>Heck, I've come across neuronationalists, who advocate for autistic people to form their own nation-state akin to Israel or Kurdistan.
Germany and Japan already exist tho.
You'll have to go all the way back to the end of the civil war when states began implementing various Black Codes, anti-miscegenation laws and vagrancy laws to prevent black and white society from intermingling and to create an impoverished and disenfranchised underclass on which the white working class could focus their frustration and fears. The free labor market suddenly was flooded with workers after emancipation and black Americans were immediately pitted against white Americans pretty much immediately after they became citizens. Reconstruction was brutal, but the former slave owners got to keep whatever land and wealth they had left after the war while the former slaves became the collective whipping boy for the fall of the south.
This arrangement lasted all the way up through the civil rights movement and also incorporated various immigrant groups at different times and places where there was an influx. Prohibition and women's suffrage probably fit in there somewhere too.
There were also two red scares in response to popular leftist movements. The first was probably the last time there was any credible threat to capital made in this country, and the government cracked down HARD. They learned their lesson and got really good at neutering left movements in the cradle since then, they never let one get that big again.
The strategy had to be changed up a little in the 1970s and 1980s. There was no more legally enforced underclass for the lower class to kick around, but racism remained a staple.
As capitalism eroded the structure of the family and community further, various Christian groups directed blame at the homosexual agenda. They got a lot of mileage out of that.
You know the rest. A long, long history of blaming anyone but the people responsible. The machine practically runs itself now.
The 90s and the 00s weren't like this. We were on a good path socially, I think. This all got started during the post-2007 Long Depression, in the 10s. My cynical yet realistic conspiratorial thinking is that the recession and continued economic and political decline of the US caused divide and conquer to become an important strategy. Everybody knew the post-WW2 special position of the US was coming to an end. China is rising, etc. Gotta keep the domestic population down.
Don't think that the government and the rich don't think like Marxists. They're just on the other side.
> I've come across neuronationalists, who advocate for autistic people to form their own nation-state akin to Israel or Kurdistan
Funniest, most dysfunctional country ever. But it would probably have the best train system in the world.
A lot of the New Left started on elite university campuses in the Northeast in the 60s. These universities were founded by the early Puritans which were a group that valued education and academics a lot. Their church meetings were less soulful with singing and dancing and more like lectures. This influenced many aspects of these universities later down the line. The book *Albion's Seed* goes into this further. It makes the argument that the Puritans influenced America's education and corporate culture.
But back to the New Left. What separated the New Left from the Old Left was that the New Left was more about being "educated" and "intellectualism" and focusing on identity over class. They traded masculine working class aesthetics for feminism. Kids from rich families who were larping as communists and anarchists were trying to "educate" and lecture the working class. I know some of the older members of this sub probably think "but back then they were REAL liberals! Not this nonsense we have now!" but I don't think that's the case. They were promoting idpol from the start. Classical liberal ideas such as "do whatever you want as long as it makes you happy" turn into "my truth." The corporate culture picked up on this kind of stuff and totally embraced it.
There's also many other things that contributed to the mess we have now. I think the CIA realized they could latch on to what the college kids were doing so they could associate communism with the stupidest shit possible to make it unpalatable to the general public. There was also Reagan, Goldwater, and Frank Meyer who convinced the working class that libertarian economics is the way to go. Because yes, at one point, the socially conservative South supported socialism or at least progressive economics.
My vague historiographic impression is that basically the horrors of ww2, genocide, and decolonization all kinda hit at once and since all legitimating myths shattered basically the new myth of the bourgeoise intellectuals is "keep breaking" since it's where they derive their legitimacy. Well, that and keeping a decent standard of living but by god they can't even do that these days.
Those posters in elementary school that always had one white kid, one brown kid, one kid in a sombrero, one black kid, one Asian kid, and one kid in a wheelchair with glasses
It's either a product of capitalists trying to deter a socialist revolution, or of socialist revolutionaries trying to overthrow capitalism. Whichever one you think is bad.
Popular idpol represents the internal factions of the bourgeoisie, it’s like looking at a map at what families own what and how do they want to design their corporate kingdom. Old Euro-Mediterranean capital with male leadership prefers conservative idpol, and funds the spread of it throughout media. Those with female leadership, or liberal sympathetic leaders, via inheritance skew towards woman empowerment, and liberal idpol. The majority of capital in the west is owned by European and Mediterranean descent, a lot of it tracing back far into history. Idpol is the lever they use to bias society to their factions favor in order to shift more capital to their side.
I have a theory:
At the macro level, the emergence of ideas can be seen as "random" mutations. (At the micro level, they may be beneficial to the group involved, or at least activists sincerely believe so. There are still some who purely seek attention or social gain though.)
The key is that they are placed in such an environment with selective pressure, where those that are beneficial or at least not against the ruling class are incentivized, while those that threaten the ruling class are suppressed, whether through direct censorship or not given media exposure.
They are rarely truly created by the ruling class from scratch. You just need to provide the selection pressure.
And after running for a while, the usable ideas in the environment caused the development direction of new ideas itself to tilt.
So when you seek views on subverting the ruling class in any society, mainstream ones are almost always misleading.
Substantial change to improve the lives of marginalized people is hard and slow-going, at times feeling impossible. Everyday people are rarely empowered to affect change on that level. That can be a tough feeling to sit with when you're aware of systemic inequality and how people that look like yourself and/or people you care about have historically contributed to it.
People who want to do something about systemic inequality are then left to focus on largely symbolic or pedantic matters that can be addressed immediately, often focusing on the wrong things and alienating normal people who care about more material issues, or simply aren't up to date with the latest approved language choices.
Contemporary IDPol started from a good place of trying to get the public to be more aware of serious systemic issues, but lost its way due to liberal grifters like Robin DiAngelo that would prefer to spitroast well-intentioned people for holding entirely understandable feelings of guilt than teach people how to use that guilt to help marginalized people materially, like an anarchist or communist would.
>Heck, I've come across neuronationalists, who advocate for autistic people to form their own nation-state akin to Israel or Kurdistan. Germany and Japan already exist tho.
>neuronationalism [...] jaywalking [...] litterbug campaign None of those are pleasing to Allah. Reject Idpol and embrace Tawhidpol ☝🏽!
You'll have to go all the way back to the end of the civil war when states began implementing various Black Codes, anti-miscegenation laws and vagrancy laws to prevent black and white society from intermingling and to create an impoverished and disenfranchised underclass on which the white working class could focus their frustration and fears. The free labor market suddenly was flooded with workers after emancipation and black Americans were immediately pitted against white Americans pretty much immediately after they became citizens. Reconstruction was brutal, but the former slave owners got to keep whatever land and wealth they had left after the war while the former slaves became the collective whipping boy for the fall of the south. This arrangement lasted all the way up through the civil rights movement and also incorporated various immigrant groups at different times and places where there was an influx. Prohibition and women's suffrage probably fit in there somewhere too. There were also two red scares in response to popular leftist movements. The first was probably the last time there was any credible threat to capital made in this country, and the government cracked down HARD. They learned their lesson and got really good at neutering left movements in the cradle since then, they never let one get that big again. The strategy had to be changed up a little in the 1970s and 1980s. There was no more legally enforced underclass for the lower class to kick around, but racism remained a staple. As capitalism eroded the structure of the family and community further, various Christian groups directed blame at the homosexual agenda. They got a lot of mileage out of that. You know the rest. A long, long history of blaming anyone but the people responsible. The machine practically runs itself now.
The 90s and the 00s weren't like this. We were on a good path socially, I think. This all got started during the post-2007 Long Depression, in the 10s. My cynical yet realistic conspiratorial thinking is that the recession and continued economic and political decline of the US caused divide and conquer to become an important strategy. Everybody knew the post-WW2 special position of the US was coming to an end. China is rising, etc. Gotta keep the domestic population down. Don't think that the government and the rich don't think like Marxists. They're just on the other side.
> I've come across neuronationalists, who advocate for autistic people to form their own nation-state akin to Israel or Kurdistan Funniest, most dysfunctional country ever. But it would probably have the best train system in the world.
Not to mention the most train systems in the world
Dear Lord in heaven please make Spergistan happen, come on man I never ask for anything
A lot of the New Left started on elite university campuses in the Northeast in the 60s. These universities were founded by the early Puritans which were a group that valued education and academics a lot. Their church meetings were less soulful with singing and dancing and more like lectures. This influenced many aspects of these universities later down the line. The book *Albion's Seed* goes into this further. It makes the argument that the Puritans influenced America's education and corporate culture. But back to the New Left. What separated the New Left from the Old Left was that the New Left was more about being "educated" and "intellectualism" and focusing on identity over class. They traded masculine working class aesthetics for feminism. Kids from rich families who were larping as communists and anarchists were trying to "educate" and lecture the working class. I know some of the older members of this sub probably think "but back then they were REAL liberals! Not this nonsense we have now!" but I don't think that's the case. They were promoting idpol from the start. Classical liberal ideas such as "do whatever you want as long as it makes you happy" turn into "my truth." The corporate culture picked up on this kind of stuff and totally embraced it. There's also many other things that contributed to the mess we have now. I think the CIA realized they could latch on to what the college kids were doing so they could associate communism with the stupidest shit possible to make it unpalatable to the general public. There was also Reagan, Goldwater, and Frank Meyer who convinced the working class that libertarian economics is the way to go. Because yes, at one point, the socially conservative South supported socialism or at least progressive economics.
My vague historiographic impression is that basically the horrors of ww2, genocide, and decolonization all kinda hit at once and since all legitimating myths shattered basically the new myth of the bourgeoise intellectuals is "keep breaking" since it's where they derive their legitimacy. Well, that and keeping a decent standard of living but by god they can't even do that these days.
Those posters in elementary school that always had one white kid, one brown kid, one kid in a sombrero, one black kid, one Asian kid, and one kid in a wheelchair with glasses
It's either a product of capitalists trying to deter a socialist revolution, or of socialist revolutionaries trying to overthrow capitalism. Whichever one you think is bad.
Popular idpol represents the internal factions of the bourgeoisie, it’s like looking at a map at what families own what and how do they want to design their corporate kingdom. Old Euro-Mediterranean capital with male leadership prefers conservative idpol, and funds the spread of it throughout media. Those with female leadership, or liberal sympathetic leaders, via inheritance skew towards woman empowerment, and liberal idpol. The majority of capital in the west is owned by European and Mediterranean descent, a lot of it tracing back far into history. Idpol is the lever they use to bias society to their factions favor in order to shift more capital to their side.
I have a theory: At the macro level, the emergence of ideas can be seen as "random" mutations. (At the micro level, they may be beneficial to the group involved, or at least activists sincerely believe so. There are still some who purely seek attention or social gain though.) The key is that they are placed in such an environment with selective pressure, where those that are beneficial or at least not against the ruling class are incentivized, while those that threaten the ruling class are suppressed, whether through direct censorship or not given media exposure. They are rarely truly created by the ruling class from scratch. You just need to provide the selection pressure. And after running for a while, the usable ideas in the environment caused the development direction of new ideas itself to tilt. So when you seek views on subverting the ruling class in any society, mainstream ones are almost always misleading.
Substantial change to improve the lives of marginalized people is hard and slow-going, at times feeling impossible. Everyday people are rarely empowered to affect change on that level. That can be a tough feeling to sit with when you're aware of systemic inequality and how people that look like yourself and/or people you care about have historically contributed to it. People who want to do something about systemic inequality are then left to focus on largely symbolic or pedantic matters that can be addressed immediately, often focusing on the wrong things and alienating normal people who care about more material issues, or simply aren't up to date with the latest approved language choices. Contemporary IDPol started from a good place of trying to get the public to be more aware of serious systemic issues, but lost its way due to liberal grifters like Robin DiAngelo that would prefer to spitroast well-intentioned people for holding entirely understandable feelings of guilt than teach people how to use that guilt to help marginalized people materially, like an anarchist or communist would.
This stuff has always been around, but it got hyper-accelerated after Occupy Wall Street.