Everyone who has studied politics knows damn well what The Left means, (except for the part where they pretend that National Socialism isnt on the left). It is a coalition of victim groups and their alleged protectors, who seek greater government control to redress the alleged historical harm done to those groups and punish the oppressors thereof.
...
Its actually worse than that. The Gramscian infection consumes worthy causes, chews them up and remakes them in its own pro-totalitarian image...
For a worthy cause in the end stage of Gramscian consumption, consider the U.S. antiwar movement. It is right that we should have a vocal, principled domestic constituency against unnecessary military action. But we have no such thing.
Instead, we have a kind of sock puppet that becomes dead silent when a Communist-indoctrinated President is in the White House, raising not so much a peep at drone-strikes a go-go or multiple failed interventions in places like Libya, or at boots on the ground right now in Iraq.
Wars are protested only when doing so serves the purposes of the Gramscian long march. This isnt even hidden well any more: scratch an anti-war demonstration and you find a Stalinist political group like International ANSWER at the bottom of it. And the mainstream media doesnt care about this infected themselves, they see no enemy to the left, ever.
This is very poignant example of how the Gramscian infection is so pervasive...
Humans lack immunity to the Gramscian virus because they all want more power than they really have, so they live vicariously via the victimization causes of the collective.
A socialist from the Netherlands seems to agree with my theory:
"Every political movement claims they are under attack from the evil others. That is not a prerogative of The Left. Just read Bannon and the KKK.
The Left and Right are also struggles over the spoils of the economy. You seem to have a fairly simple idea about how these spoils should be divided.
His perspective is framing as a righteous struggle as if the economy belongs to the collective and not to the owners of things, but my theory is framing it as a self-destructive theft and lust.
The minanarchist perspective is that the collective has no (or very minimal) rights. Whereas, the Left and Right can both be statist (Left much more so) wanting to leverage the power of the collective. Any way, I agree it is a competition and a war between competing strategies.
My theory is emphasizing the power lust of humans which leads to this Iron Law of Political Economics:
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=984