3 ms·

It seems to me that communism would make that problem worse, not better. If the state is the breadwinner in your family, why do you need men at all?

AFrogInCanada 10y ago
Of course, he is not advocating for communism. The big "enemy" he is denouncing is rather _unbridled_ capitalism, and with that, the erasure of borders, the liberal, globalist economy (and political movements that follow), the sovereignty of countries being traded away to transnational entities, etc. As general as I could put it, he exposes feminism for making women the "reserve army" of capitalism against the worker strikes in the 1970s, which resulted in the diminution of salaries and thus prevented families from being able to support themselves on only the man's salary. He highlights that power has been moving from political leaders to business leaders (see: election of Donald Trump) who have been bending countries to their will, forcing those countries to no longer make decisions to best serve their countries but instead to best attract businesses (which bring jobs, development, education, etc etc). He is advocating for a return to the nation state which he believes is being dismantled, conservative and self-sustaining economies within countries with protectionist/nativist regulations. Whilst his solutions can be questioned, his diagnostic is still rather accurate, in my opinion. That book has a lot of his opinions on the disappearance of the men's virility, but the parts in which he explains the causes and consequences of that are fascinating.
- eli_gottlieb 10y ago
  >He is advocating for a return to the nation state which he believes is being dismantled, conservative and self-sustaining economies within countries with protectionist/nativist regulations. Ok, we recognize you Mr. Bannon, now go back to Breitbart where you came from.
  - AFrogInCanada 10y ago
    I specifically highlight the fact that I don't think his conclusion is the best one. However, none can deny that there is truth in his diagnostic. To me, he's a guy who writes well and does his research on current phenomenons, hence why he is accurate on what is _currently_ happening. He has little education on economics though, and is just proposing ideas which he has gained through reading nostalgic essays on the glories of the past.
    - eli_gottlieb 10y ago
      I take exception to the diagnosis! There was never a system of "national" capitalism under which nation-states could make totally independent economic decisions, except during the two world wars. Even in those times, those nation-states made those decisions not for the good of working-class people but for the survival and power of the nation-state itself. The social-democratic "reasonably golden" age was based upon the Bretton-Woods trade system, under which currencies were pegged to each-other and surpluses were recycled to prevent international debt crises. That was by no means an autarkhic capitalist system; it was internationalist social democracy.

AFrogInCanada 10y ago

Of course, he is not advocating for communism. The big "enemy" he is denouncing is rather _unbridled_ capitalism, and with that, the erasure of borders, the liberal, globalist economy (and political movements that follow), the sovereignty of countries being traded away to transnational entities, etc. As general as I could put it, he exposes feminism for making women the "reserve army" of capitalism against the worker strikes in the 1970s, which resulted in the diminution of salaries and thus prevented families from being able to support themselves on only the man's salary. He highlights that power has been moving from political leaders to business leaders (see: election of Donald Trump) who have been bending countries to their will, forcing those countries to no longer make decisions to best serve their countries but instead to best attract businesses (which bring jobs, development, education, etc etc). He is advocating for a return to the nation state which he believes is being dismantled, conservative and self-sustaining economies within countries with protectionist/nativist regulations. Whilst his solutions can be questioned, his diagnostic is still rather accurate, in my opinion. That book has a lot of his opinions on the disappearance of the men's virility, but the parts in which he explains the causes and consequences of that are fascinating.

eli_gottlieb 10y ago
>He is advocating for a return to the nation state which he believes is being dismantled, conservative and self-sustaining economies within countries with protectionist/nativist regulations. Ok, we recognize you Mr. Bannon, now go back to Breitbart where you came from.
- AFrogInCanada 10y ago
  I specifically highlight the fact that I don't think his conclusion is the best one. However, none can deny that there is truth in his diagnostic. To me, he's a guy who writes well and does his research on current phenomenons, hence why he is accurate on what is _currently_ happening. He has little education on economics though, and is just proposing ideas which he has gained through reading nostalgic essays on the glories of the past.
  - eli_gottlieb 10y ago
    I take exception to the diagnosis! There was never a system of "national" capitalism under which nation-states could make totally independent economic decisions, except during the two world wars. Even in those times, those nation-states made those decisions not for the good of working-class people but for the survival and power of the nation-state itself. The social-democratic "reasonably golden" age was based upon the Bretton-Woods trade system, under which currencies were pegged to each-other and surpluses were recycled to prevent international debt crises. That was by no means an autarkhic capitalist system; it was internationalist social democracy.