The left has no response to this.

[Syne]

https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/BdhTfofNJhU

[C C]

Christian Heiens
https://x.com/ChristianHeiens/status/204...3676450260

"The reason you keep seeing comments like 'it’s over for the Left' or 'the Left has no response to this' on posts like this one is because the Right understands that the Left’s cultural dominance comes from demoralization. [...] the Right says look at this cute fuzzy little animal that doesn’t need to be deconstructed, queered, problematized, historicized, or academically revised. It’s just good, and the Leftist worldview cannot produce this. It can only endlessly criticize or destroy it."

Well, it's a worldview that revolves around discerning finer and finer degrees of socioeconomic oppression (and associated grievances). It has to do that in order stay in business, no matter how well life actually improves. That's why it seems to be an eternal faultfinding crusader, cynic, pessimist, nihilist of occidental values, etc.

The classic Marxist was finished once a successful revolution speciously placed the working class in charge. But by Neo-Marxism shifting the struggle to remedy social injustice over to marginalized population groups, victims of Western colonialism, animals, super-fringe sex fetishes, the environment, AI and robots, space aliens, and countless other new possibilities... No end is in sight.

If Gabriel Rockhill's conspiracy happened to be surprisingly correct -- that Neo-Marxism was a concoction of the CIA and other security organizations to water down old-fashioned communism... Then the irony would be that the engineered replacement is perhaps more annoying than the original left-wing religion. But the influential work of Antonio Gramsci well predated any bizarre CIA master plans for dealing with classic Marxism.

[Magical Realist]

"The reason you keep seeing comments like 'it’s over for the Left' or 'the Left has no response to this' on posts like this one is because the Right understands that the Left’s cultural dominance comes from demoralization. [...] the Right says look at this cute fuzzy little animal that doesn’t need to be deconstructed, queered, problematized, historicized, or academically revised. It’s just good, and the Leftist worldview cannot produce this. It can only endlessly criticize or destroy it."

Not DE-moralize so much as A-moralize. But then it's hard to say you are amoralizing an image that is already essentially amoral in its essence. Hence the utter failure of the Right's assumption that non-rightwing humans are failing because there are amoral things. The real question is why a mere picture of something aesthetically pleasing to innocent and agenda-free people becomes weaponized for the Right's obsessive political agenda. Who is really moralizing about shit that is essentially amoral?

[Syne]

Someone either didn't watch or didn't understand the video. 9_9
But proves the video's point... having no response to it, other than deconstructing it as right-wing weaponization.