The views of Marx have been inexorably linked to communism. But he did not create it. And the only thing that he added to communism, which already existed, is a hatred of Christianity, denial of race, etc. All the typical jew shit really.
It's like saying that Ayn Rand invented capitalism. Though one would be forgiven for thinking that Marx, and jews in general, are the founding fathers of communism. As they have been linked together forever because Marx was a good salesman for his personal variety of it, and the first person who actually published any sort of article about it which named a cohesive ideology.
But, as can be expected, Marx is a massive hypocrite here. His chief inspiration for everything he wrote was based off of the French revolution. Which was not communistic at all, actually. Not by any definition. The French revolution was a capitalistic movement. It was a revolt by the middle class against the aristocracy over the means of production, textbook change of power from feudalism (i guess mercantilism would be more accurate) to capitalism. It was just incredibly violent. More so than anything else except the English Civil War, but far outpacing the English War in depravity in any case.
What is "communism" then, if it cannot be adequately portrayed by Marx's work. Nor by the French revolution?
Communism was invented by no jews but rather it was invented by puritans in England during the English Civil War. A faction called the diggers. Namely by one Gerrard Winstanley. He published the first document which can be considered "communistic" with "The New Law of Righteousness"
And, given that Gerrard Winstanley was a pastor, the entirety of his thesis is absolutely rife in entirely biblical and Christian motives.
What is communism then? It's simple. The entire March of progress and technology can be explained by the transfer of wealth and the means of productions to a different class. In the beginning stages of settled human life, power was transferred from random tribal leaders and to a king. After this, the kings and emperors would feudalize their states and transfer effective power and the means of production to the nobility. After industrialization, the nobility would transfer their power and means of production to the bourgeoisie, and this is capitalism. And communism, then, is the transfer of power and means of productionfrom the bourgeoisie to the proletariat.
That's what communism is. That's it. You can have communism with a king or with no leadership at all. You can have communism that hates jews and niggers. You can have extremist Christian communism. It doesn't matter. It's just economic theory. It's as diverse as capitalism is. You can even have fascist communism. Sound like an oxymoron? It isn't. Fascist Marxism is an oxymoron, but *communism* is strictly an economic theory. There actually was a French nationalist communist party during ww2 that was supported by hitler. It was not tied to Marxism in any way whatsoever, but believed in communism.
What does Marxism do with this then? Marxism inflates communism with social theory and politicizes it severely. He attacks religion in his works when this matter should be devoid from the subject in its entirety. He assigns social justice causes to something that has nothing to do with it. Why? Because Marx was more influenced by the French revolution than he was communism, and the French revolution was absolutely full of the same bullshit that Marx was spreading. Marx was less interested in an economic theory than he was in establishing an insane cultish hell state like robespierre. And, rather than to be inspired by *actual proto-communists*, like the diggers mentioned earlier, he was instead inspired by a capitalist bourgeoisie revolution. Why? Again, because Marx didn't give a fuck about communism and just tacked it on to his own personal rebranding of French revolution ideological insanity. Which should have died forever after the death of napoleon, but Marx revived it and paraded its corpse around.
How does Marxism appeal to whites specifically? Because communism, actual communism, is based in large part on Christianity. Because it was a puritan movement. And thus it follows that an ideology that is based off of the Bible should influence people who follow the Bible. Who are white people. Marx kept this part of communism alive. He shoehorned shit in it from the French revolution and dressed it up to look nice so that it would be eaten up by millions.
It's like saying that Ayn Rand invented capitalism. Though one would be forgiven for thinking that Marx, and jews in general, are the founding fathers of communism. As they have been linked together forever because Marx was a good salesman for his personal variety of it, and the first person who actually published any sort of article about it which named a cohesive ideology.
But, as can be expected, Marx is a massive hypocrite here. His chief inspiration for everything he wrote was based off of the French revolution. Which was not communistic at all, actually. Not by any definition. The French revolution was a capitalistic movement. It was a revolt by the middle class against the aristocracy over the means of production, textbook change of power from feudalism (i guess mercantilism would be more accurate) to capitalism. It was just incredibly violent. More so than anything else except the English Civil War, but far outpacing the English War in depravity in any case.
What is "communism" then, if it cannot be adequately portrayed by Marx's work. Nor by the French revolution?
Communism was invented by no jews but rather it was invented by puritans in England during the English Civil War. A faction called the diggers. Namely by one Gerrard Winstanley. He published the first document which can be considered "communistic" with "The New Law of Righteousness"
And, given that Gerrard Winstanley was a pastor, the entirety of his thesis is absolutely rife in entirely biblical and Christian motives.
What is communism then? It's simple. The entire March of progress and technology can be explained by the transfer of wealth and the means of productions to a different class. In the beginning stages of settled human life, power was transferred from random tribal leaders and to a king. After this, the kings and emperors would feudalize their states and transfer effective power and the means of production to the nobility. After industrialization, the nobility would transfer their power and means of production to the bourgeoisie, and this is capitalism. And communism, then, is the transfer of power and means of productionfrom the bourgeoisie to the proletariat.
That's what communism is. That's it. You can have communism with a king or with no leadership at all. You can have communism that hates jews and niggers. You can have extremist Christian communism. It doesn't matter. It's just economic theory. It's as diverse as capitalism is. You can even have fascist communism. Sound like an oxymoron? It isn't. Fascist Marxism is an oxymoron, but *communism* is strictly an economic theory. There actually was a French nationalist communist party during ww2 that was supported by hitler. It was not tied to Marxism in any way whatsoever, but believed in communism.
What does Marxism do with this then? Marxism inflates communism with social theory and politicizes it severely. He attacks religion in his works when this matter should be devoid from the subject in its entirety. He assigns social justice causes to something that has nothing to do with it. Why? Because Marx was more influenced by the French revolution than he was communism, and the French revolution was absolutely full of the same bullshit that Marx was spreading. Marx was less interested in an economic theory than he was in establishing an insane cultish hell state like robespierre. And, rather than to be inspired by *actual proto-communists*, like the diggers mentioned earlier, he was instead inspired by a capitalist bourgeoisie revolution. Why? Again, because Marx didn't give a fuck about communism and just tacked it on to his own personal rebranding of French revolution ideological insanity. Which should have died forever after the death of napoleon, but Marx revived it and paraded its corpse around.
How does Marxism appeal to whites specifically? Because communism, actual communism, is based in large part on Christianity. Because it was a puritan movement. And thus it follows that an ideology that is based off of the Bible should influence people who follow the Bible. Who are white people. Marx kept this part of communism alive. He shoehorned shit in it from the French revolution and dressed it up to look nice so that it would be eaten up by millions.
Allow me to explain.
The anglo saxons had catholicism before the normans, but they did things a little bit differently. The anglo saxon catholic church was unique in that it had a lot of "antiquated" features that were revised in various councils of which the anglo saxons were not party to. They also held mass in english. This is important.
The pope gave his blessing to william the conqueror to take England. This pissed off everyone, because William the conqueror was a genocidal fuckhead. He installed a catholic church that was different, and that people didn't like. He changed the language of mass from English to Latin, which people *really* didn't like, and he placed the normans above the English people by "divine right". So, to the English, the pope himself sanctioned their genocide and cultural destruction and declared it holy. Do you see what the issue could be here?
What naturally followed was several hundred years of sporadic rebellions by pissed off commoners that oftentimes targeted the church and its officials. Not just the puritan one. The English Civil War was just the most major and successful of these. There is a list of medieval english revolts, and that list is absolutely fucking enormous.
And what's the most natural view for someone to take of something they despise? Just do the exact opposite. That's what the puritans did. And so did almost everyone else before them.
I know that England was considered the dowry of Mary. That's true, but among the populace, England has been a hotbed of anti catholic sentiment since 1066. It was the first country with a proto-protestant movement, Lollardy, and it was the first protestant country in the world for a reason.
Here's where puritanism became a ticking time bomb: in puritan theology, the British were the true descendants of the israelites and the jews were false israelites. This was arguably the first Christian identity movement in history. What's the issue? They believed that the false jews must be converted to Christianity for the second coming to happen. So that's what they (attempted) to do, and cromwell opened up England for groups of jews to "convert to christianity". Which of course they never actually did.