An August Failure or Mere Conceit? Publishing Articles After Being Free of Cyber-Techne

14 September 2026.

Comrades, we have a confession of which we may nay further preclude its revelation. The confession has a shameful or publicly disaffecting element to it, at least it will for many Leftists, particularly our fellow 'professional' Leninists.

As announced in our previous post, we were for a time till of late made unable to publish any articles. But, whilst this is indeed predominantly true, what if there were to be a deeper failing undisclosed, which needs be self-criticised? That is to enquire, whether there was not some selfish, smallburgher apathy to returning Thoughts of a Comrade to full operation, to fully meeting its monthly quotas, with all the labour— more precisely all the fortitime (fortified-time) —this entails? Perhaps personal publishing ventures and such like alternative activities were siphoning energy which might have otherwise been used to renew publication the earlier? What am I saying, comrades? Do I intend to offer a denunciation of the liberal wrecker within me? Is it not my duty as a Leninist to do just this? Indeed, there beseems truth in every crevice.

We were and still are, it is true, distracted relating to our duties to Thoughts of a Comrade. We have failed to remain diligent in the proper spirit of Bolsheviks— the critique is rightly stated thereto. Howbeit, as Marxists, we understand that an individual genuflexion is of very little value (even if, as Leninists, we are sometimes wont to forget this in a frenzy). What is actually useful is developing an informative analysis as to why a failure emerges. Therefore, let us ask 'why is production and publication of articles slowing down?'. This question was partially resolved in reformulation, that, according to the return announcement posted, it was the publication step which remained disrupted, with articles yet continuing to be written. This was a lie; upon further introspection, and seeking the truth from the facts of counting each article produced during a given month, we must revise our confidence and suggest rather that there was an albeit mild reduction in the number of articles written. We will discussion the reasons for this reduction in a moment. Very well, then why has publication been so slow to return to standard capacity? In this case, self-criticism is absolutely warranted. Due to the extended back-log of articles— and one of these being a rather long commentary —which require typing out for publication, and the innate nature of being a two-man team for a small 'institution' as ours, Bolshevik discipline and morale have a tendency to erode without outside importation of these resources. This hindering state of affairs must be rectified, but the way to rectify this appears to be hopelessly incidental.

The purpose of this article is to re-engender the bolshevik ghost (mind and soul combined) in the editorial office of Thoughts of a Comrade. Yet, to successfully accomplish this as a lasting fire, we must address the true source of these extinguished embers. We must, at last, address the second part of this article's title, about the freedom enjoyed away from cyber-techne and its consequences. This restoration of the Netlog's standard operation insinuates the return of the spectre of being once more shackled to the thought-drain chains of cyber-techne. It is not, perhaps, a difficult matter to describe after all: both of us, but especially to speak for myself, do not enjoy the use of cyber-techne, for it causes the malaises intellectual and optical, and is the very model of a mannish-made undeath bestowal. That is to say, it hinders the eye-sight and slackens the mind, till one is nay more indistinguishable from the undead. The undead are known neither for their reason nor their literary acumen. We should like to think that the current iteration of Thoughts of a Comrade has superior standards to these.

That is the main problem. There is also an unpleasant though recurrent question of morale interred in all this, but it will be addressed in a future article, if it must be addressed at all afterwards. The second interred question closely bound with the former two, of course, is the question of commitment. We hinted at these rival commitments at the beginning of the article, and the shifting balance of commitment was quietly spelt out by the previous actual article regarding the shrinking prospects for promoting high culture via the political arena [Musings on Some Fears Regarding The Prospect for High Culture]. If the political arena is dominated by the ideals of the Eotner, to do in Midyard as it is done in Eotenham, then the sole secure refuge for the sake of edifying the soul is in the thought and craft of sacred scripture, Sothliche. The Prophet Michéa failed on the Left, and the Prophet Deneen failed on the Right, the Prophets Spengler, Eliot, Lasch, and MacIntyre being long ago forgotten by the post-modern rottens. Then, what hope have we except to enter self-imposed exile?

Neither of have have ever viewed the purpose of the Left as being a grotesquely deviated pseud-Gramscian vengeful suicide. Socialism, in our imagination at least, is suppos'd to be the aristification of the whole society, where high culture is but the average, the normal standard of the majority. Alas how most of the popular conceptions of socialism are now violently deconstructionist, vapidly hedonist, or vulgarly burgher-capitalist. Does any one contend against the fact that capitalists and aristocrats (or middling-class burghers and faithful nobles, to point to the cultural class originations), in their respective ideals, have fundamentally differing, ultimately clashing manners of lifestyle, and the values which belie them? Whoever wishes to make every one resemble to-day's highest placed burghers, those making recent news, is thus a sick pervert.

This covers the problems facing the advance of the Lenin Banner of Reform. However, speaking for myself, I am glad to say that writing this article has helped to raise my spirits a bit. Rereading The Eighteenth of Brumaire has also proved a restful respite from the modern idiocy. How little it changes— the Right pretends and the Left offends. It appears that we must ever turn to the hermit, noble, and prophet to rediscover the Good and the True.