Marxism And The New Age Progressive Movements

ljihkugft7

Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2020
Messages
86
Location
Australia
Can anyone elaborate why Ray is pro-Marxism, free education and a global base income?

As far as I know, Socialism has never worked?

Are these progressive left movements not the same people that are pushing veganism and PUFA? (WHOrg)
They're also anti-small farms? And anti-nuclear families?

Would love to hear some opinions on these topics.

I lean towards the right "red pill" side, but I really don't know enough to make an informed choice.
 

j2mugs

Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2016
Messages
20
Location
United States
I have wondered this a bit too. I think Ray is a generous, brilliant, and all around amazing guy, but every time he gets into political theory on Danny Roddy's show I have to ask myself; "what the???"

It's like of all forms of authoritarianism, Soviet authoritarianism gets a pass somehow in his thinking. In one of his recent episodes he sidestepped Soviet authoritarianism by claiming that it was only American propaganda (of which I'm sure there was some involved). While I would not claim to be an expert in Russian history or politics by any means, in 2000 I did spend a month living in Russia while I was working on a documentary. The authoritarianism was far more "in your face" and "destructive" than it appears to be in the US. We interviewed scores of people and all of them were glad the Soviet days were over. Many lost loved ones in gulags, starvation was rampant, etc. We were east of the Urals, so it was different than in Moscow, but even after nearly a decade of "capitalism" there was little to eat, the water and air quality was poor, communists were still battling for power, etc. I was so malnourished when I came home that I weighed only 120lbs (54Kg)! I'm not claiming that we have it right here in the US, but the contrast was quite noticeable, and hardly a utopia of Marxist thought.

I think we often put too much stock in everything Ray says. Just because he's right about a lot of the health stuff doesn't mean he has the rest of life figured out. He has his areas of bias, dogma and reductionism as well. His understanding of Christianity for example is abysmal. Once he said on Danny's show that Marxism was just people following what Jesus said on a mass scale. That is the philosophical equivalent of saying "sugar makes you fat". It's honestly pretty embarrassing to hear him talk about Christianity at all, because he clearly knows very little about it. It also puts a lot of doubt in my mind about the validity of what he is saying in other areas too.

For one who eschews reductionism, I think it would serve him best not to wade into topics where he doesn't have a full contextual understanding because it undermines his credibility in the areas where he does.

I agree, there seems to be a big disconnect between his political theories and his understanding of biology, but this is where I believe Ray's faith comes into play. The linchpin of his political prospective is based on a belief that man is basically good and if he only has the right education, proper nutrition, proper environment and proper stimuli then he will behave in a cooperative manner. To which, I would answer by letting Ray watch my well nourished, PUFA deprived, non-hypothyroid, environmentally stimulated twin three year-olds for an afternoon.

We all need to remember that Ray is just a guy too, and as much as we want to believe that he is neutral in his thinking, he is not. When he begins discussing things outside of actual empirical science I have to listen extra hard because I know it is full of faith claims, assumptions and dogmatism. I cherish his wealth of knowledge in science, but when it comes to the rest of life (worldview related issues) - I listen and then ignore.
 

PolishSun

Member
Joined
May 25, 2020
Messages
447
As John Gray in his book "Straw dogs" said, people are animals: “The human mind serves evolutionary success, not truth. To think otherwise is to resurrect the pre-Darwinian error that humans are different from all other animals.”
 

TheSir

Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2019
Messages
1,952
Socialism is a concept which, on the superficial level, holds a considerable amount appeal to the intellectually oriented mind. The downsides of socialism are not necessarily that intuitive, nor even that apparent until the later stages of its implementation. Moreover, socialism could very well work in a uniform nation in which everyone was at peak health and no degenerative societal forces were at play. Thus from Peat's perspective socialism would simply be a natural consequence to his dietary ideas. The conclusion is not necessarily wrong, just unrealistic.

In the end, no on is an expert of all subjects. Peat has invested much of his life into study of nutritional science. Had he done the same in regards to politics, he might hold different views.
 
B

Braveheart

Guest
" I listen and then ignore."....when it comes to political commentary ...
 

thorgus

Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2020
Messages
10
We all need to remember that Ray is just a guy too, and as much as we want to believe that he is neutral in his thinking, he is not. When he begins discussing things outside of actual empirical science I have to listen extra hard because I know it is full of faith claims, assumptions and dogmatism. I cherish his wealth of knowledge in science, but when it comes to the rest of life (worldview related issues) - I listen and then ignore.
I share the same sentiments. If we're talking about topics like sugar and lipids, I'll lend an ear to Peat, but only as long as he stays within his area of expertise. We must do our own research instead of expecting to learn everything about the world from one or even a handful of people. Individuals simply do not have the time and scope to be well-versed in every topic of interest. It's our job to go out and find the best information available on any given subject and synthesize it into a coherent perception of reality.

"Nothing is more irritating than the certainty with which a man who has had success in one thing gives his opinion on everything." -Don Colacho
 

snacks

Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2020
Messages
388
Location
Rostov-on-Don, Russia/Southern United States
De Maistre is the cure for all "anti-authoritarian" masturbatory thought once it leaves the realm of personal inquisitiveness and experimentation

Once he said on Danny's show that Marxism was just people following what Jesus said on a mass scale

It's funny because both in my religion (buddhism) and christianity there is a very long history of "communal" utilization of resources, such as monasticism or semi-sharecropping such as happened in the high middle ages. The problem with equating either of those things to communism is that both require a degree of religious or cultural common cause which is at odds with the Marxist worldview and are extremely hierarchical. Communists will try to get you to agree on the "nucleus" of communist thought, i.e. that community acting with common cause and without selfishness is good, and then try to imply that rejecting any of the rest of their word salad ideology is against this. Well-read, orthodox marxists are dishonest people and there's no use in arguing with them but it seems to me like Ray Peat just bought into the usual entry level leftist beliefs about christianity
 

Jessie

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2020
Messages
1,018
Ray reminds me of the old-school lefitst types, reminiscent of guys like Gabriel Kolko. Truth is his views probably have very little in common with modern day leftism. There's really a divide in the left's support of freeing labor, and the left's desire to control labor. Hence labor is not really free from the burden of capital if leftists are trying to bend them into their own world views.

We live in a world where "anarchists" are trying to be anti-authoritarians while still existing within the confounds of the authoritarian mindset. Ray has spoke about these inflexibilites in radical movements, and how they essentially erode all the principles they allegedly stand for.
 
B

Braveheart

Guest
"Nothing is more irritating than the certainty with which a man who has had success in one thing gives his opinion on everything." -Don Colacho.....man, this is so true....thanks
 
B

Braveheart

Guest
De Maistre is the cure for all "anti-authoritarian" masturbatory thought once it leaves the realm of personal inquisitiveness and experimentation



It's funny because both in my religion (buddhism) and christianity there is a very long history of "communal" utilization of resources, such as monasticism or semi-sharecropping such as happened in the high middle ages. The problem with equating either of those things to communism is that both require a degree of religious or cultural common cause which is at odds with the Marxist worldview and are extremely hierarchical. Communists will try to get you to agree on the "nucleus" of communist thought, i.e. that community acting with common cause and without selfishness is good, and then try to imply that rejecting any of the rest of their word salad ideology is against this. Well-read, orthodox marxists are dishonest people and there's no use in arguing with them but it seems to me like Ray Peat just bought into the usual entry level leftist beliefs about christianity
you don't understand Buddhism...your own religion
 

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe
Can anyone elaborate why Ray is pro-Marxism, free education and a global base income?

As far as I know, Socialism has never worked?

Are these progressive left movements not the same people that are pushing veganism and PUFA? (WHOrg)
They're also anti-small farms? And anti-nuclear families?

Would love to hear some opinions on these topics.

I lean towards the right "red pill" side, but I really don't know enough to make an informed choice.

In the last podcast with Danny Roddy he asked Ray directly "do you think replacing the current system with socialism will be better" to which Ray answered flatly "No, it would be just as rotten".
There is neither socialism nor capitalism any more. We now have some weird hybrid that managed to combine the worst parts of both systems - i.e. the welfare state and fascism/corporatism. I am pretty sure Ray is against both and is for empowering the individual as much as possible to take matters of importance into their own hands. Not sure what political *ism these views fall within but that's the vibe I am getting from him.
 

pepzorpdorp

Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2016
Messages
112
In the last podcast with Danny Roddy he asked Ray directly "do you think replacing the current system with socialism will be better" to which Ray answered flatly "No, it would be just as rotten".
There is neither socialism nor capitalism any more. We now have some weird hybrid that managed to combine the worst parts of both systems - i.e. the welfare state and fascism/corporatism. I am pretty sure Ray is against both and is for empowering the individual as much as possible to take matters of importance into their own hands. Not sure what political *ism these views fall within but that's the vibe I am getting from him.
May I ask what problems you have with the welfare state? Also curious if you had any thoughts about a universal basic income.
 

snacks

Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2020
Messages
388
Location
Rostov-on-Don, Russia/Southern United States
you don't understand Buddhism...your own religion

Only insofar as I ommited the fact that most monastaries don't actually produce most of their resources in a communal way and rely on donations :happy:. On the other hand, some Christian monastic communities actually do. I was feeling charitable and so felt like making the marxist case for its own precedence via communal life (you'll see left-integralists do this) less ridiculous than it is . Either way unless you are also a Buddhist I will respectfully decline to care about whether you think I understand the Dharma

There is neither socialism nor capitalism any more. We now have some weird hybrid that managed to combine the worst parts of both systems - i.e. the welfare state and fascism/corporatism

Google "anarcho-tyranny." It's a great read if you have the time. As for welfare state/corporatism I'm actually fine with fascism but you can see that our system isn't really that far from Mussolini's italy or even like Japan's current pseudo-fascist system with the exception that in those cases the government dictated to the corporations whereas now the opposite is true and governance is also less coherent as a result
 
B

Braveheart

Guest
In the last podcast with Danny Roddy he asked Ray directly "do you think replacing the current system with socialism will be better" to which Ray answered flatly "No, it would be just as rotten".
There is neither socialism nor capitalism any more. We now have some weird hybrid that managed to combine the worst parts of both systems - i.e. the welfare state and fascism/corporatism. I am pretty sure Ray is against both and is for empowering the individual as much as possible to take matters of importance into their own hands. Not sure what political *ism these views fall within but that's the vibe I am getting from him.

"empowering the individual as much as possible to take matters of importance into their own hands."....yes!
 

j2mugs

Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2016
Messages
20
Location
United States
@haidut - I can see what you're saying, but it still seems like Ray doesn't want to acknowledge any Soviet authoritarianism. Every time it comes up he seems to deflect to some sort of American propaganda distraction. It may be warranted, but it usually seems like he's trying to downplay the Soviet atrocities by deflecting to an American one. I haven't ever heard him specifically denounce the Soviet government (maybe he has and I've missed it), in fact he usually speaks pretty highly of Lenin and Stalin. You grew up behind the iron curtain didn't you? I was hoping to hear some of your personal experience in that section of the conversation. Do we misunderstand Soviets as Americans?
 

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe
May I ask what problems you have with the welfare state? Also curious if you had any thoughts about a universal basic income.

It always seems to come with heavy strings attached, and those strings in the current situation can be lethal. Right now, UBI is quite openly advertised as being tied to compliance with a number of mandates such as getting the new (untested) coronavirus vaccine, agreeing to full digitization of the medical record and possibly carrying it at all times with us in the form of an implanted chip, accepting heavy restriction of movement based on that record, agreeing to remote work arrangements regardless of their feasibility (e.g. hard to "work from home" if you are surrounded by berserk children/relatives who are literally going nuts from all this home confinement), agreeing to full currency/asset digitization, agreeing to lifestyle choices deemed "healthy", agreeing to specific diet/food/drugs/procedures, etc, etc. Given the current state of almost 40% of the US working population being considered quite literally "useless" by the economy, a welfare state / UBI is one of the best protocols to push these people towards "planned obsolescence", as people will obviously do just about anything to get food and a roof over their head. I have not heard a single politician discuss simply giving people money for life without some set of stringent requirements. The current unemployment benefits are an exception and already coming to an end. Let's see what replaces them but I highly doubt the welfare state will just start giving people enough money to live and just move on.
 

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe
@haidut - I can see what you're saying, but it still seems like Ray doesn't want to acknowledge any Soviet authoritarianism. Every time it comes up he seems to deflect to some sort of American propaganda distraction. It may be warranted, but it usually seems like he's trying to downplay the Soviet atrocities by deflecting to an American one. I haven't ever heard him specifically denounce the Soviet government (maybe he has and I've missed it), in fact he usually speaks pretty highly of Lenin and Stalin. You grew up behind the iron curtain didn't you? I was hoping to hear some of your personal experience in that section of the conversation. Do we misunderstand Soviets as Americans?

He speaks highly of Lenin as a materialist philosopher. I have not heard him speak of Lenin as a politician. As far as Stalin, he seems to be saying that Stalin was more of a realist than anything else. His policies were initially pro-people but he quickly became a brutal authoritarian once he started dealing with Hitler. Can't be toying with democracy and "soft" socialism when you have Hitler planning wiping you out...At least that's what he said in a few interviews.
As far as my experience - communism/socialism formally ended when I was 12 but dragged on for another 3-4 years before "democracy" was attempted for real. I did not have bad experience with the system, quite to the contrary. However, I do know of people who were crushed by that system for having dissenting opinions...but I also know of people getting crushed by the current system, ironically, for similar types of dissenting opinions.
I think Peat's argument is more physiological than political - i.e. if you ensure metabolism works well and the environment is not destroyed/poisoned then pretty much any political system would do, with the caveat that the current system quite openly destroys both the environment and health. As far as political discussions, I think he is just trying to present the contrarian view in a Western society. Again, he did say that socialism would be just as rotten if it replaced the current system, which I read as him saying "in the current engineered, poisoned environment no political system would work in favor of the people".
The way I see things is this - politics is a metabolite of economics, economics is a metabolite of human relationships, human relationships are a metabolite of health, and health is a metabolite of...metabolism, which is a metabolite our environment/reality. So, bad reality/environment => bad political system, no matter what *ism it is officially called.
 

pepzorpdorp

Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2016
Messages
112
"empowering the individual as much as possible to take matters of importance into their own hands."....yes!
What do you think that will looj
It always seems to come with heavy strings attached, and those strings in the current situation can be lethal. Right now, UBI is quite openly advertised as being tied to compliance with a number of mandates such as getting the new (untested) coronavirus vaccine, agreeing to full digitization of the medical record and possibly carrying it at all times with us in the form of an implanted chip, accepting heavy restriction of movement based on that record, agreeing to remote work arrangements regardless of their feasibility (e.g. hard to "work from home" if you are surrounded by berserk children/relatives who are literally going nuts from all this home confinement), agreeing to full currency/asset digitization, agreeing to lifestyle choices deemed "healthy", agreeing to specific diet/food/drugs/procedures, etc, etc. Given the current state of almost 40% of the US working population being considered quite literally "useless" by the economy, a welfare state / UBI is one of the best protocols to push these people towards "planned obsolescence", as people will obviously do just about anything to get food and a roof over their head. I have not heard a single politician discuss simply giving people money for life without some set of stringent requirements. The current unemployment benefits are an exception and already coming to an end. Let's see what replaces them but I highly doubt the welfare state will just start giving people enough money to live and just move on.
Very interesting, do you know who said tying the basic income to vaccination and etc? I think the universal part is what makes it such an interesting idea. Independent UBI researcher Scott Santens have some nice resources about the importance of making the basic income universal to everyone.
Scott Santens - "Won't basic income give too much power to whomever distributes it?"
Should We Provide Emergency Universal Basic Income to Everyone or Just Those Who Need It?
 

j2mugs

Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2016
Messages
20
Location
United States
Thanks @haidut for sharing your personal experience with us - I always enjoy hearing first hand perspectives from people. Do you think Ray sees the primary role of the state (in our current situation) as an ordering of resources or as an arbiter of justice?
 

gately

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2013
Messages
305
I guess I’m considered a leftist by Ray Peat Forum standards these days. So I’ll throw in my two cents.

Anyone who aligns with the insurance companies and is opposed to universal coverage is my political enemy. Same goes for the prison industrial complex. Same goes goes for the military industrial complex. If your values align with a corporation’s bottom-line over human life, I basically think you have brain worms. Pretty simple, and I don’t have much interest in politics beyond what’s obviously moral and fair for the majority. And if I have to put up with the left’s perverse social identity agendas, oh well...because it’s certainly the lesser of evils.

I personally think anyone who thinks that mass devaluation of individual liberty is at stake when the left proposes a platform of basic human welfare, is living in some kind of fear-mongered theoretical world where just because we give everyone healthcare suddenly the hammer and sickle are flying on every street corner, and innovation ceases to exist, and children are asked their preferred gender as soon as they are able to speak.

Almost the entire rest of the modern world has universal coverage, to one extent or another. And by example of places where it works pretty well: the UK, Canada, and Sweden aren’t exactly throwing people in Gulags or suddenly socially bankrupt of all traditional values.

We can have it both ways. We can have a society that looks out for one another and isn’t morally degenerate. It probably starts with ceasing to look at the problem through a left vs right lens though, but what do I know.

So...Healthcare, please.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom