Having skimmed through the manifesto, Hatfield clearly defies easy classification, and might well be a somewhat original thinker. I have written up a brief, unpolished commentary (long relative to standard Reddit-style posts) of sorts but suspect I won't bother posting it anywhere. A cursory grappling with his ideas was an interesting intellectual exercise.
Far-Left
He's a Marxist, but jettisons equality between the sexes, in particular, out of it, and possibly jettisons equality of various other kinds out of it as well. He clearly rejected trans-sexualism altogether. Equality of sexual minorities would likely also be out in toto. Marxism becomes redirected towards a less egalitarian end-goal, in a way that almost all contemporary neo-Marxists would absolutely reject.
Anti-capitalist
Yes. Capitalism and the bourgeoisie for him drives feminism, which is how he arrives at the unusual combination of Marxist anti-capitalism and anti-feminism.
Pro-communist
Yes, but I detect no explicit anarchist, Antifa-style nonsense element. Possibly, the 'Hatfieldian' state never withers away, but rather ends up as a possibly permanent tool for liquidating degenerates, such as drug dealers, pedophiles, and pornographers, controlling the internet to make it 'devoid of degeneracy', and various other things.
Jew hating
No. Contra sources like Rebel News, he only mentions the yids once, and not in a wholly negative light.
Whilst I find plenty with which to disagree, I suspect that, with more polish, his manifesto would have been publication worthy, and possibly second only to that of Kaczynski in terms of its novelty and general value.
Having skimmed through the manifesto, Hatfield clearly defies easy classification, and might well be a somewhat original thinker. I have written up a brief, unpolished commentary (long relative to standard Reddit-style posts) of sorts but suspect I won't bother posting it anywhere. A cursory grappling with his ideas was an interesting intellectual exercise.
He's a Marxist, but jettisons equality between the sexes, in particular, out of it, and possibly jettisons equality of various other kinds out of it as well. He clearly rejected trans-sexualism altogether. Equality of sexual minorities would likely also be out in toto. Marxism becomes redirected towards a less egalitarian end-goal, in a way that almost all contemporary neo-Marxists would absolutely reject.
Yes. Capitalism and the bourgeoisie for him drives feminism, which is how he arrives at the unusual combination of Marxist anti-capitalism and anti-feminism.
Yes, but I detect no explicit anarchist, Antifa-style nonsense element. Possibly, the 'Hatfieldian' state never withers away, but rather ends up as a possibly permanent tool for liquidating degenerates, such as drug dealers, pedophiles, and pornographers, controlling the internet to make it 'devoid of degeneracy', and various other things.
No. Contra sources like Rebel News, he only mentions the yids once, and not in a wholly negative light.
Whilst I find plenty with which to disagree, I suspect that, with more polish, his manifesto would have been publication worthy, and possibly second only to that of Kaczynski in terms of its novelty and general value.