Weekly Webinar #33: “Living Under Socialism”

I think that your socialism phases are not always true. After ww2 mosts socialist govs were installed by the soviets. Of course with the help of local scums, but this honeymoon phase didn't exist there. They went straight to prosecuting and killing opposition just after the war front moved to next city.

As far as I know Putin is liked in Russia and he just stop opposition (sometimes brutal) from getting too much power. And basically he can't allow that. Russia is too big to hold itself together without strong leader. Everyone thinks he is bad, but it's just trait of the country.

Yes, I put it right there in the description of this video when I uploaded it.

Coach: Any luck finding that link to the Twitter thread on the statistics analysis? I actually saw a thread on Twitter the other day but now I can't see it -- I hope that's not Twitter suppression.

I'd also be interested in hearing about countries that have actually made the transition from dictatorships to something else -- e.g., it looks like Chile actually adopted a constitution while Pinochet was still running the country, which seems weird for a dictatorship, so it must have happened with his consent, I guess. I'm also wondering what kind of government Russia actually has under Putin, since it feels dictatorial but is probably constitutional from a legal standpoint.

I'd be interested in hearing Coach do an overview of Chile's history of government up through the present day, since he seems to know a lot about it. I took a glance at Wikipedia but it reads like a list of bare facts. What I gleaned was that before COVID broke out they were looking at creating a new constitution, and that sounds really interesting. Maybe Coach could put the facts together in a better narrative than Wikipedia.

Although Coach pooh-poohs audible books, Gulag archipelago is next on my audiobook list.

I enjoyed hearing the questions from your non-US listeners on this one. Being from the USA, I can tell their life experiences have been much different than mine, just from their questions. I can also hear it in their voices.

Hey Coach, great webinar! Question: What makes you think that Harris will bring on full socialism? I tend to see her as more of a crooked politician than an ideologue. What am I missing? Where can I find out more?

That's one way to sideline him without having him be put aside due to dementia (which I do not think they'll do). They can get a patsy to kill him, then blame "right wing extremists" and use that as an excuse for crackdowns. "H8 kills!!! Reeee!!!" - have him be a martyr and then portray Harris as a righteous avenger of the fallen Biden.

Porphy's Attorney

A friend of mine said he thinks Biden will be assassinated.

Look at California

Yup... The United States is fucked. Gonzalo, how high do you think gasoline and fuel prices will go under a Biden administration?

JK, great webinar!

Thomas Levy

OK Doomer

Thomas Levy

The Yarvin Thesis explains some of the anomalies, though: our press, instead of going right or at least having a meaningful split (when it comes to the mainstream one strolls along) comes pre-coordinated. Because it already got converged when the revolution happened. They all know the party line and express it in the words they're supposed to use.

Porphy's Attorney

The real question is whether we're in/leaving Phase One or if we're actually in Phase Three. If guys like Yarvin are correct we went through Phase One in the 1930s (and had an abortive one in the 1910s). Complete with the free stuff and monetary debasement, hagiograpic presentations of the Great Leader (who, like Chavez, died in office but instead of being replaced by a Maduro, in the form of Henry Wallace, we got a fairly normal hack who emerged from a political machine and thus was reasonably pragmatic). We didn't have Leninism, and won't have the brand of Socialism that AOC or Bernie wants - the big global capital behind Harris don't want to be nationalized (though they would be happy with what Woodrow Wilson did, which was a quasi-nationalism with guaranteed profit levels but under tight, tight state regulation and direction - mainly to limit market entry by potential competitors. FDR did this, too). This Yarvin-Spandrell argument is that won't have Leninism because we are already the world center for Bioleninism, but it is already in the sclerotic Brezhnevian phase. I'm not sure I agree because I don't think it's impossible to go from Bioleninism to Leninism. Partly because, for many who have pushed the ideology of Bioleninism, they saw it as a way to eventually get to "real" socialism. A Gramscian-Marcusian project (with a large, large dash of Foucault). But the Yarvin argument is that the revolutionary fervor is actually in its decayed stage, it's harder and harder to motivate the throngs compared to the 60s rioting, much less the mass movement of the Wilsonian and its censorious crackdowns (and the mostly forgotten - largely because ultimately very successful - efforts during the New Deal at eliminating real opposition, such that a ersatz cardboard conservative movement had to be recreated by Buckley et al in the postwar era). (Rothbard is pretty good as an introduction to this subject but there are others).

Porphy's Attorney

Just before webinar CRP posts a link to it.

How do you join the webinar? I am the right tier.

Excellent webinar, red pill for Normies big-time ♠️