#AntiMarxist

[nando161mando]

Hmmmm I wonder why. Karl Marx and Marxism is hypocrisy as it bootlicks to an authoritarian fascist state.

[plagiarmola]

(Esp) Siempre activxs para dar pelea.

(Eng) Always active to fight.

[argyrocratie]

"100 years of Interpol: Why there’s no reason to celebrate"

(...)

"Following several inconclusive conferences like the “International Conference of Rome for the Social Defense Against Anarchists” in 1898, the follow-up in 1904 in St. Petersburg, as well as the “First International Criminal Police Congress” in Monaco 1914, another conference took place in September 1923 following the initiative of Viennese chief of police Johann Schober. The conference was concluded with the founding of the International Criminal Police Commission (ICPC), direct predecessor of today’s Interpol, with Johann Schober as its president. As Viennese police president he forced reforms towards a “modernization” of investigation methods and information exchange systems, making the Austrian police internationally renowned. He established an intelligence service that compiled a register of persons as well as indexes through surveillance and informants. The focus was not only set on general criminality but with regards to the politicaly active, like anarchists, communists and social revolutionaries. Regarding the personnel, he worked towards removing social democrats from the agency and employed antimarxists and later nazis.

In 1938 the ICPCs leadership was taken over by the National Socialists and its headquarter was moved to Berlin-Wannsee, where it shared its rooms and lead with the Gestapo. The ICPCs records, that were transferred to Berlin, like the so called “Internationales Zigeunerregistratur (international gypsy registry)”, as well as the records concerning counterfeiting of money and passports, helped the National Socialists prosecuting certain groups and in their mass production of counterfeit money and fake passports in the KZ Sachsenhausen.

The ICPC was dissolved in 1945 but newly formed as the International Criminal Police Organization, Interpol – probably also to distance itself from the ICPC of the inter- and poastwar period. However, certain continuities are observable in its 100 year history, even though it was probably only a coincidence that in 1968 Paul Dickopf, a sworn SS-policeman, was elected president and the prosecution of nazi criminals did not start before the 1980s…

_

Interpol, as it exists today, is, contrary to the popular medial representations, not a supra-national police agency with the authority to arrest, but more an association that functions as network of law enforcement agencies of its member states. As an organization, it offers administrative support in the fields of communication and data banks/information exchange, as well as support in investigations, expertise, and trainings for the various law enforcement agencies.

(...)

Besides its headquarters in Lyon, France, and seven regional bureaus, the organization has bureaus in each of the 195 member states with more than 1000 employees, making her the largest police organization. The budget of 140 million euros is comprised of the member states’ contributions and, additionally, separate contributions from EU, several repression agencies of the member states (FBI) and the Interpol Foundation. But Interpol also receives donations from NGOs, the private sector (Philipp Morris, FIFA, IOC, Quatar 2022, etc.) and other international organizations (UNICEF, FRONTEX, etc.). One of the organizations central tasks is the maintenance of 19 data banks, that contain entries on missing and wanted persons, fingerprints, DNA samples, and stolen (travel) documents. According to its own accounts, the data banks contain 125 million police files that are queried 187 times per second. In 2022 alone this results in 5.9 billion queries with 1.4 million hits. In Austria 32 million wanted person searches were queried through, or for, Interpol in 2020, additionally there were 900.000 car inquiries, as well as 7.4 million inquiries on stolen documents.

(...)

Transnational repression

Arguably the most important instrument for repression by Interpol is the sending out of so-called “Notices”. These are calls for support requested for by Interpol member states and subsequently being sent out to law enforcement agencies globally. These Notices are divided into colours depending on their respective purpose. A Black Notice is a call for support in finding or identifying a body, while a Blue Notice is a request for information regarding the whereabouts of an individual. The by far most frequent Notices are Red Notices, i.e. the request for information of whereabout and the arrest with subsequent extradition of a person.

These Red Notices are very popular in autocracies like Turkey, China, Russia and some of the Arab states as tool for the international persecution and repression of dissidents or other politically persecuted individuals. The perfidious thing here is that affected are not informed about their international labeling, or can only lose them after long-lasting and expensive juridical processes. The president of the Uighur World Congress, now living in Germany, was searched for, by these means, for 21 years after China issued such a warrant.

When labeled with a Red Notice, people do not only have to live in fear of repression by the original persecuting state but also in fear of the cops of the other 194 member states. Apart from the ever present danger of being arbitrarily arrested and extradited, it can impossible for affected individuals to open bank accounts, move across borders or find a job. Red Notices are thus not only issued as means of political persecution and extradition, for some states it is enough to simply make the life of dissidents abroad as hard as possible.

According to the Interpol statutes, Red Notices cannot be issued out of political or religious reasons but it is only since very recently that requests – though, of course, by Interpol itself and only lapidary – are being controlled; though, rather, such a control can be easily circumvented by issuing the Notice on a wrong warrant. This happened to the nephew of the former opposition leader Fethullah Gülen. He was arrested and extradited from Kenya to Turkey on basis of a fake warrant for child abuse, in Turkey, however, he was wrongly convicted for being part of a terrorist organization for which he is still serving time in Turkish prison.

The Bahraini dissident and human rights activist Ahmed Jafaar Muhammad Ali was, on his flight from Bahraini authorities, extradited from his Serbian exile on base of a Red Notice from Interpol, deported to Bahrains capital Manama where he was directly turned over to the local repression agencies. This happened despite intervention by the European Court of Justice and its demand towards the Serbian state to annul the undertaking, since Muhammad was facing possible torture and execution in Bahrain for his political work. He actually was even held captive and tortured prior to his flight for taking part in anti-government protests. In his absence he was sentenced for life. In 2017 two of his co-convicts were, after two years of inhumane captivity, executed by the Bahraini state. All this was known to Interpol and the Serbian authorities, yet neither were the extradition cancelled nor the Red Notice at Interpol annulled.

Interpol thus becomes a tool of repression by autocracies and dictatorships, and the supposedly “democratic” states their henchmen. This transnational contempt for mankind puts a spotlight on the fact that no single state, may it be ever so “democratically legitimized” or appeal ever so much to respecting human rights, can be trusted. As long as this world is trashed with an internationally connected body of pigs, the politically or religiously persecuted or individuals persecuted for their race, have nowhere to be safe."

...

[aurevoirmonty]

« Les après-guerres sont faites pour faire la paix, panser les blessures et se pardonner réciproquement les offenses. Ma tristesse est que la paix n’ait pas, n’ait jamais été faite. Ce qui a empêché de la faire, c’est le résistancialisme qui a perpétué la guerre civile pour pérenniser ses prébendes et son pouvoir. Pour abattre un adversaire, l’exclure à vie, il suffit encore aujourd’hui de l’assimiler, par un tour de passe-passe adéquat, à Hitler. En n’oubliant pas de confondre, en dépit de toute raison, Vichy avec celui-ci. Sur cette lancée inepte, des crétins ont diabolisé la très belle devise travail, famille, patrie, qui fut celle de saint Eloi et du syndicalisme antimarxiste, sous prétexte que ce fut celle de l’Etat français. A ce compte-là, on devrait marteler au fronton des mairies toutes les inscriptions Liberté, égalité, fraternité parce qu’elles furent le slogan de la Terreur ? »

Jean Marie Le Pen, Fils de la Nation.

[skzloona]

when is Peter Coffin gonna drop a video about why disliking someone who fakes their death is actually antimarxist?

[obiternihili]

i feel like the LTV is overly focused on by everyone, marxists and antimarxists alike

even if there's no real distinction between use-value and exchange-value to be had the whole exploitation thing - whereby management is taking home far more than their fair share of the profits while cutting labor before they even properly see their own returns and considering that more profit, as well as extracting rents from their own labor force - can remain entirely valid without a LTV

It doesn't even seriously undermine the TRPTF idea; inflation happens for a variety of reasons and competition itself drives down profits in favor of the consumer.

[one-divides-into-two]

Also I should emphasize that Somerville, the guy who wrote the article in CNS critiquing UEEtheory, is some kind of anti-Leninist academic Marxist, though he makes a few good points (what the hell does it mean to be "more exploited"? However I would add that you can be exploited in more ways than one and in more ways than another person, how could you *really* measure the quantitative level of exploitation someone experiences outside the realm of emotional reaction? Measurement of exploitation can only ever be qualitative and basing politics on a quantitative form of exploitation is antiMarxist, sure, suffering is definitely quantitative, but Marxists don't understand suffering and exploitation to be interchangable terms)

I mostly think it's interesting that such a debate is happening *at all*. UEEtheory and WST have both had a pretty tight grip on academic leftism for a whiiiiile and it's past time to shake things up

well, there’s a degree to which we can explicitly, quantitatively talk about a degree of exploitation (via the rate of surplus value in a particular shop/sector/national context/etc); it’s possible I’m misunderstanding your point here, though, and it’s secondary to what we’re in agreement on.

but I do agree re: rejection of UE/WST specifically because I don’t think it has any explanatory power compared to the Leninist approach which emphasizes finance capital / FDI. the dominance of UE theory in the so-called core countries and their academies is unsurprising given the petit-bourgeois reformism which necessarily follows from its outlook.

you may appreciate the PCP (MPP) document ‘On the process of bureaucrat capital in the third world countries.’ Can link later.

[yespat49]

L'entretien avec Didier Lecerf, auteur de "François de La Rocque, des tranchées au Parti social français", publié dans le dernier numéro de Lectures françaises

Source Lectures françaises cliquez ici Vous venez de publier, aux éditions Synthèse nationale, dirigées par Roland Hélie, un livre consacré à François de La Rocque. Pourquoi avoir choisi de travailler sur cette grande figure de la droite nationale antimarxiste, sociale et populaire des années 1930 dont beaucoup, aujourd’hui, ont oublié l’existence et dont les autres, notamment dans nos milieux au…

[uncertainblogue]

Journal de bord 5

Dans une brochure sur l’« idéologie du genre », la Manif pour tous en France affirmait : « C’est manifestement le flou qui entoure la notion de genre qui la rend apte à servir toutes sortes de revendications. Le genre est un attrape-tout qui permet de fédérer à bon compte des militants dont rien ne garantit qu’ils poursuivent des objectifs compatibles : féministes préoccupés de l’égalité entre hommes et femmes, militants des minorités sexuelles soucieux de faire reconnaître les droits de « toutes les sexualités », activistes trans et queer en lutte contre le « dimorphisme sexuel » (l’idée qu’il y a seulement deux sexes), etc. » (Paternotte 2015, 1). Durant les dernières années à travers le monde, le discours anti-genre a augmenté dans la sphère politique. En Italie et en Allemagne, « des manifestations contre les programmes scolaires ont été menées sous l’égide de la «protection des enfants» menacés de dépravation morale par la prétendument imposée « idéologie du genre » » (Grzebalska 2016, 6). En Croatie et en Slovaquie, les mouvements civils conservateurs a donné lieu à une présentation d’amendements constitutionnels interdisant le mariage homosexuel. De plus, en Russie, « un projet de loi visant à protéger les mineurs contre la « propagande homosexuelle » a été voté en 2013 (Grzebalska 2016, 6). En Amérique du Sud, le mouvement anti-genre a aussi pris de l’ampleur ces dernières années. Après 2016, « les manifestations anti-genre se sont intensifiées de manière flagrante, principalement en s'associant à des processus électoraux pertinents, tels que le référendum sur l'accord de paix en Colombie (2016) et les élections présidentielles au Costa Rica (2018), au Brésil (2018) et en Uruguay (2019) » (Corrêa et Parker 2020, 12). 

Ce discours est majoritairement dominé par des hommes. Cependant, ces mouvements et formations anti-genre comptent « un nombre important de femmes et ont largement recruté des jeunes pour le militantisme national et international contre l'avortement et le progrès sur la question du genre. Elles transcendent les structures de classe et les politiques d'identité » (Corrêa et Parker 2020, 13). Très adaptables au contexte et aux circonstances, les formations anti-genre savent saisir les opportunités politiques. Elles soutiennent les batailles politiques, « même lorsqu'elles sont vaincues, afin de maintenir la flamme des mobilisations » (Corrêa et Parker 2020, 13). 

Le discours anti-genre est actuellement populaire. Il a abandonné « la sémantique religieuse pour emprunter des arguments et des tropes à la biologie, à la biomédecine, à la démographie comme à la démocratie, à la citoyenneté et aux droits » (Corrêa et Parker 2020, 13). En Amérique latine, le trait le plus marquant du discours anti-genre est qu'il est généralement déployé en articulation avec « des constructions discursives et imagées antimarxistes » (Corrêa et Parker 2020, 13). 

Ce discours n’est pas sans conséquences. Il a un impact négatif sur le genre et la sexualité dans l'éducation. Les droits à l'identité de genre, « qui n'étaient pas une priorité lorsque les campagnes ont éclaté en 2013, sont devenus leur principale cible après 2016, comme l'ont montré les études chilienne et uruguayenne. Les croisades contre le genre ont également amplifié la stigmatisation beaucoup plus ancienne de l'homosexualité en tant que "pédophilie" » (Corrêa et Parker 2020, 14). 

Aux États-Unis, Wendy Brown analyse les dynamiques de dé-démocratisation et l’interprète comme un effet combiné du néolibéralisme et de la re-politisation de la sphère religieuse. Selon Brown, « le premier et principal effet politique du néolibéralisme, dans sa version du 21e siècle, est de réduire la politique démocratique à la loi et aux institutions et de restreindre le cadre des droits aux droits de propriété et au droit de vote » (Corrêa et Parker 2020, 15). Selon elle, ces effets « dépolitisent la sphère publique et la vie sociale, érodent l'autonomie du politique et disqualifient la participation des citoyens à la vie politique. La rationalité néolibérale approfondit l'individualisme, transforme les citoyens en consommateurs et en entrepreneurs de leur propre survie économique » (Corrêa et Parker 2020, 15). En conséquence, la dimension politique de la vie devient secondaire et une indifférence politique s’installe.

Présentement aux États-Unis, on voit un discours anti-genre très présent dans les États ayant une majorité républicaine. Certains de ses bannissent l’avortement et les procédures chirurgicales pour les enfants qui souhaitent de faire une transition de genre. Les personnes transgenres sont devenues la nouvelle cible de la part du parti républicain. La Floride est un État ayant passé les lois les plus sévères concernant l’accès aux soins des personnes LGBTQAI+. Les droits à la santé sexuelle et reproductive sont menacés plus que jamais aux États-Unis. Ces nouvelles lois restrictives sont un exemple d’un État genré et du pouvoir patriarcal sur les minorités sexuelles et de genre. Les lois sont créées pour dominer sur ces personnes déjà marginalisées dans la société américaine. 

[schooltrashers]

It makes me happy to know that I'm not the only Anti-Extremist(Anti-Commie & Anti-Nazi) on this website. There are others like me who oppose extremist groups and ideology.

I'm against Commies because of groups like Antifa and BLM rioting & murdering innocent people. I also oppose mass-murdering communist dictators like Mao and Stalin.

I'm against Nazis because of groups like the KKK and Neo-Nazis, especially with how the KKK used to riot and lynch black people decades ago. I also oppose Hitler since he is a mass-murdering nazi dictator.

Marxists/Communists had attempted to convince me that they're nothing like Nazis, but they had failed multiple times because I do know history very well and they can't rewrite history, nor could they erase the sins of Communist dictators. The Commie symbol is just as evil as the Nazi symbol. So I oppose both ideologies and piss on it.

I am a freedom-loving Patriot. Extremists want to control you. I want to keep you free. It's okay for people to disagree with each other and still co-exist with each other. That's what real freedom is. Not this cancel culture nonsense. Censorship and bannings are anti-free speech. Nazis & Commies love their censorship & banning things they don't like.

If you have any common sense at all, you too would oppose Nazis & Commies.

[nikator]

I was working on a draft earlier today and thought a phrase I used sounded familiar, so decided to look it up in case I was plagiarising. Turns out it's the title of a Red Guards Austin text. Something about that fucking neutralised my brain and gave me 2017(?) leftblr flashbacks. Lads, it's all in their somewhere, we can't escape it and it's all gonna come out one day

[nando161mando]

REMINDER: MARXISTS ARE NOT ANTIFASCIST!

[rgr-pop]

@little-brisk i am not admitting that i posted it here at 5:30 am my time knowing that you might see it because you’re my target audience for a certain genre of bad things... but on the level of prose alone...

[rubyroboticalt]

americans hear communism and think marxism. no, that is one subset of communism. theres a lot. im talking about anarchocommunism, not marxism.

[aurevoirmonty]

"En son temps, le Fascisme fut un des régimes les plus progressistes et les plus en avance en matière de mesures libérales. Mais le corporatisme du Ventennio, ou ce qu'il avait de valable, doit être essentiellement interprété dans le cadre d'une idée organique antimarxiste, c'est -à-dire étrangère à tout ce qui peut légitimement se réclamer du socialisme. C'est précisé­ment et uniquement, à cause de cela que le Fascisme aurait pu être une troisième force, une troisième voie pour l'Europe, opposée aussi bien au communisme qu'au capitalisme".

Julius Evola, Le Fascisme vu de droite (1964)

[rustchild]

one of the biggest and most basic misunderstandings about media criticism that i see on here is people conflating media criticism with being critical about things, i.e. negative. It doesn’t. To actually engage critically with a piece of media is to apply a critical lens to it, which means that you are analyzing specific elements of that piece of media in relation to a body of existing thought. A critical reading can be feminist, postmodernist, marxist, antimarxist, queer, historical, biographical, postcolonial, etc. etc. etc. All that means is that you are looking for elements and themes that relate to a framework, and questioning how they manifest in that particular work.

Let’s say we have a movie about a group of coal miners going on strike, in which the coal miners’ wives play a relatively minor part. “I don’t like how women are portrayed in that movie” is not critical engagement. “I’m not going to watch that movie because I heard that women aren’t portrayed well” is especially not critical engagement. “That movie denies female characters their agency by having all significant plot points rest on the decisions of men, even when they’re central to the female characters’ story arcs” is a critical reading through a feminist lens. “That movie really brilliantly explores how women’s agency is thwarted by male-dominated spaces” is also a critical reading through a feminist lens! Critical readings aren’t always negative!

A marxist reading of the same set of scenes might focus on how women’s labor in the domestic sphere enables men’s labor in the professional sphere, and how both are impacted by the constraints of class. A queer reading might look at how homosocial spaces are framed, and the contrasting framing of scenes between heterosexual couples. Different lenses, applied to the same text, will bring out different elements--and none of them are necessarily contradictory, or more right than the other.

Even if you aren’t applying a specific lens intentionally, engaging with a work critically means being aware of what you’re bringing to the text. What patterns are you looking for? How are they grounded in the work itself? And a critical reading has to be grounded in the canon--your reading is as strong as your ability to find evidence that supports it. And, once you find those patterns, where do they come from? What impact do they have on you, the reader? On the text itself? How do they relate to similar works? Are they familiar? New? How might a different reading analyze the same set of ideas?

The point of a critical reading isn’t to point at problems and say “hey, that’s a problem.” It’s to gain a deeper understanding of a work by pulling out specific patterns--which, yes, might be problematic, but also might just be interesting--and contextualizing them in order to gain a deeper understanding. Reading critically doesn’t mean reading with an eye out for bad shit, it’s reading with an understanding that a work doesn’t exist in a vacuum, and actively looking for the way that ideas build over the course of the story.