Situational Leninism (SL) is an unscientific process which describes HOW left statists and right statists scorn each other. In this youtube video, I ratiocinate that leftism and rightism are two different sides of the same coin. These two tribes believe that “government is the means” to achieve the ends. The virtual goal of both groups is to maximize power and minimize liberty (through the “means” of legal enforcement, taxation, expropriation, collective thinking, subsidies and “social contract“).
Their political row “always” ends with another curb on “freedom of speech”. By the end of this century, I assume that our world would be totally reduced to mumbling.
With the end of every “election”, one tribe imposes their “views” on another tribe. The whole science is circular as well as static. Both tend to circumvent that government is a fiction: “a state that is powerful enough to give you everything you want…is powerful to take away everything you have.”
Due to this tribalistic identity politics, they have enunciated an universal belief i.e. statism. Both think that “government is a necessary evil” in the universal governance of the political method and socioeconomic approach, and the view that “statism” constitutes the best worldview or the most valuable part of human development—to the exclusion of other ideologies. Their discussions are also and always involving an imbecilic question i.e. “without government, who will build the roads?“
In my view, the science of both groups is common and violent. Their imaginations are limited, and they intend to also enforce their beliefs on “others” or voluntaryists like me who wish to live a peaceful life (without any interventionism of ruler or “legal thug” enjoying monopoly on force and violence). Read: Voters have fascist tendencies.
The science of SL believes that “government is a liberating movement of all democratic institutions”, but it is nothing than a dogmatic and rigid belief, and therefore had become increasingly a religion, and, despite its so-called success, their science had started to attain some “oppressive features”, and it was not possible to come up with an unambiguous way to distinguish their science from “religion“, magic, or mythology. I also feel that the science of SL as a means of directing society is fully authoritarian and ungrounded.
Leave a Comment