No matter how urgent the threat of hostile alien cultures or Islam is, we must never forget about Communism, a creeping evil which can, and does, seep into any culture. No matter what race or culture communism infects, it’s going to produce an unfree, technologically moribund, backwards, starving, hellhole of a country. Communism is the reason why North Korea is a backwards, starving, goolag, while South Korea is a modern technological paradise. Before the Korean split, there was absolutely zero cultural and genetic difference between north and south. In fact, the north had all of the industrial development, but today it is the south. What changed? Communism.
I am a big reader of sci-fi and fantasy, although I prefer older authors over contemporary. One of my favorite authors is Edger Rice Burroughs, who consistently uses communists as the enemy, no matter which planet the protagonist is on. Whether it’s Venus, the Moon, or that world from “Beyond the Farthest Star,” his depiction of communism is always the same, and it’s dead on. The communists are depicted as people who have low IQ, are lacking in morals, and are often physically unattractive. Regardless of race, this is how the communists are, and regardless of what they were prior to communism, the country (or planet) will become a hellhole. Whether it’s Europeans (USSR), Asians (North Korea), or Amerindians (Venezuela), the country is going to be wrecked. There will be food shortages, and little to no technological progress. There will also be no freedom of speech, religion, or association. Instead of having your choice of everything at a reduced price, you are at the mercy of whatever rations happen to be available, and what your government mandated allotment is.
“In Soviet Russia, store shops for you!”
Most of the people who advocate communism are low-achieving, beta (or gamma), losers. I don’t say this to denigrate them or sling mud, only to report what I have encountered. They typically have not been very successful, don’t have a job (or a well paying one), and often lack female companionship. I believe this makes them bitter, and so they come to perceive themselves as victims, and turn to an ideology which calls for taking the things they covet by force rather than earning them.
Communists have no respect for voluntary association. What they want is a one-world communist government. Some claim to be anti-statists, but when challenged on how they will achieve world-wide socialism without force they either have nothing to say, or admit that they are willing to use force to boost other people’s stuff.
The worst thing about communism (and all left wing agendas), is that there is no opting out. They are never content to sit in their own corner and do their own thing. They have no concept of NAP or “live and let live.” They believe that their ideas and models are universal, and that if people don’t buy into it then they must be hammered into it. But why?
Based on what I have seen, the communist is like a miserable child, who wants other people to be miserable because he’s miserable. It’s common for children to think in this fashion, as they do not yet have the cognitive development to prevent their intellect from being subsumed by their emotions. Most of us could probably remember a time when we were miserable over something, as a child, and upon seeing other children happy we felt a gut level urge to destroy their happiness. The average communist never grew out of that state of mind.
In a far right society (and there is nothing further right than ancap), the communist is still free to do whatever he wants. He can buy land, and establish a commune where all the hippies can congregate and share everything/own nothing. The only thing a communist cannot do in a far-right society is ruin other people’s happiness. However, in a communist society, an individual who wants to own his own things cannot. The communist won’t be content with having an autonomous commune surrounded by free and successful people, because the success of those people, who have achieved what he cannot, will gall him and chafe at him.
A communist who wants a socialist US will not get up and go to Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea, Sweden, or whatever, because that won’t destroy the happiness of people living in America. We are willing to let them go, but they want to chase us down.
There is only so much utility and insight that can be gleaned from psychoanalyzing (or attempting to) the communist. I just want everyone to beware.
Nothing exists which is not real. If equality is something that has to be created, then it does not exist. The only people who are equal are identical twins (or triplets, etc.) at birth, and that is only because they are genetic copies of one another and have no life experience to differentiate them. People are not equal at the individual level in most cases. People vary in IQ, strength, talent, and ability. If people were equal then we would all have the same body, IQ, abilities, talent, and be the same age. Obviously this is impossible, so there is no basis for supposing or presupposing equality.
A man with an IQ of 70 is not the intellectual equal of a man with an IQ of 160. The former has less than half the intelligence of the latter. Performing brain surgery is a much more difficult task than pushing a basket at a grocery store, which is why doctors get paid so much more than courtesy clerks or retail associates. Almost anyone can push a basket and carry groceries, but very few people can perform brain surgery. If we lived in a universe were mental tasks were easy and physical tasks were hard then a basket pusher might get paid more than a brain surgeon, but we don’t. Yes, all (or most) tasks do have value, but not the same value, because supply and demand are factors.
Socioeconomic stratification is a natural outgrowth of specialization of labor, which is a requisite for civilization. The only type of culture which has everyone sharing all resources and earning the same/nothing/subsistence, is tribal culture where the only specialization of labor is male vs. female tasks. The culture is technologically moribund, minimalist, stagnate, and achieves nothing other than bare subsistence. Everyone is equal in terms of social and economic outcomes, but there is no progress, and whatever potential for progress and innovation their might be, however minimal, is not being utilized.
Specialization of labor allows people to devote their time to what they are good at, and/or enjoy, and while it is true that some people will earn more than others in this setting, the quality of life is uplifted for most people. Even the people stuck working low income jobs still get to have things like air-conditioning, running water, TV, and radio, vs. tribal societies where people lie on the ground and eat insects while other insects eat them.
Socialism Vs. Tradition:
When defending socialism, leftists will say something along the lines of; “What about poor people and old people?”
In traditional societies people get married, produce children, and take care of the children they produce. Then, when the parents get old, the children take care of the parents. If a family member is struggling the other family members help out. For those who don’t have families there are/were religious organizations to help and assist when they are down and out.
In India, for example, parents often move in with one of their children after retirement, or in some cases one or more of the children never moves out.
It makes sense for family members to support one another, as they are building strength, but it does not make sense for one to be expected or forced to take care of people with whom he has no relation, connection, or vested interest.
Socialists often refuse to form proper families and work, but then they expect other people to be held responsible for them in their old age, or (in the event that they do have children) to be held responsible for their children. Really I would prefer to keep my money and invest it in my own children, who I have a natural and immediate connection to, than complete strangers who don’t even share my values and might not even be from the same country.
When arguing these matters with a socialist, the leftist may then attempt to appeal to your religion (real or presumed) and argue how you should want to give because Jesus called for it. It is true that Jesus called for giving, but he also said to do unto others as you would have them do unto you. In any case there is a difference between voluntary giving and boosting another person’s stuff. I would tell the leftist that if they want to appeal to Christianity, the logical course of action is to go to a church and ask for help.
Out of one corner of his mouth the socialist begs and demands a safety net, while out of the other he condemns and works to undermine all the natural/traditional safety nets, such as family and religion.
Feminism & MGTOW:
Both feminism and MGTOW are predicated upon hatred and dismissal of the other sex. They are two sides of the same coin. It could be argued that MGTOW is a reaction to feminism, but it is not a solution to it. MGTOW does not have the ability to overwhelm or subsume feminism. It is like a little boy taking his ball and going home after the other little boys told him that they don’t want to play with him or his ball, or a teenage boy telling a girl he will never talk to her again after she tells him she never wants to talk to him again.
Hating the other sex is not productive, and will ultimately lead to population extinction. In traditional societies/the natural way, men and women are not rivals, but partners. Men and women are different, and have different functions, but are meant to work together.
One of the most insidious things the left has done to western civilization is the fostering enmity between men and women, and forcing them to compete in the same sphere for the same functions. When women do not perform the traditionally male task of bread-winning as well as men, the left blames it on the inherent prejudice of men rather than recognizing that there are inherent differences between men and women.
The left has told women that the only task which has value is earning money and having a career, which is the traditional male function. In the event that a woman cannot garner a successful career, then the government is there to provide her with financial support and security. In the first case women are isolated, and in the second they are married to government, but in both cases women have been divorced from men.
Regardless of sex, having a career is only a means to an end (survival), not the end itself. A career without children is not an investment in the future.
Coming back to the solution to feminism, there is no easy answer. Women, in general, are followers rather than leaders, so their views and opinions can be changed through logic (yes, they are capable of understanding logic) combined with a strong personality. If you lack the logic and force of personality to alter a woman’s views, or if the woman is too tainted (had sex with many partners) for it to be worth while, then there is the option of bringing in women from other cultures where feminism and cultural Marxism do not have the same level of influence. I recommend Eastern Europe, Russia, India, and China.
MGTOW is self defeating and nihilistic. It amounts to ending feminism by ending humanity, or at least cultures where feminism exists. But if an entire culture or race is destroyed in order to destroy feminism then that is still a failure of colossal magnitude.
Liberalism vs. Western Civilization:
There are many people who conflate liberalism with western civilization, and will talk about the promulgation of sexual immorality in non-western cultures as being an artifact of western civilization, or “westernization.” This theory is thoroughly incorrect.
Traditional western civilization was hierarchical, patriarchal, and family oriented, with high birth rates, and in some cases arranged marriages. The flow of power ran from King to man, to husband, to wife, to children. Most people knew their place, and had a place, unlike today where so many people are shiftless, purposeless, confused, and unfulfilled.
Liberalism opposes, at every turn, our traditional culture and values, and seeks to guard against it’s reemergence. Liberalism is only western civilization as much as the AIDS virus is the body it infects. The AIDS is not the person, the person does not need the AIDS, and the virus does nothing to help the person it infects. Ultimately the AIDS virus is going to shorten the lifespan of the person it infects, as well as reduce the quality of their life, and that is what liberalism does to any civilization it touches.