'Against the Loyal Boys of Grandeur did the Gemachtists seek to bruise, but alas for them, our brave boys stood their ground, for culture and glory they are renowned, and the Gemachtists so rout from the Hill Grandeur. Their Rynboghencrood trampled and torn, by boys all clad bullion an' or'nge, they yelled and screamed after the Boys, for in retreat they cenned that they're steer-Helled. Cheers of noise to the former boys, these newly Men of Grandeur!'
-The last siege of Grandel; Prophecy of Grandeur, Peril of Gemacht
Update: I think that I may have found the event which caused this 'Sense of Betrayal' in Citizen B, at least, if it was not a personal matter affecting him. I will post an article about that above-linked news soon.
Greetings citizens! I hope you enjoyed that little story bit, for now we must enter a distasteful debate that broke out recently in the Club. Citizen B was enraged by a large margin, and the strange matter is, I am still not sure why he was so enraged. He said that 'we' (he oddly called us the Communist Party of America, and referred a few times to us merely as 'the Communists') wish to cancel the Pride Parade. Citizen K and I looked to see if perhaps Citizen B had heard some bad news on this front that we had not... but there is no news of any local Pride parades being cancelled, nor have any states around us paßed anti-LGBTQ legislation, that we could find. It is all the more strange, as when I asked him about potential prejudice in the divorce courts, something he agreed is a problem that 'Woke Leftists' (he identifies this word for this term as such) have a duty to fix, he seemed to lash out at me, saying 'oh are you getting divorced any time soon!'. The divorce topic was merely to reach some common ground, to more neutrally discuß the entirety of the matter, rather than one small policy in it.
My critique of Wokism is that it is an atrocious world-view, and that one who sees only through this lens can but reach a horridly dehumanising, hyper-individualist, and so ultimately anti-egalitarian conception of all other policy areas: politic, economic, social-relations, even areas of abstraction as philosophy. Nay one at the meeting was arguing for the banning of gayneß, or were really talking about that. Citizen B seemed almost obseßed with the single ißue of LGBTQ marriage, to the exclusion of everything else included in the definition of Wokery, in my view of that word, at least. When I speak of Wokery, I mean the world-view of it to all else's subordination or out-right exclusion; and in particulars, I do not give a fig about LGBTQ activism, what irks me far more, and I find to be far more foolish, selfish, and harmful are matters such as potheadery, anti-historicalist Wokeneß, and Felcommsen (that is 'feeling communications sensitivity', called 'the English Speech' by evil Nazi-commie racist Anglo-Saxon misogynists, back in the dark ages). What is ironic, is that Citizen B LOVES Eric Blair/George Orwell, who socially I believe to be an actual piece of shite, but in relation to speech, I sothly agree with Blair's/Orwell's concerns!
Citizen M made my point when she said that Sanders was both focused on economic and was, what I would personally call socially sensible, Wokery being for me rather the world-view of exclusively identity-politic, yet Citizen B treated this as some fatality against my point, when, to my perception at least, it seemed a reaßurance to my point.
All of this recapitulation to say, after long thought for what on Eornath-Ierthan happened in this discußion, whose actual topic was supposed to be on the role of the state in the mode of production/economy, methinks that I have found the source. Citizen B is a Gemachtist, but I am a Grandeurian. That is to say, Citizen B holds that, whatever is taken up by the citizenry and is currently being pushed into power, is ideologically correct, it is gemacht. Yet I believe that the minds of the citizenry can be poisoned by the powers that be (the ruling burgher-claß being merely one of these powers), and that the citizenry can be swept up into anti-cultural rubbish hysteriæ. I use that specific term with purpose. According to Gemachtism at the present time, I am an evil Nazi sexist misogynist for daring to use the word hysteria, in an aßault on women's rights and personhoods. A Grandeurian would retort 'that is not the meaning of the statement, for citizenry lacks sexuality of any sort, be it uterus or womb'. Furthermore, the citizens of the Republic of Mars likely lack genitals whatever, and if bacteria ever become sentient, will not it be these same Gemachtists who are insulting, hateful Nazis, disavowing Martian and Bacterial rights and personhoods? Citizen B, in fact, said some very disturbing things in this vein of thought, which I will not disclose. And his saying these kinds of things demonstrates that Wokery is a dangerous slope to gruesome 'solutions'.
Is Wokery sustainable, then? I say nay. The Gemachtist and the Identity-Politic/Woke world-view, as Citizen S pointed out in the discussion, can be used to justify the most horrible wrongs, and the words of Citizen B affirmed the fears of Citizen S; at least for myself, they did. I implied something during the discußion, and that is simply that the Left is Grandeurian, full stop of the sentence. Nay, more I would say principled ideology is inherently Grandeurian. Ideology that is unwilling to abandon all tenets of its system for the benefit of social fads cannot be Gemachtist, for it has standards, and in the most primitive sense of it, culture is a promotion of standards (tenets). I would hate to say out loud what I am currently thinking, but I think that it is my duty, and to maintain my honour, I must speak it, dueleß the consequences; Gemachtism is ultimately opportunism. And more damningly, if one is unwilling to go against the wave of the present, then how can one be ideologically principled, much leß a true Leftist? Is not the Left based upon the premise of organising the present material conditions to lead to a future mode of production or society? If that is so, then Gemachtism cannot coherently, without contradiction, be employed in a Leftist ideological framework, or to me this is how it seems. If LGBTQ capitalism is the present will of the folk, then is it not according to the logic of Gemachtism evil or fascistic for a Leftist to attempt to change EITHER of these two society-endorsed fabrics? A Grandeurian puts duty before popularity, and therein lies one of the Kantian groundrises within Leftism, and sonderly Marxism, I should think.
Perhaps I am some evil misogynistic Nazi racist for staying with my fellow man (oh triggered, I of course denote man as in mankind) though he (see above) be an unconscious proletarian. Recall that, right before I became a Leftist, I was leading a popular student movement, with large segments of the studentry now poßeßing an opinion of approval for me. I was the popular kid, beloved by the maßes. But I discovered socialism, and I realised that what we, nay, what I was making was senseleß inequality. When I announced my ideological duty, at the drop of a hat, I was considered the weird school shooter extremist, and became from then on ostracised by the studentry (unhelped, to be sure, by the fact that in contrast to the middle school, the high school had a generally atomising/estranging and therefore dehumanising effect on and for all of us). To conclude this unpleasant article, I conclude in the same manner as Comrade Eugene Victor Debs:
'Your Honor, years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings, and I made up my mind that I was not one bit better than the meanest on earth. I said then, and I say now, that while there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a criminal element I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free.
I listened to all that was said in this court in support and justification of this prosecution, but my mind remains unchanged. I look upon the Espionage Law as a despotic enactment in flagrant conflict with democratic principles and with the spirit of free institutions… '
Sothlice, Comrade Debs; Sothlice indeed.
Comments