I don't understand why anti white isn't good enough. Arguing about terms seems a bit frivolous. This Riboua person doesn't even mention what's most important, white erasure. I think it's a little disingenuous to handwave Andrews' idea because the regime kinda sorta supported apartheid south africa a little bit as a short term anti communist tactic. Really seems to ignore the big picture. Saying that Mamdani supports empire in any meaningful sense is a bit like saying Joe Biden believed in free and fair elections. Mamdani didn't mention much about bringing America's enemies to heal or spreading an empire of liberty across the globe. Instead, he thanked all the non white groups who supported him. Because hatred of whites is the currency of our enemies. Everything else is mere intrigue. All the talk of woke this or trad that and 'muh culture' and which type of stupid christianity and on and on and on are major distractions. Like when men should be lifting, acquiring skills, tapping gash and instead they're...oh I don't know...playing morrowind for 12 hours straight. No one should play video games after they've hit puberty and they should probably be banned altogether. Heterosexual porn (with domination and a firm hand against a subjugated female) should be shown to boys on a daily basis in all our schools from a relatively young age. Just my two cents, while we're going off on tangents about what terms we should use to describe our enemies. In a related story, what color should the uniforms be? Are we Arminians or calvinists? I'm really sick of these cosplay zoomers with their assorted collection of esoteric idiosyncratic sexually repressive right wing ideas/complicated BS/convoluted crushingly boring meaningless crap, like some old guy with his stamps or trains. Please make them go away. This is what happens when people never masturbate. Glad to know the online right is focused on the important questions. Please kill me now.
Attend your local GOP, be vocal, and start using the term "race communism" instead of "woke". Your local suburban GOP has so much power, and most of the time the precinct committeeman chairs seats are left open or uncontested. They are shocked when anyone under the age of 55 shows up. During the course of a few meetings, you can turn a hall of a thousand people from Brilyn Hollyhand into Scott Greer if you talk clearly, and calmly about the four main issues Scott brought up in this article. Dress nicely too. Do not sperg out. Use data, facts, and real life examples. Talk like Chris Rufo would.
I don't see a problem with the term "progressive" - in fact it's the best one. I say "progressive" and "conservative" instead of "right" or "left", because P & C are immutable like north & south, unlike right & left whose consituencies change over time, and depends on the POV of the speaker.
In politics, you're either wanting to change society, or wanting to preserve it. Those are the two poles. In every culture around the world. Why do we need a "scary" term like Race Communism? Just say so-and-so is a Progressive and everyone knows what you mean. You can even qualify it with "mild" or "very" progressive. Same for conservative.
The only problem with this is how long does one define a period of time after which something is considered conservative? For me, it's at least a century. So by that standard, wanting social security is conservative, but wanting SNAP benefits is progressive.
I like "leftist" as a general term, but I'm starting to just use "democrat" more often. There's functionally no difference between the terms like there was a couple of decades ago, since blue dogs have all either died or gone Republican and there are vanishingly few members of the party who are respectable individuals. The root word effectively means 'mob rule' which is something everyone should be against. It's a simple three-syllable word that easily rolls off the term as a slur. And maybe if we can get enough people to use it as a curse word we can permanently associate that stink with a party whose name is their brand and can't easily change it.
I like lumpen racial redistributionism or ethnoredistributionism which captures the fact that it’s primarily about taking from the most productive and giving to the least productive primarily along racial lines, but that’s not something you can slur someone with and it’s a bit too heady.
it would never break through in the same way kyriarchy never broke through for the left.
Saying 5 simple words will stick better than one complex one, and 1-2 simple words will stick easiest of all.
One thing that commends “third worldism” to me (besides saving a syllable compared to race communism) is that the Left’s implicit goal is to transform the United States, and all Western nations, into third world states.
And the project of a right wing political movement should be maintaining our status as a first world nation.
In other words, it gives us something tangible and desirable to be *for*—first worldism—as well as something to be against.
"First World" and "Third World" refer to Cold War alignment. They're not a tier list. The US is always First World by definition, because it refers to the US and its allies. Notice how no one ever says "Second World" anymore, because that referred to the Soviet Union and other communist countries. The unaligned Third World happened to be mostly the global south, so people started associating it with general poverty and awfulness, but that's not what it means.
Third Worldist in modern language means the people who simp for any country that isn't part of the American empire like Iran, China, Russia, North Korea, various South American countries, etc. (India is absent for some reason, hmm) It's also an anachronistic term but that's more of what it means.
I like the term race communism, or Cultural Marxism. Cultural Marxism means it calls everyone to have equal outcomes, not equal opportunities, and it does it by race and not class. Global Cultural Marxism ties it to being a world wide thing of equality or equity. I also see their viewpoint most stated in Ibram Kendi's thesis. Ibram X. Kendi’s most notable and defining quote on discrimination from his book How to Be an Antiracist is: "The only remedy to racist discrimination is antiracist discrimination. The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination
"Highly Respected" my ass. How about you call the left what they really are - Human Beings that care about humankind? You repugnant conservatives don't care about anything but power and money.
The Left killed 100 million innocent people in the 20th century. How is getting thousands of people killed in the US every year by repeat violent offenders out on multiple felony bonds, released by Democratic judges and Democratic district attorneys, caring about humankind? 95.2% of all stranger on stranger murders in the United States are a direct result of Democratic policies. You even fail the people you claim to defend. 14,000 to 17000 black people are killed every year as a direct result of Democratic/Leftist policies at the state executive/legislative/judicial policy level, local DA level, and local judge level.
Are you still paying Scott money? Be an economic leftist at least and not a woke one. Blame the big tech oligarchs who fund the ADL and AIPAC if you got a problem.
I think there is alot of utility to the term 'Pardocratia', which Cal Crucis defines as
"This is a more historically focused term that avoids something clunky & hazy like "3rd world race communism" or "global market socialism", among other sorts. It's the recognition that the impetus behind the Bandung Conference & the creation of the "3rd world" has deeper roots in anti-colonial liberation movements that have a history longer than the Age of Revolutions but exploded with that time (e.g. Tupac Amaru, Fr. Hidalgo, the Haitian Revolution). This would later meld into the Leninist adjunct to Marxism in anti-imperialism, but the important point is that Socialism was a means to an end, which was land reform for an underclass that would form itself into a new patronage network that was anti-white because pro-indigenous (however that was defined). This indigenousness was itself a novelty, not necessarily the original peoples, but increasingly a mixture of white, indio, & black. This 19th c. concept has become poignant for the racial genesis of "People of Color," who have a similar kind of consciousness about their estate & project. This is a coherent political vision that can make sense of the past & future as a grand anti-colonial struggle to bring about a true global village of equality"
I think 3 is marginal (and somewhat covered by 1 and 2) and should be replaced with feminism. Even sans immigration and demographic replacement as seen in South Korea, feminists can destroy a society.
Fake news! Many women who claim to be bisexual just use it a term to make themselves seem unique and think the prospect of lezzing out with another woman is gross.
I personally always preferred race communist. Like to throw gay race communism in as well to capture the hyper effeminate nature of it.
Great minds think alike. We simultaneously posted this.
I remember seeing "gay race communism" on Twitter a lot and I thought that was a pretty good descriptor. "Woke" needs to be retired.
I don't understand why anti white isn't good enough. Arguing about terms seems a bit frivolous. This Riboua person doesn't even mention what's most important, white erasure. I think it's a little disingenuous to handwave Andrews' idea because the regime kinda sorta supported apartheid south africa a little bit as a short term anti communist tactic. Really seems to ignore the big picture. Saying that Mamdani supports empire in any meaningful sense is a bit like saying Joe Biden believed in free and fair elections. Mamdani didn't mention much about bringing America's enemies to heal or spreading an empire of liberty across the globe. Instead, he thanked all the non white groups who supported him. Because hatred of whites is the currency of our enemies. Everything else is mere intrigue. All the talk of woke this or trad that and 'muh culture' and which type of stupid christianity and on and on and on are major distractions. Like when men should be lifting, acquiring skills, tapping gash and instead they're...oh I don't know...playing morrowind for 12 hours straight. No one should play video games after they've hit puberty and they should probably be banned altogether. Heterosexual porn (with domination and a firm hand against a subjugated female) should be shown to boys on a daily basis in all our schools from a relatively young age. Just my two cents, while we're going off on tangents about what terms we should use to describe our enemies. In a related story, what color should the uniforms be? Are we Arminians or calvinists? I'm really sick of these cosplay zoomers with their assorted collection of esoteric idiosyncratic sexually repressive right wing ideas/complicated BS/convoluted crushingly boring meaningless crap, like some old guy with his stamps or trains. Please make them go away. This is what happens when people never masturbate. Glad to know the online right is focused on the important questions. Please kill me now.
Attend your local GOP, be vocal, and start using the term "race communism" instead of "woke". Your local suburban GOP has so much power, and most of the time the precinct committeeman chairs seats are left open or uncontested. They are shocked when anyone under the age of 55 shows up. During the course of a few meetings, you can turn a hall of a thousand people from Brilyn Hollyhand into Scott Greer if you talk clearly, and calmly about the four main issues Scott brought up in this article. Dress nicely too. Do not sperg out. Use data, facts, and real life examples. Talk like Chris Rufo would.
I don't see a problem with the term "progressive" - in fact it's the best one. I say "progressive" and "conservative" instead of "right" or "left", because P & C are immutable like north & south, unlike right & left whose consituencies change over time, and depends on the POV of the speaker.
In politics, you're either wanting to change society, or wanting to preserve it. Those are the two poles. In every culture around the world. Why do we need a "scary" term like Race Communism? Just say so-and-so is a Progressive and everyone knows what you mean. You can even qualify it with "mild" or "very" progressive. Same for conservative.
The only problem with this is how long does one define a period of time after which something is considered conservative? For me, it's at least a century. So by that standard, wanting social security is conservative, but wanting SNAP benefits is progressive.
I like "leftist" as a general term, but I'm starting to just use "democrat" more often. There's functionally no difference between the terms like there was a couple of decades ago, since blue dogs have all either died or gone Republican and there are vanishingly few members of the party who are respectable individuals. The root word effectively means 'mob rule' which is something everyone should be against. It's a simple three-syllable word that easily rolls off the term as a slur. And maybe if we can get enough people to use it as a curse word we can permanently associate that stink with a party whose name is their brand and can't easily change it.
No single term captures them perfectly, but I tend to divide them between Jewish supremacists and nigger communists.
I like lumpen racial redistributionism or ethnoredistributionism which captures the fact that it’s primarily about taking from the most productive and giving to the least productive primarily along racial lines, but that’s not something you can slur someone with and it’s a bit too heady.
it would never break through in the same way kyriarchy never broke through for the left.
Saying 5 simple words will stick better than one complex one, and 1-2 simple words will stick easiest of all.
You're all a bunch of fucking shitbag MAGAts. Fuck off all the way to Hell.
Stop oppressing me
One thing that commends “third worldism” to me (besides saving a syllable compared to race communism) is that the Left’s implicit goal is to transform the United States, and all Western nations, into third world states.
And the project of a right wing political movement should be maintaining our status as a first world nation.
In other words, it gives us something tangible and desirable to be *for*—first worldism—as well as something to be against.
"First World" and "Third World" refer to Cold War alignment. They're not a tier list. The US is always First World by definition, because it refers to the US and its allies. Notice how no one ever says "Second World" anymore, because that referred to the Soviet Union and other communist countries. The unaligned Third World happened to be mostly the global south, so people started associating it with general poverty and awfulness, but that's not what it means.
Third Worldist in modern language means the people who simp for any country that isn't part of the American empire like Iran, China, Russia, North Korea, various South American countries, etc. (India is absent for some reason, hmm) It's also an anachronistic term but that's more of what it means.
Yes, and “Right” and “Left” refer to what side of the hall members of France’s Constituent/Legislative Assembly sat in the 1790s.
The original etymology of a term doesn’t constrain the evolution of its meaning, especially for something as fluid and context-dependent as politics.
I like the term race communism, or Cultural Marxism. Cultural Marxism means it calls everyone to have equal outcomes, not equal opportunities, and it does it by race and not class. Global Cultural Marxism ties it to being a world wide thing of equality or equity. I also see their viewpoint most stated in Ibram Kendi's thesis. Ibram X. Kendi’s most notable and defining quote on discrimination from his book How to Be an Antiracist is: "The only remedy to racist discrimination is antiracist discrimination. The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination
"Highly Respected" my ass. How about you call the left what they really are - Human Beings that care about humankind? You repugnant conservatives don't care about anything but power and money.
Take the greerhead pledge ASAP
The Left killed 100 million innocent people in the 20th century. How is getting thousands of people killed in the US every year by repeat violent offenders out on multiple felony bonds, released by Democratic judges and Democratic district attorneys, caring about humankind? 95.2% of all stranger on stranger murders in the United States are a direct result of Democratic policies. You even fail the people you claim to defend. 14,000 to 17000 black people are killed every year as a direct result of Democratic/Leftist policies at the state executive/legislative/judicial policy level, local DA level, and local judge level.
You're full of shit, MAGAt. Keep swallowing the lies. You people are absolutely and stunningly stupid.
Are you still paying Scott money? Be an economic leftist at least and not a woke one. Blame the big tech oligarchs who fund the ADL and AIPAC if you got a problem.
I think there is alot of utility to the term 'Pardocratia', which Cal Crucis defines as
"This is a more historically focused term that avoids something clunky & hazy like "3rd world race communism" or "global market socialism", among other sorts. It's the recognition that the impetus behind the Bandung Conference & the creation of the "3rd world" has deeper roots in anti-colonial liberation movements that have a history longer than the Age of Revolutions but exploded with that time (e.g. Tupac Amaru, Fr. Hidalgo, the Haitian Revolution). This would later meld into the Leninist adjunct to Marxism in anti-imperialism, but the important point is that Socialism was a means to an end, which was land reform for an underclass that would form itself into a new patronage network that was anti-white because pro-indigenous (however that was defined). This indigenousness was itself a novelty, not necessarily the original peoples, but increasingly a mixture of white, indio, & black. This 19th c. concept has become poignant for the racial genesis of "People of Color," who have a similar kind of consciousness about their estate & project. This is a coherent political vision that can make sense of the past & future as a grand anti-colonial struggle to bring about a true global village of equality"
I think 3 is marginal (and somewhat covered by 1 and 2) and should be replaced with feminism. Even sans immigration and demographic replacement as seen in South Korea, feminists can destroy a society.
You're really missing a key component of the left if you ignore the LGBTQ stuff.
Since almost all women are to some degree bisexual, feminism can cover the LGBTQ territory pretty well.
Fake news! Many women who claim to be bisexual just use it a term to make themselves seem unique and think the prospect of lezzing out with another woman is gross.