Why are so many neo-conservative imperialists former Trots?
What is it about the Anti-Stalinist Left that attracts them to neoconservativism?
Why are so many neo-conservative imperialists former Trots?
What is it about the Anti-Stalinist Left that attracts them to neoconservativism?
Don't tell anyone but…
(they're the same thing ;) )
I'm serious here. If you look at all the Bush neocons who supported the Iraq War, almost all of them were ex Trots (most from Red Flag).
It's not only Trots, but Marxist humanists (and sometimes anarchists) as well.
The reason being is, they're saturated with Enlightenment philosophy and get to the point where they believe the West and "western values" are something worth protecting.
Look no further than Murray "google me" Bookchin's support of Israel: he wasn't supporting Israel out of ethnic loyalties, but because it represented progressive/humanist values in comparison to its "savage" Arab neighbors. Likewise, the Platypus Society as well as the Marxist Humanist Initiative frequently go on about "left anti-semitism" (doesn't exist) and use all sorts of whataboutisms whenever Zionism is brought up. "But all forms of nationalism are bad so why single out Israel?!?!?!" Not to mention Zizek is heading down that road as well. I'd also be concerned about Zero Books.
most of them are utopians who've had their ideology built around the dictator-democracy dichotomy which made them anti-Stalin in the first place. This is basically the foundation of modern imperialist ideology.
Also because of their rejection of the USSR; they were left wing anti commies and when the USSR collapsed they had to movie to the next big other.
That too, but more importantly they hold to false ideas of western/Christian supremacy. They believe eastern (including Eurasian) peoples are all de facto totalitarian and backwards.
It's the obsession with revolutionary upheaval and the global "liberation of humanity" - which was easily aligned with the US government's foreign policy goals to provide an ideological justification for US intervention in Third World countries (MUH FREEDOMS, MUH DEMOCRACY, MUH HUMAN RIGHTS)
my friend knows zizek personally and constantly brings up how zizek rips shit on israel non-stop so unless there has been some new development within the last year where he loves israel im highly critical of this claim
If you're a trot, you're either a neocon or a Posadist.
Israel is an interesting case since its entire essence is hypocrisy and dual faces. Israel portrays itself as European in character, progressive, tolerant, democratic and "fun" but in reality most of Israel's population is made up of Eastern Jews from Arab countries and something like 1/3rd of its population is right-wing orthodox Jews who reject Enlightenment values and are overall kosher Evolas.
I believ Stalin condemned Trotsky as an adventurist during the Soviet-Polish War, saying that the Poles were still in their nationalist phase and trying to force socialism on them wouldn't work until they were ready for it.
It's not a huge leap to go from "Permanent Revolution" and Trotsky's utopian dream of the Red Army liberating the world - to something like Bush's imperialist utopian "down with the dictator" approach to Iraq.
wtf? i love the jews now
They're not good people.
It's something that started with the generation of Trotskyists that Trotsky himself lived with (and constantly criticized). Max Eastman and James Burnham are the major examples, and Burnham in particular was at the heart of Buckley-esque conservatism for a generation.
I think part of it can be explained by deep politics (if I'm not mistaken it's confirmed that the CIA supported anti-Soviet leftist publications for a period, Trots among them) and part of it can be explained by the psychology of people who'd pick up the "Trotskyist" label in the first place. If you think about it, the chance Trotskyism gave people of calling themselves Marxists and Bolsheviks without the risk of long-term career and reputation damage that being a pro-Moscow communist posed was probably very tempting to the sort of faddist, middle-class, college radical of the world of letters that would easily switch banners when offered a nice paycheck. They could have their little socialist phase without any of the self-sacrifice usually associated with it, and eventually when a major conservative newspaper needed a Leftist to vomit pseudo-Socialist defenses of war, to attack the Soviet Union from a leftist perspective or just trash Labour/Democrat politicians, they would hire them and set the ball of neo-conservative transformation rolling.
Have a source for Trotsky's criticism of the future neocons?
Left wingers who become right wingers are usually guys who got owned hard by the right.
Actual right wingers despise neocons because they are former trots and 99% jewish.
Neocons are basically liberals that like war a lot. There is nothing conservative about them.
The neocon movement is on the decline though because of trump victory and alt right.
Also the whole starting a forever war in the middle east and crashing the economy
Trump isn't a neocon but the people around him are.
Then why is he threatening destruction on North Korea at every turn? Why did he launch dozens of cruise missiles at Syrian bases?
So he's not a "neocon", he's just a regular imperialist, what does it matter?
No man rules alone. He has to satisfy the interests of his peers. If the US government and associate institutions are full of neocons and the like than that will be the chief police no matter who is president.
Chief policy* not police*
In their litle soirées, the New Left came to the conclusion that thanks to Stalin, USA was the lesser evil. Add the common move rightwards as one grows older and no doubt some CIA CONINTELPRO and presto, neoconservatism.
This guy, Durão Barroso used to be a maoist, loo in the video how he talk, he talks like Jason Roo kek
Then he married a very welathy chick, changed for the right wing party, became the prime-minister, in the middle of his term he was invited to become the head of EU comission, and now he works for Goldman Sachs.
Clearly the Stalin Society and ISIS are the only true uncorrupted revolutionary movements to support in our time.
DEFEND ISIS AGAINST WESTERN IMPERIALISM REEEEEEEEEEE!!!!
His rhetoric wasn't that of a neocon but all his actions save striking down the TPP have been typical of one. I think he can be safely considered a neocon, just the degenerate end stage of the disorder.
what the fuck trots EXPLAIN YOURSELVES.
In fact.. do any Trots even post here? I'm pretty sure they know not come here. I'm not sure trots know what the internet is, still get all their info from newspapers
Daily reminder the first "neocon" was Leo Strauss who was never a Trot.
Doug Lain, the publisher, is probably a crypto-humanist
One of his recent guests was Moishe Postone, who is a huge Zionist.
The fact that Doug never challenged him on this view is proof enough Doug is not /ourguy/.
so much for anti-establishment
What do people think about trotskys theory of uneven and combined development? Just read an article that said it was really good. Do some people like this contribution while not liking Trotsky or do most of you think its not important or bad?
we've been over this he didn't say "Israel is so great lets all critically support Israel against arab arab barbarism" he said, even if Israel goes away their are plenty of arabs suffering under brutal regimes.
Who? Bookchin or Zizek?
they moved to the right because of anti-Zionism on the left. Zionism always takes priority for Jews, and neoconservatism is primarily a Jewish and Christian-Zionist movement.
Jews You know it's true.
It's not Trotsky who's the issue, it's Hegel.
Literally all of these people were Hegelian-oriented Marxists before Hegel's philosophy took them straight into Neoconland.
Platypiss Society should be the most obvious example. Chris Cutrone literally advocates Palestinian genocide and US imperialism in Afghanistan on the basis that these things are the "rational kernel" or some shit.
Religious Right was never Trot.
neo conservative isnt even a thing.
Secondly what some edgy teens called themselves in college in order to get easy access to pussy isnt necessarily indicative of their politics.
Meanwhile, trotskyism is a tendency that presents itself as taking itself very seriously and is for serious people. "Conservatism" is also the ideology for serious grownups so you can see there might be a natural progression after they get out of college and no longer feel peer pressure.
Also see this
You are really just repeating anti-semitic smears by talking this trot=neo con line.
Found the Jew
Let us not forget many French MAOISTS became NeoCons well into the 1980s, the most obvious example being BHL.
found the tank
Antihumanism and revolt against enlightenment values are also used to justify atrocities and fascism as well, dipshit. Just look at Modi who wants to "cleanse" Indian society of anything foreign. You know, "decolonize the mind" type of bullshit.
Socialism is an enlightenment philosophy dipshit.
get in line. the LLCO discussed this years ago
Trots haven't sold out any more than other leftist groups.
You may as well ask why Stalinists become hardline reactionaries and market revisionists.
God damn, that shit is tankie as fuck.
And i stopped reading
i should've seen that you were full of shit at "marxist humanists". my bad i guess.
Zero Books features Zionists like Postone on his show.
he also interviewed a posadist and published a book about angry frogs
What is it about the Stalinist 'left' that makes them think they were ever leftists?
At least he had good taste in music
Increasingly believe politics is more about who you hate than who you like.
Hence why you can sometimes have an alliance of SocDems and Socialists and so on, but at other times two types of socialists will loathe one another more than even capitalism, because their primary enemy in their present struggle is each other.
Also perhaps why I love Peter Hitchens (because he's critical of Thatcherism and privatised companies) and dislike Christopher. (Because he likes Tony Blair and the Iraq War, which are "enemies")
I like this guy.
Orwell literally denounced socialists and communists to the British government. He was a piece of shit
Because Trotskyism is the lefty version of imperialism.
He denounced stalinists. And we was basically dying at that point.
Really? I know people use Trotsky's name as a catch-all term for political ideologies they don't like sometimes, but calling Hitchens that implies he was ever a socialist. Not even a SuccDem would be that much of a war mongering piece of shit.
if your brain has turned to mush its generally "ok" to do anything.
Also orwell did nothing wrong. He perceived stalinists as a serious threat to britain and socialism. And no one was denounced, all that happened to them was that the intelligence services kept tabs on them in case they were in a position to do damage as spies.
This was not uncommon. In australia ASIO kept a file on literally every politically active left wing person in the country. Including my dad, who dindu nuffin.
It isn't, neither is thinking that the US/Israel and their lackeys needing to be violently driven out of the MENA supporting Islam either. Get fucked burger
Scapegoating philosophers is fucking stupid.
trots are neocons tho or at least certain elements of trotskyism is stolen from neocons
Ironic, because the Islamic World gave us those "enlightenment values" 800 years before the West.
This. The West is a joke, really. Everything they have is stolen from other civilizations - they just take credit for it.
God tier post.
Tankies think that ISIS is a branch of the CIA.
In an interview he claimed to be a dialectical materialist.
Postone also has a bizarre idea that in modern capitalist economy labour has become so abstracted that it no longer can be used in Marx's traditional theory of labour exploitation and therefore should be abandoned. He then says that the left has to find a new source of revolutionary activity (which he believes will come about due to the contradictions within capitalism) but still it is a bit odd. I mean I only gave his work a very brief look over so I may be wrong here, but from what I've seen it is pretty revisionist.
So screencap it.
I'm not seeing those passages there, try as I might searching for one "Jason Handjob". All Google returns is a 404 PDF here in Holla Forums
Also it's hillarious that you phrase it "a threat to BRITAIN and socialism". Socialist movements should be a threat to the existence of any nation-state insofar as it's one built upon capitalist relations. The abolition of capitalism in a nation would necessarily abolish to some degree that country in the sense that certain cultural and institutional power relations will have to be changed or abolished all together.
You're a fucking idiot.
Roo used fake names to avoid liability.
Can you actually tell me what's incorrect in Parenti's statement on Left anticommunism or are you just going to throw around childish buzzwords
Trot leads to brain rot
Trotskyism was the implicitly Ashkenazi-nationalist branch of international communism. The transition of Trotskyists into neoconservatism was the result of two factors:
1. The increasing realization that Ashkenazim were being purged from the increasingly ethno-nationalist Soviet Union and that Trotskyism had no future in Russia.
2. The fact that the Soviet Union had become a major backer of anti-Israel military actors, necessitating the creation of a new ideological faction which would manipulate Ashkenazi host populations into defending the Jewish ethno-state.
Nothing about neoconservatism makes sense unless Ashkenazi tribal self-interest is taken into account.
As if you know what that means…
Ashkenazim are an inbred Semitic/Italian high-I.Q. merchant clan which specializes in infiltrating and manipulating European host populations.
They are literally stupid goy cattle who ruined their careers and legacies in order to pursue the tribal interests of their masters.(USER WAS BANNED BY JEWS)
Wtf I'm nazi now
Although Iraq was indeed a Jewish war and neoconservatism was/is indeed a predominantly Jewish movement, saying that neoconservatism is a branch of Communism is blatant nonsense. Neoconservative is ideologically more or less ultra-hawkish Israel-uber-alles liberalism. Jews moved from the New Left to neoconservatism mainly as a response to left anti-Zionism, at least those who weren't Soviet emigres. Holla Forumssters need to get off this "Everything is Communism!" nonsense, it makes you look stupid.
Also, the prominence of Christian Zionists in neoconservatism makes it somewhat atypical among Jewish movements - though Christian Zionism was originally a Jewish effort to get Christianis to support Israel through funding the Scofield Bible.
Didn't tead the rest of your ghost story.
Okay lets kill every Jew, whoops capitalism and the profit motive still exists. Thank god my slave owner's last name is Odinson, I am less oppressed based on that.
We need political organizations to achieve political goals. We can't achieve anything if we allow a highly cohesive external population to infiltrate all of our organizations and transform them into organs for pursuing their own tribal interests. Ignoring the JQ is impossible.
hence why we should kill all anglos
You don't have to be a particularly tribal or cohesive population to conquer a bunch of dysfunctional third world brown people. Ashkenazi institutional conquests in white countries are objectively more impressive.
"Marxism is a mental illness"
- Mikhail Bakunin
I can understand how they would switch to Capitalism but I honestly don't understand how they went far right instead of being socdems. How can you possibly stop believing in things like single payer healthcare.
Reminder that "Trots = neocons" is a meme made up by right wingers and leftists should stop parroting this nonsense
Because their political beliefs are guided by one question: "What's good for the Jews?"
So obviously Communism and especially "New Left"-ism was at one point better for the Jews because it was explicitly anti-racist, anti-nationalist, was the ideology of a superpower which had banned anti-Semitism and fought Nazism, recognized Israel, etc.
Obviously there is the usual Jewish double standard here where racism is okay provided it's against Arabs and nationalism is okay when it's done by Israel, though these beliefs are not held by all Jews. When anti-Zionism took hold on the left it ceased to be good for the Jews so they moved towards neoconservatism, which is essentially liberalism guided by concern for what is good for the Jews, almost nothing is conservative about it.
Here I'm ignoring the Christian Zionists who love Israel because they think it's their Biblical duty and will bring about the Rapture sooner, or whatever.