Why is nazism popular today?

[Dachshund]

Is Nazim popular is is calling people Nazis popular?

Bingo. It's inflated by the internet.

It's a term commonly thrown around by Leftists.

They also throw around pejoritives like racist, homophobe, xenophobe, deplorable ... sometimes all in the same breath.

They probably don't even know what the words mean.

And to prove how stupid and hateful they are, such labels are even used in presidential campaigns to describe citizen voters whose votes they should be trying to win.

Yes, Walker is absolutely right,

Today, the term "Nazi" is pretty much a generic, "broad - spectrum" insult thrown by leftists at anyone who stands on the political right. For instance, if I were to tell a group of American college kids who were SJWs that I was a social Conservative who voted Republican they would very likely denounce me as a "Nazi" (NB: Ironically, because they are no longer taught real history at university, they would almost certainly not know who Hitler was nor what the ideology of original Nazi party he joined, i.e; the National Socialist German Worker's Party (NSDAP), was all about .

Likewise, if I were to say to a group of feminists that their movement has critically undermined the institution of patriarchal marriage/the family and that this has, in turn, brought disastrous social consequences to bear on mainstream Western societies (which is true), they might well call me a fascist or a Nazi or a sexist pig (or worse). This largely because they cannot rationally defend themselves when faced with the charge, just hurl insults because they know that would be crushed very quickly in any serious debate on the issue. You will see another form of this on a Conservative cable news network like FOX in the US. I used to like watching Tucker Carlson on FOX, but I found that whenever he was interviewing a spokesperson from the American Left, say, an abortion advocate from "Planned Parenthood", or a pro-immigration advocate who is arguing that illegal immigrants should have access to full civil rights/services, etc, or a "Green New Deal" proponent and pointing out the blatent contradictions, logical inconsistencies or factual errors in their arguments , or, for example, asking them straight-up, questions like these, that he put to a senior manager from "Planned Parenthood" i.e; "Do you agree that it should be legal to carry out third trimester abortions? or "Do you support the current bill that permits the legal killing of a new-born infant? These people simply refuse to answer the question. Because they can throw insults like "Nazi !" at Carlson on national television they start to filibuster instead. Then they are asked a second and third time by Carlson, could you please answer the simple question I have put to you? But they totally refuse, they start to filibuster again. Then there are those on the Left who refuse point blank to be interviewed by any news network at all. Examples here are Democrat politicians like Ilhan Omar (the Muslim woman who recently made callous comments about 9/11 that demonstrated gross disrespect for the majority of Americans) or Alexandria Ocasio- Cortez (AOC) a socialist Democrat whose jaw-dropping stupidity is truly beyond belief. Despite being politician who are accountable to the public these two morons simply refuse to allow themselves to be interviewed on FOX by someone like Carlson, who is BTW, scrupulously fair in the way he interviews political figures. If they were interviewed by a leftist media network like CNN, they would not be asked any difficult questions and the interview would not be worth watching. Politicians like AOC and Ilhan Omar refuse to face an intelligent interviewer from the Conservative side of politics on national television because they know that they don't have a leg to stand on, that there is absolutely no excuse for their conduct and they would be exposed for what they are - FOOLS. I mean, how is it that Omar, a black Somalian muslim, who, as a child refugee, was taken in by America, but now criticises the country that gave her a second chance in life as: racist; bigoted; unjust; "bad"; discriminatory, showing not one atom of gratitude, who thinks personally supporting associations with direct links to Al Quaida is no big deal - just a laughing matter, who complains bitterly that she has been victimised for insulting the memory of those Americans who died in the 9/11 terrorist attack, who called Trump "not a human being", is allowed to continue working as a an American politician ?? Honestly, you wouldn't read about !!

Sorry about that diversion. To continue from where I was before I got pissed of with Democrats...

If you want to acquire (for whatever reason/s) a sound understanding of Hitler's personal politics you would need to read Mein Kampf, that is where he sets out his weltanschauung ("world-view" or global concept) it is complex, extremely multifaceted, and in many instances not what you might expect.The standard English translation of "weltanschauung" as "world-view", does not do justice the what the term is intended to connote in German. But this is another story and I cannot begin to pursue it here. Suffice to say that Hitler's "political"weltanschauung" is not anything like a common or garden variety Nazi Party manifesto, where a list of crisp principles and maxims are neatly set down in a pamphlet one can purchase for $2.00.

As for those here who infer some kind of relation to Marxist socialism/communism in the term "National Socialist", could I point out that Hitler - from a young age - absolutely loathed Marxism. This was evidently the result of his being bullied by members of a communist union while he was working as a labourer on a construction site in Munich (I think) when he was around 20 years old. After this incident, he attended communist political rallies to listen to speakers, read Marx and a swatch of other communist literature (NB: If you think Hitler was an illiterate pig, the fact is that he was quite the opposite; Hitler was actually a very well read man of well above average intelligence. In Mein Kampf, there is, for instance, a chapter on the art of propaganda, that is still regarded (by eminent Western scholars) today as one of the greatest dissertations on that topic ever written. Hitler was crazy (afflicted with a personality disorder) and profoundly wicked, but he was far from stupid) To continue. He said he was shocked and sickened by what he learned about Marx's theory of "scientific socialism" and its goal of global communism.

Finally, I have been called a "Nazi" many times on this and other forums. Why? For saying such things as multiculturalism is a profoundly flawed thesis that has caused tremendous social discord/harm in Europe (which is true); for saying that promoting ethnic/racial "diversity" in the form of mass, 3rd - world immigration into the United States has, since 1965 , progressively fractured and corrupted American society (which is also true) and so on.

The Left have acquired this habit of puerile name-calling; i.e; Nazi ! Racist !, Sexist ! Fascist ! KKK ! from the Postmodern movement (in philosophy), which strongly discourages any form of rational dialogue/debate and advises that the best way to deal with spokesmen from the opposing political right is to continuously shout/chant him/her down with mindless insults, so that they , literally, cannot be heard . You will, unfortunately, find lots of examples of this "debating strategy" right here and now on this forum. Generally the offenders are young people who are students, or youngsters who have recently graduated from one of America's Postmodern-Left indoctrination centres (i.e. colleges/universities).It is criminal actually what these bastards (leftist college "professors") are doing to kids at universities in the West. They are taking advantage of their innocent trust, their inexperience and the fact that they are - like all youngsters - highly impressionable, to poison their minds with an extreme Left political ideology that is grounded on: encouraging support for the concept of identity politics; on fomenting aggressive social conflict; on preaching hate and instilling nihilism and
on teaching 19 year-olds them to despise and work to actively undermine their own Western culture/society. Why/how this "intellectual" scum are allowed to get away with doing this, I have no idea. They are readily identifiable and should all be sacked immediately.




Regards

Dachshund

[Gary Childress]

Is Nazim popular is is calling people Nazis popular?

Bingo. It's inflated by the internet.

It's a term commonly thrown around by Leftists.

They also throw around pejoritives like racist, homophobe, xenophobe, deplorable ... sometimes all in the same breath.

They probably don't even know what the words mean.

And to prove how stupid and hateful they are, such labels are even used in presidential campaigns to describe citizen voters whose votes they should be trying to win.

Yes, Walker is absolutely right,

Today, the term Nazi is pretty much a generic insult thrown by leftists at anyone who stands on the political right. For instance, if I were to tell a group of American college kids who were SJWs that I was a Conservative who voted Republican they would very likely denounce me as a "Nazi" (NB: Because they are no longer taught real history at university they would almost certainly not know who Hitler was nor what the ideology of original Nazi party, i.e; the National Socialist German Worker's Party, was all about .

Likewise, if I were to say to a group of feminists that their movement has critically undermined the institution of patriarchal marriage and that it has, in turn, brought disastrous consequences to bear on mainstream Western societies, they might well call me a fascist or a Nazi or a sexist pig (or worse).

If , BTW,you want to acquire (for whatever reason/s) a sound understanding of Hitler's personal politics you would need to read Mein Kampf, that is where he sets out his weltanschauung ("world-view" or global concept) it is complex, extremely multifaceted, and in many instances not what you might expect.The standard English translation of "weltanschauung" as "world-view", does not do justice the what the term is intended to connote in German. But this is another story and I cannot begin to pursue it here. Suffice to say that Hitler's "political"weltanschauung" is not anything like a common or garden variety Nazi Party manifesto, where a list of crisp principles and maxims are neatly set down in a pamphlet one can purchase for $2.00.

As for those here who infer some kind of relation to Marxist socialism/communism in the term "National Socialist", could I point out that Hitler - from a young age - absolutely loathed Marxism. This was evidently the result of his being bullied by members of a communist union while he was working as a labourer on a construction site in Munich (I think) when he was around 20 years old. After this incident, he attended communist political rallies to listen to speakers, read Marx and a swatch of other communist literature (NB: If you think Hitler was an illiterate pig, the fact is that he was quite the opposite; Hitler was actually a very well read man of well above average intelligence. In Mein Kampf, there is, for instance, a chapter on the art of propaganda, that is still regarded (by eminent Western scholars) today as one of the greatest dissertations on that topic ever written. Hitler was crazy (afflicted with a personality disorder) and profoundly wicked, but he was far from stupid) To continue. He said he was shocked and sickened by what he learned about Marx's theory of "scientific socialism" and its goal of global communism.

Finally, I have been called a "Nazi" many times on this and other forums. Why? For saying such things as multiculturalism is a profoundly flawed thesis that has caused tremendous social discord/harm in Europe (which is true); for saying that promoting ethnic/racial "diversity" in the form of mass, 3rd - world immigration into the United States has, since 1965 , progressively fractured and corrupted American society (which is also true) and so on.

The Left have acquired this habit of puerile name-calling; i.e; Nazi ! Racist !, Sexist ! Fascist ! KKK ! from the Postmodern movement (in philosophy), which strongly discourages any form of rational dialogue/debate and advises that the best way to deal with spokesmen from the opposing political right is to continuously shout/chant him/her down with mindless insults, so that they , literally, cannot be heard . You will, unfortunately, find lots of examples of this "debating strategy" right here and now on this forum. Generally the offenders are young people who are students, or youngsters who have recently graduated from one of America's Postmodern-Left indoctrination centres (i.e. colleges/universities).It is criminal actually what these bastards (leftist college "professors") are doing to kids at universities in the West. They are taking advantage of their innocent trust, their inexperience and the fact that they are - like all youngsters - highly impressionable, to poison their minds with an extreme Left political ideology that is grounded on: encouraging support for the concept of identity politics; on fomenting aggressive social conflict; on preaching hate and instilling nihilism and
on teaching 19 year-olds them to despise and work to actively undermine their own Western culture/society. Why/how this "intellectual" scum are allowed to get away with doing this, I have no idea. They are readily identifiable and should all be sacked immediately.




Regards

Dachshund

Dachshund,

I hear you. However, many of the students of those "intellectual scum" teaching at Universities are minorities. Minority students have more and more access to education and are very aware these days of the discrepancies in wealth and power that exist between them and whites. Professors don't need to teach them that they aren't as well off as whites in economic and political terms. They know from first hand experience all on their own. They're not stupid. If you know anything about the Civil Right's movement in the US, you'd know that it was driven almost entirely by minorities with only minimal token participation by some whites, however, most all the organizing was done by minorities. They are perfectly capable of doing that sort of stuff on their own. We've had riots that were entirely organized by minorities without any outside help from whites--whom many of them don't trust to represent their best interest. What do you propose doing to stop that discontentment? Do we give in to their demands and share some of the nice things with them, or do we crush them stormtrooper style? Which do you think would be the better approach?

My point, Dachshund, is this. As Hegel contended, much of the real is rational. There are reasons for what is going on in our day and age that are perfectly understandable in terms other than it being the result of some nefarious conspiracy on the part of "leftist" or "liberal" whites to undermine Western Civilization. Look at Britain after WW2. She couldn't hold on to her overseas possessions once it was demonstrated by the Germans and Japanese just how weak and vulnerable she was as a "world empire". It was only a matter of time after that, my friend. There was nothing that could be done to stave off independence movements in former European colonial possessions, short of resorting to outright barbarism that would only have made us look like monsters--making the situation entirely worse. Frantz Fanon (a black man himself) was an instrumental force in instilling distrust and resentment among third world nations against their former colonizers. He's scarcely even taught in American universities but his work is well known outside of the US, among intellectuals in the developing world, regardless. How are any of us supposed to stop that, ban his books outside of the US?

What do you propose doing in our institutions of higher education? Do you propose that professors teach students lies about Jim Crow, slavery and the conquest of the American Indians? That was tried up until well into the 1980s (through the time I went to school). We were effectively robbed of an education back then and it's showing as things which we didn't know much about continually surface in the historical record. For example, I had not heard of "redlining" in the post WW2 housing boom. But it's an historical fact and one that cannot be erased. The truth is out there and those of us who learned prior to the 1980s are behind the curve on a lot of it, thanks to being sheltered by our education system.

These problems are insoluable in pretty much every other way than to face them collectively together, meaning including both minorities and whites as equals in dialogue. The problems have been stewing because we keep kicking them further down the trail for someone further down the road to solve.

There's nothing that can be done to save the past. We can't go back. "Liberals" are not the problem. In fact, "liberalism" is porbably the single most significant contribution which Western Culture has made to humanity--the notion that liberty is a fundamental right and good of all humans. "Liberalism" was developed out of the change and turmoil of the industrial revolution and amassing of private wealth outside that of the old aristocracies of Europe. Unless you want to turn back the clock and restore Monarchism, then you are in fact a "liberal" yourself in some rudimentary sense of the tradition.

[Dachshund]

Hi Gary,

Thanks for your interesting response. I have not forgotten, BTW that I owe you a response from the thread on MAS IMMIGRATION. I will sent it tonight. I am an old guy, and I get tired a lot these days, that is why I have been tardy. I now also owe you a reply to your post above. Don't worry I working on them. They are on the way !

Kindest Regards

John

I have just edited my post above in order to make my points more clear

[Gary Childress]

Hi Gary,

Thanks for your interesting response. I have not forgotten, BTW that I owe you a response from the thread on MAS IMMIGRATION. I will sent it tonight. I am an old guy, and I get tired a lot these days, that is why I have been tardy. I now also owe you a reply to your post above. Don't worry I working on them. They are on the way !

Kindest Regards

John

Hi John, That is fine. I'm sorry to hear of what sounds perhaps like some degree of (hopefully just low level) depression. If so, it is certainly understandable for some of us in our day and age. I look forward to your reply. However, I would appreciate a direct answer to my very specific questions of how you propose to solve many of the issues that are brewing between minorities and whites (not only within Western Civilizations themselves--but within our larger world--encompassing the entire planet).

I have just edited my post above in order to make my points more clear

John, I apologize. I don't have the energy right now to go back and try to sort out what you changed. It's taxing enough on me as well just reading your prolific (though certainly interesting) writing. I would appreciate if you would edit going forward instead of editing behind my replies.

[Dachshund]

The best song (yes, song, it is rather philosophical), that describes the sentiment is "We Won't Get Fooled Again" by The Who.

It goes:

Meet the new boss.
Same as the old boss!

"We'll be fighting in the street
With our children at our feet
And the morals that they worship will be gone
And the man who spurred us on
Sits in judgement of all wrong
He decides every shot gun sings the song"

Sounds to me like a perfect anthem for Hitler's "Brown Shirts" the SA ( i.e; Sturm Abteilung/ Storm Troops) in Munich during the early 1930s.


Dachshund

[Dachshund]

What do you propose doing in our institutions of higher education? Do you propose that professors teach students lies about Jim Crow, slavery and the conquest of the American Indians? That was tried up until well into the 1980s (through the time I went to school). We were effectively robbed of an education back then and it's showing as things which we didn't know much about continually surface in the historical record. For example, I had not heard of "redlining" in the post WW2 housing boom. But it's an historical fact and one that cannot be erased. The truth is out there and those of us who learned prior to the 1980's are behind the curve on a lot of it, thanks to being sheltered by our education system.

Hi Gary,


What I propose is an end to the kind of nonsense I am about to show you.


I will set out below an example (just one of many I could give you) of the kind of courses American Universities are dishing up to 18 and 19 year old kids.


The course, whose details I will transcribe for you shortly is currently being offered by Occidental College in Los Angles. Occidental is a private college and boasts Barack Obama as a former student (Obama studied there for two years in the lat 1970's before transferring to Harvard Law School). This year (2019) the highly respected Niche organisation ranked Occidental College number 120 out of 1,647 in the category "Best Colleges in America" and number 44 out of 997 in the category "Best Small Colleges in America." I think you will agree that is quite a respectable achievement for Occidental, and we are certainly not talking about some shoddy, 3rd - rate educational institution here.


The course I will describe for you is offered by The Critical Theory and Social Justice Department at Occidental College. So let me briefly outline the meanings of Critical Theory and Social Justice as they are being used here. (1) Critical Theory was originally associated the Frankfurt School philosophers, individuals like Theodore Adorno, Max Horkheimer and Herbert Marcuse. Critical theory is a Marxist inspired movement in social and political philosophy that draws heavily on the work of Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud. Critical Theorists maintain , in short, that a primary goal of philosophy is to understand and help overcome the social structures through which people are dominated and oppressed in advanced industrial societies (in particular Western capitalist societies like the US) To give you some idea of Critical Theory in action in the real world, Herbert Marcuse is helpful. Marcuse was probably the 20th century's most compelling and controversial non - Soviet Marxist. Based in the US, he taught at Columbia and other universities. As an outspoken critic of American Conservatism ("the capitalist system") he became a guru of the "New Left" a term loosely associated with a collection of radical, Marxist political movements that took place in America during the 1960's, primarily among college students, he outraged Conservatives by advocating the use of violence to overthrow the existing status quo in America. The "New Left" opposed what it saw as the prevailing authority structures in conventional American society, i.e; "the Establishment". It also enthusiastically supported revolutionary communist thinkers of the time like Mao Zedong, Ho Chi Minh and Fidel Castro. They drew much of their inspiration from black radicalism, esp the "Black Power" movement and the militant "Black Panther Party". The "New Left" was also engaged in feminist activism, environmentalism, gay rights and pro - abortion politics. In addition to this Anarchists, countercultural and hippie-related groups such as the "White Panther Party" and "Up Against the Wall Motherfuckers" were also members of the "New Left." So you get the picture, Critical theory is basically a form of Marxism that is inherently hostile to what it views as the oppressive structure of contemporary Western societies that it claims subjugates and exploits the poor/working class, disempowered, marginalised and alienated. (2) Social Justice Social Justice means equal access to wealth, opportunities, privileges, health and well being in society, it is a goal of Postmodern politics (and other wings of the progressive Marxist/socialist left). Postmodernists (aka deconstructionists and post - structuralists) yearn for the day when all of societies ills and abuses will be eliminated and social justice will prevail. The goal is nothing less tan an ideally decent and civilised society. The American postmodern philosophers, like Richard Rorty wanted utopian America to replace God as the unconditional object of desire. They wanted social justice to be the country's animating principle, "the nation's soul." Rorty repeatedly emphasises the desire to substitute social justice for individual freedom as America's primary goal. Again, postmodernist philosophy has a number of its roots in Marxist theory. It does not acknowledge the individual as being of any importance, only the group/collective, it is premised on an egalitarian utopist vision of society and so on. Postmodern theory is the source of the Identity Politics that is currently generating social strife in the US , for example, in the form of ethnic and racial tension/conflict, gender warfare and so on.



OK, so, here for your delectation is the description of a course called "Stupidity" that is currently on offer for students at Occidental College in the Critical Theory and Social Justice Department. I have transcribed the course description from Occidental's current academic prospectus The total cost for 1 year of "Stupidity" is a mere $ 67,194 (USD)


STUPIDITY


"Stupidity is neither ignorance nor organicity, but rather, a corollary of knowing and an element of normalcy, the double of intelligence rather than its opposite. It is an artifact of our nature as finite beings and one of the most powerful determinants of human destiny. Stupidity is always the name of the Other, and it is the sign of the feminine. This course in Critical Psychology follows the work of Friedrich Nietzsche (NB: The Postmodern philosophy movement have claimed Nietzsche as one of their spiritual progenitors as some of his theories , like perspectivism, for example, can be viewed as being consistent with some aspects of Postmodern theory, however, I must point out that many of Nietzsche's philosophical concepts are totally antithetical to Postmodernist principles. The reason I mention this is that Nietzsche was truly one of the West's greatest philosophers and the same cannot be said
I'm afraid of the founders of Postmodern Philosophy (Jacques Derrida and Michel Foucault) who were nothing more than intellectual shysters and slippery crypto -Marxists), Giles Deleuze and most recently, Avital Ronell ( Avital Ronell, BTW, is an extreme leftist, feminist intellectual who recently - (2 or 3 years ago) - taught "Stupidity" in person at Occidental. In 2018, the eminent and erudite Professor Ronell was found guilty by New York University of the sexual harassment, sexual assault, stalking and retaliation of a former male student over a period of three years. In other words she is a rampant nut case, or should I say, an extraordinary STUPID woman), in a philosophical examination of those operations and technologies that we conduct in order to render ourselves uncomprehending. Stupidity which has been evicted from the philosophical premesis and dumbed down by psychometric psychology, has returned in the Postmodern discourse (that doesn't surprise me) against Nation, Self and Truth and makes itself felt in political life from the Presidency to "Beavis and Butthead."


Well I don't know what you thought of that, Gary, but it struck me as a pile of pure, nonsensical bullshit. Bullshit that will cost you $67,194 a year to listen to !


Actually, Gary, I can't resist giving you another example of the kind of material American kids are currently being taught in college. This time the course I would like you to run your eye over is being offered by Skidmore college (at Saratoga Springs, NY). Skidmore was ranked by "Niche" number 87 out of America's top 975 private universities and number 115 out of the best 1647 colleges in the US. So, like Occidental it's a good quality university.


The Sociology Department at Skidmore is currently offering a course called: "The Sociology of Miley Cyrus: Race, Class, Gender and Media." The cost for one year is $65,042. Here's the official description of the course...


"From Disney tween to twerking machine, Miley Cyrus has grown up in the public eye, trying on and discarding very different Identities on screen and off. She provides rich examples for analysing aspects of intersectional identities and media representation, including: The rise of the Disney Princess; gender stratification and the hyper - commodification of childhood; transition to Disney stars as they age (see Justin Timberlake, Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera and more); Allies and appropriation, uses of culture across race, class and gender; bisexuality, queerness and the female body. Ongoing media frenzy focused on Miley Cyrus' public image, music and body highlights the ways in which intersectional personalities are shaped by pop culture and mass media. In this special topic course, we will explore core issues of intersectionality theory, looking at race, class and gender, as well as issues of taking feminist critique of the media, using Miley as a lens through which to explore sociological thinking about Identity entertainment, media and fame."


Well Gary, are you impressed? As for me, I find the whole thing so outrageously bizarre, I am affected with a sensation of the surreal. I think to myself, "No, this must be a prank, no university would dare serve up garbage like this" But it's not a hoax, it very real, and so is the $65,042 price tag (!) Words fail me...I mean, studying a moron like Miley Cyrus, how could anyone possibly justify that ? Here's a snapshot of her mind for you...

On the eve of the 2016 election, Miley Cyrus announces to 72 million fans who follow her on twitter: "Honestly fuck this shit I am moving (out of the US) if this (Trump) is my President." Then, shortly after Trump wins the election, she declares: "I'm not fucking leaving this country, that's some ignorant shit, that's dumb." Miley hates Trump, and when on another occasion she hears that the President has made a harmless comment about how his wife's looks compared to those of another woman's while he was attending a political function, Miley shouts out to her fan base: "Trump can't stop won't stop saying stupid-ass, sexist shit. Comparing women. Are you fucking kidding. We will not allow you to destroy everything we have overcome as women." Then there's Miley discussing a new song she likes: "I love that new song: 'Show Me Somethin' Natural like Ass With Some Stretch Marks."I love that because it's not ' Come sit on my dick, suck on my cock', I can't listen to that anymore." Very classy , I must say !!

??????????????????????????????????????????

Finally, bear in mind that these two courses are not exceptional in terms of being worthless, ridiculous and beyond the pale. There are literally HUNDREDS and HUNDREDS of others like them I could show you.

Kindest Regards


John

[Dachshund]

[

Not really democratic socialism(and I don't mean American 'Democrats') is a far cry from the soviet, maoist versions and any nationalistic party tends towards fascism in the end.
[/quote]

Democratic socialism is a oxymoron.

Socialism, by definition cannot be democratic.

I seem to recall Marx was very up front about this ?

Any democracy that he envisioned was far, far in the future -generations away.


Dachshund

[Dachshund]

'democratic socialism is a far cry from the soviet"

A slightly less offensive turd is still a turd.

By and large it's a turd that grows roses.

AOC is a rose?

No, I don't think so.

A socialist and therefore a moron?

Yes, that's more like it.

[Arising_uk]

Democratic socialism is a oxymoron. ...

Is it? Not heard of the Chartists then, for someone who yaks on about the jolly old political history of the white half-castes in Britain you seem to be missing parts, is that a selective choice?

Socialism, by definition cannot be democratic. ...

Can it not?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_socialism

I seem to recall Marx was very up front about this ?

Marx was a socialist? He wasn't even a Marxist.

Any democracy that he envisioned was far, far in the future -generations away.

Time to catch-up then as that possible future is knocking on our door. Of course many other sorts are possible as well.

[Dachshund]

Democratic socialism is a oxymoron. ...

Is it? Not heard of the Chartists then, for someone who yaks on about the jolly old political history of the white half-castes in Britain you seem to be missing parts, is that a selective choice?

Socialism, by definition cannot be democratic. ...

Can it not?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_socialism

I seem to recall Marx was very up front about this ?

Marx was a socialist? He wasn't even a Marxist.

Any democracy that he envisioned was far, far in the future -generations away.

Time to catch-up then as that possible future is knocking on our doors. Of course many other sorts are possible as well.

What do you mean by claiming "I yak on...about the political history white half-castes in Britain ?"


Regarding Chartism. I see you have been reading the standard, "Mary Poppins" , "air - brushed" version/s of history which convey the notion that Chartism was a noble, altruistic movement; one that sought to establish a universal "right to vote" and demand democratic government in Britain as a matter of moral principle. Ronald Reagan once said: "Democracy is worth dying for, because its's the most deeply honourable form of government ever devised by man." And that is exactly the kind of lofty sentiment that no Chartist would ever have uttered.


I'm afraid, that's not true, old sport. Chartism was a political movement that is best understood as a determined, socialist revolt; a 13- year - long, gruelling class struggle between British workers and the Victorian ruling class of the time (1837 - 1850) The Chartists demanded the "right to vote" for the British working class (or proletariat as Marx would call them). They wanted the "right to vote" because gaining it would mean that the working class would then be able to install working class MPs in the parliament, who would then enact laws that favoured the proletariat in good old Blighty. At the same time, the ruling class (the aristocracy, etc) realised that it MUST maintain control because the workers were directly linking obtaining the vote to its economic struggles as a class.


In short,he Chartists were primarily socialist "revolutionaries" who were trying to secure the "right to vote" in order that they could use it as a political weapon to kick the collective butts of the British ruling class out of the state/government corridors of power and place themselves in charge of the affairs of state; whereafter they would , of course, govern in their own best interests. In sum, the Chartist movement was all about POWER - the Bristish workers were trying to seize political power to advance the economic, social etc interests of their class. They saw "democracy" as nothing more than a means to the end of improving their material lot in life.


Now, as for Marx.Communism, in short, has two phases according to Uncle Karl. The first phase of communism is what he termed in his theory ("scientific") socialism, which is the phase between capitalism and communism. The second phase of communism is the perfect stage. There is now no inequality or injustice in this stage. Communist society was one, Marx claimed, where products would be delivered according to individual needs.


Kindest Regards

Dachshund WOOF !! WOOF !!

[Gary Childress]

What do you propose doing in our institutions of higher education? Do you propose that professors teach students lies about Jim Crow, slavery and the conquest of the American Indians? That was tried up until well into the 1980s (through the time I went to school). We were effectively robbed of an education back then and it's showing as things which we didn't know much about continually surface in the historical record. For example, I had not heard of "redlining" in the post WW2 housing boom. But it's an historical fact and one that cannot be erased. The truth is out there and those of us who learned prior to the 1980's are behind the curve on a lot of it, thanks to being sheltered by our education system.

Hi Gary,


What I propose is an end to the kind of nonsense I am about to show you.


I will set out below an example (just one of many I could give you) of the kind of courses American Universities are dishing up to 18 and 19 year old kids.


The course, whose details I will transcribe for you shortly is currently being offered by Occidental College in Los Angles. Occidental is a private college and boasts Barack Obama as a former student (Obama studied there for two years in the lat 1970's before transferring to Harvard Law School). This year (2019) the highly respected Niche organisation ranked Occidental College number 120 out of 1,647 in the category "Best Colleges in America" and number 44 out of 997 in the category "Best Small Colleges in America." I think you will agree that is quite a respectable achievement for Occidental, and we are certainly not talking about some shoddy, 3rd - rate educational institution here.


The course I will describe for you is offered by The Critical Theory and Social Justice Department at Occidental College. So let me briefly outline the meanings of Critical Theory and Social Justice as they are being used here. (1) Critical Theory was originally associated the Frankfurt School philosophers, individuals like Theodore Adorno, Max Horkheimer and Herbert Marcuse. Critical theory is a Marxist inspired movement in social and political philosophy that draws heavily on the work of Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud. Critical Theorists maintain , in short, that a primary goal of philosophy is to understand and help overcome the social structures through which people are dominated and oppressed in advanced industrial societies (in particular Western capitalist societies like the US) To give you some idea of Critical Theory in action in the real world, Herbert Marcuse is helpful. Marcuse was probably the 20th century's most compelling and controversial non - Soviet Marxist. Based in the US, he taught at Columbia and other universities. As an outspoken critic of American Conservatism ("the capitalist system") he became a guru of the "New Left" a term loosely associated with a collection of radical, Marxist political movements that took place in America during the 1960's, primarily among college students, he outraged Conservatives by advocating the use of violence to overthrow the existing status quo in America. The "New Left" opposed what it saw as the prevailing authority structures in conventional American society, i.e; "the Establishment". It also enthusiastically supported revolutionary communist thinkers of the time like Mao Zedong, Ho Chi Minh and Fidel Castro. They drew much of their inspiration from black radicalism, esp the "Black Power" movement and the militant "Black Panther Party". The "New Left" was also engaged in feminist activism, environmentalism, gay rights and pro - abortion politics. In addition to this Anarchists, countercultural and hippie-related groups such as the "White Panther Party" and "Up Against the Wall Motherfuckers" were also members of the "New Left." So you get the picture, Critical theory is basically a form of Marxism that is inherently hostile to what it views as the oppressive structure of contemporary Western societies that it claims subjugates and exploits the poor/working class, disempowered, marginalised and alienated. (2) Social Justice Social Justice means equal access to wealth, opportunities, privileges, health and well being in society, it is a goal of Postmodern politics (and other wings of the progressive Marxist/socialist left). Postmodernists (aka deconstructionists and post - structuralists) yearn for the day when all of societies ills and abuses will be eliminated and social justice will prevail. The goal is nothing less tan an ideally decent and civilised society. The American postmodern philosophers, like Richard Rorty wanted utopian America to replace God as the unconditional object of desire. They wanted social justice to be the country's animating principle, "the nation's soul." Rorty repeatedly emphasises the desire to substitute social justice for individual freedom as America's primary goal. Again, postmodernist philosophy has a number of its roots in Marxist theory. It does not acknowledge the individual as being of any importance, only the group/collective, it is premised on an egalitarian utopist vision of society and so on. Postmodern theory is the source of the Identity Politics that is currently generating social strife in the US , for example, in the form of ethnic and racial tension/conflict, gender warfare and so on.



OK, so, here for your delectation is the description of a course called "Stupidity" that is currently on offer for students at Occidental College in the Critical Theory and Social Justice Department. I have transcribed the course description from Occidental's current academic prospectus The total cost for 1 year of "Stupidity" is a mere $ 67,194 (USD)


STUPIDITY


"Stupidity is neither ignorance nor organicity, but rather, a corollary of knowing and an element of normalcy, the double of intelligence rather than its opposite. It is an artifact of our nature as finite beings and one of the most powerful determinants of human destiny. Stupidity is always the name of the Other, and it is the sign of the feminine. This course in Critical Psychology follows the work of Friedrich Nietzsche (NB: The Postmodern philosophy movement have claimed Nietzsche as one of their spiritual progenitors as some of his theories , like perspectivism, for example, can be viewed as being consistent with some aspects of Postmodern theory, however, I must point out that many of Nietzsche's philosophical concepts are totally antithetical to Postmodernist principles. The reason I mention this is that Nietzsche was truly one of the West's greatest philosophers and the same cannot be said
I'm afraid of the founders of Postmodern Philosophy (Jacques Derrida and Michel Foucault) who were nothing more than intellectual shysters and slippery crypto -Marxists), Giles Deleuze and most recently, Avital Ronell ( Avital Ronell, BTW, is an extreme leftist, feminist intellectual who recently - (2 or 3 years ago) - taught "Stupidity" in person at Occidental. In 2018, the eminent and erudite Professor Ronell was found guilty by New York University of the sexual harassment, sexual assault, stalking and retaliation of a former male student over a period of three years. In other words she is a rampant nut case, or should I say, an extraordinary STUPID woman), in a philosophical examination of those operations and technologies that we conduct in order to render ourselves uncomprehending. Stupidity which has been evicted from the philosophical premesis and dumbed down by psychometric psychology, has returned in the Postmodern discourse (that doesn't surprise me) against Nation, Self and Truth and makes itself felt in political life from the Presidency to "Beavis and Butthead."


Well I don't know what you thought of that, Gary, but it struck me as a pile of pure, nonsensical bullshit. Bullshit that will cost you $67,194 a year to listen to !


Actually, Gary, I can't resist giving you another example of the kind of material American kids are currently being taught in college. This time the course I would like you to run your eye over is being offered by Skidmore college (at Saratoga Springs, NY). Skidmore was ranked by "Niche" number 87 out of America's top 975 private universities and number 115 out of the best 1647 colleges in the US. So, like Occidental it's a good quality university.


The Sociology Department at Skidmore is currently offering a course called: "The Sociology of Miley Cyrus: Race, Class, Gender and Media." The cost for one year is $65,042. Here's the official description of the course...


"From Disney tween to twerking machine, Miley Cyrus has grown up in the public eye, trying on and discarding very different Identities on screen and off. She provides rich examples for analysing aspects of intersectional identities and media representation, including: The rise of the Disney Princess; gender stratification and the hyper - commodification of childhood; transition to Disney stars as they age (see Justin Timberlake, Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera and more); Allies and appropriation, uses of culture across race, class and gender; bisexuality, queerness and the female body. Ongoing media frenzy focused on Miley Cyrus' public image, music and body highlights the ways in which intersectional personalities are shaped by pop culture and mass media. In this special topic course, we will explore core issues of intersectionality theory, looking at race, class and gender, as well as issues of taking feminist critique of the media, using Miley as a lens through which to explore sociological thinking about Identity entertainment, media and fame."


Well Gary, are you impressed? As for me, I find the whole thing so outrageously bizarre, I am affected with a sensation of the surreal. I think to myself, "No, this must be a prank, no university would dare serve up garbage like this" But it's not a hoax, it very real, and so is the $65,042 price tag (!) Words fail me...I mean, studying a moron like Miley Cyrus, how could anyone possibly justify that ? Here's a snapshot of her mind for you...

On the eve of the 2016 election, Miley Cyrus announces to 72 million fans who follow her on twitter: "Honestly fuck this shit I am moving (out of the US) if this (Trump) is my President." Then, shortly after Trump wins the election, she declares: "I'm not fucking leaving this country, that's some ignorant shit, that's dumb." Miley hates Trump, and when on another occasion she hears that the President has made a harmless comment about how his wife's looks compared to those of another woman's while he was attending a political function, Miley shouts out to her fan base: "Trump can't stop won't stop saying stupid-ass, sexist shit. Comparing women. Are you fucking kidding. We will not allow you to destroy everything we have overcome as women." Then there's Miley discussing a new song she likes: "I love that new song: 'Show Me Somethin' Natural like Ass With Some Stretch Marks."I love that because it's not ' Come sit on my dick, suck on my cock', I can't listen to that anymore." Very classy , I must say !!

??????????????????????????????????????????

Finally, bear in mind that these two courses are not exceptional in terms of being worthless, ridiculous and beyond the pale. There are literally HUNDREDS and HUNDREDS of others like them I could show you.

Kindest Regards


John

I agree there are a lot of junk courses out there. I don't know if cleaning house on some of those courses will seriously affect the issues that you seem to be largely concerned with, though. Unless I'm mistaken, you seem to be mainly concerned with increasing racial diversity in traditionally white societies. I don't see how getting rid of a few junk courses like "stupidity 101" and "Miley Cyrus 101" (or whatever those courses are supposed to be) is going to change what is going on in the world in that respect.

[henry quirk]

Liberty? You have as much liberty as you claim and hold. Property? You have as much as you can claim and hold. Individual rights? Claim them, hold them.

...or...

Liberty? You’ll have as much liberty as the politburo allows. Property? You'll have what's left over after 'the people' take what they want. Individual rights? You have the right to labor on behalf of 'everyone'; the right to submit to the rule of the majority.


No middle ground: own yourself of be owned; direct yourself or be directed.

Waters get muddied with definitions and 'isms'. Get past all that, down to the root of it.

[-1-]

Liberty? You have as much liberty as you claim and hold. Property? You have as much as you can claim and hold. Individual rights? Claim them, hold them.

...or...

Liberty? You’ll have as much liberty as the politburo allows. Property? You'll have what's left over after 'the people' take what they want. Individual rights? You have the right to labor on behalf of 'everyone'; the right to submit to the rule of the majority.


No middle ground: own yourself of be owned; direct yourself or be directed.

Waters get muddied with definitions and 'isms'. Get past all that, down to the root of it.

You are also welcome to build your own roads, weave your material, sew your own clothes, raise your own pig, mine your own salt, iron-ore and silicon, make your own glass, tie your own shoe, make your own bed, sow your own corn, harvest it, make food out of it, make your own tools, build your own computer (from silicon, carbon dioxide and water, you can do it at liberty, since you got so much liberty), etc.

Henry, you live in a society. You can't cherry pick the good that benefit you and reject the obligations laid upon you to contribute.

[-1-]

The best song (yes, song, it is rather philosophical), that describes the sentiment is "We Won't Get Fooled Again" by The Who.

It goes:

Meet the new boss.
Same as the old boss!

"We'll be fighting in the street
With our children at our feet
And the morals that they worship will be gone
And the man who spurred us on
Sits in judgement of all wrong
He decides every shot gun sings the song"

Sounds to me like a perfect anthem for Hitler's "Brown Shirts" the SA ( i.e; Sturm Abteilung/ Storm Troops) in Munich during the early 1930s.


Dachshund

In a way you are right, inasmuch as every revolution has this feature.

The communist revolution had it in Russia.

The French Revolution had in France.

The American Revolution had it in North America.

The Christian Revolution had it in Jesus' time and for a while afterward.

I can't argue that the Nazi revolution lacked it. You're right, it was part of the Nazi revolution as well.

[henry quirk]

"You are...welcome to yadda yadda yadda."

I pay folks, folks pay me...it's called 'transacation'...it's called 'contract'...it's called 'civillization': 'polituburo' isn't needed or wanted (by me).

#

"Henry, you live in a society."

No: I live in close proximity to other folks, most of them strangers *who owe me nuthin' just as I owe them nuthin'.

#

"You can't cherry pick the good that benefit you and reject the obligations laid upon you to contribute."

Of course I can: I can vote for folks and props that reduce my taxes, reduce my obligations, reduce my dependence; I can out & out cheat on my taxes; I can shelter properties from pryin' eyes; I can fly low & quiet. And that's just within the sphere of being governed. In the marketplace I have even more options. Absolutely I can cherrypick & reject.









*slight amend: what is owed is that each & every one mind his own business & keep his hands to himself