Remember how we said that America was a communist country? Well, it's obvious that we need to clarify what that means, and that mean refuting the idiotic strawmen.
First, America is not a capital-C Communist country. It's not under the control of the KGB or any such evil conspiracy, contrary to the words of the McCarthyites of the 1950s. Although there were some Stalinists within FDR's administration, they saw themselves as the senior partners in that relationship. But more on that later.
Second, America has not achieved communism. No country has ever achieved communism. Every modern communist country, from Venezuela to Cuba to China to the USSR before its decline, has had massive inequality between the rich and poor, markets, and totalitarian state control. None of this is actual communism, and none of these countries ever claimed to have achieved communism in their official propaganda. So we can't say America isn't a communist country on the grounds that we have hedgefund billionaires, especially since most of those billionaires are progressives. Hypocrisy, too, is as American as apple pie.
Third and finally, there's the dualist argument against communism. This argument claims that there is a "moderate" leftism and a "radical" leftism, and that these things have nothing whatsoever to do with one another. One is as meek and mild as a spring lamb and sounds like NPR. The other snuffs out reactionaries with a bullet to the back of the head and has a Slavic growl. But would progressives accept such a distinction with Nazis? I mean,
Rudolph Hess was about as harmless as Jimmy Carter, and no doubt, if the Nazis had won the war, that whole "killing the Jews" thing would've come to be seen as a mutation of "real Nazism," an aberration created by Hitler's cult of personality. If so-called moderate leftists were really anti-communist (as opposed to being anti-Communist/anti-Soviet, a very real phenomenon), then we'd expect them to treat communists like Nazis. Instead, they treat anti-communists like Nazis and invite actual communists to their dinner parties. Huh.
To demonstrate the communist roots of America, all one has to do is look for who had the same viewpoints NPR espouses today. Moldbug's example is
Thomas Wentworth Higginson: Unitarian minister, author, and
terrorist financier (Quoth Moldbug: "If you have to get your balls groped at the airport, it’s because America isn’t your country. It’s John Brown’s country—you just live here"). In 1891, he helped found the
Society of Friends of Russian Freedom, an organization dedicated to the overthrow of the Russian Tsar. As an old man, Higginson helped Jack London and Upton Sinclair start the
Intercollegiate Socialist Society, later known as
League for Industrial Democracy; that organization begat the
SDS; And it, in turn, begat
Bill Ayers, far-left terrorist and
good friend of one Mr. Barrack H. Obama.
If all this doesn't convince you, then read some of
Mr. Higginson's writings. The ideas found within are basically mainstream leftist politics now. Leftism/progressivism/"liberalism"/socialism/communism/whatever you call it is an unbroken intellectual tradition in America. Thus, "communism is as American as apple pie, and America today is a completely communist country."
Bioleninism in Modern America
Now that that's out of the way, what is communism, exactly? To understand this, I'm enlisting one of the jewels of the dissident right, the theory of
Bioleninism. Under this theory, Leninism is defined as the political strategy of building a political movement to overthrow the current regime by using the dregs of society - the downtrodden, the weirdos, the lumpenproletariat - to form the backbone of the Party, with which you'll rule with an iron fist.
Here's how it works: the Party offers high status to groups that would otherwise have low status. Said groups now have a positive incentive to be loyal to the Party and despise whomever the Party claims is the enemy. When the Party obtains absolute power, they'll remain loyal in spite of any oppression because the alternative would involve the restoration of the old status quo - an unthinkable prospect. In Russia, classical Leninism, such groups include “workers and peasants,” as well as Jews and other non-Russian ethnic minorities. In Bioleninism, they are “marginalized groups” like women, blacks, mestizo Hispanics, nonwhite Muslims (especially those of Arab, African, or “Asian” descent), gays, and transgender people. Biology, rather than class, is the determining factor here.
Now, the Party doesn't necessarily care about improving the livelihoods of their charges. In fact, they are often motivated by what Moldbug calls "callous altruism" or what Charles Dickens called "
telescopic philanthropy." In the revolution, the Party's leadership is often made up of people who are emotionally, culturally, and socially removed from the actual "marginalized groups" they're supposed to be helping, and that doesn't really lend itself to being all too concerned with the actual well-being of the people you're supposedly "helping." By the way, how did classic Leninism turn out for the actual workers and peasants it was supposed to help? Anyone? Anyone?
Bueller?
And how did Bioleninism turn out for (for instance) black people? Well, when Higginson and his amazing friends freed the poor negroes in the 1860s,
a fourth of the slaves died. Quoth Moldbug: "Naturally, since America is a communist country, this episode—which might under other regimes be viewed as an outbreak of mass criminal insanity—is considered one of the most glorious in our glorious history." And for the past sixty-odd years, one of the main focuses of political life was to advance the economic status of the Black Americans. Today, black areas that were once thriving business districts are now burnt-out ghettos home to feral thugs, and in most of those areas, there's a street named after Dr. King,
who was also a communist. But don't take my word for it,
ask black economics man!
Ultimately, this system - communism, Leninism, Bioleninism, socialism, leftism, whatever you want to call it - is evil, plain and simple. It's evil because it's a fucking lie from top to bottom. A truly charitable person wills the good of the other. If a truly charitable person's well-intentioned actions cause the ruination of the person they were trying to help, they wouldn't go "oh well, we tried" like so many champagne socialists do when confronted with the effects of their preferred policies. It's all about power, plain and simple. It's all about freeing the slaves so that they treat you as their new master. Callous altruism is sadism and power-hunger disguised as charity.
This is why I never, ever, ever, ever take seriously accusations of MUH RACISM, MUH SEXISM, MUH TRANSPHOBIA, or any other buzzwords you can think of. The kind of people who make such accusations are usually either party leaders, witch-hunters (read: petty bureaucrat and bullies for hire), or direct beneficiaries of Bioleninism. It's all cynical power-mongering. Once you see this, you can't un-see it. It's just
everywhere.
