Friday, August 24, 2007

On the intellectuals


The intellectuals in the left-wing movement, are not a vanguard and could never become a vanguard. Marxists, neo-marxists, frankfurt-marxists, post-structuralists, queer-theoreticians and all other post-working class idiotologues and mental midgets high on political correctness and the dusts on their university chairs and their meaningless doctorates are ultimately parasites, vermin, yes a scourge on the back of the working class.

When they are questioned about their background, they are hiding behind their research, one Kamali, one Lundgren, one Rosenberg, all sociologists and not materialists, and start gnabbing about the "intellectual independence of the universities", like vermin determined to defend their cheese.

They are acting like ancient ephors, claiming that the university is a "sacred ground" which the system of capitalism is unable to drip into. Yet, their whole research is dependent on funds from the capitalist state and the capitalist EU.

Does anyone sincerely believe that the state would give money to projects not determined beneficial to it's economic, social and cultural polices of devastating the European culture and the European economy in the name of mondialist cosmopolitan globalism and urbanism?

The universities are bringing up a youth determined to smash the capitalist system, is the echoing myth of our age. The truth is that the generation of the 40;s, the disciples of Frankfurt, of Berkley, of structuralism, existentialism and marxist humanism, are the ones who are administrating capitalism today. Just ask the Clintonian Dynasty, Tony Blair, Joschka Fischer, and the entire Italian government.

Anti-intellectualism and populism is thus not a vice for the marxist movement, but a vaccine against the leper-infested kisses from the intellectuals in their ivory towers. The marxist leaders of the future would not be a product of the university environment, but of the destruction of the propaganda centers of western culture that these universities are.

The marxist party should not focus on the university students, except on those who are not interested of complying to the ideological consensus of the university (leave the economics to the right and culture to the left). Instead, it should focus on recruiting the working-class youth on the street. The very same youth that today is demonised by the left as potential fascists.

Those who are dissenting are the people of CRAP.

Sociology, gender theory, neo-marxism and all various form of post-68 theories should be purged from the universities. Instead we should focus on hard science. On rocket technology, on history, on mathematics, on physics, on chemistry, on programming and on warfare. Time to get rid of all dust, and burn some books.

By burning books like Parecon by Michael Albert, and Empire by Hardt and Negri, we won't get more stupid at least. It is worthless filth that has grown lke a tumour on the marxist movement in the past 40 years. It is high time for a surgery.

It is high time for a new 1937.


On antihumanism

Marxist humanism is a self-contradiction in it's very nature, and makes almost as much ideological meaningfulness in it's statement as for example "christian atheism", "poetical mathematics" or "physical spiritualism". Yet, many modern socialists, pseudo-marxists and real marxists claim to be adhering to the idea of marxist humanism, or humanist marxism.

Humanism and marxism are polar opposites. Humanism is the tool of the bourgeoisie, and marxism is the tool for the working class. If marxism is the oil that drives the engine of worker emancipation, then humanism by all means is the water that dillutes it.

The foundation of humanism is the idea of the cartesian subject, the rational man who is acting and knows that he are acting, in the words of the vulgar Austrians. Thus, according to humanism, man is more than his physical and mental characteristics, a metaphysical being in essence, open up for rationalism, reason and enlightenment.

The foundation of marxism is that the basis of mankind is the means of production by which he acquires his living, and that the superstructure which makes possible more efficient methods of distribution and some form of predictabiliy is society. Historically, society has always tipped the distribution inefficiently in favor of those who control the superstructure. Under feudalism, it was the armed barons. Under capitalism, it is the capital-owners. Under post-leninist socialism, it will most likely be the labor aristocracy.

Humanism is a method to atomise society into the individual particle, and to worship an idealised culturally alien image of that particle. The reason why I say culturally alien, is that rational man by definition is thinking and acting according to economist dogmas inframed by Anglo-Protestant methods of thinking.

According to humanism, man is free and rational because he is aware of his own existence and not put under direct oppression.

According to marxism, man is unfree and alienated since he is not the master of the means of production as long as society is divided according to class lines.

Humanism is also an idealist notion about the "sacredness" of human life and the universal church of secularism, the UN, has taken the authority to define reality according to some idea about "inalienable rights". A humanist is basically a secular christian, who have fired God, the Holy Ghost and Jesus Christ from the equation while still fanatically preaching christian individe-centrism and guilt.

For marxism, morale, ethics and rights are not inalienable metaphysical subjects independent from human mind, but the living result of the ruthless class struggle which have formed and continues to form our civilisation. An individual is not only an individual, but also the agent of a class, who economically act in behalf of particular class interests (while maybe not fully aware of it by himself).

Marxists who claim that Marx was a humanist, are most often themselves from the bourgeoisie cultural establishment, and has not encountered Marx due to any repression that they've faced but instead as the adoption of a cultural cliché. Hence, due to their meeting with Marx on the dusty university libraries and the wet student union parties, they have come to be unable to understand the sentiments of marxism. For a bourgeoisie student reading Marx in a totally bourgeoized society is like an Earthling have found a Martian piece of litterature. It is like two different languages, from two different planets.

Humanism is a natural posture for the establishment, since it is based on the christian dogma, the biophobic, metaphysical religion which for 2.000 years like a drunken prostitute has lended herself to all types of Anti-European repression. Christianity has made the comprehension of secularism into a monoteistic faith with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as the sacred Ten Commandments.

For a marxist to accept that, he must either be an intellectual microbe or a bourgeoisie ideologist cloaking in a marxist mantle. He must accept the legitimacy of the bourgeoisie laws, the bourgeoisie policemen, and the bourgeoisie social order, in order to have something to criticise.

He is thus reduced to a parasite on the back of the working class, not better or worse than a sinister cosmopolitan capitalist, but more poisonous a therefore more dangerous for the working class. It is not the duty of the marxist to sit on a university and talk about the plights of the "intelligentsia", but to engage in the real flesh'n'blood struggle against the beast of international capital.

Real marxism is a honourful warrior-code based around the vision of a new red dawn, where the workers would emancipate themselves and take control over the means of production. Real marxism could be called warrior socialism. It is manifested through the struggle which the Communist Revolutionary Action Party is enduring each and every day, and not on all these countless, fart-smelling university seats in Europe.


Sunday, August 19, 2007

CRAP library updated

The CRAP library is today formally updated with a link to the pamphlet "Giving Priority to Ideological Work is essential for accomplishing Socialism" by supreme commander Kim Jong-Il.


P.S - A review of the pamphlet should later on be published on this website.

Saturday, August 18, 2007

On national bolshevism and dialectal materialism

CRAP has recently been associated with the National Bolshevik party of Russia. Therefore it is important to differentiate marxism from national bolshevism, so that we could conclude whether or not CRAP is a marxist or a national bolshevik party.

The definition of national bolshevism is murky, but one could conclude by reading the ideological works of Limonov that the ideology of national bolshevism is inherently idealist. With that, follows that national bolshevism does not belong to the ideological tradition of marxism, which is utilising scientific dialectal materialism to predict possible trends.

One could, by looking at the methodologies of the national bolshevik party combined with their idealist ideology, conclude that they are a variation of insurrectionalist anarchism, and thus a purely western product by definition. With that does not automatically follow that they in any way are not nationalist (for Russian national liberation) or socialist, but that their analyses are based on the flawed argument that the human interpretation of reality is a substitute for reality.

CRAP could not accept such a deviation as an ideological position, and upholds scientific dialectal materialism on the basis that it builds the foundation for an on-going analysis of reality and the tendencies of history. Of course, the tendencies in themselves are possible to question, but the basis of materialism is the fundament of any successful interpretation of reality.

We do neither condemn the national bolsheviks on the basis of their flawed idealism, since they have contributed much to the cause of the global radical revolution.

We chose to officially condemn to it's fullest extent though, the participation of the National Bolshevik Party in the movement "Another Russia" which is a stooge for creating instability in Russia and open up for a liberal democratic revolution. It was a pragmatic decision, but one that could be proven fatal given Russia's temporary weakness.

What we have always admired in the National Bolshevik Party, are their innovative ways to attract members, and their decentralised model of organisation, suitable for growth in an environment marked by political repression.



Wednesday, August 15, 2007

On democracy and dictatorship

We are objecting to the idea that Europe, and even more so that Europe together with the USA, could in any way objectively represent the ideas of human rights in the world. Firstly, it is idiotic to think that "laws" could protect anything in themselves, since laws without force are impotent, and it is even more idiotic to think that "states" or alliances of states could utilise force to protect the rights of people.

First, rights are non-existent. They are either a metaphysic assertion of divine power which must be denied by a strict dialectal materialist. The only way a people could protect itself, is by control over the means of production.

The reason why bourgeoisie oligarchic pronvincial states are employing an extensive system of privilegies and "rights", are not because of "goodness" or "democracy", but because the bourgeoisie need to have an environment which is possible to predict. A more uninhibited state would probably by mistake interfere in the interests of the bourgeoisie.

The "left" is not repressed because the "left" is not the "left" but a department of the ultraliberal right, handling cultural warfare. That is why the culture pages on right-wing newspapers are given to the "communists". There are no honest communists in Sweden anymore, except Jan Myrdal and myself.

The nationalists are subjected to repression because the globalist establishment fears secessionism from the new global order. Even though such movements as the national socialists are microscopically small, they are feared with unsustainable paranoia, especially compared to the various islamist terror organisations hiding in the suburbs. That is not a Swedish phenomena, but a western phenomena. Islamism is a global ideology, and could if needed be utilised to unify the Islamic world with the world market (just look at the cheered "moderate" islamic government of Turkey which is put forward as a role model to the Islamic world). Nationalism on the other hand, is complicating the situation, since it is anti-globalist. It is not because of a specific care of "immigrants" that the state is repressing nationalism, but it is rather the immigrants which are a convenient argument-in-reserve for diminishing social rights. The reason why the state want mass-immigration is because it wants to destroy the self-concious working class to serve the "adaption" to the libertarian new world order.

The idea is to put it into people's brains that welfare statism is "racist" and therefore "bad", "evil" and "immoral", something deemed possible due to usage of the "meme of solidarity". That is just a part of the adaption though.

Another part of the adaption is NATO membership.

We get to learn that NATO is the international police force for punishing "tyrants", "barbarians" and enlighten "uneducated" people, in remniscence of 19th century imperialist propaganda. The truth is that the wars that NATO has undertaken (not taking the Iraqi War into the equation) has all produced tremendously BAD results from Europe.

The Kosovo War in 1999 for example.

It was started to punish the "dictator Slobodan Milosêvic" (who had been twicely elected, once as president of Serbia, once as the president of Yugoslavia) for fighting Albanian islamic terrorists. Milosêvic, a moderate social democrat, was defined as a new Hitler, and demonised beyond comprehension, called an "evil Serbian ultranationalist". It could be interpreted as NATO prefers islamism over nationalism, but there is another dimension there as well, and that is the destruction of the Serbian state, which naturally and voluntarily represents a Russian foothold deep into Europe.

If Croatia... catholic, pro-west Croatia had waged the same war, they would have been supported by NATO, because they are pro-west, and not pro-russian. The war in Yugoslavia in 1999 was the culmination of the 1991-1999 war described in the Krutov manifesto, where western intervention was crucial in destabilising border regions near or within the borders of the former Soviet empire.

What positive effects did the war in Yugoslavia have for Europe?

It led to a wave of unprecedented ethnic cleansing of Serbs, the indiscriminate destruction of orthodox shrines, and the establishment of a second Albania, a harbor of criminality and drugs, under protection of the West, payed by European tax-payers.

Another such war was the war in Afghanistan, which albeit with a stronger casus-belli twarted an efficient regime and replaced it with gangsters who increased the heroine production thrice. Eventually, this misuse of heroine reached Europe, where it trashes the lives of European children.

Therefore, we could conclude that pro-west imperialism is in character anti-european and pro-US. By committing ourselves to the war-wagon of USA, Europe is ensuring it's subordination under American initiatives. The reason why European leaders chose to ally with USA, is that they know that without the USA, Europe would within a decade be restructured around anti-capitalist, anti-western sentiments, ariound "totalitarian" and "populist" ideologies.

We in CRAP would cheer such a development, not at least because it would probably give people like Rudolph J Rummel a stroke.

Conclusively, we could also state that NATO policing is based on establishing "elite democracies" built around the "mythology of moderation", the idea that the bourgeoisie represents the current and "civilised" manners, the politically correct values. Therefore, the facist dictatorship in Colombia is a "liberal democracy", while the popular democracy in Venezuela is a "populist dictatorship".

Ethiopia is pro-west, and could invade Somalia or practicing genocide at home and receive subsidies, while Sudan is anti-west and therefore is deprived of national sovereignty.

Third world states are doing genocide because their population growth, because their ethnic tensions, because they are FAILED STATES. The only thing which could solve ther inner self-contradictions are the conclusions of said genocides.

Anti-western policies are pro-european.

Therefore, the more we hear that a regime is breaking human rights, the more we should cheer for it. Human rights has always been violated. It lies in their nature to be violated.

Heck, CRAP would cheerfully violate article 17 in the charter of Universal Human Rights when we come to power. And we will sure laugh when the parasites are crying. The more they cry, the more we will enjoy it.

The conclusion is: NATO interventions must be opposed, not because NATO are war-criminals or that Iraqis, Afghans (not Serbs, because Serbs are Europeans and therefore evil ultranationalists according to the mainstream left establishment) are suffering.

NATO-interventions must be opposed even if they are directed against a dictator who is working to erradicate his own people and sadistically tortures or starves millions to death, and even if the intervention would clearly temporarily improve the conditions of people there.

NATO-interventions must be opposed because they are beneficial to the onslaught of globalism, to the advance of capitalism, liberalism and cosmopolitanism.

NATO-interventions must be opposed because they are pro-west and therefore inherently anti-european.



Saturday, August 11, 2007

On the class analysis of CRAP II

It stands evidently clear that capitalism today has transcended the national borders and become a global order. Of course, markets has been global since the late 19th century, but one could claim that capitalism today, due to the treachery of the Soviet Nomenklatura, modern technology and the natural tendency for centralisation, is in a process of totally integrating all aspects of action, life and death on this planet within it's motives.

It also stands evidently clear that capitalism today is a system marked by self-awareness, which is running an elite driven by an idealist will to transform the Earth into a "new utopian golden age". These tendencies should we discuss more in-depth in the future, but we could roughly state one interesting fact about modern capitalism.

That it is a capitalism without capitalists.

Of course there are some capitalists left, but they are dinosaurs bond for extinction. Their heydays are over. Nowadays, the ownership of the means of production stands under control of the most parasitic and least efficient aspect of capitalism, namely the sphere of cosmopolitan financial speculation.

Most capital today is owned or controlled by funds and banks which are fueling multinational corporations. The individual owners have very little influence over where their capital is invested, and most of the direct management is taken care of by boards with short mandates and short-sighted profit goals for the stock-owners.

Thus, we could say that the pure capitalist, the hook-nosed crocodile with the high hat and the cane, is an animal which evolution has left behind. Therefore, the current system could be described both as collective capitalism and plasma capitalism. The characteristics of plasma is that the heat has produced a state where the electrons of atoms are not longer circulating around the individual atoms but rather in a space of atoms of the very same kind.

In short, the entire global establishment, could be considered as one giant meta-capitalist, a virtual squid encompassing all of Earth. Since capitalism has managed to totally encompass the political, cultural, sociological and economical relations and structures on the globe, almost everything today could be viewed as an extension of global capitalism.

The system is not an unintelligent system. It is highly intelligent, predatory and most important of all, aware of these conditions. The awareness of the system is manifested through the new world order, the will to rationalise and restructure the planet into a few unified markets based on cultural paradigms which would be continuously outphased in return of a higher amount of inter-connectionalism. One could say that the World Bank, the IMF, the WTO and organs like WHO and Unesco are the government departments of the future world government, the Randroid Leviathan fueled by the totalitarian fascism of Rand's philosophy, while the EU, the NAFTA, the ASEAN are supra-regions in this dystopian world government.

That is the tendency of the whole system of capitalism.

Within this system, we could see the out-crystallization of three classes, two of which are utterly parasitic in nature, and one which carries the world order on it's shoulders.

The two parasite classes are of course the establishment and the lumproles.

The establishment is consisting of the activity amassed at the centres of capitalism, in Wall Street, London, Frankfurt, Tokkyo. It is also consisting of the multinational corporations, from the highest CEO to the middle-large stock-owners and the vampiric dogbertian consultants. It is consisting of governments and bureaucracies. It is consisting of media. It is consisting of the universities and the intelligentsia with their cosmopolitan left-wing and right-wing ideologies. This structure actively works to keep the status quo, and to increase economic profits by manipulation of currencies and financial speculation.

The establishment is an utterly parasitic class.

At the bottom of society, we would find the lumproles, short for lumpen-proletariat. They are the beggars, the lepers, the starving, the worthless overpopulated filth that is reproducing like flies. In most of the underdeveloped nations, plagued by diseases, remnants after Aryan-Cosmopolitan imperialism, ethnic tensions, failing states, and chaos caused by the ravings of global capitalism after resources, this group of people are consisting of the majority. These masses, fuelled by their will to survive, are utterly incapable of doing anything else than ultimately serve the interests of capitalism. Overpopulation is a convenient result of western policies of charity which will ensure that there will always be some instability in the system, so that marginal differences in the wage differences always could consist a secure profit.

These faceless masses are used by the rootless cosmopolitan to split the workers of Europe, to create ethnic tensions which are later on used so that people will focused on small-scale provincialism and neglect the ultimate holism of capitalism. The lumprole, eager to satisfy his own primitive needs and unable to get any collective identity beyond his tribe, is an excellent tool, willing, docile, angry at the European worker.

The lumproles are by that reason and a thousand others a parasitic class which has a broken back and eventually will drag down all European workers and the last remnants of civilisation in the abyss of laissez-faire anarchism.

The class which is carrying the entire world system of capitalism, is the working class.

The working class is at least as diverse as the establishment and the lumproles. Here we have everyone from the petty-borgeoisie small-shop owner to the scientist and the robot programmer. The working class is operating the technical and productive aspects of capitalism. They are the scientists who discover new technologies, they are the technicians maintaining machinery, they are the countless cogs in this giant wheel. They are envied by the lumproles, who long for clenching their claws around the necks of them, and despised by the establishment which is biophobic and despises life and productivity.

The worker, and especially the labor aristocracy, is the true elite of the world. They are well-educated, productive and creative. It is they who are deserving to rule the world and control the means of production, not the mutants, not the parasites, not the whores.

To emancipate himself, the worker just needs to get rid of the parasites which are keeping his potential down.

This is the basic class analysis of CRAP.


Thursday, August 9, 2007

On the class analysis of CRAP I

The Aryans

Tribal communism was the dominant system of modern Europe until the transition between the bronze age and the iron age. The tribal communist system, was marked by a matriarchal cult of nature, of a respect of all living beings, of peace and plenty. Then, the Asian Aryans rode into Europe and erradicated the confederate system of tribes which earlier on had dominated Europe, and replaced the Queens and the great Mother with male gods of wars. Thus, tribal communism was replaced with an Aryan system of submission under Asiatic slavery.

But no ruler could ever dream to rule over a civilisation without making assertions of acceptance to the earlier dominating culture. No society, not even a classless society, could work without division of labor. Hence, the Aryan rulers of Iron Age-Europe, be they Celtic, German, Hellenic or Latin, were forced to adopt strategies to rule without too much opposition, by the inclusion of the majority people into their system (inter-marriage by the elite, and contracts with the lower classes). This process took several centuries, and eventually, the European continent was divided from the north-west to the south-east by a line demarking the border between the Aryan Romans and the Aryan Germans.

The Aryan Romans employed a system of city-states and codified laws amassed underneath one imperial state with constitutional limits. The economic base of that system was slavery, which permitted a large part of the population to parasite from other's work. There were also a class of free citizens, and an aristocracy. The Aryan Germans did as well employ a similar system, but centered around the household and without a centralised state as a last resort.

This conflict was resolved through the Age of Migrations, where the synthesis - feudalism - allowed the birth of Europe as a geo-political entity unified by Semitic Christianity. Feudalism continued the ethnic stratifications of earlier systems and destroyed the multiculturalism of the late Roman Empire. Feudalism presents itself as a triumph of labor over wealth, of the German over the Roman. It was a Continental, not a Mediterranean system.

The French revolution saw the dethronisation of Aryan rule over Europe, and the beginning of Capitalism. But capitalism has not emancipated the European worker and given him the control of production denied by 3000 years of Aryan yoke.

The old aristocracy is a relic, but it is not a European ideal, but an anti-European ideal, and hence by all means should be desecrated.

The Capitalists

One important thing to notice is that the capitalists, which often are either members of differing ethnicies or included in their worldview, driven by profit as only interest, has no interest whatsoever in releasing the creative mind of the European worker and inventor.

On the contrary, the capitalists are driving people to maximise the profits of the companies, which whenever it suits them could move to China or Malaysia. When Europeans are working over-time to keep their jobs, their demographic development turns negative, which the vile hook-nosed capitalist solves by importing lumpen-proles from the third world. That is a slow genocide on the European population, which is chained to the means of production.

The Third World and
the Lumpen-proletariat

The socialist parties of Europe has become pawns in the game of chess of capitalism, fighting against the interests of the worker and for the interests of the capitalist. The lepers, the beggars, the perverts, the mutants and the masses rid of an identity are the ideal herd for a master, something which the Aryan Romans already realised 2.000 years ago with their destruction of the Italic culture.

The Capitalist utilises the faceless, beastly masses of the Third World to destroy the European worker and domesticate him.

The European Socialist Class War is a two-front war. Against the capitalist, and against the underclass.

The European Worker

What have made European swords so sharp, is not the strength of the Aryan swordsman, but the ingenuity of the European blacksmith. What have made European companies great is not the tongue of the Cosmopolitan Capitalist, but the ingenuity of the European working man.

When the European worker is fully liberated from the chains of Cosmopolitan capitalism and free to embrace his full creative potential, and new European Sun will rise, and a new European oak will grow, a thousand times more bright and shining.

Europe will become the greatest civilisation that Earth has ever seen, a civilisation not domesticated under brute elite but free to with joy and celebration make tremendous progress in all forms of arts and science. The vanguard is a European vanguard. The destiny is a European destiny.

A socialist revolution by all means must be a European revolution, and intended to emancipate the European worker with his history, and erradicate 3500 years of oppression underneath Aryan and Rootless Cosmopolitanist cultures.


Wednesday, August 8, 2007

On Rienzian Vanguardism

CRAP does not profess to the idealist national bolshevik assertions of the "misfit" as the natural vanguard of the working class as described by Eduard Limonov. Of course, misfits have played a significant role in most states of revolutionary upheaval. But what Limonov fails to realise, is that these individuals would never have gained momentum in becoming leaders of revolutionary movements had it not been for the self-destruction of the European World Order of the bourgeoisie and aristocracy in 1914-1921.

In fact, the problem with the insurrectionist nature of the national bolshevik party lies in itself gazing blind on the situation of Russia in 1917, which catapulted the bolshevik party - at the time a political sect at the margin of worker movements in the land - into government.

Instead of advocating the leadership of fringes, we should not hesitate to take a second look at the vanguard as manifested in a marxist-leninist party. As both I and Limonov are aware of, the states run by marxist-leninist parties has been the subject of a certain amount of corruption and revisionism on behalf of party bureaucrats. For example, the Soviet Union collapsed because it was betrayed by IT'S OWN ELITE.

Stalin tried to solve that problem by instituting purges, while Mao tried to solve it by the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution. Both of these attempts tragically failed to root out the cause of the problem, due to the fact that even the new uncorrupted and loyal cadres eventually degenerated. We could therefore assert that attempts at purging out certain elements in the practice of Stalin and Mao has failed to outlive the persons attempting to save the marxist-leninist vanguard parties.

As dialectal materialism learns us, the material conditions of a social class determines it's practical actions at big. One could claim that dialectal materialism is a theory remniscent of Einstein's general theory of relativity, and that it has influence on the macro level. Thus, a single individual might not be class concious and might have differing opinions of the others of his class, but the whole class will act according to it's objective material interests. The problems with the vanguards of the working class has been that they have been unintentionally engineered so that they will degenerate and replace the corrupt aristocracies and the decadent bourgeoisie they originally overthrew.

Thus, any attempt to destroy a degenerated political current without attacking the social conditions giving birth to such abominations, is the equivalent of trying to destroying weed by spreading it out and not touch it's roots or the soil that took care of it.

What is vanguardism after all?

It stands evidently clear that the theory of a vanguard party has not been developed to it's core and to it's logical conclusion. The working class, being unable to channel it's own class interests, must be represented by the movement which stands above history, and is prepared to die for the cause of the communist revolution.

Therefore, the vanguard must be incorruptable.

Subsequently, the vanguard must be economically and socially isolated from the desires and cultural fetisches of the bourgeoisie. That excludes many workers, who wish to better their own material conditions by short-sighted goals like "higher minimum wage" or "expanded rights to strike". Those people are by their nature unable to comprehend the transformation from capitalism into socialism, and therefore worthless as material for the vanguard.

There are three solutions.

1. Create a mass-party without a vanguard, claim it to represent a vanguard, take over it, and see it deteriorate into opportunism, revisionism or trotskyism (tested out in almost all socialist states).

2. Create an elite party, comprised of fanatic intellectuals, and become isolated and harmless (tested out in marxist-leninist dogmatic sects).

3. Rienzian vanguardism. Build the party as an orden. Organise sympatisers amongst the workers, who are to organise the direct struggle on the working-place, while a Vanguard is then harvested from the most dedicated, intelligent, calm and fanatical warriors.

This is a natural evolution which moves into the other direction, than the direction which leads to revisionism and death. It is a path of life.

It is central that the vanguard holds the same internal loyalty and transparency as a monk orden. It is also central that the vanguard as a whole obides some basic rules which would direct their energy.

* A vanguardist should not own or seek to own any property, but on being admissioned into the vanguard should donate all that he owns to needing workers and to the Communist Revolutionary Action Party (50/50 division)

* A vanguardist should not build a family, seek a spouse or raise children, since that diverts from the cause of building communism.

* A vanguardist should not intoxicate his body or mind with poison, and should avoid alcohol, nicotine, and other types of drugs.

* A vanguardist should channel all his energy and faith to the cause of building communism.

* A vanguardist should not engage in sexual relations, since physical pleasures diverts from the cause of building communism. Masturbation is a bourgeoisie practice which should be seen as a crime against the revolution. Celibacy is implied.

* A vanguardist should feel uncompromising compassion for the workers and those mistreated by the establishment. He should without hesitation be prepared to sacrifice himself for the cause of justice, righteousness and truth - for the cause of supporting worker communities against the two class enemies (the establishment, and the lumpen-proletariat).

* A vanguardist should feel uncompromising hatred against the enemies of the working class.

* A vanguardist should respect and uphold the workers, and detest and root out intellectuals of false conciousness, the advocates of identity politics and political correctness. Those are attacking the workers on behalf of the lumpen-proles and the establishment, and are the prime intellectual enemies of the working class.

* A vanguardist should fight both the state and the criminal networks of the lumpen-proles, and build up autonomous zones according to the theories of national revolution advocated by such thinkers like Kai Murros.

* A vanguardist should seek to perfect his soul and body by practicing martial arts and read exclusively.

Thus, the active minority which would comprise the vanguard, both pre-revolution and post-revolution, should be a class, or rather a caste resembling warrior monks. Those who are mentally or physically unfit to represent the objective class interests of the European working class would be declined admission from the start.

Another very important aspect of rienzian vanguardism, is that the vanguard should never be allowed to control the means of production, since that would create a grave risk for corruption and thus the creation of revisionism.

The European Union of Soviet Socialist Republics should be built on worker control of factories. The Central Committe should not direct production and consumption, since we today have the technological means to empower the working class in control over factories, farms and production.

That is essential to the whole character of European socialism.


Monday, June 25, 2007

People's Front of National Resistance

What is differing CRAP from revisionist, neo-marxist and out-right liberal parties and movements cloaked under marxism, is that we base our analysis on dialectal materialism on modern conditions, and are not trying to use outdated maps from the 1930;s in determining our allies, our friends and our enemies.

There are several differences now. Most of these differences are based on the miscalculations and open treason of the leadership of the left-wing intellectual vanguard. While socialism turned out to be national, capitalism have become international. In year 1933, there was still a national form of capitalism, with national banks, big corporations and a national bourgeoisie. Capitalism today is synonymous with globalisation.

Owners of modern corporations are anonymous. A corporation based in Germany could this day be owned by American cosmopolitans and tomorrow by Chinese capitalists. Long-term strategic planning has been outphased and replaced with short-sighted profits not exceeding the term of the CEO:s.

Modern capitalists are thus freely moving capital over a global market, and has thus become dependent on a global free market with supranational institutions and some sort of collective military force (NATO). Thus, even if it would theoretically be strategically wise of them of aligning themselves with nationalist movements to crush revolutionary sentiments, they COULD simply NOT do so, since that would cut off the legs of their movements.

Instead, through intellectual institutions, they have tamed the left, and what are left of the institutional communist parties of the Cold War era, are a sort of controlled opposition which is given the right to control culture politics and the interpretation of left-wing opposition to the power. It is interesting that the current liberal totalitarianism of the USA and the EU is based on both the legitimisation and delegitimisation of opposition. Socialists who are caring for theaters where people have right to wear dildos, or for the right of refugee smugglers to co un-caught, are "legitime". Socialists who actually care of the working people are demagogues according to liberal media, and thus "illegitime".

If you say the criticism which the media want you to say, you will eventually become minister in a centre-left coalition government (a sort of quisling government running errands for cosmopolitan international speculation).

If you say anything which truely threatens the ideals of neo-liberalism and free market economics, you are a dangerous extremist.

No wonder that a lot of AFA activists are then allowed in as journalists on LIBERAL newspapers. AFA are simply the stormtroopers of the liberals, who need multiculturalism in order to break working class solidarity (the Babel strategy).

Therefore, we could conclude that European nationalists today are not necessarily a regressive force. On the contrary, a historical opportunity of an alliance between labour and the petty-bourgeoisie has opened up. That could form the foundation of an anti-globalist people's front aimed at one realist, achievable target.

That target must be to destroy the liberal, totalitarian state of the EU, and replace it with a national liberation government which could secure truely free elections in European populist traditions.

There is only the system, and the enemies of the system.

The enemy of my enemy, is my ally.


Friday, June 8, 2007

Nerd Defense League

A revolutionary people's front against bullying and mass-culture

As capitalism devolved into consumerism in the late 1940;s, due to the need to get rid of excessive production over-capacity, led to the establishment of a mass-fashion culture based on the lowest common denominator. Suddenly, the values of the lumpen-proletariat - excessiveness, debauchery, promiscuity and testosteronocracy, became the guiding principles in popular culture, spreading from the USA to the rest of the world, efficiently destroying all earlier class identities, as observed by Pier Paolo Pasolini.

In such an environment, brilliance and interests on science and development are certainly not looked upon as evolutionary preferable traits, and are thus frowned upon by an hostile surrounding pack - a mass building up a hierarchy based on the lowest possible form of caste graduation of human beings, namely sexuality.

Mass culture is a poison which, among other things, especially hurt persons of above average intelligence and prevents them from joining the creative class due to peer pressure and bullying, thus harming their self-confidence and forcing them into a docile role as "Dilbert's" on the working place. Actually, nerds are rejected by the capitalist society which is dependent upon them. They are not the ideal, even though they are the part of the working class which is most responsible for the technology we have been granted with.

They are not on the giant propaganda posters.

They are not seen as moviestars.

They have a lower status in their companies than bosses and consultants who've never done anything but talking, living off their "social competence". The creative class wants to create and be free from the inhibations of capital. It is a great myth than our current capitalist stage of civilisation is benevolent to nerds. In fact, nerds are locked down on as the lowest caste.

In the Soviet Union, all children with exceptional intelligence were given resources to develop themselves. Scientists lived in apartments of great quality and got food home-driven to their door-step. They were allowed to conquer space and granted all the resources they ever would need to make it possible.

Heck, even in MEDIEVAL EUROPE, exceptional children were granted to study at the universities by their local parish, no matter their original social class. In current day West, such children are given Luvox, stamped with asperger's, and taken to underfunded schools where they are to be blamed for the constant bullying received day in and day out, and told by apathetic underfunded teachers that it is their fault because they are "socially incompetent" and not interested in drinking, smoking and fucking like apes.

Children are today forced into social roles at school, in roles that they have never asked for, never wanted, and they are constantly told to accept that as a fact. As a status quo. As a dictatorship of status quo. If a child in the 1940;s smoked heavily, drank and copulated in a park bush, that kid would be sterilised. If a child today read excessively, excel at school and refuse to take part in the monkey culture amongst his peers, he is marked as sick, because he do not do as the majority of blind consumers.

Communism is not to turn everyone into the strength of the weakest link of the chain, and of the slowest ship of the convoy, but to LIFT up people to a higher level. That would not mean that everyone would be equally good at everything, but that everyone would be asked, permitted and expected to try to do violence on himself and turn from a primitive being to a citizen. It is an enlightenment ideal, not an ideal of a braindead mass, today realised in capitalist west.

What we need to do now, is to wage a multi-front war against mass-culture, both in the working places, in the psychiatric clinics and in the schools. The children are now an integral, socialised part of the system of class, and constantly brainwashed with the myths which the cosmopolitan international dictatorship of the bourgeoisie wants to promulgate in order to support status quo of degradation and decay.

Nerds must be organised and turn into a revolutionary force against mass-culture, against americanism, against the dictatorship of the status quo. This organisation will lead to the emancipation of the nerds and their freedom to define their own identity independent of those labelled "higher" on the social ladder. The nerds ought to take leadership over the working class-children and grip them away from being emancipated into capitalist consensus culture.

The war is everywhere.


Wednesday, June 6, 2007

Cottrell & Cockshott

On Economics

One really interesting aspect of the contemporary left-wing intelligentsia is their complete, almost ritualistic unwillingness to define exactly how the economic system of their future socialist world would be managed. It is almost as they are caving into the mythos of bourgeoisie prejudices about socialists as confused utopians. Modern socialists are given a piedestal of feelings, of soft politics, while the liberals reserve economics as their domain (and the left largely complies, mostly because the leftist intelligentsia are stooges and useful idiots for the globalist agenda).

To add it on, the current left-wing intelligentsia seems to be allergic against mathematics and clear definitions. When, if ever, it is pressured to talk about economics, it pukes up the mandatory references to Marx without ever mentioning that the alienation from labor is not solved through more labor but from automatisation brought by capitalism, causing unemployment thus proletarising the population, and that the communist society will be one digital, automatised society. The modern authorities on socialist economic theory, apart from Marx and Keynes(!), are Michael Albert, Murray Bookchin and Amartya Sen, who reminds of the three apes in that famous sculpture. Albert and Bookchin are positive towards creating a system where the labor intensity of the work determines the output in consuming ability - something which is outright idiotic since it would reward inefficient types of production. Sen is just talking about social capital and other new labourite rethorics. Some are talking about fair trade which essentially is a dress of christian guilt put on laissez faire free-trade, mixtured with charity.

CRAP intends to form the vanguard and basis for a new socialist Europe. Therefore, it is essential that we are employing the most modern and pragmatic socialist economic theories and empirically validates them towards reality in order to produce an economic environment adjusted to the interests of the European working class. Therefore, since technological development and geo-strategical resources are constantly switching hands, we cannot tell exactly how our economy will work, but we could offer some blueprints.

We should discuss "hard economics", not the "soft economics" of social welfare in this article.

Initially, our economic policies will be directed towards nationalising the energy sector, and make Europe self-sufficient on energy. That is a federal, strategic interest of enormous proportions.

Thereafter, we should increase the strength of our labor unions by giving them control over the productive forces of labor and including all industrious in their profession, thus turning the unions to syndicates, corporations or guilds. Note that would also fulfill some modern anarchist and syndicalist goals, in a BETTER way than those groups are able to formulate by themselves.

Thirdly, we should institute a grand council of representatives of all these syndicates to determine and follow up the economic development of Socialist Europe. In short, it would be central planning but with some market socialist functions.

Last, we would abolish the market system at it's core, and completely turn over to planning. But not central planning - but CYBERNETIC, integral planning of Cottrell and Cockshott. These two, one economist and a programmer, has formulated a new economic system which went largely ignored by the left-wing intelligentsia because of it's rationality and it's focus on mathematics.

CRAP is different. We are appreciating brilliance, and not silencing the part of the creative class which is known as "nerds". Inventors are naturally socialists since capitalism is limiting them and regressing their inventions.

Here is the manifesto of Cottrell and Cockshott, which must be as important for the modern marxism of CRAP as the Krutov manifesto.

When you, as a CRAP activist, is pressured about our long-term goals of socialist economic planning, you will see that this book is of great help.


Prussian heroism

One could see that different civilisations have different class values and have developed different forms of capitalism. For example, the Asian form of capitalism in it's present form is patriarchal and based on a collectivist view on the state as an extended family, remniscent of Asian confucianism which have predetermined much of the economic and cultural development of the Chinese zone.

I will not dedicate this article to the inherent differences between Russia and Europe, which is necessary to do in order to understand how our new European Union of Soviet Socialist Republics will work compared to the USSR, but rather define a historic rift between two closely related cultural identities in Europe, which most Europeans may feel more affiliated with than with the old Soviet Union, namely the differences between anglophilic culture and germanophilic culture.

Both of these cultures were inherently focused on work, moralism and based on protestant values derived more from Calvin than from Luther. Both of these cultures emerged fully during early trade capitalism in the late 17th and early 18th centuries, and reached their highest manifestations until the crisis of capitalism was fully unleashed in year 1914, in the forms of Victorian Britain and Vilhelminist Germany.

Both these countries had historically during the two centuries before the Great War developed a close bond, which was broken by the competition over markets, German need for prestige and British needs of "continental balance". Though their seemingly similar character though, they had inherent differences which must be looked upon closer.

Victorian Britain was the then ideological fortress of capitalism and "commercial enterprise", free trade (it is easy to be for free trade when you control one quarter of the world's surface), as well as the myth of the entrepreneur. The capitalist was seen as the epithome of human development, almost as a representative of an emerging, supreme master race. The philosopher Herbert Spencer for example, wanted natural selection to solve the social problems in society.

Vilhelmine Germany was a result of British interests in Europe. It was founded by support from Britain, to stiffle the Second French Empire and open up new markets in Europe through the Zollwerein. It was an unintentional result, and the differences in interests and directions between the German and British social system would later on destroy Old Europe.

Vilhelmine Germany did not have capitalism as it's supreme guiding ideology, though it was a capitalist power, and an imperialist power, it did not live by the glorification of the capitalist, of free trade or of the attitudes of the bourgeoisie. Rather, the German culture looked down on trade, on cosmopolitanism and on banking.

In Germany, capitalists were called "industrialists" in official imperial propaganda, were they were depicted in a positive light. The word "capitalist" defines an individual who is controlling capital, and hence is a buyer of labor while not doing any work by himself. The archetypical capitalist looks like the penguin in Batman and wears a high hat. An industrialist in contrast, gives as a word the impression to rather be defining a large, bossy man with a shaved head who regularily inspects the work place and rather identify with his own workers than with other industrialists, just like a medieval feudal duke rather identified with his vassals than his likes.

One could therefore say that in Germany, pre-modern feudal values of social responsibility, and discarding of commerce still prevailed until the 20th century. The German patriarchal form of capitalism was not remniscent to the more family-based variants of capitalism and corporatism in the Latin countries, but to get a frame of reference, one might just look at the Nordic welfare system which was originally founded in Vilhelmine Germany by Bismarck. Social welfare was almost unique of Germany, and more generous than in any other contemporate state.

It was not a question of unlimited handouts, but of a form of system of responsibility, giving the worker (vassal) certain rights (privilegies) for service (duties) for the company. It was a conservative system, reactionary even, but yet surprisingly modern and durable. That Germany became the greatest industrial power in Europe in just 40 years, despite it's social welfare system and with protectionism as it's preferred trade policy, is something which libertarians conveniently chose to ignore (when they are not mocking Bismarck or Vilhelm II).

For those of you who think that we are praising a right-winger now, let us say two things.

First, Bismarck, when becoming chancellor of Prussia in 1862, offered Karl Marx the position of royal treasurer.

Second, what we are saying, is that a socialist Europe cannot, if it want to survive, employ a continuation of present americanised liberalism and consumerism, because those values worship the most improductive aspects of both production and class society. We cannot have a society where the celebrity, no matter if it is a pop star or a gender theorist, is uphold as an ideal, since it is sterile and improductive.

What we might need is ironically maybe a return to Prussian militarist, feudal and guild socialist values, akin back to the traditional European preference of valuing physical, material work over abstract idealist capital. In any way, we need to build up a confidence in the worker to defeat his feeling of alienation from work, and to progressively integrate the socialist project as something integral to European traditions, not something alien to them.

Yes, we know that Prussia was the favourite hate object of a lot of socialists during the 19th century. We do not contest that it was a reactionary monarchy. What we want to stress, is that some of it values, the despise of the middle-hand, of the capitalist and speculator, and the worship of the labourer, the officer and the "industrialist" shows forward to a unification of the European productive classes in the industrial and farming sectors against the prostituted classes.

Europe is a vehemently anti-capitalist culture. It only needs to awake. And we are the bell of dawn.


Monday, June 4, 2007

On the G8 riots

Anarchism as a form of Retardism

Quite symptomatic, is'nt it?

It is also quite symptomatic that one that is not buying the aesthetic, cultural and mythological values of the modern left is denounced as a fascist. If you do not listen to their music, worship the primitive values of stone-throwing and of "violence against fascists" you are against them. It is not about ideology, but about preferences, often of a cliche-esque liberal search of identity. If you join with a political group, you should adapt to their ways of using language, to their dresscode and to their imaginative pictures of reality. No matter if you are a liberal or an anarchist (often, these two extremes are one and the same).

The braindeadness of the activist environment is manifested through their favourite ritual, their habituation to go rampage with street-stones and then get a well-deserved beating by the working class boys of the police. Their slogans, their propaganda, their dresscode and theire ideals are all of the most puberesque and simplistic nature. Their political analysis is to lump together all of their opponents, real or imagined, with fascists. Thus, "fascism", we are made aware of, is the dislike of hiphop music, the dislike of promiscuous behaviour, the respects for traditions and elders, and everything that even breathes criticism of uncontrolled immigration.

All of that is an example of a self-alienating political position which is a good incubator for the "rebellious youth" in the academia. No true industrial worker, retiree or serious anti-globalist analyst would follow such demented characters, who believe that Jagtvej 69 equals the Louvre or the Egyptian pyramids. They wear tons of PIN;s, have rings in their noses, and colourful clothes. They are advocating a sexually promiscuous way of living, and an attitude of sloth and disregard for common interests. The belief that these people could pose an alternative to the current globalist system is horrendous.

Notice as well, that the anarchists/libertarian socialists are nourished by the globalist system. They are maybe "harassed" by the police (after going berserk at everything). They are given benefits from the governments, in the form of money to their "houses of youth", to their garage bands, to their "street theater" and to various projects related to Identity Politics.

One thing we could see, is that these libertarian socialists are sharing more in common with the globalist political establishment, than the establishment is having in common with the petty-bourgeoisie fascists. They are both "open", for "diversity", for "multiculturalism", for "HBT persons", for "free trade" (which the ultra-leftists call "fair trade". They want to abolish the European subsidies to farmers. They want to rip the food from the mouth of the European worker and give it away to the petty-bourgeoisie farmers of the third world.

They both hate traditional European culture, whether in the form of catholic conservatism, old state socialism, or "fascism".

Many of the current political leaders are representatives of the 1968 generation, which could be called the beginning of the "New Left".

Thus, the current "radical activist environment" is not an opposition but the future establishment in being.

We must first and foremost attack the system relentlessly, it's values and it's doctrines and worship of the market. We must attack false criticism and false conciousness which is infecting all radical criticism and leading to stagnation on thoughts.


Sunday, June 3, 2007

On the western marxist establishment

The greatest enemy of the western working class today, is the collective known as the western marxist establishment. There, we are talking about the French and Italian "new left", the Frankfurt institute and the neo-marxist and post-colonial thinkers. The whole 1968 establishment is a part of the political power, and it's most right-wing aspects have even had seat in European governments (in the forms of the Italian left, and the former foreign minister of Germany). The university intelligentsia, cosmopolitan, queer and chic, is loved by the liberal newspapers. They criticise the power, but they are never offering ANY sustainable or feasible alternative.

From 1968 and onwards, the leading "marxist" thinkers of Europe have become politically accepted critics of the bourgeoisie power. And why not? The current bourgeoisie is not national, not even supranational, but global. When western marxists are kicking against racism, prejudices, homophobia, anti-immigration sentiments, nationalism and some aspects of US foreign policy, they are doing it with the support of the elites in their respective states. The current bourgeoisie represents the very same values, cosmopolitan, liberal, tolerant, open-minded. As long as the neoliberal economic dogma (in a left-wing pack) is advocated through fair-trade, support of free migration, support of abortions and neglect of the core groups of the left.

No socialist party will be supported by the liberal media unless it caves in to the issues by heart of the liberal ultra-rightists, namely market economics, urbanism, deterioration of the national labour market, support of minority cultures, and support for the corporate power (masqueraded with a false support of the petty bourgeoisie).

We could conclude that there is in existence a strong "neo-marxist" presence on western universities, represented by such subjects as sociology, social science, neo-marxism, and various "humanist teachings". In essence, the soft, female-sounding subjects at the university are derived to the self-castrated, effeminised marxist establishment, while economics (a social science) and the technical subjects are handed over to the right.

The right despises the humanist and aesthetic subjects, while the left despises the technical skill-orientated subjects. In the 1930;s, the left led the struggle for the future, but nowadays, all the modern left could produce aesthetically is photos of social alienation and degeneration, and post-modern assaults on the values of the previous generations of communists. These "humanists" which are polluting the mindset of the youth do exactly fit into the Kazscynskean definition of the leftist mental mindset (Industrial Society and it's future).

If we look at the universities as a system where the establishment (economic, political, cultural) renew itself and spreads down to new generations, we could see that "marxism", in terms of gender theoretics, aesthetics and humanism plays an important role in creating an intelligentsia which stands unified in a false opposition to a power which have built and defined that intelligentsia. In short, the intention with the creation of the neo-marxist intelligentia was probably to "civilise" the barbarian working class and pacify the communist movements. The latter goal has largely been accomplished.

But exactly as predicted by the Soviet bolsheviks of old - when marxists turn away from the working class, the working class will turn to another force to protect them. The national petty-bourgeoisie, composed of local capitalists, bureaucrats and some genuine representatives of pre-capitalist elites, are mounting a counter-offensive against the neo-liberal globalism of the NWO system. With increasing support from the working class, the European petty-bourgeoisie nationalists are forming a populist and in some essence genuinly fascist alternative to the world order of globalism.

The left, with Hardt and Negri as foremost representatives, is unable to take up the challenge since it nowadays prefer to speak with the new language of political correctness, and as the positions of the globalists wither to pieces, so will the leftist intelligentsia fade.

Our goal must be to build up a new political movement, neither national or global, but European in it's essence. Europe is being colonised by the forces of international political capital, and must be fended. The petty-bourgeoisie do not hold the ability to create anything which will be able to create a dynamic and living Europe. We got it.

Now it is time that we smash the western marxist establishment, before it suffocates by itself.


Thursday, May 31, 2007

Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold

Two European Spirits in the land of the Americans

In all extent, the actions undertaken by Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold have been seen as an expression of typical American features by the scornful, aristocratic left-wing intelligentsia of Europe. What that left-wing intelligentsia in it's isolation from the true world of emotions and class struggle have failed to realise is that they in their own incarnation is more of a representation of contemporary American thinking than our two friends Reb and VoDKa.

In the true extent, Europe, no matter the fact that it is convenient for American supremacy that it's political leadership is more liberal and weeping than that of America, is the home-continent of the dogma of violence, of social hatred, of revanschism, and of illiberalism. That is why the European leaders need to be more wimpy and more prone to use means of state control over it's population.

In the US (and Australia), historical social mobility and constant immigration by new waves of immigrants have weakened the class struggle and ressentiment between the social classes. The lack of a domestic aristocracy (after the civil war) has led to a society where we only have one (from the beginning) monolithic bourgeoisie and one very diverse and disunified working class.

Due to the heterogenity of the American society, there has been a constant social violence in the background, but it has historically been below the political discourse, and all answers towards that violence have been made through symbolic rather than socio-economic measures (for example affirmative action, which by no means would make an end to the fact that the inner cities of the American metropoles look like they have been hit by atomic bombs).

Americans are defensive individualists, who are barking like dogs but are happy as long as they could protect their own property. They are armed to the teeth, but so socially domesticated by their inherent libertarianism that they pose less a threat to their government than the unarmed Italian populace represent to theirs. Without the ability to interpret class struggle, to discover and trace social groups, and without a ressentiment against the higher stratas of society, Americans are pretty harmless. All their hampering and disunity could be solved by meaningless, cosmetic actions (banning of abortions, affirmative action, abolishment of affirmative action, installment of the ten commandments poster at the school, etc...).

Some spectacular examples manage to see through and become frustrated with the inate meaninglessness of the civil and public debate of the USA. I argue that Eric and Dylan were such examples. They understood the inherent hatred against those privilegied at their school, the jocks and preps, as well as the general hypocrisy of their suburb, and managed to interpret it into making an action which is very Un-American, namely suicide, after taking so many as possible of their enemies down.

Say what you want about their action, it's conduct and it's outcome, but it is clearly not an example of the American way of thinking. Instead, it shows more resemblance to the thinking and mentality of the RAF or the Red Brigades of 1970;s Europe. By the de-individualisation of the victims of the massacre, Eric and Dylan upgraded their ressentment from an individual level to a collective one. And why not? Everyone understood that they were treated as inferiors despite their apparently superior ability to interpret things, and everyone accepted the ritualistic ideas of the preps and jocks, the idea that high school was a seat of mating together boys and girls.

The classical American way of dealing with social inferiority is to keep silent and try to work upwards. Americans can not see the structures of repression if they are not directly visible.

The classical European way of dealing with social inferiority is to DESTROY the group allegedly responsible for that inferiority, no matter be they Jews, capitalists, immigrants, aristocrats, catholics, puritans, moslems or politicians.

No values attached, it is so.

Europeans are able to see or perceive privilegies almost everywhere, while Americans just see individuals. That is one reason why the socialist movements (and fascist movements) had a bigger success in Europe than in the US.

The American government, as well as it's client governments in the rest of NATO and Europe, recognise the fact that the European people is very dangerous for the status quo of international capitalism. Therefore, it has made a policy to try to liberalise Europe since 1945, try to make it a seat of tolerance, political correctness and general wimpyness. So, the liberalism and "female" values which Robert Kagan attach to Europe is not a product of European weakness, but of a general political project made to soothe and moderate the European people.

While "liberty" is a codeword for the USA, and the ideal is to own property, the codeword of Europe is "defiance", and the goal throughout the historical European rebellions, from the medieval age to our time, has been to destroy the concept of property and create some sort of utopian state. That is akin to the lost golden age of Europe, in the bronze age, when the Proto-European peoples worshipped female gods and practised tribal communism.

Eric and Dylan were, in almost all of their personality traits, more European than American. They loved aesthetics, they loved German music (an expression of the cultural experiences of Germany, not of the USA), they loved Tarantino, one of the most international (hence European) of the American film-directors.

A typical American guy, no matter his ethnicity, look round-faced, muscular, a bit like Justin Timberlake, a bit like Bill Clinton in his facial features. Eric and Dylan look more European than American. If I saw them on a given photo without knowing their citizenship, I would have written Germany for Eric and Ireland for Dylan.

Even though their actions where made easier by their access to weapons, the actions of Eric and Dylan where more in line with the mentality of Sorel and Mussolini than the one of Nozick and Friedman. The spontaneous act of violence, against a herd which do not deserve better, is not an American action.

It is the European way of thinking.

In order for us Europeans to reclaim our identity, we must embrace exactly the characteristics which our cosmopolitan establishment are condemning. Vengeance, aggression, ressentiment, revanschism, and hatred have been the keys behind all successful overthrows of corrupt social systems.

I would also like to recommend the following website.

Try to download the game. It is enjoyably multi-dimensioned and helps investigate the mindset behind such destructive actions.


Liberal paradigm

One interesting aspect of the IP/PC deviations is that those deviations are in line with the current development of contemporary western society. Often, they are assumed as natural by the establishment and the left-wing intelligentsia, who together works hard, like two relentless parents, to teach the working class to not react in any way that could seem or look racist.

Speaking of the general society, we could talk about a public communication between the rulers and those who are ruled which is based upon a liberal paradigm, with a meta-ideological foundation, an own mythology and an own language. That modern paradigm includes the cultural norms and expressions deemed acceptable by the establishment, and excludes the expressions which drives against the consensus ideology of the establishment.

The positive key-words are aligned with the concepts of "diversity", "multiculturalism", "tolerance" and "cosmopolitanism". The ideal promulgated through these beliefs are clearly inclined to produce social peace in a more and more culturally diverse class society where there could exist real threats of secessionism and even race warfare exists.

Instead of class struggle, the establishment and the left-wing intelligentsia have together formed a discourse blaming most of the ills on society on the "unenlightened" domestic worker. The problem is that our unenlighted proletarian, uneducated, inferior, is not tolerant towards immigrants, politicians, economists, gays and ethnic minorities.

That worker is a racist stereotype created by the establishment, remniscent of the views of the "Third class" that the French aristocracy held before the revolution of 1789. The basis is the American redneck, a poor alcoholic white male who is beating his wife and kids, believes in conspiracy theories, hate Jews and Blacks. That propaganda was created during the American Civil War, and is today renewed in the minds of the establishment through college and university indoctrination. It is basically a premise for the creation and motivation of a class society where the struggle of minority equality through moral legislation helps prevent the emancipation of the working class.

The very same left-wing intelligentsia which hold compassion for the coloured people and their plight (including multi-millionarie O.J Simpson) loathe the inhabitants of the trailer parks and the poor inner cities of Europe. The same could be applied nationwise. If it is Africa or Latin America, then everything excusable, including Mugabe destroying his own economy. If it is Russia or Serbia, everything that is made by the governments of those countries in preserving the national interests and the life and honor of the people are interpreted as "ultranationalism".

By employing the liberal paradigm, the leaders of the mainstream left-wing parties (even nominally communist parties and institutions) have shown that their true interest lies in preserving the status quo of the current situation. The left has been hijacked by persons holding such opinions and is efficiently and profoundly destroyed as a credible force for the European working class.

Therefore, CRAP urges all serious-minded marxists to join our ranks in our struggle against the capitalist beast.