231
White nationalist Nick Fuentes is exposing a civil war among US Republicans: ‘We look like clowns’
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 21 Nov 2025
231 points (97.9% liked)
politics
28716 readers
1850 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Brother you literally cited capitalist realism like it supports your claim when the guy who coined the term was a LITERAL SOCIALIST HIMSELF. You're not educated about anything.
Other economic systems fell as a result of contradictions between classes. The roman empire fell because there were no lands left to pillage and no slaves left to misuse. Feudalism fell because the peasants wanted to be free labourers and the lords wanted money and not agricultural products. Capitalism WILL fall because there are contradictions between who owns the means of production and those who are subject to it. This contradiction is being accelerated by climate change and the global south is experiencing the brunt of this.
Shut the fuck up and do some reading
You don't even know what the term idealism is😂🫵. You think I'm using it to call a system great or something. You're a halfwit!
Have you read capitalist realism? The guy killed himself because he placed all his hopes that it wasn’t the case. Literally read a fucking book.
State your source for this, and i swear to God if you give me a misreading of his work...
Capitalist Realism, M. Fisher.
You didn’t read the book and yet claim you know the contents. Lol.
That quote undermines nothing of what I've said😂. You've taken Fisher out of context like most idiots do. The point of capitalist realism is that the ideology of anti-capitalism and capitalism sustains itself because people are led to believe so. Capitalism fails all the time, like when the market crashes, but governments bail them out because to them that's just how it is. To them the system can't fail because they can't fail because they can't envisage another outcome.
Capitalism realism is just an extension of Marx's theory of false consciousness. Which is when the actions of the proletariat do not align with their actual class position.
This is why it is necessary to sensitize the working class towards socialism, otherwise, capitalism realism happens, where people convince themselves there's no other alternative. It's a diagnosis of a problem, but dimwit ms like you misquote Fisher.
Feudalism fell to the capitalists, the only revolutionary class in world history.
Talk about reductivist slop, it’s not wonder socialists make ideal converts to fascism.
Bruh. That's literally the point. Feudalism was supposed to fall into capitalism. That was the entire point. What's your problem?
You should probably explain what you mean, because I already stated that ideological fantasy does not determine objective reality.
That is the exact opposite of “idealism” you dolt.
Your brand of idealism is that capitalism is unbreakable. That we've reached the final stage of history. This is fatalistic and therefore idealism. Go to school kid
I spelled out that it will collapse, what replaces it is eventually another dominance hierarchy if we escape extinction.
Sorry bucko, no socialist utopia in any future.
The dominance hierarchy is one where the proletariat rules over the bourgeoisie. After that we end class altogether. You're way out of your depth here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominance_hierarchy
Ahh yes, the proletariat rules over the bourgeois, but the proletariat are not smart enough to rule, so some enlightened elite must rule for them, let me guess, you? The closet aristocrat?
Mate your ignorance is glaring here. There are many socialisms. There's Marxism-Leninism which warrants a vanguard, there's anarchism which believes in decentralisation, there's democratic confederalism which is a fusion of the state and decentralisation. You're so ignorant it's not even slapstick.
This is why you're not intelligent. You're wrong, but some dogma is holding you back and i don't know what it is.
Any form of socialism is not feasible without human consciousness evolving into some kind of singularity. You’ve already contradicted yourself and betrayed the principles of Marxism by claiming the proletariat would dominate the bourgeois. If socialism is about the worker owning the means of production, there is no bourgeois class, except for the worker. In the real world, all you get is some type of authoritarian state capitalism.
Bruh what😂.That's just not true. The workers only need to be class conscious. That means they need to realise that they're oppressed and must revolt. That's all that is necessary. We've gotten close many times, but those opportunities have been squandered. Once again, i refer you to the Occupy Wall Street movement which started to put capitalism back into the minds of the working class.
The bourgeoisie would be in a constant bid to reinstate itself throughout socialism. This fight not only exists within the state's own borders, but outside of it. This is the main fight. That is what is meant by this. I don't have quotes on hand, but I can find you specific Marx quotes if you're adamant about it.
The old theories are obsolete, the modes of production replaced by modes of representation. No matter how much you pray and recite your holy scripture, paradise never comes. Marxist theory is as relevant as phrenology.
Your position has changed many times throughout our discussion, from faulty use of Fisher's theory, to raving about dominance hierarchies and now you've settled on "the theory is outdated".
The theory is not in fact outdated because it's based on historical materialism which is widely accepted among academics and has proven itself to be true. In fact dialectical materialism was extrapolated to form the basis of the conflict theory which many sociologists use to explain 'why' and 'how' conflicts develop in society, like between different races, the patriarchy etc.
There's an argument to be made that the economic system that is "socialism" is outdated, but that's another argument; the philosophy underlying it however is not. Every Marxist whether anarchist, Leninist, syndicalist and so on agrees that capitalism will end; everyone's just arguing about whose type it's going to be.
Historical materialism is unfalsifiable, it’s in the same category as praxeology. Junk science.
Marx version of conflict theory is similar to the claim that the sun revolves around the earth, inadequate.
You don't even attempt to rebut the theories. Just slinging around insults. You're just a troll i guess
~~https://www.britannica.com/topic/dictatorship-of-the-proletariat~~
https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Dictatorship_of_the_proletariat
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_dominance_theory
https://abagond.wordpress.com/2014/12/26/wilfully-obtuse/
Are you a vulgar Marxist?
That makes sense.
No idea what that means pal sorry
Capitalism falls to what? What replaces the system? Technofeudalism?
You are so propagandized you have no idea what I said, the type of system does not matter in so far as it is a dominance hierarchy.
Capitalism falls to whatever solves the contradictions between the working class and the owners of capital. Most likely some form of socialism
Your dominance hierarchy has nothing to do with this. The working class has the revolutionary potential, so it is necessarily the working class who will seize the means of production and we end up with socialism. That is Marxism in a nutshell
Vulgar Marxism, and history has already shown the masses are an inertial force. The ideal circumstances for socialism was last century, only dominance hierarchies formed.
Ideological delusions to think otherwise.
No idea what you mean by dominance hierarchy pal. As far as i know, the working class has the revolutionary potential and will seize the means of production when pushed to the brink.
Climate change is accelerating this reality
Also what nonsense is this about the working class always being inertial? There are plenty of moments within history where the working class was in pole position to start an uprising. You're the one ignoring history here. Occupy wall Street was literally that. Bernie Sanders fucked up the moment by being a lapdog to the democratic party