I feel like there is some sort of overlap there with radlibs fetishizing failed revolutions/revolutionaries who were martyrs while denouncing successful socialist countries.
I mean, you don't even need to break out yellow Parenti when it comes to radlibs, I'd just look at who they call their heroes.
The late 40's/50's were a total betrayal of the working class. The "second" red scare was totally successful in destroying any institutional pull the left had up until that point, but you know who libs love from that era? Edward R Murrow. More so than anyone else, I hear him credited as the one who "ended" the second red scare which was bad not because it uprooted the working class from levers of power and left them to rot in the sun, but because they were attacking journalists and vague liberal perceptions of civil liberties. He got a drunk from Wisconsin to shut up for two seconds after he achieved everything he wanted to do, congratulations, Quik Trip cashiers have to do that every day. Journalism was and still is a fucking joke, your civil rights still don't actually meaningfully matter, even on his own terms his freaking epic speech ultimately didn't matter because it couldn't reckon with the fact that capital is fundamentally perverting our society into a living hell. It's the same with RBG, and Fauci, and Warren, and the Squad. They don't want success, they just want to be in the right when they fail, because anything further would force them to reckon with the fact that they might actually prefer the 4th Reich.
its petty bourgeois mindset. They are blinded by bourgeois ideology and can only stumble around until they bring about their own ruin. The radlib wants the ideal revolution so they deny anything that would actually bring progress. The chud wants to become the big bourgeoisie but cannot maintain the niceties of the liberal bourgeoisie so they are unpalatable to the market.
I feel like there is some sort of overlap there with radlibs fetishizing failed revolutions/revolutionaries who were martyrs while denouncing successful socialist countries.
I mean, you don't even need to break out yellow Parenti when it comes to radlibs, I'd just look at who they call their heroes.
The late 40's/50's were a total betrayal of the working class. The "second" red scare was totally successful in destroying any institutional pull the left had up until that point, but you know who libs love from that era? Edward R Murrow. More so than anyone else, I hear him credited as the one who "ended" the second red scare which was bad not because it uprooted the working class from levers of power and left them to rot in the sun, but because they were attacking journalists and vague liberal perceptions of civil liberties. He got a drunk from Wisconsin to shut up for two seconds after he achieved everything he wanted to do, congratulations, Quik Trip cashiers have to do that every day. Journalism was and still is a fucking joke, your civil rights still don't actually meaningfully matter, even on his own terms his freaking epic speech ultimately didn't matter because it couldn't reckon with the fact that capital is fundamentally perverting our society into a living hell. It's the same with RBG, and Fauci, and Warren, and the Squad. They don't want success, they just want to be in the right when they fail, because anything further would force them to reckon with the fact that they might actually prefer the 4th Reich.
deleted by creator
its petty bourgeois mindset. They are blinded by bourgeois ideology and can only stumble around until they bring about their own ruin. The radlib wants the ideal revolution so they deny anything that would actually bring progress. The chud wants to become the big bourgeoisie but cannot maintain the niceties of the liberal bourgeoisie so they are unpalatable to the market.
Good point, and knowing the often similar class makeup of radlibs and fascists it might even come from the same place
deleted by creator