Your observational skills aren't worth shit. The idea that wealthy elites would be colluding with world leaders to usher in global communism is ridiculous. Think instead global monopoly. They collude together to make money not to help poor people. That much should be obvious. Does the type of globalism you're describing, where companies can move their manufacturing oversees to exploit cheap labor, does that seem like a progressive policy to you? Really? Its the free market capitalists that would allow the sort of economic conditions to exist where wealthy companies could put profits over the lives of the American worker. What patronage they give to us is capitulation not cooperation.
Hold on. I said
"I cannot say that this is exactly 'communistic' but then it does represent a general cooperation between extremely large governing forces in *collusion* (cooperation) with the vast industries which, as is always the case I guess, stand behind the various social governments."
You are under the illusion, I think, that what you call Progressive policy by the Party that holds that moniker has the real interests of people at heart. Power tends to use whatever means to consolidate power. I can appreciate many Left-Progressive values if they defend the family and the working man (and defend other sound values) but I think
you might have an 'observation skill issue'. And this has to do with vast capital interests and the way they secure their interests. In a period of social crisis those who have real *ownership interest* very carefully survey what is going on and do what needs be done to secure their position.
True, a classic 'communism' does not seem to be on the horizon, but there are authoritarian tendencies among the present *elites*, and certainly visible in the Biden'Harris regime, which tend to that centralization Paradoxical speaks of.
Good point to insert Jonathan Bowden talking about the Left and Marxism:
I extend to
you very little capacity for sound analysis about what is going on -- I mean that which has to do with powers operating behind the scenes. You say *We are winning* but in truth I'd suggest that you are not.
You are given the illusion of gaining ground but, as I say, in your case anyone feeding your astounding anger, contempt and hatred to them you will grant
all sorts of concessions.
You are being played, of course, but the African America in America has been played from day one. That is what happens to a people with limited or no agency. As long as you are useful, you are played. And when there is no longer a need, you-plural are often left with very little. That has been the historical patter, I think. Many people have pointed this out.
Does the type of globalism you're describing, where companies can move their manufacturing oversees to exploit cheap labor, does that seem like a progressive policy to you?
No, it doesn't, but then I do not have faith in the collusion between 'progressives' and what we have been calling 'socialization' and 'socialism'. I think that governments and corporations -- this nexus -- will grant socialistic concessions in order to secure their power and keep social unrest at bay. This points to a different sort of socialized system. But the same interests are said to stand behind it.
Think instead global monopoly. They collude together to make money not to help poor people. That much should be obvious. Does the type of globalism you're describing, where companies can move their manufacturing oversees to exploit cheap labor, does that seem like a progressive policy to you? Really? Its the free market capitalists that would allow the sort of economic conditions to exist where wealthy companies could put profits over the lives of the American worker. What patronage they give to us is capitulation not cooperation.
If classic communism isn't on the horizon then why did you mention it earlier when you clearly meant crony capitalism? You know what never mind. That question is rhetorical. We know why.