"Not Your Minion"
Leftist revolutionaries tend to be the spoiled children of the bored upper-class. They are close to the top, and they want to be on top. A world where they are second-best is what they call "capitalism", a world with them on top they call "
socialism/communism/justice", regardless of actual policy. This is why "
communism has never been tried" - because the particular leftist saying it has never been on top. It's also why the left is so uninterested in what happens after the revolution - who cares? They are on top, their birthright is being respected (
justice), that's all that matters.
Problem: The West is a meritocracy, and spoiled rich kids don't have enough merit to rise to the top. Solution: violence.
Deciding to solve their problems with violence, they become revolutionaries. Problem: As as the spoiled children of the bored upper-class, they are as white, fluffy and melt-able as the snowflakes they are compared to.
Revolutions, A.K.A. civil wars, are not ideal habitats for the fluffy and meltable. So what is a revolutionary to do?
Solution: get minions to do your fighting for you. This is why the left used to be all about the proletariat, despite knowing almost nothing about the working class, and hating what they did know. The need for cannon-fodder makes strange bedfellows.
By the 1960's it was obvious this plan had flopped, but Mao was a rising star. So the left gave up on recruiting Proletarian minions and instead tried to recruit third-world peasants as minions.
Overnight the left suddenly did 180 flips on a bunch of issues, becoming all about unregulated mass immigration, alliances with dark-age reactionaries, turning a blind eye to antisemitism, violent crime, etc.
This is why it never works to tell leftists that they are allied with terrorists, violent criminal cartels, and rapacious savages. That's the whole reason the left chose those allies: they need people to do the dirty work that they, as over-socialized softies, are unable to do!
"Diversity is our strength"
So now you know what the left means when they say
diversity: they mean their coalition has both a future ruling class (themselves) and a cannon-fodder class (brown people). The leftists know they are too weak to fight, and believe that brown people are to dumb to do anything without white leadership. But put the two together and they are strong.
"Diversity is our strength".
Brown people need to understand: leftists don't love you for your funky music and flavorful cooking. They like you because you have a reputation for violence. They need you to carry out violence when the revolutionary war comes. You will be the meat-shield, soaking up the bullets while your fearless leaders lead from behind...From a safe distance. So they can keep an eye on the big picture, of course.
So the next time a leftist tries to recruit you, tell them you are
Not Their Minion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MitzaLizalor
I'd like to mention
"paradigm shift"
"journey" (such as my journey out of fiscal responsibility which no-one else is interested in at all, not even slightly)
so they make a two hour documentary about it anyway
|
Talking about how the CTRL Left uses language is worthy of a whole new thread, but let's start here anyway:
"White Jews"
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Tablet
The campaign against “white Jews” on the progressive left is not an accident but a determined effort with several concrete ideological purposes. The first is to codify the position of Jews at the bottom of the social justice victim pyramid, as just another category of “whites.” This move is intended to downgrade or even erase anti-Semitism—a sin of which Farrakhanites, radical Islamists, and other important progressive allies are all guilty. “White Jews” erases that sin by stipulating that “Jews,” insofar as they are “white,” cannot actually be victims of hate–because they aren’t, functionally speaking, Jews at all. They are white people, and therefore, by definition, the oppressor and not the oppressed.
“White Jews” is therefore, first and foremost, an epithet—an attempt to make “Jews” synonymous with “white supremacy.” This move is especially invidious, since Jews—“white” or not—are themselves the primary victims of theories of racial supremacy, and anti-Semitism is central to white supremacist ideology, including in the U.S.
But the larger point of marking Jews as “white” is to render them political treif—unassimilable into the left’s virtuous coalition of the oppressed, which includes plenty of Third-Worldist groups and alignments that are rooted in a political discourse in which conspiratorial anti-Semitism is normal. The solution that progressives have apparently alighted on is not to educate their allies out of bigotry and ignorance, but to trim “Jewishness” of any traits that might set off wild, conspiratorial fulminations by the people they wish to position as innocent victims.
Notice how it is only Jews who are endowed with a racial descriptor; no one on the left is busy fingering “white Muslims.” This assault on reason and history puts Jews, or “White Jews,” in their place as inherently oppressive and vile, while gifting their valuable history of oppression to its “true” inheritors—namely progressives and their handpicked allies...
...intersectionality, not unlike anti-Semitism, is a conspiracy theory, one that hinges upon essentializing individuals into discrete and irrevocable racial, religious, or sexual-identity based groupings and ranking their virtue accordingly, in order to arrive at a more perfect form of justice, which will then rule the planet Earth. Intersectionality demands that the sectarian agendas and superstitions of a Palestinian-American woman in an arranged marriage, a Somali-born legislator who tweets about Israel “hypnotizing the world,” and a fellow traveler of a black nationalist cult take precedence over the universalist aims for which progressives used to stand.
|