(no subject)
« previous entry | next entry »
Nov. 29th, 2022 | 08:43 pm
Previous Add to memories Edit Tags Share Statistics Track
Exposing the "enemy".
I believe both Russel Brand and Jordan Peterson share the same level of incomprehension with the nature and structure of the state we live in.
After the New Deal, all the nation-states of the "first world" borrowed the central idea from Italian fascism -- to have working masses organized into unions from the top down, then having the State mediate relationships between the oligarchs and the working people via these unions bosses.
Unions simplify, average out, and standardize miscellaneous workers' demands across all industries, boiling them down to safety, job protection, decent salary for everyone including the least capable ones, pension, and so forth. These demands are then negotiated with an oligarch via State administration. What decent salary means? It depends! And the State may have the final word, within the limits of what oligarchs can provide.
Similarly, in more recent times, with deindustrialization and demise of some powerful trade unions, export of the jobs abroad, and atomization and casualization of the remaining workforce, there is a concerted attempt to organize all other conceivable groups of people into quasi-unions, pigeonhole them, assign them single voices of union bosses who speak for the whole group, and organize a smooth mediation process via State authority.
The same recycled New Deal idea lies behind the initiative of "Aboriginal voice" in parliament, or with the attempt of herding the cats, pardon me, trans activists along with crossdressers and other deviants, into an imaginary unity.
There is nothing new about it, it is simply an attempt of the managerial elite to use the same tried and trusted approach that worked with the working class people, defusing the threat of mass communist uprisings.
If this idea offends you, then you don't like New Deal and you are among those who called Franklin D. Roosevelt a fascist.
Or perhaps, once a functional idea of negotiating deals between people united by the actual work they do, with all the risks and rewards, - became dysfunctional because it cannot be applied to the people united by their favorite fetishes and fanciful clothing, nor by faith or skin color. There is nothing to negotiate there; no value exchange is possible to mediate.
Yet the inertia drives the State in the same "progressive" direction.
Growing more bureaucratic structures to interface with ever smaller groups, even children, and/or acquiring more executive powers by a politician or a political party is a kind of inflation of power of the State we are all witnessing right now.
https://youtu.be/b2KOSS5rYiU
Exposing the "enemy".
I believe both Russel Brand and Jordan Peterson share the same level of incomprehension with the nature and structure of the state we live in.
After the New Deal, all the nation-states of the "first world" borrowed the central idea from Italian fascism -- to have working masses organized into unions from the top down, then having the State mediate relationships between the oligarchs and the working people via these unions bosses.
Unions simplify, average out, and standardize miscellaneous workers' demands across all industries, boiling them down to safety, job protection, decent salary for everyone including the least capable ones, pension, and so forth. These demands are then negotiated with an oligarch via State administration. What decent salary means? It depends! And the State may have the final word, within the limits of what oligarchs can provide.
Similarly, in more recent times, with deindustrialization and demise of some powerful trade unions, export of the jobs abroad, and atomization and casualization of the remaining workforce, there is a concerted attempt to organize all other conceivable groups of people into quasi-unions, pigeonhole them, assign them single voices of union bosses who speak for the whole group, and organize a smooth mediation process via State authority.
The same recycled New Deal idea lies behind the initiative of "Aboriginal voice" in parliament, or with the attempt of herding the cats, pardon me, trans activists along with crossdressers and other deviants, into an imaginary unity.
There is nothing new about it, it is simply an attempt of the managerial elite to use the same tried and trusted approach that worked with the working class people, defusing the threat of mass communist uprisings.
If this idea offends you, then you don't like New Deal and you are among those who called Franklin D. Roosevelt a fascist.
Or perhaps, once a functional idea of negotiating deals between people united by the actual work they do, with all the risks and rewards, - became dysfunctional because it cannot be applied to the people united by their favorite fetishes and fanciful clothing, nor by faith or skin color. There is nothing to negotiate there; no value exchange is possible to mediate.
Yet the inertia drives the State in the same "progressive" direction.
Growing more bureaucratic structures to interface with ever smaller groups, even children, and/or acquiring more executive powers by a politician or a political party is a kind of inflation of power of the State we are all witnessing right now.
https://youtu.be/b2KOSS5rYiU
(no subject)
from: anonymous
date: Nov. 29th, 2022 - 10:43 am
Link
Reply
(no subject)
from: anonymous
date: Nov. 29th, 2022 - 07:12 pm
Link
Reply