Any organization not explicitly right-wing sooner or later becomes left-wing

Marxism is anti-rationalist and SSC is anti-Marxist and pro-capitalist.

I should add that he literally critiques Communism for not taking into account human nature and being ignorant of economics. There is nothing worth reading on that blog.

Except the nazis were plenty infiltrated by jews

Are you saying that because of dialectical materialism?

I wouldn't say marxism is anti-rationalist but I would say it's anti-Rationalist

standard psychiatry is a bourgeois fiction used to induce docility in the population through drugs and hide the reality that the horror of the capitalist mode of production causes mental illness

there is no such thing as human nature, yes. human nature is determined by the material conditions of society.

Only if you re-define "left-wing" to include Social Liberal porkies.

It's not a Holla Forums-meme but an old conservative/republican American one.

Any organization not explicitly anti-capitalist sooner or later turns into sell outs and apologists for the status quo.

Idk there are excellent critiques of idpol on that blog The Toxoplasmy of Rage and I Can Tolerate Anything Except the Outgroup.

Franklian psychology (logotherapy) is pretty cool and can easily be turned into a critique of Capitalism.

Gulag with you.

Any organization not explicitly X-wing just works under the paradigm of capitalism and therefore becomes vaguely centrist and opportunist.

"Leftwing" by American standards, thus liberal. Conquest came up with it, but it was a popular saying among proto-aut-right types who ultimately are just mad that don't get to join goosestepping parades and wear fancy armbands.

His opinions on communism are idiotic, yes. Doesn't mean there is worth reading on that blog.

...

Which historians of the left are actually professional and haven't been on the payroll of at least one intelligence agency?

Marx
:^)

Parenti?

Hobsbawm.

...

that's just not true, first of all. And I think you underestimate the extent to which genuinely subversive movements become "legalized," "officialized," or otherwise recuperated. In other words, they get neutered. But if you're from a far-right demographic, the same sort of process may be visible from the other side. In order to make certain commodities, identities, and other shit more marketable, they begin marketing to the most middle-of-the-road or left-wing-but-safe types of people. Of course it makes perfect sense that the most powerful propaganda organs out there tend to have a cosmopolitan, tolerant but not subversive bent and this bent may appear to the left of a lot of the general public on social issues. But of course these people are not subversive. They're just city liberals. This is the ideological machine preserving itself. Occasionally it will become too bloated and dysfunctional and a more right-wing populous will take the reigns. But this is the default. Tolerant-but-safe leftlib cosmopolitanism.

I kinda contradicted myself here midway through I guess. nvm friends. ignore.

I meant historians of the history of the left, not leftist historians.

But what about leftists historians of the Left?

Well these are good too, so long as they didn't get money from the KGB or something.

Anything that is not explicitly hostile to social constructionist idpol will succumb to it.

Why wouldn't "the jews" infiltrate white supremacist movements? everyone by now should know that the best way to kill a movement is to send people in and make them be retards in public.

Any large business or state naturally becomes more left wing over time and any individual naturally becomes more right wing over time.

No idea why.