Wednesday, January 25, 2017

A 8.0 earthquake in the political world? The end of the Great Con?

This article sets it all out.

Cultural Marxism describes the overt erosion of traditional values--the family, community, religious faith, property rights and limited central government--in favor of rootless Cosmopolitanism and an expansive, all-powerful central state that replaces community, faith and property rights with statist control mechanisms that enforce dependence on the state and a mindset that the individual is guilty of anti-state thinking until proven innocent by the state's own rules.

Once it is realized that the left is at war with these things, what they do and say makes much more sense.  Family?  Hey, its a man and woman, or man/man, or woman/woman, or woman/cat, or anything.  Or it's nothing.  Need health care? You must go to the state to get it.  Cash?  Banned.  The state has ultimate control over your money, which is now all their money.  Feel like a serf yet?

 Over the past 25 years of globalized neoliberalism, social democratic movements have abandoned labor to embrace the self-serving wealth and power offered by capital. The essence of globalization is: labor is commoditized as mobile capital is free to roam the globe for the lowest cost labor. In contrast, labor is far less mobile, and unable to shift as fluidly and frictionlessly as capital to exploit scarcities and opportunities.
Neoliberalism--the opening of markets and borders--enables capital to effortlessly crush labor. The social democrats, in embracing open borders, have institutionalized an open immigration that shreds the scarcity value of domestic labor in favor of lower cost immigrant labor that serves capital's desire for lower costs.
No borders, and a flood of third worlders that immediately get public assistance (your tax money)?  Now it makes perfect sense.  It also explains the appeal of Trump, and in part his unlikely victory.
The author of this article goes on to editorialize:
To mask the collapse of the Left's economic defense of labor, the Left's apologists and PR machine have substituted social justice movements for economic opportunities to acquire economic security and capital. This has succeeded brilliantly, as tens of millions of self-described "progressives" completely bought the left's Great Con that "social justice" campaigns on behalf of marginalized social groups were the defining feature of Progressive Social Democratic movements.
This diversionary sleight-of-hand embrace of economically neutered "social justice" campaigns masked the fact that social democratic parties everywhere have thrown labor into the churning propellers of globalization, open immigration and neoliberal financial policies--all of which benefit mobile capital, which has engorged itself on the abandonment of labor by the Left.
So does this make Trump, a rich cosmopolitan fat cat if their ever was one, the champion of the working man, like FDR?
Meanwhile, the fat-cats of the Left have engorged themselves on capital's largesse in exchange for their treachery. Bill and Hillary Clinton's $200 million in "earnings" come to mind, as do countless other examples of personal aggrandizement by self-proclaimed "defenders" of labor.
Not sure I agree with this, but it is an interesting viewpoint on the otherwise inexplicable but clear movement of Democrats away from their base.   Trump's recent meeting with the bosses of big labor seems to suggest he understands the situation.  Are we indeed witnessing a titanic switch in positions of our two major parties?


  1. I think that you are witnessing the beginning of the MERGING of two political parties, that will be further consolidated and the possible emergence of a number of fringe/grievance parties like the Green Party and the vast number of other socialist/communist/progressive parties, none of whom can agree on much except that they like the pink vagina hats.

  2. CW, I think the fallacy in your question is the assumption that associates Trump with a political party. I've been reading a lot (of what's available) of what's going on from both sides of the aisle and I'm getting the feeling that Trump's 'party' is whomever elected him. What a concept!!
    PS, I've been to "one world's fair, a picnic, and a rodeo" and I still find myself gobsmackingly amazed at the sights I see.

    1. Excellent points both! Trump's been in office only a few days, but he is rocking the establishment and making fools of the media. I never would have thought...

  3. The concept of two political parties- the Democrats and the Republicans- is one of the fictions of our time. There's actually only a Uniparty, who find it expedient to appear to be two different parties.

    In fact, however, it's all Kabuki theater; the "two" parties have the same goals, and regardless of who gets elected, the people have no say in governance. All the iron rice bowls stay intact, and the gravy train continues to fill the trough from which all the well-connected get their fill.

    Then when politicians "retire" from government, they become "lobbyists." Once again doing the same job but with a different title. It's all boob-bait for the suckers, and most of us fall for it.

    President Donald J. Trump is not beholden to the donors, or the political parties, or the media. We the People elected him, and that's who he is beholden to. No wonder there's panic in the newsrooms, in Washington, on Wall Street, and everywhere the Uniparty once ruled!

    "I'm loving it."