Neoliberalism is post-ideological-- it is "purely pragmatic" in its allegiances-- it defends *the market*-- ie-- the empty space in which interests compete. It curates this empty space to its own ends-- instrumentalizing anything from "communism" to "fascism" depending on context

This idea that when the CIA gives money to Kurdish nationalists & Ukrainian Neo-Nazis-- & to "communists" under right wing (autarkik) regimes that aren't instrumentalized -- that it's somehow "allied with" & not merely "using" these groups as pawns-- is being a r*tard.

"There is no there there" said Clinton-- embodying the Neoliberal post-ideological frame. There is no "there"-- everywhere is nowhere-- nothing beyond the curation of the market. There is no "logic" beyond this to it. They are not "communists" or "fascists"-- they're NOTHING!

Neoliberalism is the PERFECTION OF POLITICAL NIHILISM.

Ideologies are only instrumentalized strategies for deploying groups to enact certain actions-- toward an end that none of these groups can conceive of-- because that end is THE CONTINUITY OF POLITICAL NIHILISM.

Neoliberalism is pure TECHNOCRACY-- TECHNICS-- it can INSTRUMENTALIZE ANYTHING-- EVERYTHING IS RESOURCE VALUE-- NOTHING IS ANYTHING BUT ITS "VALUE IN THE MARKET" AT ANY GIVEN TIME.

The Nazis go: "Look look the CIA instrumentalized disaffected Trotskyists!"

The Commies go: "Look look the CIA instrumentalized former Nazis!"

That's right-- there is no contradiction here-- both groups were Human Capital that could be utilized in defense of THE MARKET.

It's really simple-- if the Taliban is useful for the Market against the USSR-- then they get funding. If the USSR falls & the Taliban becomes an impediment to opening the Market in the Middle East-- then they're the enemy. Saddam good to fight Iran-- now Saddam bad to fight OPEC

"But logo look the CIA supported Fascist Death Squads!"
In order to open up the "isolationist" latin american socialist countries.

"But logo look the CIA supported anti-franco democracts!"
In order to get Franco to open up his Autarky & let in foreign investment (the market)

This is the sort of idiocy-- imagining that a Hedge Fund Manager (here an "Ideology Fund Manager")-- has any allegiance to his shares-- what he has allegiance to is the profit he could derive from investing in shares. That's it. If the stock starts tanking-- he sells it.

Why were anti-assadist terrorists like ISIS funded? Because Assad is a Nationalist Socialist-- the US puts sanctions on him & funds a coup-- so that when a new leader is in, we can buy it up via "Shock Doctrine"-- it's called a "Hostile Takeover" in financial terms.

Now Asssad is just trying to keep his economy running without having to acquiesce to a hostile takeover-- he seeks investment from non-NATO alligned "Free Market Defenders" (Neoliberal hegemony)-- these being mainly Russia & China. That's how simple this really is.

Now-- imagine you're Assad-- why *wouldn't* you choose Russia & China over the US? You've just watched two decades of your allies in an Anti-NATO "pan-arab" socialist sphere get taken out one by one in "democratic color revolutions"-- when have China or Russia done that recently?