During the Cold War, there was the sense that the West was about freedom, about having a good time and being 'cool'. Not everything had to be politicized. In contrast, the communist world was seen as overly political, with ideology shaping and coloring just about everything. This was especially true of Stalinist USSR and China of the Cultural Revolution. So, while everything had to be Marxist-Leninist in the communist world, one could be just cool and happily apolitical in the West. You could have fun and be left alone by the state, commissars, or activists. It's like that movie NINOTCHKA. Garbo as Soviet commissar is staunchly ideological, so hardline. She is humorless and stern. But when she begins to laugh, she begins her transition to capitalism and freedom. She learns one doesn't have to be uptight and upright all the time with radical commitment. One could take it easy and enjoy life. And unlike communist propaganda devised to shape one's politics and worldview, capitalist advertising had only one thing in mind: To sell stuff. It was about profits for the company and fun/convenience for the consumer(as king or queen). The appeal of capitalism was its apolitical character. It was about products and services. It was about money for the company and happiness for the consumer.
So, even though the West was plenty political and ideological during the Cold War with its own propaganda and messaging, one could nevertheless ignore all the humorless and heavy-handed stuff in the world of capitalism, consumerism, and entertainment. For sure, Americans weren't dragged to ideological sessions. One's involvement in politics was voluntary, not mandatory. One didn't drink Coca-Cola to be political. One didn't watch a Disney movie for ideology. One didn't watch a 007 movie for propaganda. Even when James Bond took on the Russkies, it was more about fantasy and romance than politics. One didn't read Archie comics for 'moral' instructions or guidance. Indeed, the West often portrayed itself as apolitical compared to the Communist East. The dreary notion was that people behind the Iron Curtain, from cradle to grave, were molded into 'good communists' and everything was politicized. If you were politically suspect or heretical, you could be hounded, persecuted, or even executed. But in the West, the capitalists didn't care about your ideology. They just sold you stuff and services. And when you took part in capitalism, it was to buy something of convenience or pleasure. You didn't purchase it for meaning or commitment. When Richard Nixon met Nikita Khrushchev in the 1950s, the message was that Americans were consumers with freedom and money to buy what they wanted without meddling of the state. And when China opened up in the late 70s, one of the famous images was of Chinese youths wearing sunglasses and drinking Coke. The appeal of sunglasses and Coca-Cola wasn't ideological. They were consumer products. At most, they had 'idolic' value. Cola meant easy pleasure, cold drink on a hot day. Sunglasses meant looking 'cool' and stylish.
During the Cultural Revolution, sunglasses had been banned as a product of 'Western Decadence'. And in the Soviet Union, body building was frowned upon(if not illegalized) as a form of vanity and narcissism. And indeed, one of the Western attractions for people in the communist world was the sense of apolitical freedom, especially in America. In the movie MOSCOW ON THE HUDSON(by Paul Mazursky), the Russian exile(played by Robin Williams) encounters many problems in the US, but he still chooses to remain because he's left alone and free to do his own thing. There isn't a commissar breathing down his neck 24/7. He could say to the Power, "It's none of your business", something disallowed in a communist system. You don't lose your job over politics(unless it's truly grievous).
So, the idea was that capitalism is fun, cool, easy-going, tolerant, individualist, and apolitical whereas communism is radical, fanatical, censorious, repressive, dogmatic, and conformist. This contrast is illustrated in THE UNBEARABLE LIGHTNESS OF BEING where pro-Western Czechs act in libertine fashion whereas the Communist Order is presented as rigid and heavy.
So, what happened? Why did capitalism in the West turn 'radical' in the current 'woke' form? Why is it so incessantly activist and pushy with its constant messaging and propagandizing? Why are people being fired or demoted or censured over some tweet years ago? Why are they being denied products and services over matters of personal creed, politics, and values? Why do capitalists fund, propagate, and lend support to views that smack of 'radical' nuttery? When Coca-Cola made inroads into China in the 1980s, it was the apolitical drink of the world. The idea was its dominance owed to quality and service, not to any idea or message. But now, Coca-Cola is the promoter of the cult of White Fragility. Burger King constantly reminds us of the sanctity of homos, as if it wants to rebrand itself as Bugger King. What does sodomy have to do with burgers? But then, why did Homosher take off as the new kosher? Why are Oreo Cookies packaged in homo colors? What do cookies have to do with guys sucking each other's pud? Why are capitalists pushing BLM the big lie when surely anyone with a sense of reality knows that blacks mostly kill one another(when not attacking non-blacks) and that the number of innocent blacks killed by cops is negligible, if existent at all? It's bad enough that capitalists are taking part in politics(when they are all about products and profits). What's worse is they willfully take the ideological or idolatrous line than have any real concern for the truth. They go with what is politically advertised than what is true in the real world. It used to be capitalism was like the Beach Boys(fun, fun, fun), whereas communists were like the Red Guards. Now, capitalism funds and supports 'woke' mobs and pushes 'radical' dogma through their public announcements and advertising. Also, they fire and intimidate their own work force on the basis of ideological correctness and idolatrous sanctity. How did things become this way? It's almost as if capitalism has taken on the attitude of Jewish Bolsheviks in the 1920s. 'Wokery' is doing to business what Neocons did with American Conservatism. It's in selective purge mode, condemning whiteness while enabling Jewish Power to grow ever bigger.
1. Surely, the ascendancy of Jewish Power is a major factor in this as Jews are the top capitalists and have an obsessively supremacist mentality. Jews love money, but their top priority is tribal supremacism. Having abandoned socialism, Jews are now totally capitalist and determined to use their monopoly power to shape the narrative and direct the course of history to secure their supremacist position. Mass media are part of Jewish capitalist enterprise, and Jews use their near-monopoly lock on news and information for tribal supremacist's sake. So, for Jews, capitalism isn't just a cash cow but a political weapon of mind-control. Jews especially feel vulnerable despite their vast riches because they are only 2% of the population. For Jews, capitalism is useful as both a political and apolitical tool. As an apolitical instrument of hedonism, leisure, fun, and entertainment, capitalism turns the masses into complacent and infantilized bunch of mindless consumers. Better to have goyim obsess about sports, video games, movies, and gambling than gain independent political consciousness that might realize that Jews control just about everything.
But an apolitical order never stays that way. In a vacuum of political meaning, some force enters the scene to offer meaning, direction, and sense of purpose. Man doesn't live on bread alone, not even on bread-and-circus alone. In the past, Jews used capitalism for profit-making and used socialism & radical politics for meaning. Jewish capitalists made the profits, and Jewish leftists served as the prophets. But genuine Jewish leftist have all vanished. Most Jews are capitalist and pro-rich. They are for more money and more privilege for the Tribe and have lost interest in Humanity. Thus, Jews have bundled profit and prophet into one package. For example, in the past Jews made some movies and TV shows for fun and nothing but fun. They hardly had any politics and were made to be as uncontroversial as possible to make the audience complacent and happy. But Jews also made other kinds of movies, usually scripted by leftists, radicals, and subversives, that were meant to push a message. These movies generally made less money and even lost money. Still, they had political and propagandistic value.
Today in contrast, even mindless entertainment is likely to be loaded with politics. Advertising is often heavily politicized or in service of ideology or idolatry of certain groups, especially Negroes and Homos, the holy icons of commercialism. The way things are going, even slot-machines of the future might be politicized with ideological symbols. Jews control advertising, entertainment, and news media, all of which are capitalist enterprises. And as the #1 priority of Jews is Jewish Supremacism, they are hellbent on using whatever means, even consumer-capitalism, as a tool of power. As Jewish Power relies most essentially on the cuckery of white goyim, Jews use capitalism to spread images, ideas, and narratives that gaslight, shame, or paralyze white identity and interests.
2. The corruption of Gramsci-ism. When Antonio Gramsci spoke of Cultural Hegemony, he hardly had stuff like 'gay' Oreo Cookies or BLM-narcissistic fests in mind. His idea wasn't to take over capitalism to spread idolatry in favor of certain groups. Rather, the idea was for leftists and socialists to gain cultural influence to win over hearts & minds. His idea of Good Culture would have been something like BICYCLE THIEVES or the films of Roberto Rossellini. For him, Marxist cultural hegemony was to destroy capitalism, not to take over capitalism and indulge in narcissistic hedonism as proper platform for good ideas and values. If socialism must have dignity, it must be conveyed through serious and noble manner. In contrast, today's neo-hegemonists indulge in the culture of excess and use such means to convey supposedly important messages. It's like radicalism expressed through a strip-tease.
If Gramsci looked forward to winning hearts and minds with a new cultural paradigm, the neo-hegemonists are perfectly fine with capitalist excess, self-indulgence, narcissism, vanity, and infantilism... as long as those are loaded with the favored idolatry, mainly of Jews, homos, and blacks. So, it's great to 'twerk' as long as it's for BLM or Globo-Homo. It's okay to indulge yourself with wild-partying and girls-gone-wild and wanton hedonism AS LONG AS you remember to pay tribute to Jews, blacks, and homos.
This has obvious appeal to Neo-Hegemonists who are more Cultural Marx Brothers than Cultural Marxists. There is precious little that is Marxist or even mildly socialist about them. They are total capitalists even if they make some obligatory noises about the dangers of 'greed' and the 1%. Indeed, the neo-aristocratic globalists fixed it so that leftism would be changed from a movement of laboring masses and lesser-haves to a movement centered on vanity, celebrity, narcissism, freakdom, and mental illness(as the new normal). Leftism went from the voice of the majority to that of favored minorities, Jews-blacks-homos. This bogus 'leftism' is not about basic justice or equality but the look-at-me obsessions of those infected with 'celebrititis'. It's not about homos asking for tolerance but demanding they be celebrated by the entire world, even in places of worship. It's not about blacks struggling for justice but howling to be the center of attention and affection REGARDLESS of how they act. It's not about blacks condemning white bigotry and violence against blacks but about them bitching and yapping about how it's unjust for blacks to be brought to justice for bad deeds and criminality. The Civil Rights Movement ran on, "Don't hurt us", but today, it's more about "Shut up when we hurt us." And of course, this is partly due to the fish rotting from the head. Jews are the ruling elites of the West, and they rigged things so that they have license to kill, steal, and feel(the shikses). With Jews having such power and privilege, why wouldn't blacks and homos, two especially self-centered groups, demand similar affection, deference, and privilege? The new 'leftism' is about the nihilism of Jews, blacks, and homos intoxicated with idolatrous megalomania.
Jewish supremacists and globalist elites studied history. They know why the French King lost his head and why the Russian Tsar was mowed down. Them fellers were at least honest in their relation to the masses. They ruled over their subjects. The neo-aristos of Jews and globalists also rule over us, and in more ways than one, they are even more powerful and privileged than the kings and emperors of old. And they know the people may rise against them IF they are seen as the over-privileged ruling elites. And so, they decided to appropriate, indeed confiscate, the cult of leftism for their own uses. This way, they can have the power of ultra-kings and uber-emperors BUT be shielded by their professed 'leftism'. In actuality, they work against the people, but their mantle of 'leftism' creates the impression that they are for 'progress' and 'justice'.
This is why today's capitalists and globalists love it when idiot conzos call them 'communists' and 'leftists'. Imagine that, conzo losers with little or nothing calling super-duper capitalists and their well-funded flunkies a bunch of 'communists'. The right would do much better to adopt socialism, and why not? Nationalism is intrinsically socialist in this sense. It says, regardless of private property, a nation belongs equally to all its people. It doesn't matter how rich or poor someone is. The nation belongs equally to the rich and the poor. Therefore, the rich national must make common cause with the poor national, at least as fellow patriots. He may be rich while the other is poor, but they are fellow nationals, and as such, there is a bond and obligation that goes beyond dollars and cents. But globalist capitalism tells people that the Nation is an outdated and archaic idea. The only thing that matters is a system of global networks whereby the elites of the world all collude with another. The rich national has no obligation to fellow nationals. Of course, this doesn't apply to Jews. While Jews push ultra-individualist libertarian deracination for white goyim, they themselves have a sense of Jewish brotherhood and sisterhood. Even as they pressure whites to give up every last vestige of white identity and interest, they press upon whites to support Jewish identity and interests. Jews even got Jonathan Pollard sprung from prison, and the freed Jew is now in Israel urging fellow Jews all over the world to betray goy nations for Jews Uber Alles. No wonder Jews grow stronger as a group while whites are dividing into successful white individuals and unsuccessful white individuals(who are derided by successful whites as 'losers'). Rich Jews look out for lesser Jews, but rich whites sneer at have-less whites as 'losers' who should use opiates and die. If rich whites care for anything other than themselves, it is in accordance with the gods controlled by Jews. So, white goy elites sing paeans to Jews, homos, blacks, and even illegal immigrants while spewing venom at the 'deplorables'.
3. Another factor is the catholicization or 'christmasization' of capitalism. Look back into Christian History. Christianity was not a happy creed. It was about self-denial, sacrifice, poverty-as-virtue, turn-the-other-cheek, and other righteous deeds & values. In contrast, paganism was a lot more fun and colorful. Paganism indulged in pleasure, appreciated beauty, celebrated life as a circus, and had space for vanity, narcissism, and egotism. The Greeks and especially the Romans knew how to have a good time. Christianity looked upon much of paganism as sinful, wicked, demonic, satanic, and degrading. Christianity was severe and spartan in its mode of life and expression. It was deeply ideological. And yet, the Catholic Church didn't want pure Christianism. It was too gloomy, depressing, and judgmental. And so, the Church found ways to fuse the spiritual righteousness of Christianity with the colorfulness of paganism. This way, the Catholics could have the cake and eat it too. Practice Christianity but in a colorful pagan way. Make the faith more festive and cheerful. Of course, the Church was careful to reject the more licentious aspects of paganism and shape paganesque expressions into something holier and sanctimonious. Still, Christianity in its spiritual purity was too stark and depressing for the Catholics who found a way to fuse Christian ideology with pagan idolatry. If pagans, lacking deep spiritual grounding, were drawn to Christianity's profound faith, it was the case that Christians, lacking color and cheers, were drawn to the excitement offered by paganism. While some pagans rejected Christianity to the end while some Christians denounced all vestiges of paganism, the Catholic Church arrived at a synthesis of faith and festival. And this has been especially true of Christmas. Ostensibly a somber observance of the birth of Christ, it has turned into a kind of pagan bacchanalia of materialism, partying, and hijinks. Jesus and Santa.
In our post-Christian age, people of the West have been clamoring for new 'spiritual' meanings, and of course the Jews, as controllers of media, academia, and entertainment, get to choose the new gods. And the new gods are the globo-trinity of Jew Worship, Negro Reverence, and Homo Devotion. This new trinity constitutes the new faith. But just lamenting the Shoah, crying about Slavery, and recalling how homos used to be called 'fags' wouldn't be much fun. They need color and excitement, sass and zing.
This is where the symbiotic partnership with 'pagan' capitalism comes in. Capitalism, often characterized as crass and trashy, is redeemed by its association with Sacred Jews, Noble Negroes, and Holy Homos. And in turn, the Jewish cause, black cause, and homo cause are made cool and fashionable by capitalist color. Consider the marketing that goes into AIPAC conferences. It's like the freaking Emmy Awards night. Jews hire publicity firms to put on a big show with fanfare and razzle-dazzle. Indeed, what is the Academy Awards ceremony all about? Hollywood is mostly about marketing crass entertainment, but once a year to burnish its image Hollywood puts on a big show about how it cares about art, quality, meaning, and values.
Even though the moralists and activists may resent the power of money, they are also dependent on and grateful for the money that comes their way. So, if Marxists sought to totally do away with capitalism, the neo-catholicist 'left' is happy to form a symbiotic relationship with Big Money. The Golden Calf is also the golden goose for the activist community. Same goes for the so-called Green Energy movement. It's really bait-and-switch. It's about Jews invoking environmental concerns to replace goy-owned fossil-fuel industry with Jewish-owned fossil-fuel industry, except that the latter has been packaged with 'green energy' credentials when, in fact, most of the Jewish-backed industries are overwhelmingly run on fossil-fuel. (As for nuclear energy, Jews oppose its proliferation because other nations might, like Iran, have the potential to develop nukes. Whatever is good for Israel.) So, the Jewish oligarchs of 'green energy' aim to take over entire sectors of the energy industry, and the 'green' activist community is flush with donations. Even though the latter are mere tools, they like being in the limelight in their roles as the saviors of the planet. But then, the clergy played much the same function in European history. They mostly served the ruling elites but got housed in nice big churches and hogged roles as spiritual-moral voice of the community.
4. In a way, the fanfare around LGBTQ and BLM makes sense in accordance to the logic of capitalism. The favoritism for homos and blacks owes more to capitalist logic than socialist/Marxist logic. After all, capitalism is far more idolatrous than communism is. Granted, there were massive Stalin and Mao cults in Soviet Union and China. But the monopolization of iconography by Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and other top leaders meant that everyone else had to remain on the human level. In Cuba, Fidel Castro and Che Guevara were like gods but everyone else was merely human, equal to others. And when Soviet Union did away with the cult of personality after Stalin's death, it was mostly humanist. It was a repressive and restrictive form of humanism but humanism just the same. Humans had value as humans, neighbors, comrades, fellow citizens, and etc. Not as idols, icons, stars, and divas.
And in a way, the West was wrong to assume that the communist world was about nonstop propaganda. While propaganda could be overbearing and shrill at times, most of the arts, culture, and entertainment in the communist world was humanist than ideological. They were about people faced with daily problems, something anyone in any part of the world would recognize. So, on one level, communism vs capitalism wasn't entirely about radical propaganda vs apolitical pleasure.
It was also a matter of humanism vs stardom-ism. When youths in communist nations hankered for blue jeans, rock n roll records, and Western fads, they weren't merely seeking escapism from ideology and dogma. They were bored with humdrum humanism and were besotted with the narcissism and celebrity-cult of the West. While some resisted communist ideology in favor of Western freedom, others rejected social humanism in favor of capitalist idolatry, i.e. they weren't so much striving to be free as to fall under the spell of Western excess of vanity and diva-cults.
Apart from elevating Marx, Lenin, and some local ruler to high heaven, communism offered humanism as the proper mode for most people. Accept and appreciate people as people, as fellow workers, patriots, and comrades. Don't put on airs like you're something special. Don't be aloof and 'cool' like you're above the fray. In contrast, especially with the rise of youth culture around Elvis Presley, James Dean, Marilyn Monroe, and the Beatles, capitalism turned into a mass idolization of celebrities, stars, and divas. Nihilo-Narcissism pushed humanism aside in the West. The French New Wave got started with the humanist 400 BLOWS by Francois Truffaut. But on the eve of May 68 disaster, Jean-Luc Godard was already pondering the emergence of youth centered on 'Marx and Coca-Cola'.
But over time, people forgot about Marx altogether, and if there are young Marxists today, they got it from The Clash or Rage Against the Machine, except the Machine could easily appropriate the 'rage' that was never anything more than moral narcissism to parade onstage by shallow divas.
If the current order was truly about 'cultural marxism', then it would certainly not favor homos who are natural materialists, narcissists, egotists, and aristos. Homos have always been deferential to the rich, privileged, and/or famous. No wonder the US deep state is teeming with homos who work for NSA and CIA to smash other nations. And globo-homo agenda isn't about tolerance for homos(a good thing) but compulsory celebration and deification of homos and trannies as new angels, even new messiahs.
As for the Negro agenda, one could argue it is more in line with 'cultural marxism'. Negroes, after all, have roots in slavery, and many of them toiled in low-end jobs on farms and factories. But is that the reason why Negroes get so much attention? No, if that were so, how come browns don't get much attention? Browns were conquered by whites and mostly toiled as peons and servants in South and North Americas. Even when white libby-dibs feigned outrage over Trump's "kids in cages", it was less about the illegals than about JEWS, i.e. border security reminded all these libby-dibs of Jewish Refugees during the Holocaust, LOL. (And now that Biden's administration is putting the kids in 'cages', they aren't cages anymore according to the Jewish-run media.) And if 'cultural marxism' is about the oppressed, there is precious little discussion of the American Indians, the most tragic people in the world who permanently lost their homeland to foreign invaders. And there's hardly any talk of Palestinians and Arabs destroyed by Wars for Israel cooked up by Zionists.
So much for 'cultural marxism'. So, the reason why blacks get special love is due to 'cultural capitalism', not 'cultural marxism'. It owes less to the history of slavery or Jim Crow than black success in the idolatrous fields of capitalism, mainly in sports and pop music. It also helps that Jews own the media and much of sports industry and have much to profit from black ability and talent. And of course, Jews associate 'white guilt' with blackness because blackness is most potent in paralyzing white agency and unity. After all, people feel more guilty about having done wrong to the superior than to the inferior. It's like there's more outcry over someone killing a grand elephant than a lowly warthog. As whites idolize Negroes as rappers, athletes, and super-studs in the capitalist-hedonist order, it was only natural that so-called 'woke' capitalism would come to favor blacks and BLM mainly due to the higher idolatrous value of the Negroes.
So, in a way, capitalism's promotion of globo-homo and BLM isn't so much a fusion of 'right-wing capitalism' with 'leftwing ideology' but the logical outcome of capitalism's obsession with vanity and idolatry, finally leading to the moneyed apotheosis of whatever has the most 'idolic' value. It's hard to think of two groups more narcissistic and exhibitionist than blacks and homos, and not surprisingly, under Jewish media orchestration, BLM and LGBTQ symbols are often displayed side by side. This is 'cultural capitalism'.
