[Digression to Fascist advocacy moved from coronavirus thread...]
I am curious if you see this as a far-left site? I think of myself as an advocate for a well-regulated capitalist system, with serious antitrust enforcement and a Henry George-style tax on land and raw materials.
You seem far-left compared to Joe. But the USA government and other Western governments cannot and will not well-regulate a "capitalist system". This is because liberalism, liberal democracy, is anti-state and so encourages the elites to rule over government, over state institutions (why do you think Joe has gone on and on about Freemasonry and secret societies?).
Therefore Georgist style taxes on land are essentially impossible under Western regimes, and the philosophical reason for that is Einstein's relativity, peddled and upheld by the liberal elites and which claims that matter, space (meaning 2-D space too!) and time reduce to one thing:
stuff - this following the agenda of Bento Spinoza originally. You are advocating for what is impossible in the West - only the Fuehrerprinzip, accepting significant character and thus caste differences between people - this to replace class differences - can solve this aporia. This is why Georgism flounders helplessly without garnering public support.
But your worst imposture is below.
Agreed that they are "pretend Left" and that their caricature of the Frankfurt School "agenda" causes distraction, debasement and destruction. But while pretending to be "Left" they are actually captives of the billionaires.
The pretend Left can believe what they like about the Frankfurt School, but any caricature of the Frankfurt School agenda on their part merely causes distraction! By singling out the pretend Left you are
singling out halfwits to blame without understanding or admitting the elite agenda in force in the West!
Your words instead exculpate the Frankfurt School, and its anti-family agenda causing Sex'n'Drugs'n'R&R to debase the young in preparation to destroying them utterly. The pretend Left's caricature of it is incidental, revealing instead the pretend Left's subordinate status, their manipulation and their lack of awareness thereof.
Marcuse said:
(Eros & Civilization p. 90) Historically, the reduction of Eros to procreative-monogamic sexuality (which completes the subjection of the pleasure principle to the reality principle) is consummated only when the individual has become a subject-object of labor in the apparatus of his society; whereas, ontogenetically, the primary suppression of infantile sexuality remains the precondition for this accomplishment. The development of a hierarchical system of social labor not only rationalizes domination but also "contains" the rebellion against domination. At the individual level, the primal revolt is contained within the framework of the normal Oedipus conflict. At the societal level, recurrent rebellions and revolutions have been followed by counterrevolutions and restorations. From the slave revolts in the ancient world to the socialist revolution, the struggle of the oppressed has ended in establishing a new, "better" system of domination; progress has taken place through an improving chain of control.
You completely fail to grasp the implications of Marcuse's hypocrisy. He wants to
liberate infantile sexuality to free us from "domination" i.e. from an "authoritarian personality", whether our own or someone else's (the Fuehrer's e.g.).
Liberating infant sexuality in adults old enough to read the book means paedophilia in practice and utter confusion among the 'liberated' masses of people e.g. transgenders, people thinking that they should be the sex opposed to what nature gave them in organs, leading to utter confusion and emphatic government support for such surgical procedures. Worse still it serves to distract, debase and destroy the population, ensuring that the mass of the underclass remain divided and confused until they day they die on the street.
Now you can argue that the particulars of domination are wrong - e.g. Catholic emphasis on sinful masturbation etc. -
but the solution to this problem is not, repeat, not the liberation of infantile sexuality, since the issue of wealthy - largely Jewish - financiers (the Frankfurt School being primarily of Jewish origin) is sidelined and forgotten by the idiot liberal middle class, a.k.a. the "Evangelical Christians", the mass of Judaeo-Christians who add their names to this crooked Frankfurt agenda, thinking they are somehow helping the poor to overcome their prejudices.
That you have put your name to denouncing only a
caricature of the Frankfurt School agenda, one peddled by the "pretend Left" (?Democrats?), can only suggest to me that you are comfortable with if not supportive of the real Frankfurt School agenda, that of "critical theory", the Cultural Marxist Clown College, whose Marxist core, I might add, derives from Marx & Engels research into human origins, later published by Engels as
The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State. The teaching there derives from a fatal flaw dealing with humanity's original tribal societies: they presumed that there was an original situation in which there was group marriage, promiscuous &/or indiscriminate sexual liaisons between males & females.
No such tribe of people has ever been found* - the story of group marriage merely arises from Marx & Engels - and many others' - adolescent fantasies.
Yours faithfully
Claude very Badley
*This is also the underlying reason why there was so much conflict over Margaret Mead's
Coming of Age in Samoa.