Incels, if they think about politics at all, tend to lean right — pretty far right in some cases. But there’s a distinct, if relatively tiny, bunch of incels who claim to be leftists and even Marxists. Let’s just say their version of Marxism bears little resemblance to the original flavor.
Meet TheIncelRepublic, a self-described “Sexual Marxist and Incel Revolutionary” who posts regularly on the BlackPillClub incel forums.
In a post titled “I think I got brainwashed into accepting the communist ideology through the most weirdest ways,” TheIncelRepublic offers his own supervillain origin story, which involves, among other things, an unused air conditioner and a sucky boss at PizzaHutCuck.
Back in the old days, he explains,
I actually fairly liked Capitalism and was not a commie.
That changed when I starting preaching “sexual communism” and calling for the redistribution of the means of reproduction (foids).
Slowly I started going down the “left wing rabbit hole”, I started listening to commie music and eventually got brainwashed a bit by the comment section.
Then my boss stopped using the A/C in the Pizza Kitchen in the middle of Summer (because he wanted to save bills) and started cutting many wages as possible. (I work as a wageslave at PizzaCuck).
Then I started reading history about the 20th century and found how based Stalin and Tito were. I started reading more history and got even more brainwashed.
Then while I deliver pizzas at Pizzacuck, I started delivering at rich places were Chads and Stacies were having parties.
I also was lurking in Tankie [Stalinist] forums such as /leftpol/ and found how based they were.
All this with other shit turned me into a commie. Although I am more of a nazbol, social democrat, strasserist or mutualist at best, I wish the Soviet Union came back and destroyed degenerate America to the gorund.
These days his posts on TheBlackPillClub are a mixture of incel obsession and weirdly repurposed Communist slogans. His vision of the socialist utopia involves women being treated as little more than “commodities that are for exchange.”
He and his allies, he promises, will
seize the means of reproduction (foids)! We have [nothing] left to lose but our virginities! Down with Sexual Bourgeoise (Chads) and the Sexual Kulaks (Cucks and Simps)!”
To be a truly convincing Marxist one should probably be able to correctly spell “bourgeoisie.”
He dreams of a “planned sexual economy” in which there is a “foid” in every man’s dacha, doing all the chores.
This is why Sexual Communism works, simply put, women are commodities. The more women a man can score, the more he will spread his genes and win the game of life. By having a planned sexual economy, the state can provide every male with a fit fertile woman for them to breed with and do all the shit for the men like cooking and cleaning. There is enough women for everyone and Chads are hoarding all the women.
Time to seize the means of reproduction!
TheIncelRepublic believes that the “(((sexual capitalists)))” — that is, the Jews — have been experimenting on the black community in order to see what happens when women have too much power over their own lives — that is, they have the same basic rights as men.
The African American communities are a good example of what happens when you let your women go out of control. We know the (((Sexual Capitalists))) tested free market dating to see what will happen and it fucking worked. Now they are trying it on everyone else. …
If you remove feminism from black communities, thug culture and crime will disappear overnight.
Most incels, while generally on board with the idea of “sexual redistribution,” don’t see themselves as communists of any kind. Indeed, one incel has written out a detailed “rebuttal” of TheIncelRepublic’s incelcommunist manifestos. It’s quite possible it will be the worst thing you read all day (or week). According to LiveFromInferno,
When you find out that fembots [women] are nothing but means of reproduction, a resource, and also happen to be incel, it can be tempting to embrace “sexual communism” and wait till gfs belong to everyone. I’m going to make a case that it’s no solution to inceldom.
Communism is what you get when private property is gone, with production and consumption of resources socialized; everyone gets their equal “free” share.
In case of cumdumpsters, private property is demonstrably gone because this is what culture (=patriarchy) was about. The cultural coverup for it was that we as a society were giving the holes the right to choose for themselves, but it was doomed to fail for lack of hole agency, which it did as fembots base their lives around the top 1-20% of men (chads). …
Another major problem with communism applied to rapemeat [women] as means of reproduction lies in the name: they do not produce sex, they produce babies. In our stage of development as a species we do not equate babies with sex. As such, for a lot of men sex isn’t means to an end which would be reproduction; to them sex is the end …
This alone for me is enough to say that sexual marxism doesn’t solve inceldom in that it doesn’t guarantee ascension at all, at times making it way harder, and also it skews the reasons why we see incel as a problem in the first place.
The right way to tackle inceldom and many more social issues is to recognize private gfs as the human right that it is, repeal fembot suffrage and restore the property rights on fembots.
In this battle between “Sexual Marxists” and “Sexual Capitalists” both sides are so transcendently awful that I can only hope they both lose, the more ignominiously the better.
Follow me on Mastodon.
Send tips to dfutrelle at gmail dot com.
We Hunted the Mammoth relies on support from you, its readers, to survive. So please donate here if you can, or at David-Futrelle-1 on Venmo.
My copy of the Communist Manifesto must be missing some pages, I don’t recall that section. Reproduction and production are not the same word
Worst restaurant name ever.
This explains much about Mr. TheIncelRepublic.
Being a Nazbol and social democrat seems like a bit of a contradiction, but I can see how a Nazbol might believe the same things Nazis do about women.
Sexual Kulaks is the name of my new burlesque group.
Usually Jews are blamed for spreading communism, not capitalism, but I guess we’re a versatile scapegoat.
This is basically the “sex workers don’t count” bit again, admitting it isn’t sex they want but power.
I’m still stuck on how removing feminism from black culture will get rid of thug culture and crime overnight…
Slow down, Commander Waterford.
Does anyone else here have a morbid curiosity about what would happen if tankies were infiltrated by incels? What if this rambling catches on with the greater incel community. Or perhaps I am simply uttering unholy words.
Not sure if Poe’s Law or real… oh, they’re incels, it’s gotta be real.
Of course, the way things worked out under Stalin, the Chadskis got even more of the women, and Incelovitches got nothing.
But men are needed for reproduction too. Wouldn’t that mean enbies should seize the binaries?
(Yes… I know that’s not how it works, I’m being stupid on purpose.)
I mean, I won’t say that I haven’t gotten into communist RP (“I claim this ass in the name of the People”), but that was a) consensual roleplay with a rather strong element of self-mocking humor, and b) between a man and an AMAB NB person, so I don’t think the incels would be happy with it.
And @Naglfar — Jews are blamed for communism and capitalism. Antisemitism is a hell of a drug.
You poor incels. Why should you have to go out into the world and make a life for yourself that includes a relationship with an equal. That might mean rejection. Disappointment. Hurt feelings. No way. Time for a new legal code. Rights for women? Time to disappear those laws. There’s no way that women would rebel against their enslavement. . . .
I guess that means testicles should be redistributed as well. Some people have two and some people have none. It’s so unfair.
@Kat
And of course this is from the “facts don’t care about your feelings” crowd, also known as the most overly emotional group of people I can think of. There is a special form of irony for the fact that the people who talk about logic the most are usually the least logical, and those who talk about being unemotional are usually driven by emotion.
I see his devotion to communism stops short of giving up his own right to private property.
That isn’t communism. It’s called slavery.
They do have a sort of ‘sexual socialism’* in the Netherlands.
Access to sex and intimacy is considered a fundamental human right, so the government funds schemes that allow people with disabilities to access sex workers up to 12 times a year.
https://dutchreview.com/culture/love-dating/sex-care-in-the-netherlands-helping-the-disabled-find-intimacy/
[* As it’s a public/private collaboration then I guess it’s technically sexual social democracy]
Re the OP: uh… I’m pretty sure Marx himself had some direct things to see about women’s liberation being a necessary part of communism? Doesn’t change that he was misogynistic and ableist and all (see “lumpenproletariat”) but come on.
@Alan
Saying this is probably going to get me ridiculed as a SWERF or something, but… honestly? That’s gross as hell. Like I know any kind of society with money or bartering is going to have sex work, but institutionalizing it explicitly like that sounds really dangerous, and I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s more exploitation involved than most Dutch are comfortable admitting.
Edit: I guess what I’m saying is, I just don’t see how any form of “socializing” access to people’s bodies won’t be inhumane and end badly.
@Cyborgette
He did. There’s also a long tradition of Marxist feminists (Betty Friedan, Leslie Feinberg, etc).
I agree. I also take issue with the idea of sex as a human right, I find that to be dangerously close to incel beliefs about how they’re entitled to sex. One individual does not have a right to another’s body.
I should note, I am not opposed to sex work as a whole, my issue is with this context.
Without reference to the actual Dutch implementation, there is a way I can see this working that would be nonexploitative, given a pre-existing, properly regulated legalized brothel industry that lacks exploitative pimps and the like: Give out redeemable vouchers. A voucher recipient still has to find a brothel willing to accept them as a client, which means an abusive one can still end up being refused service. Brothels that are in good standing vis-a-vis the regulation of their industry could then redeem the vouchers with the government for money.
As for any special transport and mechanical accommodations for the disabled, having a disabled-friendly public transit system goes a long way, and of course a brothel with poor accessibility won’t be redeeming many of those vouchers, so would be excluding themselves from a chunk of the market, and perhaps a chunk of significant size. Accessibility standards could also, obviously, be part of the industry’s regulation.
As for the human-rights angle, I’d suggest that the opportunity for sex and intimacy is a human right, as is the choice to reject them, the latter with any particular person or in general. (The former, therefore, only in general.) That would obligate the state to remove obstacles to citizens’ pursuit of these things, especially ones that disproportionately obstructed marginalized people and the socioeconomically disadvantaged. Removing obstacles to socialization in general would typically suffice: cheap or free public transportation, guaranteeing the existence of inexpensive venues for socializing (perhaps by subsidizing some, or directly creating some, such as free galleries and museums that include socializing areas), and of course accessibility regulations and universal healthcare.
Similarly to the US’s “the pursuit of happiness”, this explicitly limits the state’s obligations to leveling the opportunity playing field, and not to leveling outcomes (which, as everyone has noted, is impossible to do with sex and relationships without enslaving people).
Of course he’s a Strasserite
Course there’s the segment of tankies who act like the Anti-Sex League is peak theory, they’ll prolly disagree with IncelRepublic
@ cyborgette & naglfar
Yeah. I don’t know much about the scheme. I only found out about it when I was chatting to a Dutch friend about an old Harry Enfield sketch (that’s sort of in the same vein) and she said they did actually have it. So I just googled that article when this post reminded me.
@ surplus
I have seen some legal commentary that argues that, in the Constitution, ‘pursuit’ has its meaning of something that is actually undertaken or carried out (like in Trivial Pursuit) so it’s a guarantee of actual happiness, not merely the opportunity to try.
I’m not convinced by that interpretation though. It’s a pretty impossible promise, and if they did mean that they could just have said ‘life, liberty, and happiness’.
ETA: The dictionary gives a better example of the alternative meaning than my board game one.
@ surplus
You’ve reminded me of a court case; that incels did comment on.
It was a personal injury claim. Negligent surgery left a woman unable to have sex. Part of the damages award reflected that. The court said that this was something people were entitled to.
Incels went on about how that meant courts said that sex was a fundamental human right for women, so why not men? But of course the court actually meant it in the way you mention. The right is to have the capacity for sex; not sex itself.
Same as when you get damages for a broken leg. You get those even if you had no interest, or opportunity, to go walking somewhere.
Asked the brother in law, since he’s lived in Amsterdam for years and deals with disability issues. This is pretty much how it works. It’s a claimable benefit for the disabled and is specific to sex work. The workers still have full rights to refuse the client, and have to register their interest/willingness to work with the scheme in the first place.
@Alan Robertshaw:
It was a personal injury claim. Negligent surgery left a woman unable to have sex. Part of the damages award reflected that. The court said that this was something people were entitled to.
Incels went on about how that meant courts said that sex was a fundamental human right for women, so why not men? But of course the court actually meant it in the way you mention. The right is to have the capacity for sex; not sex itself.
I wonder if Stella Liebeck’s McDonald’s coffee scald settlement—such as it was—took that into account.
Well that’s the first time I had to leave and come back later, I just couldn’t finish reading the post. I was like “nope” outta there.
Rapemeat is a new one but I’m not surprised at all.
@ full metal ox
Possibly. I think the settlement was confidential though, and with settlements it’s just a figure the parties agree on. So might not be calculated the same way a court would.
Usually in PI cases (and defamation) there’s ‘general damages’ and ‘special damages’.
General is just the standard award that everyone gets. That’s based on the nature of the injuries themselves. Over here we use something called Kemp & Kemp to assess that. It’s a book of previous payouts, so over time they become standardised. Other jurisdictions have similar things.
Special is quantifiable damages that arise from the claimant’s own particular circumstances. So for example, everyone who gets their leg broken gets the same amount for ‘pain and suffering’. That’s general. But then special damages would be based on things like loss of wages, and that amount will vary from individual to individual depending on their salary.
It all gets a bit complex though. Some interesting cases on facial scarring. Models get more as it can affect their work; but also attractive people generally can get more because it’s more of a loss!
There was a McDonalds coffee case here; but it failed. But as cropped up last time the US case was discussed here; it seems British coffee is generally hotter anyway. I get a free coffee from a supermarket. Its a three mile walk back and it’s still too hot to drink even then.
http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2002/490.html
It seems to me these incels disagree on “sexual communism” because some of them assume it’d mean abolishing exclusive private “ownership” of women – even though the ones who do advocate “sexual communism” or “sexual redistribution” probably don’t actually mean it like that.
Mostly, incels seem to yearn for some idealized social past where monogamy was perfectly enforced, all men were able to marry a young virgin woman, all young women were beautiful and all husbands of aging women were faithful. In this sense, they are socially rightwing, while economically they may be all over the place, and mostly uninterested in politics.
Meanwhile, they don’t seem to very seriously envision themselves dealing with the practical reality of being the husband in a lifelong committed relationship, raising a family etc. They don’t even seem to be much comfortable with the term “wife”, as they come up with quirky expressions such as “private girlfriend” and “fit fertile woman to breed with”.
So they’re both convinced women are property. The argument is whether they’re public or private property.
@Big Titty Demon – oh, same about that “word” (rapemeat). I was laughing at “PizzaCuck” but that one disgusted me.
But then just rolling my eyes at
Yeah, sex is a “do” thing, not a “produce” thing, but women don’t randomly “produce” babies. “Producing” babies is a complicated process of conception, gestation, and birth, and so far, for people, you need a sperm and egg getting together to start the whole thing. So you’re ignoring sperm-producing folks, mostly men. Shame on you for being so man-hating, Mr. Incel!
This is a minor issue I have with this nonsense, but I assume ”fit” and ”fertile” are supposed to mean ”hot” and ”young”, respectively, but that’s not actually what those words mean. Setting aside the fact that ”every male” would get a ”fit and fertile woman” (even though if it’s for actual breeding purposes, you should really do some vetting for the men too), if there was a body that gave women to men, their understanding of ”fit and fertile” might not please this guy’s sensibilities, and then where would he be?
But that wouldn’t even factor into it, though, since I seem to remember reading something completely horrifying about how the Khmer Rouge tried to get more babies to happen and from what I understood, there were absolutely zero funtimes and no one should do anything like that to anyone, ever, but I’m reluctant to look it up because just remembering it makes me glad I’ve already done all the eating for the day.
The only thing about this I find understandable is misspelling ”bourgeoisie”, since whenever I find myself needing to spell it, I first chant it silently to myself the way I’d pronounce the letter combination in Finnish and then check and double-check I’ve done it correctly. It’s just one of those words where I don’t usually even realise if others have misspelled it, since my brain just somehow jumps over it after it recognizes it as ”that thing”.