The Deep End

Thoughts on Socialism

Socialism has emerged among western Millennials as the alternative to abusive capitalism. What's the problem? We haven't had capitalism in more than 100 years.

December 30, 2019


"And the Gods of the markets tumbled, and their smooth-tongued wizards withdrew;
And the hearts of the meanest were humbled, and began to believe it was true:
That not all is gold that glitters, and 2 and 2 make four,
And the Gods of the Copybook headings limped up to explain it once more."

-Rudyard Kipling,
'The Gods of the Copybook Headings'

Most people could agree that things in America are tense, politically speaking.

Never have we had a greater push for progressive politics, and the last time we did, we were gifted prohibition which spurred on the era of smuggling, racketeering, and criminal infiltration of government. The progressive era brought us expanded federal authority, the reserve lending system and central banks, involvement in World War I, and spending that paved the way for the Great Depression (which itself consolidated a large amount of wealth in the hands of Fabian/progressive leaders).

Europe's utopian policies have consequences, just like America's individualist policies.

On the other hand, it also created some beneficial social reform, and initiatives to improve the quality of life, education, and safety of work environment for laborers was changed for the better during America's progressive era. 

Theodore Roosevelt drew a hard line on anti-trust and was a proponent of both strong commercial sectors and government oversight and regulation of large businesses.

Progressivism is again on the rise, with more and more millennials expecting that government is more than an entity of arbitration on legal matters and international dealings. They expect it to be a useful tool in creating fairness and equality. Coincident with this is a government that's empirically corrupt, pre-empted by special interests, and a body of voters who are both terminally shortsighted and under informed regarding politics, history, and cause and effect.
On both sides.

As unbelievable as it is, with Socialism's darlings in Europe and Scandinavia floundering under the weight of dying economies, we still see them touted as the future of the west. The entirety of Europe is largely supported by Germany to stay buoyant as money is shoved into the furnace to service debt in Greece, Italy, Belgium, Spain, and France (all of which have a public debt over 90% of their GDP... for reference, imagine if you owed 90 cents for every dollar you earn).

Given that, it's understandable why the British are trying to escape the EU while they still can. After all, they don't want to end up with Yellow Vests in the street threatening coups.

Cause and Effect

This isn't a simple issue, and we won't claim it is, but what we do want to say is that a tremendous amount of economic influence comes from the London School of Economics. The architect of our current economic system was John Maynard Keynes, who believed (in very short) that markets should be controlled. Keynes, like most other influential minds in economic policy, was a member of the Fabian Society... a Fabian Socialist. Unlike the Marxists, the Fabian believes that radicalization of the proletarian is unnecessary, and that rather incrimentalism over a very long timeline is the essential way to bring about Socialism. They believed that they should slowly win control of authority in a way that most people wouldn't even be able recognize.

Keynes was instrumental in the Breton Woods agreement, which built on the sly implementation of the Federal Reserve, and this is where things get interesting. The Federal Reserve is a constituent system of 12 private banks (ummmm) that essentially control the National Monetary system via fractional reserve lending. It was created in secret by President Woodrow Wilson, himself an ardent socialist (note that the article says "father of liberalism", we'll return to that) and ironically, a white supremacist. With the stroke of a pen, Wilson - in secret - signed into law the Federal Reserve act, which gave economic controls to a group of bankers who would oversee the U.S.'s economic interests. When we take into account Wilson's political disposition, we can say that American Fabianism started with the Federal Reserve act, and our economy has had elements of central control ever since.

Flash forward to the next big chunk of the iceberg. The Bretton Woods agreement of 1944 created the World Bank and International Monetary Fund - it started out as a way to loan money to European nations to pay for war costs, but ultimately, it ends up overseeing global development of 'emerging economies'.

This is where things start getting a little muddy. Before we get to why this is important, we have to understand that the Fabian perspective was tolerant of Capitalism and international trade insofar as it was a vehicle to secure socialist policies.

Let's use an example:

The State of Montana didn't have a speed limit for years. They had a policy of "reasonable and prudent" speed, meaning it was at the driver's discretion. Montana, as a state, is fourth from the bottom in terms of GDP, though, so there isn't much money in the state.

Enter the federal government, who essentially says "We'll give you money for roads, but you need to implement the following policies..."

Politicians in Montana, beholden to federal interests, then pass laws saying that the reasonable and prudent law was "unconstitutionally vague", and voilá: Montana is forced to comply through the economic tantamount to an arm-bar: if you want to be let go, you have to tap. They receive money for compliance.

Now, imagine this is taking place on a global scale, and the doctrine being pushed is Cultural Marxism. The article we've chosen to explain cultural Marxism is intentionally from a leftist perspective, and here's why:

  1. As you read, notice that the first thing they do is identify cultural Marxism as an 'alt-right' phantom. They're generating plausible deniability here, and trying to make it seem as if the mere recognition of the phenomenon is the paranoid delusions of a fringe political movement. This is classic deception.
  2. Next, they go on to a snide, tongue-in-cheek reference to cultural Marxism as: 
    "un-American and anti-Western ills as atheism, secularism, political correctness, gay rights, sexual liberation, feminism, affirmative action, liberalism, socialism, anarchism, and, above all, multiculturalism. The ultimate goal of cultural Marxism, we're led to believe, is to slowly and stealthily dilute and subvert white, Christian Western culture, thereby opening sovereign nations to rule by a one-world corporate government. Whether that's by Jews, lizards, or communists isn't always clear."

    If we pick this apart, we've got several rhetorical devices and logical fallacies at play. First, no one of these things is considered cultural Marxism by the right. This is projection designed to illicit pathos for groups who have been traditionally marginalized. What sort of monster wants to be ostracized by their thoroughly indoctrinated peer-group for lashing out against marginalized demographics?
    They then play it as if anyone who opposes cultural Marxism is a white christian, though they conveniently leave out a definition for "western culture", which could be described by classical liberalism and Anglo-Saxon law; two things that are absolutely vital to the ability of the individual to function in society. Then there's the allusion that if you believe in this stuff, you might as well be an anti-semite who believes in lizard people controlling the government.

    Ironic, considering the Left's extreme anti-Israel posture, but crazy is the new normal, and this kind of virtue signaling is all it takes to call home the legions of intellectually facile automatons who generally don't think past the talking points of Rush Limbaugh or Rachel Maddows.

    Said another way: insult isn't policy, nor is it thoughtful, productive, or useful socially. It is, however, politically expedient when it comes to whipping the mob into a frenzy.
  3. The article creates a logical fallacy by repeatedly asserting that Multi-culturalism couldn't possibly lead to Globalism and loss of national sovereignty or identity. They simultaneously decry Nationalism (built on national sovereignty and identity), which makes this a false equivalency. Globalism doesn't have anything to do with policy on the individual; but Socialism does. However, if we turn to our European friends and look at what's happening in their nations, they're systematically losing their cultural heritage and national sovereignty through the "arm bar" method applied by the EU leadership. Need help with your failing economy? Fine. Here's what you need to do...
  4. Finally, the article asks its readers "with all these Marxists, why are there not Marxists in government?" This is a the epitome of "Dunning-Krugers" and should punctuate why you should just avoid articles like this. Because we're not under the influence of Marx or Lenin's revolutionary proletariat.

    We're dealing with Fabianism, which is not a conspiracy, it's a well documented school of thought within a very prominent school of economics that have overt members. They believe that radical implementation of Marxist principles will lead to rejection (wonder why?) from the masses, and thus, an incremental approach to socialism.
    They don't advertise. They just work. Quietly, in the background, in ways that not one person in 100,000 can recognize.

    ...Oh yeah, now might be a good time to tell you the Fabian logo is a Wolf in Sheep's Clothing. This is what Vice fails to understand: The Fabian will support Mousillini as readily as they will Trudeau if they view that leader as a malleable end to pushing the Fabian economy and social policy.
At the top Sidney Webb and Shaw himself are shown hammering out a new world on an anvil beneath an emblem of a wolf in sheep’s clothing reflecting the Society’s gradualist approach. On their left the secretary of the Fabian Society, Edward Pease is working the bellows and below are the smaller figures of active members of the Fabian Society.
Source: London School of Economics

Understanding the Politics

One of the hardest things to fight is the inability of modern people to understand language.

Above all things, the perversion of language has crippled our ability to reason. Especially in politics and economics (labeled sciences, but really they are no such thing as they are entirely qualitative and subjective), people really don't understand what political words mean, largely because they're used at whim.

Liberal, for example, originates from Classical Liberalism, which holds that the lowest common denominator in the pursuit of freedom is the individual. Liberalism originally meant "free-thinking", and originated with John Locke (now commonly thought of as a bastion of "alt-right" political thinking) who believed that people had a natural right to pursue life, liberty and property.

Quite a contrast from the self-described liberals in the modern West who's primary goal is the betterment of the collective, the removal of private ownership from the means of production and the establishment of a welfare state, isn't it?

At this point, we don't need to go line by line defining political orientation. What we need to do is recognize a few things:

1. Political words are fluid. What "equality" means today is far different from what it meant in 1864. Whenever you hear a loosely defined political buzz-word such as "common sense", STOP. Halt the presses and try and definitively define what that means.

2. Recognize that the purpose behind this is to confuse, disorient, and demoralize you. If you knew what you were really voting for, you probably would be rolling out guillotines.

Fabian Socialism... Again.

Now that we understand how strong-arming sovereign states goes, and we can see it happening on a world stage back with IMF and World Bank money, it's easy to start seeing what a mess this all really is. It's easy to have a damaged sense of patria, and lose focus on what it is that makes your country great.

This, my friends, is again, a component of psychological and political warfare. KGB Defector Yuri Bezmenov identified the process of political subversion in his 1974 interview, which he describes as a 4 step plan:

  1. Demoralizaton
  2. Destabilization of economy, foreign relations & defense systems
  3. Crisis:
  4. Normalization

While Bezmenov was speaking from the perspective of a former-Soviet agent during the Cold War, this template fits quite well over the Fabian approach as well. Think back to the the progressive politics of the 20's. The destabilization of the 1930s. The Crisis of World War II, and the Bretton Woods agreement which fundamentally altered our economy, foreign relations and defense policy. Then consider the normalization of perpetual war. Apply this template to to 9/11. To Iraq and Afghanistan.

Demoralization in a single image. Great depression in the U.S.

We're being repeatedly demoralized, destabilized, steeped in crisis, and normalized to the emergency measure that expand surveillance, federal authority, government regulation of economic practice and social programs.

Now, ask yourself: given that since the governments are notorious for abuses of power, what have they bought with their social programs? Have they bought our cooperation? If that's fine now, will it continue to be indefinitely?

If the answer is "no", we have some things to think about.

Elimination of Human Suffering

Here's where things get deep, friends. One of the tenants of Fabian Socialism, often supported by great minds as well as the commoner, is the elimination of human suffering.

We arrive at a critical juncture here, and it's where things start to matter to ISG.

As we've discussed, words must mean things.

What is suffering?

In our articles, we often discuss framing the extremes, then returning to the middle to build outwards. This "web" prevents us from being blindsided and gives us an actionable plan to build resiliency. It's designed to prevent suffering.

If you don't read the rest of this article, read this:

A government cannot prevent suffering. It cannot even properly identify it. Suffering is a spectrum, with mild discomfort on one end, and abject misery on the other.

When they try, there are always unintended consequences. Carter's Community Reinvestment Act, designed to provide housing for low-income families returned in the form of the sub-prime lending crisis.

While depressions certainly happened before (the depression of 1895 relied on J.P. Morgan to bail the government out) one of the untold stories of the great depression is that it was made possible by fractional reserve lending; a process by which banks can loan out up a fraction of the money they have on hand. In theory, this should be a small amount, but through some bank trickery, allows banks to loan upwards of 90% more than what they have on hand.

This is important for two reasons:

1. It's a consequence of Fabian economic policy, directly resulting from the Federal Reserve system implemented by President Wilson, and;

2. It's one of history's untold stories. Rarely does mention of the Great Depression include the new problem of over-extending credit - a function of central planning in the U.S. Economy.

We should be wary any time a government claims that it has the answers for human suffering.

Moreover, cultural Marxism isn't an 'alt-right' boogieman because it's accepting of other lifestyles... it's problematic because within that framework, you simply can't be liberal enough.

Modern progressivism has its problems, sure. But so does Libertarianism, Laissez-Faire capitalism, theocracy, and anarchy. We shouldn't be scared of progressivism, even if we don't agree with it politically. The aim of those other ethos's vary, but classical liberalism and libertarianism, true capitalism... they open all the doors to the individual and say "go pursue life, go with liberty, and pursue what makes you happy". That, my friends, is the panacea to 'human suffering'. The ability to fix it by yourself in the way you see fit, or remain in suffering with no one else to blame.

No government is needed. To say "we will guarantee your happiness by providing for you" implies that the government, itself a nebulous, ill-defined bureaucracy, knows what happiness is, as well as how to provide it.

Governments, at least in the West, have no money. They rely on what they take from citizens of those states, and we rely on our votes to direct our representatives to be good stewards of our money.

Objectively, regardless of your political affiliation: Is that happening?

The New Religious Extremist

The left used to be the party in which free-thinkers flocked, eager to shuck the burdens of religious morality. They were eager to embrace new ways of thinking that didn't include cultural normalization, and they were open-minded to concepts such as morality outside of religion.

Within the last 30 years, we've seen a dramatic shift; from the fringe religious groups of the right being shouted down by their own political constituency (Westboro Baptist Church), to the disavowing of violent, right wing actors, such as Timothy McVeigh.

Simultaneously, we've seen an insidious trend within the left, very much akin to Orwell's Groupthink; The cultural Marxist is continually redefining the boundaries of what constitutes acceptable thought, speech, and action, and they're doing it in such an outlandish way that it's impossible to combat with reason.

As with the Catholic persecution of Witches during the age of the Malleus Malificarum, universities have been preempted by legions of students who are so switched off to the political and cultural realities outside the window of Pax Americana, they simply can't reason. When they don't lack the intelligence, they lack the understanding of history and language that gives intelligence meaning.

They operate on belief, and belief alone. Belief that politics are utterly and indelibly based on ethnicity, class, and sexual identity, that there is no greater place to begin your political orientation than your self identity.

The smallest unit of identity might be the individual, but now, we must do everything we can to ensure the collective is not offended.

Those who differ, no matter what the degree, are shouted down as heretics, racists, and fascists, a childlike tactic that forces the conversation off the unbiased assessment of fact, and creates a situation where the witch is forced to defend their character, rather than their position.

Picking up where Bezmenov's stages of demoralization end, students are unknowingly adopting ideologies straight from Mao's "little red book" under the guise of broad thinking expecting that government can enforce new moral norms that contribute to the disintegration of American identity.

Like fixing suffering, governments can't mandate morality. The right had to learn it (and in some nations, continue to learn it... the extreme right of Radical Islam is a testament to this), and the "religion" of Marxism is essentially moral superiority that dehumanizes those who don't accept it. Dehumanization that has caused suffering on a scale never before seen in human history.

When confronting this, we're told that US imperialism has caused just as much pain.

That's verifiably false.

When bringing this up, we're shouted down with "that wasn't real communism (or socialism)!"

That's verifiably false.

Socialism being not real socialism... again... and again...

Socialism, according to Marx and Engles (the guys who made it up) is a step between capitalism in which the means of production is seized by an authoritative body, but hasn't yet been handed back to the proletarian. Socialists should know this ...they can't not, if they actually read what they're proposing, and it most certainly has been tried and pressure tested to failure. That failure, as it turns out, is often catastrophic, causing the suffering of hundreds of millions...

Who Dares, Wins

So what can we expect from the U.S. and broader West's involvement with Fabian Socialism? 

We can turn an eye to Europe to see that multiculturalism is failing spectacularly, as immigrants fail to assimilate. This problem is, of course, denied, but if there weren't a problem, we wouldn't see countries like Germany and Denmark trying to provide solutions.

Sweden, as well, has yet to acknowledge that bombings aren't normal... and of course, like the rest of the EU deny this problem is related to their immigration policy. However, given given the vast amount of refugees flooding into Sweden who have failed to integrate, and it's pre-immigration level of explosives use in crime, we at least have some unanswered questions.

We've published a string of articles that lead into our conclusion on what we can expect from the 21st Century's tryst with Socialism...

  • - In the Great Reset, we detail how energy and resource scarcity create competitive environments.
  • - In Spheres of Violence 2, we discuss how identity and othering create conflict.
  • - Our information Summaries have catalogued the rising conflict and it's roots in energy, policy, and factioning.

In all likelihood, this ends up in a combination between the monetary system doing a hard reset, and another "brother's war". A long struggle that fundamentally reshapes the landscape of Western life and politics.

What do we expect will happen to ISG?

It's entirely possible essays like this will no longer be allowed.

Speaking out, standing up, and fighting back will be met with the utmost resistance, if Marxism has its way. We know from history that while Marxists cry 'human suffering stems from inequality and capitalism', that they won't hesitate for a second to send entire families to the gulag or firing line.

It's vision is of mad, blind obedience to cognitive dissonance, to persecution of the other, and it's disjointed, pitch-and-yaw commitment to the collective it can't even define is truly a type of emotional fervor that can't be reconciled with reason.

Make no mistake, what it's doing is effective. This article argues that we've been under Fabian Socialism for more than 100 years now. We're not a laissez-faire capitalism. If this article makes a convincing case that this is true, then we need to accept that we live in an increasingly socialist society.

All the while, the problems of our system continue to be blamed on capitalism, and the panacea is more poison. Reason will never reach those who adhere to their orthodoxy as if it were a God made in their image. They're unwilling, unable, unintelligible, and growing faster than is safe for a stable society.

Whether or not this is a plan, it doesn't matter. One day, we will all be dead and gone, including those arrogant enough to make mass murder the vehicle of their ideology's supremacy.

So here's what this is all coming down to:

Work together. Carry the fire.

This insanity comes and goes throughout the ages. It's not a modern problem.

One of the things that we often fail to identify as a problem in society is the lack of a cogent, sensible philosophy of life. A reason for living. A purpose.

If you're a member of this community, you have purpose: to help strengthen the pack, to be charitable of your own volition, not because you're forced, and to be the strongest you can as an individual.

Help those who are weak, learn from those who are strong, and always be an asset.

This is what it means to help eliminate human suffering: to work together for stronger, more resilient communities. Governments can't do it, but we can.


ISG Team

Post Script

We've tried to include a variety of voices in this article to maintain our standards of avoiding bias. Avoiding bias doesn't mean ignoring issues, it means forming your position based on facts. Wherever possible, we've used the words of the institutions, sources that were either intentionally biased to show an opposing viewpoint or address their points, or unbiased sources to support this article.

The key intent of this article is to highlight that while capitalism is used as a scapegoat for most of our social problems, we haven't in fact had a Capitalist economy in the classic sense of the term in over 100 years. In a capitalism, economic matters are not matters of state.

If you disagree with our points here, simply ask yourself: What are you free to do without state licensing?


  1. Roos, D. (2019, February 22). How Prohibition Put the "Organized" in Organized Crime. Retrieved from: 
  2. The Legacy of Progressivism. William L. Anderson. (n.d.). Retrieved from web.
  3. Guide to Antitrust Laws. (2019, April 9) Retrieved from web.
  4. Mohamed A. El-Erian. (2018, December 18). Europe's struggling economy is like an all-star team that doesn't know what game it's playing. Retrieved from web.
  5. The Fabian Society: Masters of Subversion Unmasked. Cassivellanunus, 2013. Retrieved from web.
  6. Fabianism. (n.d.) Retrieved from web.
  7. A Manifesto. (n.d.) Retrieved from web.
  8. Staff of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. (n.d.) Federal Reserved Act Signed by President Wilson. Retrieved from web.
  9. Overview of Fractional Reserve Banking (n.d.). Retrieved from web.
  10. Pestritto, R. (n.d.). Woodrow Wilson: Godfather of Liberalism. Retrieved from web.
  11. Wasserman, H. (2015, December 12). Princeton Students are Right: Woodrow Wilson was Way Worse than You Think. Retrieved from web.
  12. About the IMF. (n.d.). Retrieved from web.
  13. Missoulian State Bureau. (2015, May 20). Remember 'reasonable and prudent?' Speed limits long controversial in Montana? Retrieved from web.
  14. Recovered from web.
  15. Unwrapping the 'Cultural Marxism' Nonsense the Alt-Right Loves (2017, February 23). Retrieved from web.
  16. Hammering out a new world - the Fabian Window at LSE (2018, April 26). Retrieved from web. 
  17. Yuri Bezmenov: Ideological Subversion has Four Stages (2011, May 24). Retrieved from web.
  18. FRB: FEDS Notes: Assessing the Community Reinvestment Act's Role in the Financial Crisis. (n.d.). Retrieved from web.
  19. Schlosser, E. (2015). I'm a liberal professor, and my liberal students terrify me. Retrieved from web. 
  20. The Malleus Maleficarum. (2014, February 6). Retrieved from web.
  21. Lessons from a Century of Communism. (2017, November 7). Ilya Somin. Retrieved from web.
  22. "Real Socialism" Has Indeed Been tried, and it's been a Disaster. (n.d.). Ryan McMaken. Retrieved from web.
  23. Socialsim is Communism in Marx. Union for Radical Political Economics. Retrieved from web.
  24. Germany's Syrian Refugee Integration Experiment. (2019, June 3). Retrieved from web.
  25. Timsit, A. (2018, July 3). In Denmark and throughout Europe, assimilation is becoming mandatory. Retrieved from web.
  26. Admir Skodo. (2019, May 26). Sweden: By Turns of Welcoming and Restrictive in its Immigration Policy. Retrieved from web.
  27. Leonid Bershidsky. (2018, November 2018). Sweden's Decades-Long Failure to Integrated. Retrieved from web.

join the pack

Get personalized training & consultation.


Latest articles

Level Up

Overdoses for Responder Zero

Overdosing is a problem that's becoming as universal to many cities as heart attacks and car accidents. If one happens near you, what do you do?


Tier None

In the military and martial culture, "tier 1" refers to the very best - those with the most money and best equipment. We discuss the reality: we're 'tier none'.

Firearm Skills

Why the AK?

In the past, we've discussed how to run the AK, but the question remains: Why choose one over another platform?

The Deep End

The Train

The old American Experiment is on some troubling tracks. Here are some thoughts on what we can do.


Inauguration Day

A short blog post bringing some perspective to the wider world as we navigate Inauguration Day.


2020: Basic Training for the Decade

Here's to hoping for a safe, happy, and productive 2021 - while acknowledging that it was very likely the first in a series of very troubled years.


Mythbusting: Baofengs Radios

You see these radios everywhere; influencers trying to look technically competent post pictures of their Baofengs constantly. Why is that bad? Let's dive in.


The Definitive IFAK Article

The one-stop-shop article for what you need and where to get it. No marketed or paid-for premade solutions here.

Firearm Skills

Guns of ISG: The Makarov

In this article, we will outline below why we believe that the Makarov should be considered as a well-rounded compact EDC carry gun for OCONUS use.Enter the Mak


Bad practice: Is your spouse a Liability?

The case of Mark and Patricia McCloskey have one dramatic lesson to be learned - if you're not discussing security with your family, you're wrong.

Firearm Skills

Guns of ISG: The Cereberus Project

After the 2009 and 2011 ammunition shortages, it hit me that odd calibers are usually out of favor and in stock. But are multi-caliber firearms safe & reliable?

The Deep End

Spheres of Violence 3: The Universal Language

Those encouraging violence in our society are trapping us in a deadly game. We discuss the outcomes and consequences of the "Boys of Low Standing" and violence.

never miss an update.

Get all the newest articles sent to you first.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.