Fifth blog sections of blogpol

  Everyone whose opinion I don’t like is a Russian bot /s. Coming from a Toxic Narcissistic Introvert Russian Xenophobe with NO social skills. Toxic Narcissist Introvert convinces himself he’s correct since he never leaves his home and doesn’t have any knowledge of how to interact with people in real life. Sad. Tell me about it. I feel sorry for him actually This guy is annoying for sure but he consistently gets <10 likes per tweet so I don’t think anyone really gives a shit about him other than us He’s been going at the grift for a while but he just turned his sights here and autobanned all the users from several of his subs. Personally I think we should just ignore him. I have a feeling a lot of the comments that support his nonsense in his own subs are just his alts. The typing style is too similar. Dude might legit be a fed. He posts SO much, while controlling several subs and his posts always line up with the state department narrative. Alternatively, he is just a democrat wit

Maybe I should say 'don't participate in idpol but transcend it' But then I would be doing shitlib handwringing by saying that  . But "the rightoids are the real enemy right?" I don't play favorites Liberal 2.0ers and right wingers are both equally cringe to me The real enemy is capitalism and people like shitlibs who believe the political categories of liberalism 2.0 (the Liberal 2.0 left, rightoids) are immanent and unmovable. Rather than seeking to understand why people are reactionary to ideologies that they rightly are seen as undermining their parental authority, shitlibs expect everyone to agree with their babyish moralizing because a few bad things happened to people they see as victims. And they might very well be victims, but so was Ashli Babbit, and some people have no problem calling her a whore. The Libs of Tik tok are a disease that people are too stupid to ignore I have heard people say that the Libs of Tik Tok are right wing propaganda. Yet mos

  i don't really care if leftists and lean leftists who disagree with Liberal 2.0ers and or Democrats move to be right or left wing idpol. Both negative extremes can be easily identified by me, but also to be made pointless When true stakes start to return, when clear lines are drawn in the sand and class consciousness is felt once again, all of this fake nonsense will fade away My suggestion is to quit caring about as much of day-to-day politics as much as we are able to (like I was in the 1980s, 1990s, and most of the 2000s decade and early 2010s). its all a freaking show created to make you and me pick a side. to hell with that, keep our eyes on the prize Socialism/left-wing economics does not necessarily require hyper-liberal sociocultural progressivism/liberalism. The latter ideology sours people from class unity or anything like it, that’s the reason that it’s vital for me to take a sort of a middle ground stance, that’s the method to “win” the culture war.  I mean even the r

 https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/12/03/facebook-hate-speech/ From the article: "But before the overhaul, the company’s algorithms and policies did not make a distinction between groups that were more likely to be targets of hate speech versus those that have not been historically marginalized. Comments like “White people are stupid” were treated the same as anti-Semitic or racist slurs." I guess that white people haven't been historically marginalized, but according to Washington Post and Facebook, we can always start ...  White people were on the margins of Eurasia for a thousand years This is the magical variable placeholder that is used to justify any amount of revanchist political action undertaken in modern times Simply choose an arbitrary time period and place that when the group who is in question was powerful, and then claim to be positioned athwart history to balance the scales. The more radical the action you choose to undertake today, the more po

 The actual question is whether or not Liberal 2.0ers are actually liberal. Liberal 2.0ers, like "Woke" people are very much aligned with the same ideology of a 1960's "Conservative" or modern KKK member. Both groups like Liberal 2.0ers (or at least woke SJWs) advocate for racially segregated spaces/societies using statist (former and latter) and involuntary (latter) methods Both of these groups believe in racially monolithic generalizations. Both of these groups advocate for racially targeted legislation that is based off of those group generalizations. Both of those groups believe in innate privileges to being born white. Both of those groups believe they are victims. Both of those groups believe they deserve racially targeted reparations. Both of those groups deflect from Antifa violence. Both of those groups totally despise the State of Israel. Both of those groups advocate for economic Liberal 2.0 policies . Yes, I believe that Nick Fuentes is truly very &q

https://escholarship.org/content/qt6c14j4fw/qt6c14j4fw_noSplash_1cf44456a31d06c8005a24b1a3188ce5.pdf "According to (Queer Theorist) Leo Bersani’s own argument, blackness—unlike queerness—is not contingently but necessarily and irrationally excluded from ontology. We are beginning to ask why blackness, for example, would not be a better signifier for the liminal beyond of identitarianism (instead of using Queerness for it) "Bersani’s impersonalism tends to a contradictory or ambivalent position about its self-destruction because impersonalism has obsessive, melancholic, paranoid, or fetishistic attachments to identity positions that it also wants to let go. Bersani does not want to give up sex’s centrality in antisocial theory, but his own impersonalism suggests that he should." Lee Edelman’s queer theory has strongly white overtones that resist its non-identitarian ambitions. In No Future (2006), Edelman martials antisocial theory against the figure of the Child as a “hu

 from here https://escholarship.org/content/qt6c14j4fw/qt6c14j4fw_noSplash_1cf44456a31d06c8005a24b1a3188ce5.pdf In the context of these problems with queer theory, Patricia Hill Collins’s black feminist standpoint theory gives us reasons to resist neutrality in coalitional politics. Collins argues that we should place black women’s “oppositional consciousness” at the center of coalitional politics. A problem arises here because, according to standpoint theory, the notion of a central oppositional consciousness—perhaps the Lumpenproletariat, queerness, or blackness—is a limit of standpoint-intersectionality that exceeds the determinate self-consciousness necessary for sustained political agency. Different theorists elect different ostensible identity differences as actual failures of identity in general to the place of this general limit with a trajectory beyond intersectional identity. To this limit where identity fails in general, at times Marxists have elected class differences, quee

It seems that LGBTQ + has turned into a secular religion instead of being a shorthand acronym for a community of people with a shared purpose (which is the original meaning behind the LGBTQ+).  Now the different sects of the LGBTQ+ movement are all about bringing in as many people under the LGBTQ+ banner as they can get, the majority of whom have nothing in common I find it pathetic that a heterosexual monogamous woman for example can claim more letters on the LGBTQ+ movement than most gays and lesbian  It is a religion that quickly turns into a cult for many. Sometimes there are too many traits and conditions that fall under the LGBTQ+ banner including PCOS and Queer can mean anything if someone gets carried away with finding new labels to identify as Queer Why are there letters on the LGBTQ+ spectrum that represent totally unrelated things under the same umbrella?  Some straight people have never been oppressed for their sexual orientation and what is the whole point of having “queer

  While I generally agree with the message in this image, I feel also that if we replace the term 'wage slavery' in this image with the term 'taxation', that in some more specific situations even after that change, the message in this image would be true too.

I dont think conservatism is at its core directly linked to authoritarianism but it appears that the republican party is seeping themselves more and more in authoritarianism each year I am a left libertarian, but I’ve seen right wing libertarians who disagree with me on items and I always seek common ground because that’s the way you build a society - leave your pipe dreams on the down low and work for what we agree on. Something that Congress could take page out of Libertarians as a whole need gatekeeping to keep us from idiot authoritarians (i.e conservatives) who try to identify as being libertarian. Because of cons, everyone who isn't libertarian always associates libertarianism as a whole with conservativism and believes they are the same despite the fact they're 2 very different ideologies.  DJT is not libertarian. He reinforces a police state while he has made our government much bigger. He's created provactive tariffs, he has banned bump stocks and he supports other

 Work in progress In Mark Fischer’s Capitalist Realism, Fischer says that much of the left has come to accept the conclusion that capitalism is something that will stay, so the efforts of the left (or at least Liberal 2.0) have changed from dismantling capitalist institutions to mitigating whatever inevitable effects of it occur. This is like a stoic perspective of capitalism, where they come to accept the influence and nature of capitalism as out of their control, so their goals switch from their original motive. In that respect, the philosophy of stoicism does not mesh with a struggle that requires dismantling of that system of Capitalism which appears to be inevitable, seeing how much it’s being propagandized to be in tune with human nature.  Like in a broader sense, stoicism appears to have internal contradiction with people who are in a struggle, and so a purpose.  However a lot of people can take stoicism with a grain of salt, and apply that to first-world situations like if we g