Of marxists, socialists, eco-terrorists and other Neo-Coms

The Neo-Coms (leftists, socialists, marxists, communists - which are all different degrees of the same mentality) are like a sectarian cult that use their own Vocabulary to spread their totalitarian and collectivist garbage under the guise of being warm-hearted and idealistic. Once you know the code-words you can see them all over the place - in Education, Mass-Media, Alternative-Media, Politics and Society - and you no longer fall for their manipulation of reality.

Their mentality is premised from an existential fear of "something being wrong". That means they are evaluating the state of the world, politics, society and economy through the lens of unhappiness and then projecting their discontent on the "oppressors" of the "mean world". A common manipulation of the far-left is to take something that is happening to 0.1% of any given social organism and behave as if it is happening to 99%.
0.1.% of white males being racist then becomes "white males are racist". 0.1% of Corporations being evil then becomes "Corporations are evil". Neo-Coms dont discriminate whether something is 0.1.% or 100%.

When rational thinking is replaced with Emotion, things start going wrong. Thats why the popular marxists of the 20th Century - Stalin, Lenin, Mugabe, Pol Pot, C, Kim Ill Sung - all begin with grand visions of "socal justice" and end up going on a bloodthirsty rampage of genocide or guide their people to the brink of starvation.

Because the Vocabulary of this cult has made its way into the hearts and minds of the American/European majority and especially Academia and Mass-Media, I have taken the liberty to review it here from another perspective than commonly accepted.

"Oppression"

Used in contexts such as "Oppression of Women", "Oppression of Blacks", "Oppression of Minorities", "Oppression of Workers", by the Neo.Com and based on the premise that humans do not have free will and are not capable of self-determination but are instead victims of some superordinate power. When Karl Marx asked workers to "break free from the chains of Oppression" he was implying that workers did not sign up for employment of their own free will and accord but were instead "forced" into labor. When a Neo-Com speaks of "Exploitation" of workers, he is pretending that those workers are not grateful for employment and did not out of their own will agree to the terms and conditions of work.

The term "Oppression", as used by the Neo-Com, is meant to breed contempt of people who are more succesful or have achieved more. In Western Civilization women and blacks are not at all "oppressed". The richest woman of the U.S. is black. The President of the U.S. is black. Saying that blacks are an "oppressed minority" who require our help through "affirmative action" debases and degrades the achievements of blacks. Installing a "quota for women" robs women of the opportunity to climb the later of their own skill.

"Social Justice"

When a Neo-Communist uses this word he is coming from the cry-baby stance that the world is "unfair" and that people who have money, achievements or success will only have acquired them through "unjust" means or because they were "born into privilege". I have never seen the Neo-Com clearly define what he means by "fair". When you see him whine, ask him: "What do you mean by fair?".

He will attack the idea of meritocracy by which everyone receives goods or payment according to merit. History has shown this to be the most natural and just system of human interaction and yet the Neo-Com insists that it is "unjust" and that it would be more "just" to reward people who have contributed nothing while punishing those who have contributed everything.

"Redistribution of Wealth"

This is the code-word for stealing your hard-earned money. Give a man fish to eat and he is fed for a day. Teach him how to fish and he is fed for a lifetime. The socialist wants to give people fish for free instead of teaching them how to fish. This, of course, depletes resources and leaves people weak and needy...just the way the totalitarian Communist wants to have them.

The Capitalist prefers people to learn to fish for themselves. This is why Starvation in Capitalist countries such as the North Americas and Europe is close to zero while in socialist countries supplies and food are always short.


"Social Construct"

Those trained in the newspeak of the Neo-Com often refer to things as being "social constructs". Leftists claim for example, that "gender roles" are not biologically inherent but merely "social constructs". So a woman is not a woman because of her Biology but because she was "conditioned" to be one. In accordance with this belief it is a Feminists duty to "Break" the "social construct" and re-condition herself to be...."different".

If there are no natural absolutes and everything is but a "social construct" it is understandable how some activists for pedophilia base their own reasoning on "the roles between adults and children are only a social construct".

"One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter"

When philosophical relativism is taken to an extreme, there are no universals, no rights and wrongs, no true and false. This is why many marxist authors view suicide bombers as "fighters against American Imperialist Oppression" rather than the dangerous religious fanatics that they are.

Pure Relativism doesnt make any sense at all, of course. The leftist dictum "Nothing is absolute, everything is relative" cannot be a correct statement because that statement is in itself an absolute...Duh. In reality some things are absolute/universal and some things are relative.

The Neo-Com who rejects any sort of truth or Absolute easily falls prey to all kinds of nonsense. And even in cases in which he may be philosophically correct, his Relativism is rarely of any usefulness in real life. The suicide-bomber that blew up a school for a children may very well be a Freedom Fighter for someone or other. But in our value-system we dont view child-murder as "Freedom", thus there is no need to reframe the situation in that way....unless you want to make that behaviour look good. Unless you hate humanity and root for its downfall.

"Corporatism" and "Evil Capitalism"

When the Neo-Com is talking about "Corporatism" and "Capitalism" he is attacking the very foundations of all of our modern riches. Thanks to Capitalism we have roads, cars, infrastructure, buildings, computers, internet, healthcare, scientific advances, a stable middle-class and many other wonderful benefits. The Neo-Com hates progress (although he calls himself "progressive" he would prefer to return to Tribalist Collectivism). The Neo-Com will vilify Capitalism every chance he gets because other peoples success make him feel deeply insecure.

"White people are racists"

The Neo-Com exaggerates the existence of "Racism". If you critisize someone who is not a white-male, you are a "racist". If you like diversity instead of collectivism you are a "racist". If you critisize the President, you are a "racist". In the Western World Racism is mostly overcome and yet the Neo-Com still refers to the U.S. as a "racist country". While real Racism does exist, its proportions are obviously overblown by the Neo-Com. More Racism exists in other countries and yet America is often singled out as "the most racist".

As already explained, they like to take 1% of what is happening (such as unfair wages, racism or homophobia) and treat it AS IF IT REPRESENTS THE MAJORITY. Thats the primary manipulation tool. You will notice that the Neo-Com almost never makes reference to Racism coming from anyone else than whites.

If you look closely you will find a hidden racism of the Neo-Com. It is he who is always talking about the differences between colours. Most of us couldnt care less.

"Critical Thinking"

When the Neo-Com uses this word he is not referring to it in a way the rest of us do...as scientific skepticism or empirical study and examination. What he means is the application of marxist "critical theory" to cultural situaions. This usually involves the premise that someone is the oppressed victim of someone or other.

"Imperialism" and "The Empire"

This usually refers to the United States or the U.S., Europe and Israel. The Neo-Com hates the relative wealth and well-being of these nations because it makes him feel "disadvantaged" or "in the minority". This is why he frequently speaks of "bringing down the system" and "fighting the power".

Countries such as The USA are continually attacked for being an "Imperialistic Theocracy" while real Theocracies, such as those of some muslim countries, are applauded by the Neo-Com.

"Ecological" and "Green"

The marxist idea that a human is a poor, weak and defenseless is projected onto the entire earth. From this view the whole planet is weak and defenseless, without natural ability to regenerate. Corporations and Capitalists are seen as the primary source of all evil. It is desired that humankind return to the stone-age, to a collectivist and tribal society. Seen from here, Warming and Climate Change are not caused by a gigantic Sun and atmospheric changes, but by the evil Corporations. Out of fear to hurt the poor little plant some refuse to walk in the Woods. But they wont hesitate to harm and become physically violent with humans.

There are many more code-words, but once you know the basic philosophy ("Poor me, the world is so mean to me. Someone else has to change before I can be happy") you will see through all of them. The simple truth is that if you are counting on others to change before you can be happy you have set yourself up for a life of abysmal failure.

With a wide brush you paint this work of disinformation. You attack the victims of this travesty with the same spool of lies given forward by your masters. These lies that try to perpetuate separation. Know you not that we are ONE. We are forever ONE. Look down in your sorry heart and clear away the dust. Let shine the divine spark and join us forever the one.

Originally posted by HUMBLEONE
With a wide brush you paint this work of disinformation. You attack the victims of this travesty with the same spool of lies given forward by your masters. These lies that try to perpetuate separation. Know you not that we are ONE. We are forever ONE. Look down in your sorry heart and clear away the dust. Let shine the divine spark and join us forever the one.

I fully agree with our ONENESS - but my idea of Oneness is no collectivist hive-mind Oneness it is a Oneness within beautiful Diversity.

reply to post by Skyfloating


Great thread Sky.

To me the whole neo-con language is also a form of Group Think. It's perpetuating the though that without some massive government/movement/authority that humans cannot move forward and flourish as we all should.

The idea of oneness through this paradigm is completely false as it does not take into account individuality within the oneness that actually makes things progress.

In today's socio-economic climate however, I must point out that the words echoed by the left are also used widely by the right. We all know that left vs right is a fairy tale that exists only to dilude the masses into thinking there is a side that is better than another.

The truth of the matter is there is is no right or wrong side to our problems. Only by coming together and having intelligent and unrestricted dialogue/debate, can we actually turn things around.

~Keeper

In parting, I give you a flag. Though your verse well written in stucture, its content vile lies to put all in your boxes. Boxes of separation into you would have thrown us and nailed the cover tight. We will not yield to you,your words, your threats your bullets and bombs. We'll just stand here undefeatable and wait for your sences to arrive.reply to post by HUMBLEONE

reply to post by tothetenthpower


The Neo-Con is just the other side of the coin to Neo-Com I agree. What the left and right have in common is that they are Authoritarian and are just another Brick in the Wall.

And people wonder why we can never get past our petty differences, partisanship and stereotyping.

Thanks for the giggles.

Tell that to the French protestors who are standing up to their government at the moment (waving Che Flags). This is a demonstration of the left and has worked in the past. That's why the do it.

Tell me how are you standing up to your government? Oh no your not because if people from the left want to stand up against the government , they are all labelled commies or marxist.

Keep playing their game.

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
Tell that to the French protestors who are standing up to their government at the moment (waving Che Flags). This is a demonstration of the left and has worked in the past. That's why the do it.

Tell me how are you standing up to your government? Oh no your not because if people from the left want to stand up against the government , they are all labelled commies or marxist.

Keep playing their game.

Che-Flag wavers are forever protesting against. Thats what defines them. Thats why once they reach a position of from which to govern themselves they dont know what to do - afterall, they are used to protesting, not offering constructive solutions.

Originally posted by InvisibleAlbatross
And people wonder why we can never get past our petty differences, partisanship and stereotyping.

Thanks for the giggles.

When pointing out how and why a certain philosophy has lead and will continue to lead to genocidal conditions, are we stereotyping? I think not. We are merely pointing out historical facts.

reply to post by Skyfloating


I thought that moderators are supposed to be people that are politically unbiased?

You can make many of the same arguments for the people on the Right. The question is, will you?

Again, Redstate-lite.

reply to post by Skyfloating


Well the thing is with French protests, is they have been successful in the past and thats why people get out there and stand up against their government. People power, organised by the left.

Maybe you should apply a little Marxist critical theory to the United States and its history, you may find yourself wanting to join the french protestor.

Originally posted by woodwardjnr


Well the thing is with French protests, is they have been successful in the past and thats why people get out there and stand up against their government. People power, organised by the left.

The Tea-Party could be considered succesful people-power organized by the right - not that I think either is terribly effective to create change.

France is no different than it was 50 years ago.

reply to post by Skyfloating


It's curious to see that you are resorting to negative stereotyping -- which I might add -- is as ugly as many of the stereotypes you accuse "neo-coms" as perpetuating.

I can certainly understand the need for classifying certain segments of our population based upon ideologies, ethnicities and other socio-economic factors. But utilizing stereotypes based on the lowest crass denominators is nothing more than utilizing a poorly constructed crutch.

I especially like this line:

When rational thinking is replaced with Emotion, things start going wrong.

By extension, anyone whom you may classify as a "neo-com" is lacking in the rational thinking department. If that's not a negative stereotype, I don't know what is.

Deny stereotypes and embrace empathy!

reply to post by maria_stardust


Exposing a philosophy that is responsible for much of the problems of the 20th Century may be "stereotyping" for you. For me its a matter of necessity - for the sake of mankinds survival.

You wouldnt call a snake a kitten afterall

reply to post by Skyfloating


The tea party is hardly people power, it has been influenced by big corporations, like fox news and is supported by the Republican party, hardly opposing the status quo.Hardly sticking it to the man, so to speak.

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
.Hardly sticking it to the man, so to speak.

edit on 21-10-2010 by woodwardjnr because: (no reason given)

True. There's no tear-gas and violence involved.

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
.Hardly sticking it to the man, so to speak.

edit on 21-10-2010 by woodwardjnr because: (no reason given)

True. There's no tear-gas and violence involved.

no,Its more of an eating hot dogs kinda thing, real anti establishment

reply to post by Skyfloating

Exposing a philosophy that is responsible for much of the problems of the 20th Century may be "stereotyping" for you. For me its a matter of necessity - for the sake of mankinds survival.

So, by your logic, emotion and empathy are negative traits that will ultimately lead to chaos, and hence mankind's destruction. Seriously?

You wouldnt call a snake a kitten afterall

Of course, not.

Kittens are cute and fluffy and all things tied to positive emotions and empathy.

Snakes, on the other hand, are cold-blooded, ruthless predators that prey upon those weaker than themselves and tempt damsels to eat forbidden fruit thereby damning all mankind.

By the way, don't you just love the way I worked that little bit of stereotyping.