The Hybrid War Of Terror On America
The nationwide crime wave and spree of urban terrorism that followed George Floyd’s death in police custody at the end of last month has revealed the existence of the hitherto largely undiscovered ideological syncretism of economic leftism and social fascism. The author explored its origins in his extensive analysis last week about how “The Hybrid War Of Terror On America Has Been Decades In the Making“, and the reader is strongly requested to at least review that piece before proceeding throughout the rest of the present one in order to have a more solid understanding of the author’s perspective on this topic. A superficial summary of his views is that left-wing individuals and movements have spent decades infiltrating American institutions prior to the commencement of the ongoing kinetic phase of their long-running “revolutionary” campaign to overthrow the US government. The foot soldiers in the streets on the frontlines of this unrest are a combination of criminal opportunists (“lumpenproletariats”) and misled political activists who likely aren’t aware of the true ideological cause in which they’re fighting.
An “Unholy” Alliance
The aforesaid activists have been misled into thinking that their participation is these events is guided by their opposition to police brutality and support of racial equality. Many of them are also taking advantage of these “networking opportunities” to spread messages against social fascism and in support of economic leftism. What few of them apart from the “puppet masters” pulling the strings realize, however, is that the initially peaceful protest movement that was organized in Floyd’s memory in order to raise awareness about police brutality has quickly evolved into a Hybrid War experiment for perfecting the syncretism of economic leftism and social fascism. This ideological bastard represents a global threat because of its potential to create a new Hybrid War model for carrying out & “justifying” acts of terrorism in economically challenged & ethno-racially diverse states in pursuit of each party’s shared ideologically driven goal of “revolution”. On the surface, it sounds incredulous to believe that far-left economic activists would unite with far-right social forces considering their ideological contradictions, but that’s exactly what’s happening in the US right now.
No Race Has An Exclusive Monopoly On Racism
The reader shouldn’t be under the mistaken assumption that supporters of social fascism are all KKK members or Neo-Nazis since the essence of this ideology is simply the “racial superiority” of the believer’s own race or that of a (formerly or presently) oppressed minority. In the latter instance, some members of that race or ethnic group hypocritically develop what has been wrongly described as “reverse-racist” sentiments towards the race or ethnic group that they blame for their former or present oppression. This terminology is inaccurate as the author argued in his earlier piece reminding everyone that “No Race Has An Exclusive Monopoly On Racism” since it’s solely a mindset that transcends race, religion, ideology, nationality, and borders. Nevertheless, “reverse-racism” is tempting for many formerly or presently oppressed races or ethnic groups to espouse as vengeance for how they were or still are being treated, and its expression takes many forms from the imposition of different legal and social standards for people of a different identity (race or ethnicity) to intimidation campaigns and even acts of violence against those who visually remind them of their oppressors.
Social Fascism By Non-Caucasian-Americans
Proceeding from this objective description of “reverse-racism”, some African-Americans, non-African-American “activists”, and their institutional (political and media) allies are arguably “reverse-racists” who haven’t shied away from “proudly” expressing their views to the world through their support of the US’ nationwide crime wave and spree of urban terrorism that exploded in the aftermath of Floyd’s death. The subsequent violence is intended to incite a similarly violent reaction from Caucasian-Americans, the same as the racist “virtue signaling” that’s since become popular (e.g. making viral videos of Caucasian-Americans kneeling before African-Americans while apologizing for slavery, washing their feet, and even kissing their boots) is meant to convey the message of their ethno-racial “inferiority” vis-a-vis African-Americans. Although some African-Americans are relishing in these highly-publicized displays of “superiority”, few of them realize that their provocative videos, the crime wave that many of them are responsible for, and their acts of urban terrorism are being manipulated by their “allies” for deadly ideological ends.
As the author wrote last week, “Antifa Wants To Lead African-Americans To Their Slaughter To Spark A Race War“. The analysis argued that Antifa and its institutional allies are encouraging the aforementioned crime wave and urban terrorism in order to provoke a lethal response from the security services that could then increase the likelihood of a “race war” breaking out so as to destabilize the US government. The envisioned end game is to replace the country’s current capitalist system with an economic leftist one, even if the social fascists and many of their allies aren’t aware of it. The resultant syncretism of economic leftism and social fascism is being experimented with in the US through the ongoing Hybrid War of Terror in order to perfect this model prior to its export elsewhere across the world to the similarly diverse states of Afro-Eurasia that are predisposed to the weaponization of this bastardized ideology. There is nothing inherent to economic leftism which necessitates its utilization of social fascism, but the most radical proponents of this ideology have convinced themselves that “the ends justify the means”, hence why they exploit social fascists as “useful idiots” for their cause, capitalizing on the (real or perceived) racial resentment that’s driving them.
Positive Examples Of Ideological Syncretism
There’s nothing wrong with syncretic strategies in principle since it’s unrealistic to believe that every political movement will remain “ideologically pure”. The composition of modern-day society and contemporary information-communication technology makes it much too difficult to expect that proponents of any cause will all remain dogmatic believers in its theoretical tenets, many of which were “authoritatively” expounded upon in the last two centuries during completely different socio-economic contexts as is the case with economic leftism’s. That said, social fascism should always be opposed no matter what cause it’s being exploited to advance, but there’s a difference between social fascists and social nationalists (which aren’t the same as “National Socialists”/Nazis). The first believe in the supremacy of a single race or ethnicity while the second support the social interests of the nation’s entire population, however diverse it may be. Although admittedly provocative to put forth, the author believes that China, Venezuela, and Bolivia under illegally deposed President Morales are positive examples of the syncretism of economic leftism and social nationalism.
“Good” vs. “Bad”
The acknowledgement of “positive” & “negative” forms of syncretism between the left & the right over economic & social issues raises the question of how one can go about “labeling” the result as either “good” or “bad”. Each ideology has radical elements within it, and while some might be tolerated (dogmatic communists, even if they don’t tolerate any dissent), others must be opposed by everyone at all costs (social fascists). So long as any form of syncretism rejects social fascism, then it shouldn’t be dismissed outright as “bad”, with the final determination ultimately resting on one’s subjective views instead per their individual right to make up their own mind. This understanding naturally makes one wonder about the various combinations that left-right syncretism over economic-social forms can take, which certainly deserves to be discussed. In between the left & right’s economic & social extremes lie differing degrees of beliefs, be they democratic socialism or social nationalism, which sometimes blur the lines between economic and social issues. This therefore makes it difficult to attach a label to label to each form without it being disputed, though one should nevertheless try.
Mix & Match
Tariffs, for instance, are generally considered to be an expression of economic nationalism and thus a form of right-wing economics, though left-wing governments such as China’s still apply them. The reason is that economic nationalism could be used for the indirect purpose of improving a nation’s society by generating more tax revenue for possible investment into social projects as well as protecting people’s jobs, or in other words, promoting social nationalism. Another relevant syncretic example is some Democrats’ desire to pair together the right-wing economic model of corporatism with what some divisively describe as “Cultural Marxism”, the attempt to apply economic leftism’s pursuit of “equality” into the social domain which most economic leftists describe instead as (extreme) “social liberalism”. Some historic left-wing social policies (“class war”) disproportionately targeted specific ethno-racial groups like Stalin’s did, thus giving rise to the false impression that they were social fascism (“genocide”, as Ukrainians allege that the “Holodomor” was) instead of social leftism. These examples prove that there are still plenty of interesting possibilities worth researching.
The Final Verdict On Syncretism
All told, syncretism is in principle a very flexible strategy that pragmatically makes the best of today’s socio-political diversity and the plethora of information available at everyone’s fingertips through modern-day communication devices, but it can nevertheless be exploited in a manner worthy of universal condemnation whenever it incorporates any element of social fascism. Economic fascism, which can be (over-)simplified as corporatism (which is a much “nicer-sounding” euphemism), is an altogether different system which doesn’t in theory automatically have anything to do with what’s nowadays regarded as social fascism even though the three most prominent historical examples of economic fascism (World War II-era Germany [which “officially” regarded itself as “National-Socialist”], Italy, and Japan [which practiced what’s been called “Showa Statism”]) promoted socially fascist policies through racism, ethnic cleansing, and genocide. The problem with the syncretism wreaking havoc in America’s streets is that radical left-wing ideologues are exploiting the socially fascist predispositions of citizens of all “colors” in order to advance their economic agenda.
If not directly called out for what it is (the blending of economic leftism and social fascism), then the new American syncretism cannot be properly countered on the ideological level, which can lead to the possible perfection of this strategy after some time prior to its potential export abroad to similarly diverse Afro-Eurasian states for divide-and-rule purposes. Social fascism should never be weaponized as a means to any end no matter how “noble”, “inevitable”, and/or “universalist” one believes that their envisioned end game may be (as all leftists are convinced of as a basic tenet of their ideology). It’s certainly possible to promote leftist policies without exploiting social fascists of any “color” as “useful idiots” in pursuit of this goal, which is why the syncretic strategy that was discussed is so unnecessary. Even so, the global recession catalyzed by the world’s uncoordinated lockdowns against COVID-19 (“World War C“) will simultaneously make more people attracted to leftist economic solutions in parallel with tempting them to blame “the other” for their newfound problems per the pervasive influence of social fascism, which is why this form of syncretism is so dangerous.