intellectual journal ‘Encounter’ had a great influence in the West in terms of effective propagandizing for the US point of view.

Frances Stonor Saunders, an independent film producer and writer for the New Statesman, has now produced an authoritative modern history of the CIA and the Congress, as well as related organizations, focusing both on the global political dimension. She focuses on the global politics, but also on the individuals involved on all sides, the many prominent writers and intellectuals in the organizations, and what it looked like from the CIA’s perspective, for which she makes use of newly declassified documents. She shows convincingly that the “non-Communist Left” was by and large bribed or cajoled by the CIA, in so far as they didn’t enthusiastically volunteer, into joining their propaganda front. She also shows that later denials by people such as Stephen Spender and Melvin Lasky of their knowledge of CIA involvement is extremely unrealistic and most likely just another lie.

That is not to say that this work is a polemic; far from it, Saunders writes very matter-of-factly and evenhandedly, and has little interest in discussing the merits of various political positions, though she does not fail to comment on the context of the Cold War at times, when she contrasts high-minded phrasery with the rather brutal and cynical realities of Vietnam, CIA activity in Latin America, the Soviet purges, the repression of Hungary, etc. The book is very extensive, making use of various sorts of sources, including interviews with important participants, in which they reflect remarkably often in a rather cynical way on their past activities. It’s quite astounding how many famous writers, composers, intellectuals [George Orwell, Arthur Schlesinger Jr, Gloria Steinem, Jean-Paul Sartre], from Nabokov’s cousin to Stravinsky and from Russell to Stuart Hampshire, were involved in organized campaigns to attack and discredit their socialist colleagues. For that alone, this book is worth reading, that these crimes are not forgotten.

And to not forget, let’s compare what it meant to be politically progressive back in the 19th and early 20th centuries compared to the ‘sex, drugs, and rock’n roll’ period, up to the present.

The white working class was the cornerstone, the key part of the solution for a better tomorrow, and was indeed heavily responsible for obtaining the right to vote, the welfare state, public services, full employment, and civil rights. Nowadays, the so-called liberals and progressives hate working class whites with such a passion, they wish they didn’t exist.

Follow the Duran website, their youtube channel, their iTunes Podcast, their Soundcloud, on Minds, on Facebook, on Twitter, and on Instagram for future videos and great discussions. If you like their content and are able to spare a few bucks, visit their Shop, their Patreon page, their Paypal to show your support.

Cat, mouse and snake

by Serban V.C. Enache

In his essay, “The Precariat: Today’s Transformative Class?”, Guy Standing tries to set up a historical context, a categorization of current class identities and class dynamics, and puts forth several measures to achieve a brighter future. It’s great that he talks about reclaiming the commons and taxing economic rents – albeit he forgets to stress that regressive taxes should be abolished while doing so. Continue reading “Cat, mouse and snake”