In years past, now long ago, socialist discourse in the West could include non-dogmatic examinations of capitalism and the development of internal markets. That's gone. It's been replaced by the same crackpot puritanism spiralling that informs the identitarian movements. The net effect has been to drive away anyone interested in transition economics. A culture of vituperative strawman accusations and fatuous psychologizing is lethal.
I think that's tied in to the overproduction of wannabe elites. The PMC class has burgeoned and there are not enough jobs of any kind to keep them employed. The market for mediocre managers is saturated. Everything from the corporate sphere to NGOs to the military to academia is packed. The competition for jobs is fierce. Their nastiness rises in proportion to the scarcity. None of them have any real skills. And now the language models (e.g. ChatGPT) are sophisticated enough to replace most of them.
What works in China does not necessarily work elsewhere. For example, Chinese people don't pay much attention to rules. The Chinese government can make funny or unworkable rules, and it's not a problem. Likewise, American people do not respect elders. The US government can have old politicians on television saying offensive and unworkable things, and it's not a problem.
So if Russia started copying China today, it almost surely wouldn't work.
Well, it is clear enough the government here in America, Admin and Deep State do no want to be troubled by such an antiquated thing as elections and the will of the people.
True. They hate the concepts of popular will and broad prosperity. They'd rather rule over smouldering ruins and mass despair, provided they remain in charge.
In feudal times, at least the lords in their manors understood they depended on the peasantry to survive and sought to perpetuate the system indefinitely. Our rapacious elites seem to think we are little more than useless eaters. There is nothing genuinely conservative about them, when you think about it.
They believe their own bullshit to an alarming degree. They're also economic near-illiterates. They understand just enough to work severe harm on labour, and not nearly enough to compete with emerging peers.
The Protocols of Zion – Preface, Introduction, Who are the Elders?
Of the Protocols themselves little need he said in the way of introduction. The book in which they are embodied was published by Sergyei Nilus in Russia in 1905. A copy of this is in the British Museum bearing the date of its reception, August 10,1906. All copies that were known to exist in Russia were destroyed in the Kerensky regime, and under his successors the possession of a copy by anyone in Soviet land was a crime sufficient to ensure the owner’s of being shot on sight. The fact is in itself sufficient proof of the genuineness of the Protocols. The jewish journals, of course, say that they are a forgery, leaving it to be understood that Professor Nilus, who embodied them in a work of his own, had concocted them for his own purposes.
Mr. Henry Ford, in an interview published in the New York WORLD, February 17th, 1921, put the case for Nilus tersely and convincingly thus:
“The only statement I care to make about the PROTOCOLS is that they fit in with what is going on. They are sixteen years old, and they have fitted the world situation up to this time. THEY FIT IT NOW.”
In years past, now long ago, socialist discourse in the West could include non-dogmatic examinations of capitalism and the development of internal markets. That's gone. It's been replaced by the same crackpot puritanism spiralling that informs the identitarian movements. The net effect has been to drive away anyone interested in transition economics. A culture of vituperative strawman accusations and fatuous psychologizing is lethal.
Yeah, the dogmatism you see across the spectrum is so tiresome.
I think that's tied in to the overproduction of wannabe elites. The PMC class has burgeoned and there are not enough jobs of any kind to keep them employed. The market for mediocre managers is saturated. Everything from the corporate sphere to NGOs to the military to academia is packed. The competition for jobs is fierce. Their nastiness rises in proportion to the scarcity. None of them have any real skills. And now the language models (e.g. ChatGPT) are sophisticated enough to replace most of them.
What works in China does not necessarily work elsewhere. For example, Chinese people don't pay much attention to rules. The Chinese government can make funny or unworkable rules, and it's not a problem. Likewise, American people do not respect elders. The US government can have old politicians on television saying offensive and unworkable things, and it's not a problem.
So if Russia started copying China today, it almost surely wouldn't work.
Every society will have to find a formula that works for it. There is no one-size-fits-all answer to economic questions.
Well, it is clear enough the government here in America, Admin and Deep State do no want to be troubled by such an antiquated thing as elections and the will of the people.
True. They hate the concepts of popular will and broad prosperity. They'd rather rule over smouldering ruins and mass despair, provided they remain in charge.
In feudal times, at least the lords in their manors understood they depended on the peasantry to survive and sought to perpetuate the system indefinitely. Our rapacious elites seem to think we are little more than useless eaters. There is nothing genuinely conservative about them, when you think about it.
They believe their own bullshit to an alarming degree. They're also economic near-illiterates. They understand just enough to work severe harm on labour, and not nearly enough to compete with emerging peers.
The Protocols of Zion – Preface, Introduction, Who are the Elders?
Of the Protocols themselves little need he said in the way of introduction. The book in which they are embodied was published by Sergyei Nilus in Russia in 1905. A copy of this is in the British Museum bearing the date of its reception, August 10,1906. All copies that were known to exist in Russia were destroyed in the Kerensky regime, and under his successors the possession of a copy by anyone in Soviet land was a crime sufficient to ensure the owner’s of being shot on sight. The fact is in itself sufficient proof of the genuineness of the Protocols. The jewish journals, of course, say that they are a forgery, leaving it to be understood that Professor Nilus, who embodied them in a work of his own, had concocted them for his own purposes.
Mr. Henry Ford, in an interview published in the New York WORLD, February 17th, 1921, put the case for Nilus tersely and convincingly thus:
“The only statement I care to make about the PROTOCOLS is that they fit in with what is going on. They are sixteen years old, and they have fitted the world situation up to this time. THEY FIT IT NOW.”
Indeed they do!
http://www.renegadetribune.com/the-protocols-of-zion-preface-introduction-who-are-the-elders/
“There is nothing genuinely conservative about them, when you think about it.”
How the 'Grift Right' Gimps for the Left . . . https://cwspangle.substack.com/p/how-the-grift-right-gimps-for-the
Very true, here in Europe as well. Yet they still need to preserve the appearance of such, and therein lies the rub.