Larry Fink and his Black Rock.
(media.communities.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (48)
sorted by:
Every one of BlackRock's department leaders, including Fink is a WEF Young Global Leader
ESG is the metric behind the WEF's Stakeholder Capitalism. It IS fascism.
That sounds about right. The real leaders are nameless bankers.
Stop using leftist framing. All that does is amplify their power. It is not fascism nor national socialism nor even communism. Those are dead ideologies.
You're right. It was never Marxism or any modernist ideas. It's always been a vassal hierarchy with promised positions to devoted followers. Nobody actually wants these modernist ideas, they just want to be positioned for the vassal state and not be serfing the internet.
Everything was just a cover for that. With all the intercommunication going on, the ability to accomplish this goal quietly or with propaganda drops. So, they glitz it up and say it will help those in lower positions. Not serfs, not them ever, but the lower positioned class.
How do I know this? Every country claiming to head toward utopia has ended up this way.
Marxism is alive and well.
No one is trying to unite the workers of the world to seize the means of production. Post-modernism was a rejection of grand meta-narratives, including the dialectic of historical materialism. Progressives have moved beyond that too as they have a crafted new meta-narratives. While there are similarities in structure, the left is not Marxist. Gottfried has pointed out the structural similarities to Calvinism, but, outside of Moldbug, no one is calling these people Calvinists, and even Yarvin has given up on that.
Fine. Neo-marxism then, or cultural marxism.
Too specific. Think of it like this:
Marx believed and professed that there were, largely, two groups of people. One with property (to him this was capital) and one without. For him, those with property i.e capital (bourgeoisie) engaged in a system, capitalism, to exclude others from obtaining this property that afforded them the better life.
When you think of it this way, it absolutely is still alive and well and used knowingly and unknowingly in a myriad of ways.
For example, whiteness. Those with this property i.e. whiteness engage in a system, white supremacy, to exclude those without this property from enjoying its benefits.
You can apply this framework to anything and it's exactly what they're doing. That thing is Critical Theory, and that is Marxism.
Aha, but they are. They are uniting them under the banner of SJWisms to fight eachother, and also the productive workers, who happen to be of different political beliefs than them. this is the start of a political oligarch grabbing power to transform into a dictatorship.
They are fascist, and making sure everyone knows that fascism was born from socialism, and is inherently leftwing is what destroys leftist framing. Not calling their vaguely defined variant of authoritarian socialism by some new term. Never let them call fascism right wing and you will win bigger.
And fascism does exist today. After the starvation period communist nations become fascist ones. Communist China is a fascist nation.
The merger of state and corporate power under ideology and party is fascism. The state helps the corporate sector by destroying their competition and making them above the law, the corporate power helps the state by controlling the media apparatus and providing massive kickbacks to politicians (party leaders.)
Is it a different iteration of fascism? Yes. It has a more global scale than just conquering Europe. Has it changed in tactics and ideology? Yes. The found that people indoctrinated in marxist thought make the best disposable blackshirts. They applied marxist and fascist thought to create things like critical race theory.
The foundation of the postwar global regime has been antifascism. You aren't going to win by calling them fascists and declaring yourself the real antifa. It is simply one of their many words for enemy. Fascism, as in the authentic mid-century Italian variety, can easily be critiqued from a reactionary view, such as its egalitarianism, antiracism and materialism, but that's not the point.
Stop using progressive framing. Fascism is a functionally meaningless word in its common usage that should be stepped over. If calling progressives fascists was an effective tactic, they would have been dislodged from power at some point in the last 90 years that it has been tried.
-George Orwell, What Is Fascism?, 1944
Spez: The best candidate for the current inheritor of Fascism is Israel. The Revisionist Zionism of Likud has a lot of overlap with Italian Fascism, although with a much greater racial awareness. There is a reason so many jews that would go on to found Israel were hanging out with Mussolini, at least until Hitler pressured him to throw them out.
We need to call the current system of corporate/USG collusion what it is--Fascism. I agree getting caught up in definitional arguments is a waste of time, but it is necessary to call things by their proper names and Megascandal is correct, "The merger of state and corporate power under ideology and party is fascism." The ideology is neo-Marxism and for the time being the Fascist party in the US is the Democratic Party. Confusing the matter further is the fact that for at least 60 years here in the US "Fascist" has been the go-to epithet used by the left against the right, so much so that most people believe Fascism is a "right-wing" ideology.
Orwell's point is that "Fascism" had been a term used so promiscuously it came to refer to any political ideology one dislikes. This is still true and unfortunately this confusion makes people more comfortable with our current form of Fascism. The Citizens United SC decision cleared the field for American Fascism, and when you look at the relationship between corporate lobbyists and our "representatives" it's apparent that our republican democracy is bought and sold by corporations. In fact, Eisenhower's "military-industrial complex" is a synonym for "Fascism."
We aren't calling ourselves cringe like antifascist, we are calling fascism left wing. Which it is because it was born from socialism.
Leftist dogma is defining fascism as right wing, as their opposite, when it couldn't be further from the truth. Calling Fascism LEFT WING is destroying the argument of the enemy because their entire justification is that "right wing is fascism and we must defeat right wing to defeat fascism." Their ideology is completely obsessed in calling fascism right wing to the point that it is an ideological lynch pin for them. When fascism is literally what they are doing from rigging elections, to having banks stop serving people they disagree with.
a political philosophy or regime that exalts nation and often minorities above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social control, and forcible suppression of opposition politics
Leftist framing? they pretty much fit this definition. You can guess whether this is fascism or socialism.
What you're describing is every government. Every government eventually boils down to one (or a few) people who decide. Every government that wants to survive will suppress existential threats.
Levels of economic control depend primarily on technological level. It is impossible to believe that at any time in the present or future that governments in US/Europe/Russia/China will ever return to an economy as decentralized as the economy in the 1950s, the 1850s, or any prior time. The technological genie will not be put back in the bottle.
autocracy isnt referring to "a few people who decide" it means when there is ONE ruler with absolute power.
'Existential ' threats is not synonymous with controlling the economy, and controlling domestic politics
It will happen when we have a just leader. And for the record your argument doesnt disprove anything i said. They still c0ompletely fit the definition of fascism.
That's a near worthless defintion. This describes the regimes of Lincoln and Diocletian equally well.
Setting fascism as the ultimate evil against which all other bad things are compared is the foundation of the current leftist worldview. "We are the real antifascists," is a brain dead take that only affirms the progressive narrative. Fascism is peculiar to mid-century Italy and cannot exist outside of that time and place.
Then write a new dictionary, artard.
The merger of state and corporation. Making all rights the state's, and the only freedom is in serving the state.
It's a globalist version, but fits many of Mussolini's statements about fascism. Even that it was possible because of liberalism, but liberalism is over now that it served it's purpose.
This is silly. You'd have to call FDR fascist too with these skin deep takes. The fascist weren't trying to dissolve the bonds of society.