The coming revival of workers struggle, and its place in our arc of civilizational progress

Today’s dormant period for the working class is not going to last forever. October 7 proved that in our stage of capitalist crisis, where the global workers are trapped in a perpetual decline, these masses will be compelled to mobilize when a major disruptive event appears. The next catalyst for renewed popular struggle could be another anti-imperialist revolt like October 7, or it could be a domestic uprising where one small group of workers inspire millions of others to act. It’s certain that they will act, though, even after all of the shock-and-awe tactics our rulers have used to paralyze the people. 

Class struggle is the defining factor in the present stage of humanity’s long-term development. Therefore there will always be some new upsurge in the revolutionary activities of the masses after the masses have been beaten back. Mao said that “Classes struggle, some classes triumph, others are eliminated. Such is history, such is the history of civilization for thousands of years. To interpret history from this viewpoint is historical materialism; standing in opposition to this viewpoint is historical idealism.” American civilization could soon reach the same point in its evolution that China’s civilization did when its workers won; the proof of this is how many Americans now embrace an anti-systemic politics. Our duty is to guide the mass energy in the right direction when this inevitably produces revolt.

When it comes to the question of how we can prepare for the next big upswing, of how to create an organizational force that gives the masses the means to win this confrontation, a critical aspect is the generational divide in how today’s masses are responding towards our conditions. Class struggle is immutable, but people with different class roles will have to navigate a situation in their own ways. And the increasingly unstable environment that we’ve been thrust into since 2008 has forced the bulk of Gen Z into a different role than the bulk of their Gen X parents, who along with millennials will make up the vast majority of the workers which are in position to carry out the upcoming strike waves.

The other working-age adults are largely missing from this equation. Those who’ve graduated in the post-Covid era are faced with the worst job market in our lifetime, and this will likely continue to be the case for a long while. This means that the ones in this generation who are out of school aren’t on the path to gaining the careers and economic leverage which the established workers possess. It also means that for those who are still in school, there’s an even greater political chilling effect. The attitude among the students right now is that throwing themselves into political struggle isn’t worth it, because the risk of being tracked and shut out of employment is too great. And when employment is so scarce, these students are further inclined to treat self-preservation as their sole priority.

This doesn’t mean that these parts of the masses won’t be brought into revolutionary politics. But it does mean that any organization which seeks to lead the working masses to victory must learn how to bring in an uncertain strata such as them. Accompanying his statement on the principle of class struggle within civilization, this was the problem that Mao said China’s communists needed to solve: “It is the duty of progressives -- the Communists, members of the democratic parties, politically conscious workers, the student youth and progressive intellectuals -- to unite with the intermediate strata, middle-of-the-roaders and backward elements of various strata, with all those in People's China who are still wavering and hesitating (these people will waver for a long time to come and, even after they have once become steady, will waver again as soon as they meet difficulties), give them sincere help, criticize their wavering character, educate them, win them over to the side of the masses, prevent the imperialists from pulling them over and tell them to cast away illusions and prepare for struggle.”

The role of these students and unemployed graduates is uncertain because they mostly are not part of the working class, and most of them likely won’t be allowed into the working class for a long time. So though a new uprising by the workers is guaranteed, we don’t yet know what will come from the disgruntled professionals. Part of creating a cohesive organizational structure for the workers depends on bringing these professionals into the struggle; there is real revolutionary potential within this strata that we can’t ignore, and intellectuals always have a part to play in a revolution. Therefore one of our central tasks is to cast away the illusions that threaten to bring these professionals away from such a revolutionary role, with the main illusion right now being reformism.

This is not to say that revolution can only come from the intellectuals and the elites, which is an idea that the reformists are pushing. I’m saying we need to bring in these alienated members of the “professional-managerial class” partly because if we don’t lead them away from reformism, then reformism will swallow up the working-class movement as well; because the intelligentsia hold a unique kind of leverage over movements, and we need at least a considerable part of them as allies. 

Without our intervention into the politics of the PMC, Democratic Party entryism will remain the default, and after this strategy fails it will be replaced by other deviations. What we need to do is put forth a working-class politics that brings in all parts of the masses who share revolutionary potential; and, thereby, takes on a character which is truly working-class precisely because it’s shed exclusivity towards the workers.

For a politics to actually be revolutionary, rather than a narrow economism that solely focuses on affairs in the workplace, it needs to account for every strata that could become class allies of the workers proper. This is why Mao so strongly emphasized persuading the classes who vacillate, and why the flag of China’s revolutionary government would include four stars to represent the proletariat, peasants, urban petty-bourgeoisie, and national bourgeoisie. It’s the eclecticalism in your practice, the intelligence to go deep into the masses and find all of your friends-in-waiting, that gives real revolutionary life to your working-class organizing. 

The ranks of the American communist movement are at this stage in the process of re-learning the unionist skills that we lost with the 20th century’s retreats. These skills can only be acquired through direct experience, and the bulk of us aren’t yet ahead of the masses in this area. What can give our politics broad appeal, though, and earn us many new recruits in our efforts to re-organize the workers, is a project at unifying the masses around advancing the next civilizational steps. 

The bulk of the people already in effect support our politics; they want to get rid of the system that’s destroying their lives and liberties, while forcing them to pay for billionaires’ wars. If we build a series of coalitions against Epsteinite corruption, data centers, Flock, the military-industrial complex, and all other enemies that the masses recognize, the path forward will become clearer—both for the masses and for us. 

————————————————————————

If you appreciate my work, I hope you become a one-time or regular donor to my Patreon account. Like most of us, I’m feeling the economic pressures amid late-stage capitalism, and I need money to keep fighting for a new system that works for all of us. Go to my Patreon here. 

To keep this platform effective amid the censorship against dissenting voices, join my Telegram channel.

Our post-2008 decline, the great male “dropout,” and a path forward through globalization’s ruins

One sign of hope for avoiding an American gender war is that the bulk of today’s “dropout” men are not motivated by gendered ideological zeal. They’re motivated by a desire to gain peace after experiencing an environment that they can’t exist in anymore. This is shown by the lack of a male equivalent to the feminist movement, even while the number of alienated men explodes. 

As a rule, the men who’ve been withdrawing from the dating market, careers, or friendships aren’t doing so because they want to join an ideological crusade; they’re simply voting “no confidence” by abstaining from the social contract. This isn’t the mentality of a dangerous misogynist element, it’s the mentality of a group with rising depression and suicide. This is a reality that’s obscured within the increasingly prominent rhetoric vilifying our society’s “excess males.” It’s also something that impedes the efforts of those seeking to pull these left-behinds into the “men’s rights movement,” or any other ideological cause. 

Within this passive rebellion, there is potential for class consciousness, for the building of a mass organizational force that brings these men together with all the other victims of global capital. To defeat the attempts at dividing the working masses, and provide these left-behinds with a means for asserting their interests, we will need to grasp just what kind of crisis they’re facing. 

I’m speaking both to whatever men who may be able to relate to the conditions I’m describing here, and to my fellow participants in the realm of working-class organizing. This is a civilizational crisis that can only be rectified if we update our views of society according to how society has changed in this last generation. If we seek to liberate the masses from our banking dictatorship, we’ll need to go into the parts of the masses who are being pushed out of the traditional life paths.

For working-class men and women, this process of being “de-classed” looks different, and this discrepancy is by design. There has appeared a stark and growing divide between the lifestyles of the sexes, creating contradictions that the gender war psyop can exploit. For Americans who are Gen Z or younger, there is now a reverse gender pay gap; in our environment where Wall Street has engineered a perpetual unemployment crisis, and raised interest rates incentivize businesses to reduce headcount, it’s comparatively harder for men to get chosen. This relates to a much older problem where our educational system has been set up to be hostile towards the male brain, leading to a bigger proportion of women getting degrees and their associated careers.

At the same time that this educational gap has been widening, the pool of potential graduates has been shrinking, because since 2008 the birth rate’s decline has greatly accelerated. Universities are now starting to become vocally concerned about this; and the inevitable scaling-down in these institutions compounds an existing trend, one where higher education has been getting progressively dismantled. The direction of our ruling system is to increasingly discard the professional class, and this keeps making the “normie” lifestyle less accessible; which is another factor that could produce unity among the masses, since more of the professionals are becoming proletarianized. But this unity will emerge only if we overcome the civilizational imbalances that could make the gender wars become worse, and lead to greater atomization instead of solidarity.

All of these trends—the decline in new families, the shrinking of the job market, the gender-slanted elite overproduction—have acted to isolate the sexes from each other in a physical sense. There’s been a concentration of women into the metropolitan areas as women go on the higher-education pathway, while men born in the rural areas go towards the manual labor careers often found within their own hometowns. Combined with the shrinking number of younger people, the calculus many women have made to not choose men who can’t provide, and the disappearance of communal “third spaces” that 2020 greatly accelerated, this leaves many millions of men with no prospects for marriage. As trends stand right now, relationships between men and women are dying out. However, we should not expect the United States to “go extinct” in the way that south Korea or Japan are, and this is because of a particular societal factor: the great presence and future growth potential for America’s religious institutions.

Gen Z is seeing a religious revival, but not in the way that the media portrays it. This change is only happening within a specific part of Gen Z, this being the one that’s not caught up in the atomization process which keeps driving individuals into the “left behind” class. The number of conversions has been overstated, but they are happening, with Gen Z men being the main participants in this shift so far. What could bring many more men and women down this path is the undermining of the universities, a disruption that will leave former professional class members adrift but will incentivize many others to become religious.

This turn towards religion will not translate to a rise of support for ruling-class politics, but quite the opposite; two of the biggest institutions that have been seeing increased interest are anti-Zionist Islam, and the Catholic Church, which rejects theological Zionism and American exceptionalism. The picture that’s emerging is one where our civilization sees an expansion in the community structures which let new families happen, and a solidification of anti-systemic popular sentiments within these communities.

These developments on their own will not lift most of the “excess” males out of their condition, because the gender demographic imbalance won’t be solved without massive structural changes. What the religious revival will do, though, is create a sense of collective solidarity that wasn’t there in the earlier stages of our crisis. 

Gender war politics have been able to do so much damage because what’s now considered the “successful” life path is one that’s completely hostile towards those who society has abandoned, with excess males being an easy target for this classist worldview. The hyper-individualist culture that’s promoted by university-tied professions is one which despises whoever falls behind. But in the culture of the alternative careers that are offered by the Catholic Church, professionals are actively encouraged to provide aid to those who are struggling.

As Gen Z’s new religious recruits respond to higher education’s sabotage by building new professional paths within the church, our government will increasingly try to suppress Islam and Catholicism. This assault on religious freedom will go along with the escalating war against the unions, the dissident political organizations, and the ability to engage in speech. These provocations by our rulers will force a rupture in our society whose effects reach everyone, including the “excess” males. We’ll all have to choose whether we want to stay on the sidelines, and watch as a Zionist-imperialist regime destroys the people’s basis for independent power; or join in on the fight to rescue our civilization. This is the confrontation that our generation’s collective tragedy has been building up to, and it will provide a purpose to millions of people who’ve been shut out of the “normie” life path.

————————————————————————

If you appreciate my work, I hope you become a one-time or regular donor to my Patreon account. Like most of us, I’m feeling the economic pressures amid late-stage capitalism, and I need money to keep fighting for a new system that works for all of us. Go to my Patreon here. 

To keep this platform effective amid the censorship against dissenting voices, join my Telegram channel.

The masses are gravitating to the “Jewish question.” To win them over, Marxists must account for why.

As the masses become more alienated from post-Covid society, the default is for them to gravitate towards the “Jewish question.” I’m talking not just about in my own country the United States, but much of the rest of the world, as the social factors that lead to this development have been exported through global Americanization. These factors are things that Marxists must truly understand in order to respond towards the JQ properly; otherwise we’ll trap ourselves in a bubble that’s detached from the state of the people.

The JQ is where the masses are at; it’s not just right-wing individuals who’ve been coming to this line of thinking, the framework’s prevalence is reflected by just how common it now is for commentators to use jokes or references that come from the framework. It’s your friends, family, and neighbors who are engaging with this content, and in all likelihood they are not coming from a place of real prejudice when they resonate with these ideas. So if we aren’t seeing a horrifying “rise of antisemitism,” like the Israeli agents say, then what’s truly happening in our discourse?

What’s happening is that the relationship the working masses have with their social environment—and with the managerial institutions which facilitate this environment on the local level—has broken down so severely that they’re embracing the same thinking which defined popular consciousness during much earlier productive stages. I’m talking about before feudalism had been fully replaced by capitalism, when it made more sense to the masses that Jews could be exerting control through small-scale managerial institutions. This was how Engels explained the popular focus on Jews among exploited people in this stage of development, despite the auxiliary role that Jewish capital truly held within the larger monopoly-financial system:

Even in England, Rothschild is a man of modest means when set, for example, against the Duke of Westminster. Even in our own Rhineland from which, with the help of the French, we drove the aristocracy 95 years ago and where we have established modern industry, one may look in vain for Jews.

Hence anti-Semitism is merely the reaction of declining medieval social strata against a modern society consisting essentially of capitalists and wage-labourers, so that all it serves are reactionary ends under a purportedly socialist cloak; it is a degenerate form of feudal socialism and we can have nothing to do with that. The very fact of its existence in a region is proof that there is not yet enough capital there. Capital and wage-labour are today indivisible. The stronger capital and hence the wage-earning class becomes, the closer will be the demise of capitalist domination. So what I would wish for us Germans, amongst whom I also count the Viennese, is that the capitalist economy should develop at a truly spanking pace rather than slowly decline into stagnation.

It was when the German economy declined in this way that the JQ became more prevalent than ever, and finance capital funded the Nazis so that they could weaponize the JQ against the working class. Today, with the perpetual decline that the working class has been experiencing over the last generation, we’re seeing this process repeat in a different way. Actual “antisemitism” doesn’t pose a threat to anyone under our conditions, and Jews aren’t at risk of becoming a persecuted minority. The actual holocaust that could come from the JQ now is an extended genocide against the Palestinians, whose cause for liberation is frustrated by the popularization of an ahistorical view on what’s behind Israel. There is a real danger of a violent Nazi movement in America and elsewhere, but this comes from capital’s psyops spinning out beyond the system’s control.

When the feds boost JQ content, the purpose of this is to create “proof” of overwhelming Jew-hatred that the Zionists can use as vindication, as well as to confuse the workers out of organizing for their class. And to combat the thinking that makes the JQ psyop feasible, we must provide the masses with an alternative explanation for why their social environment has turned against them. For why they’ve been confronted with a living nightmare where money is fake, there’s no hope for a prosperous future under the present system, and purpose has been stolen from them.

Who are Marxists saying is guilty of our era’s systemic crimes? We are not saying that no one is guilty, and all of modern history is just the outcome of an amorphous “capital.” For the Marxists who are actually serious about challenging the liberal order, and who get constantly attacked by the algorithms, it’s clear that an independent intelligence is at play within our society’s systems of control. And the Jewish wing of this system is only one part of it, though Zionism has shown that Engels may not have seen how big its role would become.

In On the Jewish Question, Marx recognized that Jewish religious institutions objectively have a function tied to capital, with one of his statements being that money serves as the god of Jews. He put this in the context of the class struggle, though, by pointing out that money is the god of bourgeois society as a whole. So if Judaism is not exceptional in its connection to capital, then the only way to emancipate Judaism from this condition and solve the “Jewish question” is through victory for the working class. When the working masses have been forced into a position that resembles serfs, like they increasingly are now, the JQ appears logical, because the individual has been secluded from the state; the individual hasn’t been raised up to the level of bourgeois cosmopolitanism, like happens in the higher developmental stages. 

In his explanation about what’s really behind the role which organized Judaism has, Marx explained this principle of the serf’s relationship to the ruling institutions:

Political emancipation is, at the same time, the dissolution of the old society on which the state alienated from the people, the sovereign power, is based. What was the character of the old society? It can be described in one word – feudalism. The character of the old civil society was directly political – that is to say, the elements of civil life, for example, property, or the family, or the mode of labor, were raised to the level of elements of political life in the form of seigniory, estates, and corporations. In this form, they determined the relation of the individual to the state as a whole – i.e., his political relation, that is, his relation of separation and exclusion from the other components of society. For that organization of national life did not raise property or labor to the level of social elements; on the contrary, it completed their separation from the state as a whole and constituted them as discrete societies within society. 

Thus, the vital functions and conditions of life of civil society remained, nevertheless, political, although political in the feudal sense – that is to say, they secluded the individual from the state as a whole and they converted the particular relation of his corporation to the state as a whole into his general relation to the life of the nation, just as they converted his particular civil activity and situation into his general activity and situation. As a result of this organization, the unity of the state, and also the consciousness, will, and activity of this unity, the general power of the state, are likewise bound to appear as the particular affair of a ruler and of his servants, isolated from the people

The more isolated the state becomes from the people, the more it abandons the masses and becomes a tool for police domination, the more traction the JQ will have the potential to gain. The JQ is based in the perception that the state’s power comes not from a practical need for the dominant class to enforce its rule, but from a constructed myth that keeps the state in place through sheer artificiality. This was the perception of Proudhon, the anarchist thinker who believed that a Jewish conspiracy is what’s behind all of the contradictions within civilization.

Proudhon’s ideology is the logical conclusion of the primitive, lumpenized kinds of anti-capitalist revolts, where alienated individuals inflict damage onto the immediate local symbols of the establishment. This ultra-left impulse to target only the small-scale managerial element, while forsaking an organized struggle against capital’s actual centers of power, is what’s behind the historic pipeline from anarchism to fascism. And as we build working-class power in this time of intensified alienation, we’ll increasingly find ourselves facing enemies who overlap across ultra-left and far right spheres. The far right has the potential to capture a major section of the masses, while the ultra-leftists will find a strong footing within a particular petty-bourgeois section of the most alienated. Get ready for the JQ, or politics that follow the model of the JQ, to show up in unexpected places.

————————————————————————

If you appreciate my work, I hope you become a one-time or regular donor to my Patreon account. Like most of us, I’m feeling the economic pressures amid late-stage capitalism, and I need money to keep fighting for a new system that works for all of us. Go to my Patreon here. 

To keep this platform effective amid the censorship against dissenting voices, join my Telegram channel.

The “capitalism made China’s success” lie hides the Marxist transition that the whole world is undergoing

What role in the discourse is served by the right-wing narrative that “China’s success came from capitalism?” The purpose of this deception is to numb the world’s workers out of taking any kind of action to assert their class interests, because supposedly if we keep the capitalist system then we’ll become like China through the right reforms. This is the only way that bourgeois dogmatists can still defend capitalism after the PRC has surpassed all of the world’s capitalist countries in so many respects. The framework of history that they present is a flat line where no matter how much evolution happens, capitalism must always be the prevailing system.

This view depends on completely obscuring the true character of China’s system, the distinction between capitalism and markets, and the fundamentally financial character that capitalism has had since the 19th century. Because the PRC exists outside of financial rule, and thereby has been able to utilize markets to enrich an economy that remains foundationally state-controlled, the premise of what these right-wing distorters say is demonstably wrong.

If we defeat this narrative in the popular consciousness, the workers will be exposed to a profound reality about what’s happening to today’s global civilization; a reality that can only be comprehended through recognizing China’s Marxist character. What China’s socialist development successes reveal is that a proletarian political structure can use markets to unleash the productive forces, in a way that the anarchy of production under capitalist rule could never do. Which shows that the accelerated monopolist consolidation and integration we’ve been seeing since the pandemic has created unprecedented means for the construction of socialism, bringing the entire globe closer towards replicating what China has achieved.

Right from the start of when capitalism gained predominance as the productive mode, and freed production from the old feudal constraints, there have been successful projects to use this historically unparalleled material power for the collective benefit—and in turn to further multiply the levels of wealth. This was what the industrialist Robert Owen did, as described by Engels:

The new mode of production was, as yet, only at the beginning of its period of ascent; as yet it was the normal method of production — the only one possible under existing conditions. Nevertheless, even then it was producing crying social abuses — the herding together of a homeless population in the worst quarters of the large towns; the loosening of all traditional moral bonds, of patriarchal subordination, of family relations, overwork, especially of women and children, to a frightful extent; complete demoralisation of the working class, suddenly flung into altogether new conditions. At this juncture there came forward as a reformer a manufacturer 29 years old…Robert Owen had adopted the teaching of the materialistic philosophers…In the industrial revolution most of his class saw only chaos and confusion, and the opportunity of fishing in these troubled waters and making large fortunes quickly.

He saw in it the opportunity of putting into practice his favourite theory, and so of bringing order out of chaos. He had already tried it with success, as superintendent of more than five hundred men in a Manchester factory. From 1800 to 1829, he directed the great cotton-mill at New Lanark, in Scotland, as managing partner, along the same lines, but with greater freedom of action and with a success that made him a European reputation. A population, originally consisting of the most diverse and, for the most part, very demoralised elements, a population that gradually grew to 2,500, he turned into a model colony, in which drunkenness, police, magistrates, lawsuits, poor laws, charity, were unknown. And all this simply by placing the people in conditions worthy of human beings, and especially by carefully bringing up the rising generation.

The bourgeois mindset that Owen rebelled against is not capable of grasping why someone would want to reorganize the productive forces around lifting up the working masses. Many of those in Owen’s class respected him, but they didn’t want to re-create what he did; and as soon as Owen came out as a communist, they shunned him and took away his standing in business. They gave his revolutionary innovations credit, but only as long as they could claim these innovations belonged to their own ideology and their own system. In retrospect, many of them probably came to view his effort at repurposing production as a cautionary story about what can give rise to communism.

When China’s rise came, and came in the form of a socialist development project, the only way this class could respond was by asserting that this project isn’t really socialist. Otherwise they would have no argument, which in fact they don’t. There is no “defending” the capitalist mode of production when the more advanced this mode becomes, the more of a basis there is for communism. When the impact of the infrastructural expansions by today’s biggest, most rapidly growing corporations is to further outmode the properly “capitalist” model, where the system functioned through private competition. 

This model died in 1929, when capitalist production could no longer work on its own terms and the system now had to be fundamentally run by the state. It was the inevitable conclusion of the exponential growth that the bourgeoisie’s victory brought. And in the post-Covid AI era, where human labor is being outsourced to machines at an unprecedented rate, this process is accelerating on an entirely new level.

“The new productive forces themselves can only be maintained and further developed by the introduction of a new mode of production corresponding to their present stage of development,” concluded Engels about the implications of introducing the system that made Owen’s society achievable. “That the struggle between the two classes engendered by the hitherto existing mode of production and constantly reproduced in ever sharper antagonism has affected all civilised countries and is daily becoming more violent; and that these historical interconnections the conditions of the social transformation which they make necessary, and the basic features of this transformation likewise determined by them, have also already been apprehended.” 

The bourgeoisie could not bring this new productive capacity to humanity without humanity then seeking to use these tools to their full potential. China has made this leap in evolution, so the bourgeoisie claims China’s success comes from the designs of their own class. Which is objectively not true; these achievements came from the designs of a workers party and a workers state. When seeking to reconcile their dogmas with the realities that China has revealed, bourgeois ideologists obscure the difference between productive forces and productive mode, asserting that as long as the productive means of the post-industrial era remain in use, the operative system must still be capitalism. 

It’s a dogmatism that says history stopped as soon as the capitalist mode of production came into being; which is the same absurd way that Owen’s peers could rationalize scorning his theories after they had admired the effects of these theories being put into practice. The bourgeois ideologists will remain in disbelief about the transformative nature of the productive mode they claim to love. The world’s proletariat will increasingly embrace this transformation as the conditions bring them into the class struggle.

————————————————————————

If you appreciate my work, I hope you become a one-time or regular donor to my Patreon account. Like most of us, I’m feeling the economic pressures amid late-stage capitalism, and I need money to keep fighting for a new system that works for all of us. Go to my Patreon here. 

To keep this platform effective amid the censorship against dissenting voices, join my Telegram channel.

The Zohran movement is Soros’ attempt to capture a system that can only keep spinning out of control

To understand Zohran’s role, we need to look at systemic forces that exist on an even higher level than his backers in the Soros family. We need to look at the imperial power structure as a whole, which is much bigger than even the most influential billionaires. It’s a system that’s so large, no one faction within it would ever be able to become truly supreme, because there will always be room for competitors. This is one of the core contradictions within monopoly finance capital. And because this contradiction can’t be escaped, the Soros wing has reacted towards imperialism’s latest crises by lifting up the “democratic socialist” tendency; which is a prelude to a clash within the ruling class that could tear apart the entire monopoly financial order.

No one can control a system that’s as big as the world

Stalin talked about the implications of this principle, in which the different monopolist wings will inevitably come to fight amongst each other. With the first contradiction of imperialism being between labor and capital, and the third being between colonial peoples and the colonizers, he identified how

The second contradiction is the contradiction among the various financial groups and imperialist Powers in their struggle for sources of raw materials, for foreign territory. Imperialism is the export of capital to the sources of raw materials, the frenzied struggle for monopolist possession of these sources, the struggle for a re-division of the already divided world, a struggle waged with particular fury by new financial groups and Powers seeking a "place in the sun" against the old groups and Powers, which cling tenaciously to what they have seized. This frenzied struggle among the various groups of capitalists is notable in that it includes as an inevitable element imperialist wars, wars for the annexation of foreign territory. This circumstance, in its turn, is notable in that it leads to the mutual weakening of the imperialists, to the weakening of the position of capitalism in general, to the acceleration of the advent of the proletarian revolution and to the practical necessity of this revolution.

These inter-monopolist conflicts are still happening, just in a different form than when imperialism still came from multiple countries. In the postwar age, the United States is the only imperialist country, because only the USA has the decisive financial power that’s required for a country to be imperialist during capitalism’s monopoly era. And now that the hegemon has entered into a long-term war against China, the factions inside the imperial ruling class are competing over which one gets to define how this war is waged. Over whether the goal of this entire project should be to benefit global capital, or domestic capital. At least this is the primary point of division; inside these two camps, additional factions keep appearing. And Zohran’s rise reveals that Soros’ Open Society doesn’t fully align with the old guard Democratic establishment.

Their divergence came from how after October 7, the Democrat leadership decided that it would enter an alliance with the Zionist right. The official Democratic Party line is to no longer even entertain individuals with views which are truly left-wing; this was shown when as soon as Hasan Piker fulfilled his role of lifting up the social democrats, liberal media started smearing him in the exact same way the Trump wing does. The Open Society camp has a different vision than these liberals, though. It believes that the best way to carry forth the war on China, and against the broader revolutionary forces, is through welfare capitalism and liberal two-statism.

The social base that the Soros wing employed to lift up this politics was the professional petty-bourgeoisie, who were behind both the campaign work and the votes for Zohran. These professionals have their own interests; ones that aren’t fully aligned with the Soros monopolists, but will keep them friendly with these monopolists until a new fissure appears within the system. 

A rift born out of horror over bourgeois logic’s failure

To be sure, this fissure is coming; the “democratic socialist” movement is foundationally unable to even gain ground outside the metropolitan centers, and because it functions within the Democratic Party, the DNC is capable of successfully orchestrating a great maneuver against it. The inevitable failures of this movement will push one wing of the DSA to split from the side Open Society favors. 

It’s within this divergence between the idealist intellectuals and the ruling-class cynics, between the petty-bourgeois radicals and the demagogues of big capital, where we find the repeat of an old fight. A fight that came out of the bourgeois revolutions, which both produced the modern professional intelligentsia and inevitably placed this strata into conflict with the class that it was supposed to serve.

When capital gained its decisive victory over feudalism, what came after brought about unprecedented social disruptions and institutional violence; which fundamentally contradicted the bourgeois rationalism of the Enlightenment, and forced the bourgeois revolutionary idealists to rebel against this new system as well. As Engels pointed out about what came when the proponents of this “rational” worldview got what they wanted:

The French Revolution had realised this rational society and government. But, the new order of things, rational enough as compared with earlier conditions, turned out to be by no means absolutely rational. The state based upon reason completely collapsed. Rousseau’s Contrat Social had found its realisation in the Reign of Terror, from which the bourgeoisie, who had lost confidence in their own political capacity, had taken refuge first in the corruption of the Directorate, and, finally, under the wing of the Napoleonic despotism. The promised eternal peace was turned into an endless war of conquest. The society based upon reason had fared no better. The antagonism between rich and poor, instead of dissolving into general prosperity, had become intensified by the removal of the guild and other privileges, which had to some extent bridged it over, and by the removal of the charitable institutions of the Church. The development of industry upon a capitalistic basis made poverty and misery of the working masses conditions of existence of society.

With the bourgeois order’s graduation into monopoly finance capitalism, the new imperial system could provide super-profits for a new class of privileged workers. These are the labor aristocrats who make up Zohran’s base: an elevated class who by their nature can only unionize within the realm of guilds, and who are now seeking to defend their livelihood model from the Trump wing’s attempts at dismantling it. We’re also seeing a repeat of the cognitive dissonance that the bourgeois rationalists were confronted with when their new system only threw civilization into greater poverty and conflict; doesn’t this perfectly parallel the discrediting of the “end of history” theory for the post-Soviet era, when the liberals “won” but were then hurled into a chaotic new century?

This theory came from the new bourgeois “rationalism,” in which somebody convinces themselves that they have an objective grasp on reality. This attitude is common among intellectual-minded, petty-bourgeois individuals who believe their opinions all come from an unchallengeable empiricist “logic.” Many in the millennial generation have embraced this mentality as a reaction towards the confusing changes the social media age brought, where the rules they grew up with suddenly no longer applied. Given that Zohran’s voters are overwhelmingly petty-bourgeois or millennial, it’s the definitive operating system within this base, like the Enlightenment rationalism was for the Napoleon-era intelligentsia. And the more that the ideology’s “logic” gets contradicted by the realities of history, the more the ideology’s proponents will be forced to embrace mutations of it.

What’s going to happen is that the base which has been swept up within the Zohran movement will undergo the same disillusionment process that birthed the left tendencies from the 19th century. As the intelligentsia and the craft labor aristocrats continue to be met with the exponential instability of our era, and growing portions of this class become lumpenized, today’s “democratic socialists” will have to reckon with this seemingly illogical upset. Like the original left, this current will go in many different directions. 

Parts of the DSA base will be picked up by hardline ultra-leftist orgs, others will become truly lumpenized to the effect that they’ve been rendered adrift nihilists, and others may even go to the far right. In an environment where the old order keeps breaking apart, and none of the mainstream ideologies offer real salvation, the trend is going to be towards ever-larger mass elements becoming untethered. 

If we understand that the old “rational” framework no longer works, that we’re navigating a world where no one is in control, then we become capable of bringing these masses into a cohesive proletarian politics. Then we can lead all of the alienated popular elements, whether they’ve come from MAGA or DSA or the apolitical mass, towards victory against their class enemies.

————————————————————————

If you appreciate my work, I hope you become a one-time or regular donor to my Patreon account. Like most of us, I’m feeling the economic pressures amid late-stage capitalism, and I need money to keep fighting for a new system that works for all of us. Go to my Patreon here. 

To keep this platform effective amid the censorship against dissenting voices, join my Telegram channel.

Global Israelification, the right’s tech nerds, & the project to manage a growing male “excess”

When I say Israelification, in cultural terms I’m talking about the use of sex and substances to cover up reality. The colonizer society in occupied Palestine employs these social weapons to sell the Zionist project, and to desensitize itself towards systematic mass-scale violence. Zionism’s propaganda frequently employs sexualization, turning its master race ideology into a way of fetishizing Jewishness. This messaging takes on an even darker character when you look at how “Israel” acts as a haven for pedophiles around the globe, and how the IDF fosters sexual assault both against Palestinians and in its own ranks. Fitting with the image of lavish Tel Aviv party culture, Zionism also encourages drug use, with it being a tradition for IDF soldiers to travel to India so they can take psychedelics and forget about their war crimes.

Within social messaging that’s strategically directed at certain global demographics—mainly alienated single men—these kinds of behaviors have been explicitly promoted by Israeli propagandists. Namely the right-wing author Bronze Age Pervert, who encourages his audience to not just promote societal decay but profit from it. As I’ve discussed in the past, BAP’s ideas have been influenced by the IDF advisor Edward Luttwak; and these ideas include the endorsement of sexual exploitation, gambling, drugs, and other monetary sources for the “lumpenbourgeoisie.” 

BAP represents a particular niche of right-wing intellectuals, but these agendas are also being pushed onto the minds of billions via the tech industry. It is this synthesis between “conservative” thinking and criminal degeneracy, advanced by the Zionist entity and its Silicon Valley allies, that global finance capital is using to ideologically capture the world’s rapidly growing sexless male population.

The Bronze Age Pervert psyop was one of the signs that the Zionist narrative managers see it as a critical task to seize upon the 21st century’s “excess male” base, and that our rulers believe this particular type of underclass will continue to expand. Another sign was when the Mossad produced Fight Club, which represented a proto version of the cultural manipulations that this intelligence network is now targeting men with. As our civilizational collapse began to make the numbers of excess men grow, of course intel agents would start taking notice of opportunities to influence them; making use of preexisting contradictions is core to what intelligence does. And the method they’ve settled on for how to pacify these men—or to weaponize them, as we’ll also increasingly see—is centered around rewiring the brain towards mindless libidinal release.

To see how these psychological attacks work, we must look at the different levels within the degenerate structure that Zionist tech has constructed. At the bottom, there are the lumpenized men who consume what the porn industry creates. In the middle, there are the petty-bourgeois upstarts who BAP was speaking to when he called for members of the right-wing movement to infiltrate organized crime. At the top, there are the tech nerds, who’ve been working to normalize not just regular porn but child porn; these have been the effects of Elon Musk’s aptly named “X,” which opened itself up to explicit content in 2024. 

This was an omen for what would come after it introduced Grok, which has given pedophiles a new tool for creating simulated images of children. Grok’s evils are part of a long-standing operation by the tech industry to normalize pedophilia; in 2002, the Supreme Court decided that bans against artificially generated child pornography are unconstitutional, preparing the pedocracy for when AI images would become indistinguishable from real life.

Popularizing the sexualization of children is something that modern governments have long been doing as a way to neutralize their “excess” males, who they can’t simply get rid of through war like past societies did. Is it a coincidence that at the same time when Japan’s postwar corporate life path model collapsed, and millions of men were rendered shut-ins, we saw the rise of an anime industry that’s heavily embraced pedophilic content? 

Pedophilia doesn’t exist in a vacuum, it’s nurtured by a society’s ruling institutions. The Netherlands, the prime global hub for child trafficking, has successfully normalized the view that sexual relationships with children are acceptable. And the tech bros have the role of pushing this agenda onto the masses of sexually starved males, who are encouraged to participate in the same paraphilias that their ruling class does. It’s a way for the pedocracy to make their behaviors trickle down into the broader public, and turn history in the direction that benefits their agenda of parasitism.

This is where the Zionist right takes on a critical role, not within the whole of bourgeois politics but within the particular realm of degeneracy promotion. As a popular political force, the Zionist right has already been discredited on a permanent level, because as a rule the masses have humanity and they’ll never forget the holocaust in Gaza. As a tool for managing the lumpenized “excess,” though, the tech wing of this ideology is only going to keep growing in influence until the system gets overthrown.

To defeat this system, we are going to need to think and act like internationalists, because the force we are up against is “globalist” in every sense. All parts of this destructive process—the decline in new families, the lumpenization of society, the use of sexualization for social control—is happening in every country where monopoly finance capital has decisive power. Growing out from the historic colonial powers, a birthrate decline is occurring across practically the whole globe, because the whole globe was brought into the capitalist mode of production; big tech’s social engineering towards excess men is about managing the fallout from capitalism’s latest social disruptions, and turning the human products of collapse into weapons for global finance.

The range of banker influence is right now expanding, as shown by the recent imperial takeovers in Syria and Venezuela. Israelification is one of the key outgrowths from this metastasizing anti-human force; it’s the tool the empire has decided on for how to control a growing global rabble of “excess” individuals. 

In past eras of capitalism, namely when feudalism’s end created a new mass of jobless vagrants, the system responded by shipping these left-behinds around the globe to become colonial settlers. This is one aspect of global Israelification; from Syria to Cyprus to Argentina, Jewish supremacists have been working to gain territorial footholds in a process that mirrors the early Zionist encroachments upon Palestine. Since this particular project is exclusive to Jews, though, it’s been necessary to create versions of Zionism for other ethnicities. 

Among the right-wing demagogues who target today’s left-behind men, there are figures who advocate for replicating the Zionist model to ethnic groups outside of Jews; namely the Epstein defender Nick Fuentes, whose goal is to have white Americans copy the “full fascism” of the Zionist project. Accordingly with how Israelification is something global, many of the Fuentes “groypers” aren’t white themselves; they’re part of the layer of excess males in exploited countries who emulate Israelified behaviors.

Between the Jewish supremacists and the white nationalists, it’s an inter-ethnic competition for who can be the best parasites upon the global proletariat. This is why Fuentes has sought to get his audience behind the war on Venezuela: the further the United States can go in its offensive, the more labor and resources white Zionism can exploit.

One groyper talking point is that everyone who opposes imperialism is a “third worldist,” i.e. they fetishize colonized people while having no sense of patriotism for their own nation. This rhetorical tactic can work, but only up to a point. Only as long as these right-wingers are facing a version of “Marxism” that’s not serious, and that preaches national nihilism while refusing to go into the masses. If we build a working-class movement that advances the needs of the nation’s people, we’ll bring in the people, including the lumpenized men who the right seeks to capture. 

————————————————————————

If you appreciate my work, I hope you become a one-time or regular donor to my Patreon account. Like most of us, I’m feeling the economic pressures amid late-stage capitalism, and I need money to keep fighting for a new system that works for all of us. Go to my Patreon here. 

To keep this platform effective amid the censorship against dissenting voices, join my Telegram channel.