A Brief Course in Althusserian Marxism

So I flew a few hours on an airplane yesterday. Before the typical USA FAA boilerplate safety information was given, the skank-ho wimminz stewardess announced the names of captain, first officer and navigator, and then introduced herself and the other two wimminz shoveling drinks, and announced (as though it made some magical difference, and in case we hadn’t noticed,) that it was an all-wimminz staffed flight. The self-congratulatory speech met with tepid applause from a bunch of holiday weary travelers, most of whom just wanted to get home. The same 40-something stewardess parked her wrinkly ass near me, fifteen minutes later, and “bought me a drink.” I had scotch, and vowed to write about her — thanks bitch.

Of course, it’s all very wonderful to have all wimminz do things like punch a seven digit code into the computer (built by men) that automates take-off, and in-flight navigation (with the help of satellites and ground-radar, built by men) and an all male-crew ready at our destination to do the heavy lifting and baggage transfer and refueling and de-icing and routine maintenance. Let’s all cheer for Alaska Airlines, which has hired a surplus of wimminz to hit on passengers and loaf around taking credit for various things they really had nothing to do with.

The obvious irony in all this is the precarious state of wimminz in general, and particularly boastful skanks like those I just mentioned. Should society change very slightly — and I don’t mean a societal collapse, but merely the Chinese loaning our masters more money at slightly higher interest rates — then employing these same wimminz will suddenly be untenable. Sure, there might be some wimminz on the plane, but the skank-ho wimminz who rubs her ass in your face and leers at you will be twenty, and not forty-five, and rather than having three wimminz up front to watch the controls, you’ll have one or two capable men.

Human beings enjoy their ideology, but the ideological apparatus which controls the states-of-affairs today is particularly wasteful. Feminism has no future. It’s so inefficient and counterintuitive that it almost seems like a society-wide handicap. We boast about how progressive we are, simply because we (somehow) manage to survive, while wasting so much, on so many people who don’t deserve it at all.

Happy New Year, Gentlemen!

5 thoughts on “A Brief Course in Althusserian Marxism

  1. I rarely know the luminaries mentioned by brother Boxer in his commentaries. I have to look them up. Unless I’m imagining this, there often seems to be some association with mental illness.

    “Althusser’s life was marked by periods of intense mental illness. In 1980, he killed his wife, the sociologist H?l?ne Rytmann, by strangling her. He was declared unfit to stand trial due to insanity and committed to a psychiatric hospital for three years.” – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Althusser

    Maybe we’re all mentally ill, just in different ways… Apologies to Samuel Clemens, or was it Will Rogers, and to all mentally sound commenters. (I crack myself up.)

    The self-congratulatory speech met with tepid applause from a bunch of holiday weary travelers, most of whom just wanted to get home.

    We’ve been told that women seek nothing more than equality. If that’s true, I should think the goal would be for an all female flight crew to go by unremarked rather than trumpeted for approval and applause. Wouldn’t the equality response be – so what? But that’s not really what the program is about now, is it?

  2. I rarely know the luminaries mentioned by brother Boxer in his commentaries. I have to look them up. Unless I.m imagining this, there often seems to be some association with mental illness.

    Well, madness and genius are often correlated. In the case of Uncle Louis, I used to think he was a scoundrel, but after so many years seeing so many men driven to absolute desperation by the antics of so many wives, I’m now inclined to assume she probably contributed to his condition, and say he dindu nuffin…

    We.ve been told that women seek nothing more than equality. If that.s true, I should think the goal would be for an all female flight crew to go by unremarked rather than trumpeted for approval and applause. Wouldn.t the equality response be . so what? But that.s not really what the program is about now, is it?

    It was Marx and Engels who first talked about ideology in terms like:

    “Ideology is a process accomplished by the so-called thinker consciously, it is true, but with a false consciousness. The real motive forces impelling him remain unknown to him; otherwise it simply would not be an ideological process. Hence he imagines false or seeming motive forces. Because it is a process of thought he derives its form as well as its content from pure thought, either his own or that of his predecessors. He works with mere thought material, which he accepts without examination as the product of thought, and does not investigate further for a more remote source independent of thought; indeed this is a matter of course to him, because, as all action is mediated by thought, it appears to him to be ultimately based upon thought.”

    Fr?re Louis countered with:

    “Ideology represents the imaginary relationship of individuals to their real conditions of existence.

    We commonly call religious ideology, ethical ideology, legal ideology, political ideology, etc., so many .world outlooks.. Of course, assuming that we do not live one of these ideologies as the truth (e.g. .believe. in God, Duty, Justice, etc….), we admit that the ideology we are discussing from a critical point of view, examining it as the ethnologist examines the myths of a .primitive society., that these .world outlooks. are largely imaginary, i.e. do not .correspond to reality..

    However, while admitting that they do not correspond to reality, i.e. that they constitute an illusion, we admit that they do make allusion to reality, and that they need only be .interpreted. to discover the reality of the world behind their imaginary representation of that world (ideology = illusion/allusion).”

    Thus by noting the dissonance between the stated ideals and the fruits of the practice, you’re already at the point of seeing the internal contradictions of the system itself. You are the post-ideological man, who has done the heavy lifting of removing the illusion.

    Just don’t go nuts and kill your wife. lol

  3. “So I flew a few hours on an airplane yesterday. Before the typical USA FAA boilerplate safety information was given, the skank-ho wimminz stewardess announced… that it was an all-wimminz staffed flight.”

    It happened to you, too? I once found myself on a proudly all-female flight and it took an effort to keep my seat. That, and there probably weren’t any all-male-staffed flights from Portland to San Jose to hope for.

  4. Before the typical USA FAA boilerplate safety information was given, the skank-ho wimminz stewardess announced the names of captain, first officer and navigator, and then introduced herself and the other two wimminz shoveling drinks, and announced (as though it made some magical difference, and in case we hadn.t noticed,) that it was an all-wimminz staffed flight.

    Congratulations on surviving Boxer.

  5. HI Boxer

    Just testing to see if I’m blocked in here as every single blog/thread I belong too has systematically blocked/banned me in 1 night
    I’m starting to get really paranoid!
    Ignore this comment if it makes it past your moderation and it’s a WordPress thing
    Cheers my friend

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *