Hitler started cultural Marxism. I recently listened to an audio book of Nietzsche and the Nazis By Stephen Hicks. It is eerily similar how Hitler was compared to modern Leftists in his way of thinking.
I guess I kind of knew that. My point was this way of thinking was used by Hitler. In my mind Hitler was a Progressive, no different from modern day Progressives in his ideologically driven agenda. I wouldn't say liberals are the real nazis (as opposed to conservatives) though I definitely have thought that in the past. Liberal or conservative, it makes no difference. It's all inexorably leading us off the same cliff. The real nazis are the globohomo elite, the Bilderberg group, the people who scheme in Davos. Many of them are Jews.
Do you have any books to recommend on the development and history of the Frankfurt school? I am an avid reader.
This is part of why communists are so destructive. Small-c conservatives wish to make changes - if they wish to make changes at all - by small, measured alterations, evaluating as you go.
Communists, on the other hand, seem to want to much more satisfying experience of knocking every flat in order to build again. It's much more visceral and exciting, so visceral and exciting, in fact, that they never seem to progress beyond the "knocking everything flat" stage in any particularly significant degree. At least until the inevitable Party apparatchiks turn up, execute the useful idiots and impose an old-fashioned, but marginally workable dictatorship.
All suggested -isms have one collective foundation...gaining consent of free will to a suggestion made by the free will of another; which represents ignorance towards the sole authority over self (free will) in exchange for submission to a false authority (the free will of others).
A simple bait & switch; exploiting offer/consent under natural law.
Ideologies offer people a bargain where the subject gives up their free will, and in exchange they get to follow others (presumably this is desirable because it's an easier existence).
AND, at the same time, they get to maintain the illusion of having free will, because the ideology presents itself as the expression of the free will of the collective, and thus they are saved the dissonance of feeling unfree.
Stability is maintained because everyone is submitting themselves to what they believe is the free will of their equals, an aggregate collective will of us, while in reality they are all subject to the ideology with has a mind of its own, so to speak.
Ideologies offer people a bargain where the subject gives up their free will, and in exchange they get to follow others (presumably this is desirable because it's an easier existence).
a) free will cannot be given away; only ignored, since choice is defined by balance; which is defined by flow upon form. We (form) exist as a response within flow; hence life representing the balance between inception and death.
b) form set into flow defines the need for struggle by choice of action (adaptation) for the sustenance of form within flow. So the suggested bargain of an easy existence always represents a deception.
AND, at the same time, they get to maintain the illusion of having free will, because the ideology presents itself as the expression of the free will of the collective, and thus they are saved the dissonance of feeling unfree.
Close...it's not the illusion of free will they suggest; but the illusion of choice within a controlled environment (our beliefs; which represent our choice of ignorance aka fiction within reality). Free will of choice represents ONEs sole authority over self within ALL, and with form being a response to flow; choice represents ONEs responsibility over balance within ALL.
Stability is maintained because everyone is submitting themselves to what they believe is the free will of their equals, an aggregate collective will of us, while in reality they are all subject to the ideology with has a mind of its own, so to speak.
The foundation of stability (form) represents the momentum of motion; within which temporary form can sustain. That momentum is defined by flow; while we each have the responsibility over ONEself (potential) within ALL (potentiality).
Being subject to an ideology represents the "chain of command" under false authority (the free will of others); a self perpetuating hierarchy build out of the choice of ignorance. It's not just a world wide caste system; but it also represents the origin of the pyramid scheme...those within will kiss up; while kicking down to progress; which in return allows fewer and fewer up top; while the upper echelons unite automatically under the same agenda...keep the exploitation going or face the consequences of the exploited below.
It's all self perpetuating; with the all seeing eye representing those who comprehend it; which are two groups...those who ruthlessly exploit the many (through suggested information), and those who struggle to fix the whole mess (through generated inspiration).
The short version of the chain of command; the mainstream; the party-line; the narrative etc. is "flow". We are being deceived to ignore the sustenance of form (life); while lured towards chasing after flow (death).
Even simpler...they suggest want; we ignore need. That's the main inversion and it's our free will of choice.
?
spending much time reading up on some works by socialists now in the summer.
just chilling at the lake reading mein kampf and karl marxes letters and books.
so far my gut tells me hitler was truer to marxes vision than the commies or fascists. especially on the jewish question XD
Hitler started cultural Marxism. I recently listened to an audio book of Nietzsche and the Nazis By Stephen Hicks. It is eerily similar how Hitler was compared to modern Leftists in his way of thinking.
welp, another book to add to the list.
I guess I kind of knew that. My point was this way of thinking was used by Hitler. In my mind Hitler was a Progressive, no different from modern day Progressives in his ideologically driven agenda. I wouldn't say liberals are the real nazis (as opposed to conservatives) though I definitely have thought that in the past. Liberal or conservative, it makes no difference. It's all inexorably leading us off the same cliff. The real nazis are the globohomo elite, the Bilderberg group, the people who scheme in Davos. Many of them are Jews.
Do you have any books to recommend on the development and history of the Frankfurt school? I am an avid reader.
Do you have any recommended books on the frankfurt school?
This is part of why communists are so destructive. Small-c conservatives wish to make changes - if they wish to make changes at all - by small, measured alterations, evaluating as you go.
Communists, on the other hand, seem to want to much more satisfying experience of knocking every flat in order to build again. It's much more visceral and exciting, so visceral and exciting, in fact, that they never seem to progress beyond the "knocking everything flat" stage in any particularly significant degree. At least until the inevitable Party apparatchiks turn up, execute the useful idiots and impose an old-fashioned, but marginally workable dictatorship.
All suggested -isms have one collective foundation...gaining consent of free will to a suggestion made by the free will of another; which represents ignorance towards the sole authority over self (free will) in exchange for submission to a false authority (the free will of others).
A simple bait & switch; exploiting offer/consent under natural law.
So let's see here...
Ideologies offer people a bargain where the subject gives up their free will, and in exchange they get to follow others (presumably this is desirable because it's an easier existence).
AND, at the same time, they get to maintain the illusion of having free will, because the ideology presents itself as the expression of the free will of the collective, and thus they are saved the dissonance of feeling unfree.
Stability is maintained because everyone is submitting themselves to what they believe is the free will of their equals, an aggregate collective will of us, while in reality they are all subject to the ideology with has a mind of its own, so to speak.
Is that anywhere near what you meant?
a) free will cannot be given away; only ignored, since choice is defined by balance; which is defined by flow upon form. We (form) exist as a response within flow; hence life representing the balance between inception and death.
b) form set into flow defines the need for struggle by choice of action (adaptation) for the sustenance of form within flow. So the suggested bargain of an easy existence always represents a deception.
Close...it's not the illusion of free will they suggest; but the illusion of choice within a controlled environment (our beliefs; which represent our choice of ignorance aka fiction within reality). Free will of choice represents ONEs sole authority over self within ALL, and with form being a response to flow; choice represents ONEs responsibility over balance within ALL.
The foundation of stability (form) represents the momentum of motion; within which temporary form can sustain. That momentum is defined by flow; while we each have the responsibility over ONEself (potential) within ALL (potentiality).
Being subject to an ideology represents the "chain of command" under false authority (the free will of others); a self perpetuating hierarchy build out of the choice of ignorance. It's not just a world wide caste system; but it also represents the origin of the pyramid scheme...those within will kiss up; while kicking down to progress; which in return allows fewer and fewer up top; while the upper echelons unite automatically under the same agenda...keep the exploitation going or face the consequences of the exploited below.
It's all self perpetuating; with the all seeing eye representing those who comprehend it; which are two groups...those who ruthlessly exploit the many (through suggested information), and those who struggle to fix the whole mess (through generated inspiration).
The short version of the chain of command; the mainstream; the party-line; the narrative etc. is "flow". We are being deceived to ignore the sustenance of form (life); while lured towards chasing after flow (death).
Even simpler...they suggest want; we ignore need. That's the main inversion and it's our free will of choice.
I'm almost surprised to say that at least parts of this made some sense to me.
Based