I mean the people I'm talking about identify as socialists, anarchists, anti-war, any number of things. They've definitely broken out of a lot of American social conditioning to get that far at least. Sometimes they're quite American when the subject of Islam comes up or if you ask them what everyday life is like in Iran or the DPRK. They're leagues ahead of most Americans by simple virtue of recognizing that the homeless are intrinsically valuable human beings deserving of care.
A lot of them hate America but have somehow internalized that communist countries are just worse. Like they hate capitalism and governments and they can only see socialist countries as a fiercely capitalist government, a combination of the two things they hate. I think it's a kind of goofy stance but they don't bring it up a lot and it doesn't interfere with handing out food, so whatever. They're ok.
They've also read a lot of books I haven't so I really don't know how to criticize their stances on Marxism. Some are coming at it from a religious angle. Some are utopian hippy type folk. Some are hard to pin down anarchists who are on board with Marxism up to a certain point, like one guy I know says his main problem is that Marxism is incomplete. Like we also need to incorporate philosophers like Kant and John Stuart Mill and a bunch of other people I'm not familiar with.
I also know these people. They're ultras or radlib anarchists who can do local praxis but know jack shit about the world outside of their country.
Philos guy is a weenie. Marx isn't incomplete without reading those lib weirdos. Feel free to if you want but to say Marx is somehow 'incomplete' (whatever that's supposed to even mean) without those losers is just someone who has nothing to stand behind but books. Absolute philosophy Ultra. Marxism has lifted millions out of poverty and eroded colonial exploitation, what the fuck has the philosophy of Kant and Mill done?
If I can speak a little disparagingly I think the philosophy guy just likes to sound smart in front of girls and part of that involves saying as many dead philosophers as possible. Also being contrarian. I don't think he's actually read much of that stuff. Like one time he didn't know what I meant by lumpen prole.
Oh, totally. I just meant that, even with the little bit of self-deprogramming that we are able to do, the internalized anti-AES/Marxism sentiments are still insidious. Anarchism is socially acceptable in left-ish circles in the US (and I guess the "West" at large), because there was never really a Lenin/Stalin/Mao figurehead for red scare propaganda to latch onto, and way too many people took Orwell's garbage seriously. I think that's part of it, at least. Parenti gets into some background of the "left"-anticommunist movement in Blackshirts and Reds, but I think he gets more laser-focused on the people who straight-up parrot fash talking points, rather than analyzing grievances of egoists, post-leftists, communalists, etc., since leftist infighting wasn't really within the scope of the book.
I think you're right that it's mostly a utopian mindset, though. Regardless, comrades are comrades; labels are just a damned spook at this stage.
I mean the people I'm talking about identify as socialists, anarchists, anti-war, any number of things. They've definitely broken out of a lot of American social conditioning to get that far at least. Sometimes they're quite American when the subject of Islam comes up or if you ask them what everyday life is like in Iran or the DPRK. They're leagues ahead of most Americans by simple virtue of recognizing that the homeless are intrinsically valuable human beings deserving of care.
A lot of them hate America but have somehow internalized that communist countries are just worse. Like they hate capitalism and governments and they can only see socialist countries as a fiercely capitalist government, a combination of the two things they hate. I think it's a kind of goofy stance but they don't bring it up a lot and it doesn't interfere with handing out food, so whatever. They're ok.
They've also read a lot of books I haven't so I really don't know how to criticize their stances on Marxism. Some are coming at it from a religious angle. Some are utopian hippy type folk. Some are hard to pin down anarchists who are on board with Marxism up to a certain point, like one guy I know says his main problem is that Marxism is incomplete. Like we also need to incorporate philosophers like Kant and John Stuart Mill and a bunch of other people I'm not familiar with.
Death to America though, of course
I also know these people. They're ultras or radlib anarchists who can do local praxis but know jack shit about the world outside of their country.
Philos guy is a weenie. Marx isn't incomplete without reading those lib weirdos. Feel free to if you want but to say Marx is somehow 'incomplete' (whatever that's supposed to even mean) without those losers is just someone who has nothing to stand behind but books. Absolute philosophy Ultra. Marxism has lifted millions out of poverty and eroded colonial exploitation, what the fuck has the philosophy of Kant and Mill done?
If I can speak a little disparagingly I think the philosophy guy just likes to sound smart in front of girls and part of that involves saying as many dead philosophers as possible. Also being contrarian. I don't think he's actually read much of that stuff. Like one time he didn't know what I meant by lumpen prole.
Yup. That's a Kind of Guy. It's masturbating in front of people Louis CK style and expecting to impress people but intellectually
Oh, totally. I just meant that, even with the little bit of self-deprogramming that we are able to do, the internalized anti-AES/Marxism sentiments are still insidious. Anarchism is socially acceptable in left-ish circles in the US (and I guess the "West" at large), because there was never really a Lenin/Stalin/Mao figurehead for red scare propaganda to latch onto, and way too many people took Orwell's garbage seriously. I think that's part of it, at least. Parenti gets into some background of the "left"-anticommunist movement in Blackshirts and Reds, but I think he gets more laser-focused on the people who straight-up parrot fash talking points, rather than analyzing grievances of egoists, post-leftists, communalists, etc., since leftist infighting wasn't really within the scope of the book.
I think you're right that it's mostly a utopian mindset, though. Regardless, comrades are comrades; labels are just a damned spook at this stage.