Can someone explain how extreme right wingers get their anti-marxist views?

can someone explain how extreme right wingers get their anti-marxist views?
this guy is able to waffle about an ideology he doesn't understand for over 2 hours and gets thousands of people agreeing with him

Attached: 220px-Stefan_Molyneux_2014-02-10.jpg (220x224, 9.11K)

He's not even typical of right wingers. He's got cult leader like qualities.

As for disagreements with marxism - a lot of people just want to be left alone. That's it, really. Anything "big state" (or any other monolithic entity) alarms them.

They consume memes rather than reading primary sources and regurgitate talking points to each other. You can observe a similar phenomenon with the twitter tankies and their views on anarchism.

They fundamentally understand nearly everything about Marxism, socialism, communism, you name it. They don't read Marx or if they do they just read the Communist Manifesto and call it a day. They gain their views from a standpoint of complete ignorance. From here, they learn about a few "bad" things that happened in twentieth century socialist states
and they just yell that when they are confronted with leftists. Of course, this is how it is in United States from my experience. When I first started reading Marx I was astounded how many fundamental misunderstands I had about Marxism and later most 20th century socialist states (which weren't perfect but weren't complete hellholes like right wingers like to claim)

i have not seen tankie twitter and i dont think i want to

Just imagine the worst Zig Forums "anti-imperialist" you can but they're a tranny namefag and even more LARPy

im not familiar with any material on the 20th century states other than 'the gulag archipelago' and 'the black book of communism.'

The Marxist Regimes series edited by Bogdan Szajkowski were written in the 80s. They're a bit bourgeois but they're pretty fair looks

Look at the stalinstache poster on Zig Forums who doesn't use caps and imagine them with a twitter bio that reads black genderqueer ML (she/her) with a bunch of flags in their name. That's pretty much it.

you have to see it to understand it

Attached: twitter_trans_fullmetal_leninist.png (340x448, 121.47K)

i wonder what the DPRK would do with these people?

Attached: twitter_trans4.png (320x584, 115.27K)

Some of us learn from history. Others are doomed to repeat it.

maybe fascism is the right answer

You don’t have to be a fascist to want to purge these people

that's such a lazy justification for an ideology. The "you don't know history" bit is phony and homosexual, conservatives use it all the time to discredit socialism.

spooked from idpol

The problem isn't that they're trannies who seemingly put no effort into passing, the problem is that they have a fantasy land they dream of instead of organizing in their actual situation. This is generally a problem with the more idealistic "anti-imperialists" who revolt vicariously through people halfway around the world or decades in the grave. When confronted with this and their inaction they start screaming about gulags or call you something ridiculous.

Attached: WSKKUapDrY-lY15ve-6ik7tSZPO9-s_yqJjWIypiPpw.jpg (320x320, 15.84K)

become a cuck to own the transwoman

Seems likely they're saboteurs either from.a bourgeoisie social media propaganda firm, Zig Forums or undercover right wingers trying to feminize socialism. The goal is to keep the majority loving capitalism in a super macho patriot manner. It lures the agrarians and blue collars towards the authoritarian capitalist ideology and John Wayne nostalgia.

Sure there's a couple socialist gays, but no more than capitalists.

Yeah, because of course there are no transwoman interested in politics.
you basically just took the cultural marxist argument and reversed it.


are you calling imperialism a spook?

Unless you're a transsyrrian or something, I'm not sure what the relationship is.

because of the meme definition of marxism where it's when people are equal is not uncommon.

I honestly feel sorry for this guy - really, really, obsessed with the DPRK, but his world would probably shatter when the DPRK would call her a "mentally ill" (as they have Chelsea Manning). He went off Twitter because he continue to have "episodes", I really think these people need mental help more than anything else.

And yes, I am ML myself.

This is honestly why I still appreciate Phil Greaves (even though I disagree with him on China and I'm more with Red Kahina), but he actually accepting loosing over a thousand followers because he confronted the trans cult, not by being transphobic but just calling it out on their unscientific views.

To be fair, Stalinstache has a rigid anti-IdPol stance despite him being trans. He might be insufferable, but he is nowhere near the Twitter tankies.

Of what?


maybe they'll wake up and become an anarchist

That is going further to sleep

Are all the left twitter trannies the tankies and all the left twitter "non binary" or genderqueer or whatever the anarchists? It seems like that's the trend.

They are probably either straight CIA agents or normal civilians coerced to do that by the CIA.

maybe trans fascism then

This. There’s an obvious correlation between transgenderism and mental illness, since these people always list all their fucking mental problems in their bios. What frustrates me about liberals is that they don’t seem to even be willing to have the conversation about whether or not transphobia causes mental illness or mental illness causes transgenderism. I mean any other form of body dysmorphia is considered a mental illness, so why isn’t wanting to cut off your junk?

understanding is a social construct

going back on topic:

1. Right-wingers (at least the pro capitalist ones) almost never read.
2. When they engage Marxist ideas its almost always strawman arguments.
3. Most Marxists are not equipped to counter these arguments with real theory.

Molyneux isn't a dumbass, though. He knows how to argue with people even if what he's saying is wrong. He debated a socialist who began to make good arguments (i.e. perfect knowledge and perfect competition don't exist in real markets) and Molyneux immediately changed the subject.

The tankies are also genderqueer and such. Which in most cases is just another way of saying tranny tbh.


What if it's neither, and the underlying cause for body dysmorphia is actually liberalism? Liberal society has certain performative standards that revolve around marketing oneself to others, and failing to promote your brand is one of the gravest sins one can make in liberal society. If you aren't good looking or don't meet certain performative standards? You're basically fucked. It isn't enough to identify as a woman, no matter what liberals say - you have to look like one too, and you also have to be good looking on top of that, or else you're considered reprobate.

But user liberalism is a mental illness.

A man calling himself a women isn’t a women.

Why do marxists believe that the textual is the actual? Is this what modern education does to people?

Every society that ever existed has. That's another marxist delusion; the belief that the world was created yesterday.

It may not have been clear from my post but I’ve read Marx and researched states like the USSR and Cuba separately.


What I'm saying is that a man wouldn't bother calling himself a woman if he wasn't forced to market himself. He could just be himself, in whatever weird way he wants.

The belief that capitalism has always existed is a liberal delusion. Performative behavior is as old as civilization, but the specific concept of turning your identity into a brand for the purposes of marketing is relatively modern.

The belief that capitalism is a specific module is a marxist motte-and-bailey argument. While the concept of "self-branding" is indeed a recent one, being fucked when not meeting certain standards is older than mankind.

Identifying as a woman isn't good enough because identifying means nothing itself, if all being a woman meant is stating "I identify as a woman" then it means precisely nothing because it would only refer to making the statement itself.

Today anybody can be philosopher if he has camera and can convince masses he can use "smart words" but funny is that specifically Molyneux managed to pull it off because he is, to simply put it, not very intelligent. I've seen some of his videos long time ago and I think he is not even bright enough to consciously manipulate his viewers as his colleagues (like Laura "Pay me on patreon and I will like your twitter status" Southern), which might be a plus for him when you think about it. However, he convinced himself that he has capabilities to be on a intellectual level which is just too high for him in reality. And yes, yelling "Not an argument" is pre-school tier argumentation technique.

It's very simple - Language. They see liberals and then they watch their youtube superheroes which tell them what they encountered are authentic extreme-leftists and marxists. It's buzzwords, some spooky shit. I know plenty of people who label themselves as right-wing and hate left, but it's amusing that they would find a lot common if they would actually spend 1 hour talking to any leftist who takes politics and economy seriously.

You obviously don't know him from his DEFOOING days.

But those aren't leftists, that's not how language works you see, the real authentic leftists are not those who fall under the general use of the term, but those who are awarded that term by a handful of people on a Filipino puppet theater website.

Reading Marx and Marxists extensively and having plenty of good-faith debates around the subject and giving Marxism a fair chance.