Actually, an insightful comment. Well done. We could continue, too...Trajk Logik wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2024 1:56 pm Transgenderism is a counterculture movement. They've embraced the Palestinian movement because it is another counterculture movement. Just because one movement is counterculture does not mean that it will share the values of another counterculture movement. The trans crowd doesn't seem to realize that their movement is counter to all cultures on the planet.
The root ideology of all the so-called "counterculture movements" is, of course, Neo-Marxism. They all look to produce the next stage of "human progress" by "countering" the current "culture." They all aim at sweeping interventions and disruptions in the status quo, to "free up" some mysterious power that's going to produce the next phase of "liberation." They all think they're "on the right side of History," heroes in their own way, "freedom fighters" and forward-thinkers, making steps toward some dimly-envisioned utopia or "better state."
Like all Neo-Marxists, they believe that History (capital "H") is like a sort of god-force that is automatically producing "progress," so long as it's not impeded by people like social conservatives, who are protecting the status quo from changing as fast as it could. All of these "counterculture movements" believe that if History is just "freed up" to "progress," good things will be possible (for their own group).
So the common enemy is the status quo, regardless of what it is, and the problem is the various more establishment or conservative folks who don't join enthusiastically enough in the "liberation" of History.
On the counterculture side, this makes common bedfellows of odd couples. White, privileged, middle-class Leftists can rally with supporters of Black racist advocacy, like BLM. Gays (men who don't like women) can ally with lesbians (women who don't like men), both can ally with transers (men and women who aim to replace them both), all can ally with Islamists (who throw them off buildings) and so on, who can be allied with Feminists (whose values and practices are hated by Islam). The only thing they all agree on is that if the present status quo is properly busted, then their own group will make gains, as History will move forward. So for all of them, destruction is creative. To destroy is to free History to move forward.
Only when the common enemy, conservatism or establishment stability of any kind, is gone will the antipathies between these groups reappear. Then whichever group has "won" the most will surely be seen to control the status quo, and thus become the target of the others, and a new culture war will break out. For now, they can all make common cause of hating all proponents of the status quo, and shelve their very substantial antipathies to each other.
But for now, the common thread is simple: all aim to destroy the status quo. The Neo-Marxist element of the projects they all stand for is the glue that holds them all together. Hatred is their unity. (What they claim to "love" or want to "advance," by contrast, is the element that would divide them from the others, were they not united in envy and hatred of the established order, and in the project of working its destruction.) But (and here is the cautionary point) the very minute the common destruction project is not being advanced by a particular group, the ideological Marxists will kick them to the curb.
Here's one clear recent illustration of that. The minute the men-in-women's-sports issue came up, the Neo-Marxists immediately all sided against Feminists and with the trans men. All the Feminist gains in protections for women's sports were thrown out instantly, and nobody in the counterculture block cared about women's rights anymore. Those demands had become part of the status quo: women in women's sports was standard. Now, it's THAT that had to be destroyed, it was THAT that the counterculture now hated, and thus they invented the pejorative "TERFs" to disparage ordinary Feminists, and declared all those who supported them as "oppressors." The Left, you see, only ever loves its own as long as they remain useful to advancing destruction; when they make an actual gain, and become part of the established order, and want to conserve their wins, they're inevitably changed into the enemy.
So to come back to your point, for Neo-Marxist, countercultural groups, the fact that transing is against Feminism, against lesbians and gays (whom transing replaces with their biological opposites), that it is despised by Islamists, and so on, is not at all disruptive to the goals of the larger countercultural block. They literally do not care who gets hurt, so long as their aim of social destruction is advanced, so History can deliver the next stage. Neo-Marxism even recognizes that "History is a wasteful process," as they say, and that people will die, and die in large numbers, as History "advances." And they do not care. It might even be a signal that the destruction at which they aim is being really, really successful, and History is progressing well.
The controlling orientation is what's called "queer." Queer is different from "gay" or "lesbian," as David Halperin so famously says in his famed essay that launched the movement, in that "queer" aims to "queer everything": not meaning "make it gay," but rather to "twist," "distort," "deface," "reshape," "pervert," "sicken" and "disfigure" anything that is "norm." Pedophilia (which they valorize as "intergenerational encounters," their term) is their main cause, because sexual interference with minors is the ultimate distorter of personality, the ultimate disruptor of normal psychological and social development, and is thus the best preparer of what queer aims at, which is the production of a generation so maladjusted that they literally cannot live in normal society, and have to destroy it continually; a restless, loveless, miserable, perpetually-angry and aggrieved generation, that can really launch the Neo-Marxist project of destroying everything.
The trans crowd is another perfect demographic for them. Transers are perpetually unhappy, perpetually at war with their own physiology and sexuality, tortured by surgery and drugs, with shortened lifespans, and reduced possiblities for love, and no prospect of reproducing anything like a normal family structure. They're going to be miserable, self-loathing and angry forever...ideal Neo-Marxist foot soldiers.
Likewise the Palestinians. There's arguably no more miserable, hateful, sad, self-destructive cultural group on the planet. Other Arabs hate them, (which you can see from their refusal to accept any refugees from them) but gleefully use them to torture Israel. And Palestinians are myopically devoted to hatred of the West. They're destructive, restless, hateful, alienated, socially disruptive...again, ideal foot soldiers for the next Neo-Marxist revolution.
But there is no group they will not toss aside. Now that the "L" and "G" factions and the Feminists are very much mainstream, they're the next "status quo." They're now in the enemy group that has a stake in preserving some of their gains, some of the establishment order. And so we're starting to see all three of these groups being pushed out of the mainstream of their advocacy, their vaunted gains being quietly traded away in order to serve new, more radical, "queerer" agendas.
What makes sense? Stop the Neo-Marxism. Don't join any causes with it. Recognize it for what it is: it devours its own children. Call it out, and then reject its catcalls and bully tactics outright. Ridicule it, point out its inconsistencies. Laugh it to death. Make it so risible as to be impossible to occupy any part of the public agenda. Make its mendacious strategies obvious to everybody, so they no longer work. Don't let it stay in the background, pulling the strings. Start finding the good that is now in the status quo, the established order, and get as serious about preserving the good as about fighting the bad.
I recently heard small "c" conservatism described this way: it's "progress with safety rails." That's really clever and apt. Conservatism, rationally practiced, is the advocacy of progress without the radicalism of countercultural-destructiveness. It keeps one eye on the goods of the past, while it's reaching for the goods of the future. It's the modus operandi for circumspect and mature thinkers. It has none of the impulsive adolescence of the counterculture. It's a creed for preservers and builders, not for destroyers and saboteurs. It's a creed for those who listen to both the past and to their opponents, rather than simply demonizing and destroying.
The counterculture needs to be dead. It's poisoned itself with Karl Marx. It really has no future for any group that trusts it, even if it seems to them at present to be advocating their interests. It will turn on them in a trice. Ultimately, it's anti-human.
