Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > New World Order / Global Government

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 22-11-2018, 07:52 PM   #341
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 26,740
Likes: 13,667 (7,885 Posts)
Default

the democrats seem to want to win power by marshalli9ng anti-white sentiment and by handing out free stuff but they can't seem to explain how they will finance that free stuff without raising taxes...

OOPS! Newly Elected Dem Congresswoman Didn’t Realize You’re Not Supposed To Admit This Out Loud…
November 21, 2018 by IWB



http://www.investmentwatchblog.com/o...this-out-loud/
__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2018, 07:28 PM   #342
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 26,740
Likes: 13,667 (7,885 Posts)
Default

__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act

Last edited by iamawaveofthesea; 26-11-2018 at 07:29 PM.
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2018, 09:53 AM   #343
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 26,740
Likes: 13,667 (7,885 Posts)
Default

CJ Hopkins: Beware The 'Trumpenleft'
by Tyler Durden
Wed, 11/28/2018 - 00:30
Authored by CJ Hopkins via The Unz Review,

Unless you move in certain leftist circles, you may not have heard about one of the Russians’ most insidiously evil active measures, an active measure so insidiously evil that it could only have been dreamed up in Moscow, the current wellspring of insidious evil. Its official Russo-Nazi-sounding code name is still being decided on by leftist cryptographers, but most people know it as the “Trumpenleft.”

The Trumpenleft (or “Sputnik Left,” as it is also called by professional anti-Putin-Nazi intelligence analysts) is pretty much exactly what it sounds like. It is a gang of nefarious Putin-Nazi infiltrators posing as respectable leftists in order to disseminate Trumpian ideology and Putin-Nazi propaganda among an assortment of online leftist magazines that hardly anyone ever actually reads. The aim of these insidious Trumpenleft infiltrators is to sow confusion, chaos, and discord among actual, real, authentic leftists who are going about the serious business of calling Donald Trump a fascist on the Internet twenty-five times a day, verbally abusing Julian Assange, occasionally pulling down oppressive statues, and sharing videos of racist idiots acting like racist idiots in public.

The Trumpenleft is determined to sabotage (or momentarily disrupt) this revolutionary work, mostly by tricking these actual leftists into critically thinking about a host of issues that there is no good reason to critically think about... global capitalism, national sovereignty, immigration, identity politics, corporate censorship, and other issues that there is no conceivable reason to discuss, or debate, or even casually mention, unless you’re some kind of Russia-loving Nazi.

Angela Nagle’s recent piece in American Affairs is a perfect example. Nagle (who is certainly Trumpenleft) puts forth the fascistic proposition that mass migration won’t help the world’s poor, and she claims that it creates “a race to the bottom for workers” in wealthier, developed countries and “a brain drain” in poorer, less developed countries. After deploying a variety of Trumpenleft sophistry (i.e., fact-based analysis, logic, and so on), she goes so far as to openly suggest that “progressives should focus on addressing the systemic exploitation at the root of mass migration rather than retreating to a shallow moralism” … a shallow moralism that reifies the dominant neoliberal ideology that is causing mass migration in the first place.

This is the type of gobbledegook the Trumpenleft use to try to dupe real leftists into putting down their phones for a minute and actually thinking through political issues! Fortunately, no one is falling for it. As any bona fide leftist knows, there is no “mass migration problem.” The whole thing is simply a racist hoax concocted by Putin, Alex Jones, and other Trumpian disinformationists. The only thing real leftists need to know about immigration is that immigrants are good, and Trump, and walls, and borders are bad! All that other fancy gibberish about global capitalism, Milton Friedman, labor markets, and national sovereignty is nothing but fascist propaganda (which needs to be censored, or at least deplatformed, or demonetized, or otherwise suppressed).

But Angela Nagle is just one example. The Trumpenleft is legion, and growing. Its membership includes a handful of prominent (and rather less prominent) fake leftist figures: Glenn Greenwald, who many among the “Resistance” would like to see renditioned and indefinitely detained in some offshore Trumpenleft gulag somewhere; Matt Taibbi, who just published a treasonous article challenging the right of the US government to prosecute publishers as “enemy agents” for publishing material they don’t want published; Julian Assange, who is one such publisher, and who the US has scheduled for public crucifixion just as soon as they can get their hands on him; Aaron Maté of the Real News Network, a notorious Trump-Russia “collusion denialist“; Caitlin Johnstone, an Australian blogger and poet who the Red-Brown Putin-Nazi hunters at CounterPunch have become totally obsessed with; Diana Johnstone, who they also don’t like; and (full disclosure) your humble narrator.

Now, normally, the opinions of some political journalists and rather marginal political writers wouldn’t amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world, but there’s a war on, so there’s no room for neutrality. As I mentioned in my latest essay, over the course of the next two years, the global capitalist ruling classes need to make an example of Trump, and Assange, and anyone else who has had the gall to fuck with their global empire. Part of how they are going to do this is to further polarize the already extremely polarized ideological spectrum until everyone is forced onto one or the other side of a pro- or anti-Trump equation, or a pro- or anti-populist equation … or a pro- or anti-fascist equation.

As you probably noticed, The Guardian has just launched a special six-week “investigative series” exploring the whole “new populism” phenomenon (which began with a lot of scary photos of Steve Bannon next to the word “populism”). We are going to be hearing a lot about “populism” over the course of the next two years. We are going to be hearing how “populism” is actually not that different from fascism, or at the very least is inherently racist, and anti-Semitic, and xenophobic, and how, basically, anyone who criticizes neoliberal elites or the corporate media is Russia-loving, pro-Trump Nazi.

And this is where this “Trumpenleft” malarkey fits into the ruling classes’ broader campaign to eliminate any kind of critical thinking and force people to mindlessly root for their “team.” See, the problem with us “Trumpenleft” types is not that we support Donald Trump. For the record, none of us really do. Some of us think he us a dangerous demagogue. Others of us think he is a blithering idiot. None of us think he’s Fidel Castro, or that he cares one iota about the working classes, or about anyone other than Donald Trump.

No, the problem is not that we’re on the wrong team; the problem is that we are asking people to question the propaganda of the team that we’re supposed to be on, or at least be rooting for. We are asking people to pay attention to how the global capitalist ruling establishment is going about quashing this “populist” insurgency (of which Brexit and Trump are manifestations, not causes) so they can get back to the business of relentlessly restructuring, privatizing, and debt-enslaving everything, as they’ve been doing since the end of the Cold War.

We’re asking folks, not to join “the other team,” but to pay close attention to how they are being manipulated into believing that there are only two “teams,” and that they have to join one, and then mindlessly parrot whatever nonsense their team decides they need to disseminate in order to win a game that is merely a simulation they have conjured up (i.e., the ruling classes have conjured up) in order to inoculate themselves against an actual conflict they cannot win and so must prevent at all costs from ever beginning … which, they are doing a pretty good job of that so far.

In other words, the problem with us Trumpenlefters is, the prospect of defeating a fake Russian Hitler, and restoring neoliberal normality in the USA and the rest of the West, is just not all that terribly inspiring. So, rather than regurgitating the Russia hysteria and the fascism hysteria that is being produced by the global capitalist ruling establishment to gin up support for their counterinsurgency, we are continuing to focus on the capitalist ruling classes, which are actually still running things, globally, and will be running things long after Trump is gone (and the Imminent Threat of Global Fascist Takeover of Everything has disappeared, as the Imminent Threat of Nookular Terrorist Backpack Attack disappeared before it).

Or maybe all that is just a ruse, an attempt on my part to dupe you into going out and buying a MAGA hat and shouting racist abuse at Honduran kids, assuming you can find some in your vicinity. You never know with us Trumpenleft types. Probably the safest thing to do to protect yourself from our insidious treachery is to start your own personal Trumpenleft blacklist, and spread lies about us all over the Internet, or just report us to Twitter, or Facebook, or somebody, whoever you feel are the proper authorities. The main thing is to shut us up, or prophylactically delegitimize us, to keep us from infecting other leftists with our filthy, nonconformist ideas. The last thing we need at a time like this is a bunch of leftists thinking for themselves and questioning official leftist dogma. Who knows what that kind of behavior might lead to?

N.B. As far as I could gather from my research, the “Trumpenleft” label was coined by Paul Street, a regular columnist at Truthdig and CounterPunch and all-around professional leftist. Like the editors of The New York Times, Street understands the importance of sloppily Germanicizing terms you want to frighten people with, because there’s nothing quite as terrifying as Nazi morphology!
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-...re-trumpenleft
__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2018, 10:21 AM   #344
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 26,740
Likes: 13,667 (7,885 Posts)
Default

Everything the Left believes is complete fiction… “mass hallucinations” are now the bedrock of left-wing politics
Tuesday, November 27, 2018 by: Mike Adams

Listening to the daily hysteria of the left-wing media is a lesson in just how insane society can become if the masses are indoctrinated with deliberately false information for years on end. Nearly everything the Left believes is complete fiction, and it’s fiction by design. The very point of the left-wing media’s mass indoctrination of the gullible masses is to turn reality upside down and convince people that false things are real, while brainwashing them into thinking that real things are false.

One of the simplest recent examples of this is how the left-wing media, for weeks before the mid-term elections, condemned any mention of the Honduran caravan as “imaginary” and “fictional.” Across CNN, MSNBC, WashPost and the NYT, so-called journalists told the public there was no caravan and that anyone suggesting the presence of a caravan was trafficking in “conspiracy theories.”

Once the caravan reached the U.S. border and staged an attempted mass invasion by rushing the border gates, they were repelled with non-lethal tear gas. Suddenly the same media that claimed the caravan was “imaginary” changed course and leapt into mass hysteria mode, claiming the caravan was now very real and full of “tear gas victims” who were being mistreated by mean U.S. border security officials. Of course, this same media never mentioned that the Obama administration used tear gas in a similar attempted invasion in 2013, hoping that no one can remember what happened just five years ago.

Truth is of no interest to the lying, left-wing media. Every story is twisted, exaggerated, ignored or entirely fabricated solely to achieve a political outcome. Nothing is “real,” they media propagandists believe, unless they say it’s real. And they can weave a whole new “reality” out of complete fiction, on command, and actually convince tens of millions of Americans to believe it’s real. For example, a recent poll found that over 40% of Americans believe the Russians altered votes in the 2016 elections — a completely fictional assertion that even the media itself isn’t alleging took place.

Almost everything the Left believes is rooted in complete fiction

As it turns out, all the most prominent assertions of the Left are complete fiction. They’ve been catapulted into consciousness through a daily stream of fake news media propaganda, repeatedly hammered into the mush-filled minds of gullible progressives to the point where many actually believe false things are REAL.

Here are a few of the most common falsehoods that Leftists believe are real:
#1) Gun free zones stop shootings

Yes, liberals are so brainwashed and cognitively suppressed that they literally believe “gun-free zones” stop shootings. They remain utterly obviously to the fact that 98% of mass shootings occur in gun-free zones.

To a progressive, gun-free zones are magical places rooted in magical thinking, where the mere declaration of a “zone” somehow eliminates all guns from existing within that zone. The very fact that liberals still believe in the effectiveness of gun-free zone declarations reveals just how brain damaged they are: Only a moron would believe that a posted sign would stop a would-be murderer. And the real-world evidence shows that signs, of course, don’t stop shooters.

Imagine that.

#2) Carbon dioxide is a pollutant that must be eliminated

Every botanist knows that carbon dioxide is the “nutrient of life” for plants, forests and food crops. CO2 is in short supply, and plants are starving for it all across the globe. At barely above 400 ppm, CO2 is near the lowest point in the history of our planet, and the simplest way to “green” the Earth is to raise CO2 to double or triple its current level, spurring rapid plant growth, reforestation and an abundance of food crops.

Yet the brain-dead Left has been brainwashed into believing that CO2 is a pollutant that must be eliminated from the atmosphere. If such a thing were to happen, of course, all plant life on the planet would be exterminated, followed by the collapse of animals ecosystems and human civilization. The Left, it turns out, demands all complex life on Earth be obliterated. But they’re too stupid to know that’s what they are demanding.

Now, the latest hare-brained scheme from the delusional Left demands that the skies be sprayed with sulfur dioxide — smog — to “dim the sun” and halt global warming. This insane, suicidal scheme would collapse the global food supply, unleash acid rain on the forests and vector the planet into a new ice age. According to the Left, that’s called “saving the planet” from climate change.

The stupidity of Leftists on climate change would be laughable if it weren’t so dangerous: These people actually believe all those insane things, and they are quite literally willing to destroy the planet to fulfill their sick, twisted fantasies of imagining saving the planet from a problem that doesn’t even exist: “climate change.”

#3) Lowering taxes reduces revenue to the government

Trying to talk to Leftists about economics is sort of like trying to teach a cat to play the piano. It only annoys the cat (and the neighbors) while wasting your time.

During the run-up to the Trump tax cut legislation that was signed into law over the last year or so, Leftists vehemently argued that cutting taxes would “deprive the government of revenue.” They even twisted the words around, claiming that all wages belong to the government by default, insisting that if people are allowed to keep more of what they’ve earned, that’s “stealing” money from the government and can’t be allowed.

Cutting taxes, they said, would be disastrous because it would reduce tax revenues collected by the federal government. But now, over a year later, it turns out that federal tax revenues have significantly increased, not decreased. Liberals are flabbergasted and unable to understand why, but simple economics reveals the answer: Lower taxes spurs faster economic growth, allowing companies and individuals to earn more money that gets taxed. Thus, tax revenues rise when tax rates fall. (Study the Laffer Curve, if you’re curious to know more.)

Besides, since when did government have some automatic right to your earnings, anyway? If anything, we should all be talking about ways to drastically cut the size of the federal government, slashing its budget by 90% and bringing it back down to Earth. Sadly, not even Republicans are interested in small government, anymore, but that’s a discussion for another day.
#4) Illegal immigrants are all little angels who want to contribute to society

According to the irrational Left, all illegal immigrants are angels who want to contribute to society. They’re all incredibly nice people who need our help, and if we would just let them in, they would embrace America, pay taxes, raise children into law-abiding citizens and vote to protect the United States of America. Gosh, they’re even better than Americans!

In reality, illegal immigrants are criminals by definition. They are people who refuse to abide by immigration law, and they think they have some special right to cut in line in front of all the legal immigrants, demand entry into the country on their own terms, and overrun America with their sheer numbers. They are dishonest, immoral, law-breaking criminals who should be rejected from any law-abiding society.

Illegal immigrants include rapists, murderers, child traffickers, child molesters, violent felons and fugitives who are fleeing their own home countries where they are often sought for arrest and prosecution. Those who would enter the U.S. illegally tend to be the very same criminals who also violated the laws of their home country. Allowing illegals into the USA is almost like calling for the world’s worst criminals to take up residence in your own country, where they can victimize your citizens while avoiding prosecution because “racism.”

Migrants are coached and taught how to act like victims so they can achieve asylum. But in reality, many of them can’t wait to join the drug gangs and trafficking operations while enjoying protection in sanctuary cities.

For every migrant mother that’s plastered all across the left-wing media websites, there are at least 10 military-aged males trying to get into the country who can’t wait to take part in criminal activities while collecting entitlement benefits that are paid by U.S. taxpayers.

#5) Biology does not exist, and any person can instantaneously change their sex by simply wishing out loud

As further proof of the mass hallucinations of the deranged, lunatic Left, these “progressives” actually believe now that biology isn’t real. They think that sex is determined entirely by wishing, not by DNA or physical bodies. According to the Left, babies are now born “genderless” and have their gender “assigned” at birth, through some arbitrary decision of a doctor. This is literally what they believe.

They also believe that men can get pregnant, not all women have vaginas, and that men’s restrooms should have tampon machines. These twisted delusions are all openly advocated by Leftists who obviously don’t realize how incredibly stupid they sound to normal people.

The Left is so insane and stupid about gender that a university recently cancelled a production of The Vagina Monologues, claiming it wasn’t “inclusive” enough since, they claim, not all people who have vaginas are women. Thus, the Left turns against itself, attacking feminism under the banner of transgenderism, all while claiming to be “tolerant” while insisting that all men are bad, except for the men who have vaginas… or “manginas” or whatever.

It wasn’t long ago that society would have simply called the psych ward on these people and had them committed for treatment. Now, they run Netflix and turn every TV show and movie into a transgender propaganda production while parading children around in whored-up wardrobes as transgenders, applauding the twisted sexualization of children to the delight of Leftists.

Just remember: According to the Left, all men are bad and all women must be believed, but there’s no such thing as a man or a woman, so even their own assertions are self-contradictory. (A sure sign of an intellectually lazy framework that doesn’t hold up to scrutiny.)

#6) There are racists, bigots and Nazis everywhere!

Like little children convincing themselves that scary creatures are hiding in the closet, Leftists have managed to convince themselves that racists, bigots and Nazis are everywhere in society, just waiting to kidnap them (or something).

The same nation that Leftists say is full of racists, of course, elected a black man President… twice! Yet somehow, America is still racist.

Since there aren’t actually any notable number of racists, bigots or Nazis anywhere, the Left invents them and uses imaginary “boogeyman” scare stories to manipulate voters. How do they invent them? It’s simple: They decry anyone who disagrees with the Left to automatically be a racist. So if you don’t promote transgenderism, you’re a racist. If you don’t buy into the climate change nonsense, you’re also a racist. And if you support Trump’s policies, you’re obviously a Nazi.

On Twitter, if you dare tweet that “men are not the same as women,” you are banned for “hate speech.” Suddenly you’re a bigot for stating the obvious, but that’s exactly what the Left is trying to do: Turn common sense into a hate crime. Twitter also openly supports the genital mutilation of little girls now, banning anyone who dares to suggest that the reproductive organs of little girls shouldn’t be mutilated by Muslims.

How else can the desperate Left create all their enemies where none really exist? They have to declare logic to be a hate crime, then condemn those who use logic as racists and Nazis.

There are, of course, actual bigots in America — people who judge others by the color of their skin. Those happen to be the Leftists themselves, who openly claim that being born white makes you a bad person who should be punished, condemned, removed from power and probably just hanged from a tree somewhere. Yes, there are bigots and racists in America, and they’re called Democrats.
Leftists are incapable of discriminating between good and evil

Another layer in all this is the stunning fact that Leftists are utterly incapable of discriminating between good and evil. In fact, they think the word “discrimination” is always bad, in every context, so they refuse to practice discernment at all.

As yet more proof of this, a left-wing writer who supports illegal migrants invading the USA recently said that Frodo should have allowed the Orcs to invade Middle Earth and overrun the land, because stopping the Orcs is a form of discrimination. The writer’s name is Andy Duncan, and he explained all this in an interview with Wired Magazine, sounding exactly like a libtard: “It’s hard to miss the repeated notion in Tolkien that some races are just worse than others, or that some peoples are just worse than others …and this seems to me, in the long term — if you embrace this too much, it has dire consequences for yourself and for society.”

Do you see how Leftists are incapable of discernment? They refuse to see any difference between good and evil. This is what allows them to promote the mass murder of unborn babies, all while claiming the murder is good because it’s “protecting women’s reproductive health.” (A leap of twisted logic which makes no sense, of course.)

In classic liberal fashion, Duncan believes that nations should welcome all people, including violent murderers, rapists and criminal felons, because “discriminating” against people would be bad. Orcs, he says, should be embraced because we can’t discriminate against them based on the way they were born. “A lot of these creatures that were raised out of the earth had not a great deal of choice in the matter of what to do,” he explains. And yet Duncan and other libtards openly call for discriminating against white people based on the color of their skin.

So yes, the summary of what Leftists believe is: Orcs good, humans bad.
If you believe in reality, you are engaged in “hate crimes”

In summary, the delusional Left is now entirely founded on hallucinations, fairy tales and lies. Anyone who attempts to cite reality (biological reality, fiscal reality, national security reality) is branded a Nazi or racist. Logic and reason are the enemies of the Left, which has heavily invested in thought control, speech police and public shaming to try to force people to abide by its obedience cult.

In this way, the Left has become a delusional political cult that’s run by truly deranged individuals who pose a very real danger to the future of human society. If their policies were implemented, they would destroy human civilization, exterminate life on Earth and punish any who tried to stop them.

The Left is a suicide cult. They are arsonists of society, and yet they believe they have a monopoly on “justice” and “truth” and that anyone who opposes them must be silenced with censorship and violence.

This is why, sooner or later, all human beings who value life, sustainable civilization and planet Earth will need to rise up and defeat the lunatic Left by removing all Leftists from power, one way or another. Google must be dismantled. Facebook must be eliminated from the ‘net. Left-wing politicians must be defeated and eliminated from power.

If humanity fails to stop the Left, humanity will be sent down the path of total destruction. Stopping Leftists must now become the No. 1 highest priority for the future of life and liberty on our planet.

Stay informed. Read more daily news about the “Left Cult” at LeftCult.com.

Watch free speech videos at the new alternative to YouTube, Brighteon.com.

Finally, prepare to defend your nation, your liberty and the entire human race using all constitutionally protected means at your disposal. A terrible war against humanity is under way, and we cannot allow the delusional Left to win or they will destroy everything you value.
https://www.naturalnews.com/2018-11-...cinations.html
__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-11-2018, 08:51 AM   #345
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 26,740
Likes: 13,667 (7,885 Posts)
Default

Everything 'progressives' believe is complete fiction… “mass hallucinations” are now the bedrock of 'progressive' politics

__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-11-2018, 09:46 PM   #346
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 26,740
Likes: 13,667 (7,885 Posts)
Default

__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2018, 04:05 PM   #347
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 26,740
Likes: 13,667 (7,885 Posts)
Default

David Icke Exposes Michelle Obama

__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2018, 09:14 PM   #348
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 26,740
Likes: 13,667 (7,885 Posts)
Default

Communist Group Encourages Migrants to ‘Remove’ Trump
December 1, 2018
by Luke Rosiak

The caravan of migrants that traveled from Honduras to Mexico includes foreign nationals pledging to abolish the U.S. immigration authorities, openly discussing their intent to illegally enter the U.S., and reading communist literature about overthrowing President Donald Trump, according to an in-depth report by journalists on the ground in Tijuana for the Epoch Times.

It said a Los Angeles-based group called Al Otro Lado (“To the other side”) is guiding migrants and its litigation director, Erika Pinheiro, is on the scene telling the migrants how to make sure they don’t just get into the U.S., but get as many benefits from its government as possible.

But she advised that criminals and previous deportees in the group can still get a different status, called “withholding of removal status,” in which “you won’t be deported but it doesn’t have many benefits.”

The night many migrants rushed the border, they received a flier by a California-based Communist group known as BAMN — whose slogan is “Trump must go or be removed BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY” — saying “Open it up or we’ll shut it down! Everyone must be let in!”

“Let’s organize active solidarity and defense against any nationalist or government attack,” another flier from the Communist Party of Mexico in Baja California said.

It blamed America for conditions in Latin America and said it’s “not enough to just leave the country, but to also organize ourselves to fight in a revolutionary way to transform our place of residence.”

Leaders of the overwhelmingly male caravan were positioning children on the front:

A video posted on the Netnoticias.mx Facebook page on Nov. 25, shows a Mexican police officer pleading with migrants not to listen to caravan leaders—who were telling them to put the kids on the front line.

“Don’t let them fool you! Don’t let them lie to you! These leaders; the only thing they’re doing is risking that something bad happens to your families. Because they say ‘go to the front,’” the officer is heard saying in Spanish. “Do not trust the leaders. They are brainwashing you.”

María Luisa Cáceres, who said she joined the caravan with her 15-year-old special needs son, told the paper “we are forced to” join the protests even though she did not plan to. Caceres was sleeping in a tent that said “Abolish ICE” and declined an offer of asylum by Mexico.

But she blamed the large number of male migrants who stormed past police at the border for creating a confrontation that led to her being tear gassed.

“There are people who only think about themselves, they don’t think about the mothers with kids, they think about nothing,” she said.

Guatemalan Luis Conde, 48, has been in Tijuana for about two weeks. He said he doesn’t intend to apply for asylum in the United States, because “they’re not going to give it to me.”

“If they don’t give papers, well to hell, I’m going to jump—there’s no doubt about that,” he said on Nov. 26. “If one is an opportunist, you have to grab the chances that come, and when they come and when you see that it’s not dangerous, bam, you’re there.”

Honduran Marco Gómez, 26, said he’d enter illegally as part of a large swarm of people because applying legally is “a waste of time. It’s a process that takes months and years — it’s a long time.”
http://tennesseestar.com/2018/12/01/...-remove-trump/
__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act

Last edited by iamawaveofthesea; 04-12-2018 at 09:15 PM.
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2018, 02:24 PM   #349
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 26,740
Likes: 13,667 (7,885 Posts)
Default

coming to you soon if the progressives get their way...

15 Million People Were Just Blacklisted from Travel by China’s Social Credit Program and It’s Coming to America Soon
By Meadow Clark

China’s social credit system is in full swing and has already blacklisted more than 15 million Chinese residents from travel. Is it coming soon to the U.S.?

Recently, The Organic Prepper reported some shocking news of China’s newest rollout: a social credit system.

It’s a system of surveillance and governance using a social scoring system based on the state’s perceived trustworthiness of the individual. Not only are social media and financial accounts tied into a person’s “score” – much like a credit score number – but also friends and associates are compelled to distance themselves from an offending person, otherwise, their score can be dropped too.

The program is called the Sesame Score. Symbolically this represents “open sesame”or doorways that are eithe r opened or blocked to the individual who tries to move freely.
A totalitarian dream

This is every totalitarian government’s ultimate dream: a society that polices itself, its thoughts, its beliefs and each other.

It’s the ultimate power imbalance and crushes individual will. If such a scoring system should be used it should be in cases of state or institution accountability such as checking politicians’ funding sources or Glassdoor.com where employees and interviewees can evaluate companies to let others know about the real company culture. But social scoring cannot work the other way around in a free society.

The ramifications of this are perfectly encapsulated by the episode of Netflix’s futurist show Black Mirror called “Nosedive” in season 3 episode 1, where a woman trying to boost her social credit status quickly takes a turn for the worse. Out of all the shows in the series, that episode makes my heart pound right out of my chest because it seems the most real of all the surreal dystopian themes. It’s panic-inducing to realize as you’re watching it that this nightmare is happening now and could happen to you shortly.
https://www.theorganicprepper.com/ch...l-blacklisted/
__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act
Likes: (1)
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-12-2018, 06:37 PM   #350
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 26,740
Likes: 13,667 (7,885 Posts)
Default

Former anarchist explains the 'rise of violence on left'



Sad Radicals
Published on December 11, 2018
written by Conor Barnes

When I became an anarchist I was 18, depressed, anxious, and ready to save the world. I moved in with other anarchists and worked at a vegetarian co-op cafe. I protested against student tuition, prison privatization, and pipeline extensions. I had lawyer’s numbers sharpied on my ankle and I assisted friends who were pepper-sprayed at demos. I tabled zines, lived with my “chosen family,” and performed slam poems about the end of the world. While my radical community was deconstructing gender, monogamy, and mental health, we lived and breathed concepts and tools like call-outs, intersectionality, cultural appropriation, trigger warnings, safe spaces, privilege theory, and rape culture.

What is a radical community? For the purposes of this article, I will define it as a community that shares both an ideology of complete dissatisfaction with existing society due to its oppressive nature and a desire to radically alter or destroy that society because it cannot be redeemed by its own means. I eventually fell out with my own radical community. The ideology and the people within it had left me a burned and disillusioned wreck. As I deprogrammed, I watched a diluted version of my radical ideology explode out of academia and become fashionable: I watched the Left become woke.

Commentators have skewered social justice activists on the toxicity of the woke mindset. This is something that many radicals across North America are aware of and are trying to understand. Nicholas Montgomery and Carla Bergman’s Joyful Militancy (JM), published last year, is the most thorough look at radical toxicity from a radical perspective (full disclosure: I very briefly met Nick Montgomery years ago. My anarchist clique did not like his anarchist clique). As they say, “there is a mild totalitarian undercurrent not just in call-out culture but also in how progressive communities police and define the bounds of who’s in and who’s out.”

Montgomery and Bergman see radical toxicity as an exogenous issue. They do not wonder whether radicalism itself could be malignant. As a result, their proposed solutions are limp and abstract, like “increasing sensitivity and inhabiting situations more fully.” Perhaps this is because the solutions all exist beyond the boundaries of radical thought. As Jonathan Haidt has pointed out, “morality binds and blinds.”

Unfortunately, toxicity in radical communities is not a bug. It is a feature. The ideology and norms of radicalism have evolved to produce toxic, paranoid, depressed subjects. What follows is a picture of what happens in communities that are passionately, sincerely, radically woke, as seen from the perspective of an apostate.

Faith

Commentators have accurately noted how social justice seems to take the form of a religion. This captures the meaning and fulfilment I found in protests and occupations. It also captures how, outside of these harrowing festivals, everyday life in radical communities is mundane but pious. As a radical activist, much of my time was devoted to proselytizing. Non-anarchists were like pagans to be converted through zines and wheatpasted posters rather than by Bible and baptism. When non-radicals listened to my assertions that nazis deserved death, that all life had devolved into spectacle, and that monogamy was a capitalist social construct, they were probably bewildered instead of enticed.

Instead of developing a relationship to God and a recognition of one’s own imperfection, we wanted our non-anarchist families and friends to develop their “analysis” and recognize their complicity in the evil of capitalism. These non-anarchist friends grew increasingly sparse the longer I was an anarchist. They didn’t see how terrible the world was, and they used problematic language that revealed hopelessly bad politics. Frustrated with them, I retreated further and further into the grey echo-chamber of my “chosen family.”

Trent Eady says of his own radicalism in Montreal, “When I was part of groups like this, everyone was on exactly the same page about a suspiciously large range of issues.” When my friends and I did have theoretical disagreements, they tended towards the purely strategic or to philosophical minutiae. Are cops human? If we pay attention to the few white nationalists in town, will that stir them up? Is polyamory queer, or privileged?

Deep and sincere engagement with opposing points of view is out of the question. Radicalism is like a clan too suspicious of outsiders to abandon cousin marriage, and, like incestuous offspring, radicalism’s intellectual offspring accumulate genetic load. Narrow theories must perform increasingly convoluted explanations of the world. For example, Montgomery and Bergman describe Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri’s use of the term “Empire,” in their book of the same name, as both a miasma that “accumulates and spreads sadness” and an anthropomorphized figure that “works to usher its subjects into flimsy relationships where nothing is at stake and to infuse intimacy with violence and domination.”

No worldview maps reality perfectly. But when a worldview encounters discordant knowledge, it can either evolve to accommodate it, or it can treat it as a threat to the worldview’s integrity. If a worldview treats all discordant knowledge as threat, then it is an ideology. Its adherents learn to see themselves as guardians rather than seekers of the truth. The practical consequences of such a worldview can be devastating.

Fear

When I became an anarchist, I was a depressed and anxious teenager, in search of answers. Radicalism explained that these were not manageable issues with biological and lifestyle factors, they were the result of living in capitalist alienation. For, as Kelsey Cham C notes, “This whole world is based on fucking misery” and “In capitalist systems, we’re not meant to feel joy.” Radicalism not only finds that all oppressions intersect, but so does all suffering. The force that causes depression is the same that causes war, domestic abuse, and racism. By accepting this framework, I surrendered to an external locus of control. Personal agency in such a model is laughable. And then, when I became an even less happy and less strong person over the years as an anarchist, I had an explanation on hand.

There is an overdeveloped muscle in radicalism: the critical reflex. It is able to find oppression behind any mundanity. Where does this critical reflex come from? French philosopher Paul Ricœur famously coined the term “school of suspicion” to describe Marx, Nietzsche, and Freud’s drive to uncover repressed meaning in text and society. Today’s radicals have inherited this drive by way of Foucault and other Marxo-Nietzscheans.

As radicals, we lived in what I call a paradigm of suspicion, one of the malignant ideas that emerge as a result of intellectual in-breeding. We inherited familial neuroses and saw insidious oppression and exploitation in all social relationships, stifling our ability to relate to others or ourselves without cynicism. Activists anxiously pore over interactions, looking for ways in which the mundane conceals domination. To see every interaction as containing hidden violence is to become a permanent victim, because if all you are is a nail, everything looks like a hammer.

The paradigm of suspicion leaves the radical exhausted and misanthropic, because any action or statement can be shown with sufficient effort to hide privilege, a microaggression, or unconscious bias. Quoted in JM, the anarchist professor Richard Day proposes “infinite responsibility”: “we can never allow ourselves to think that we are ‘done,’ that we have identified all of the sites, structures, and processes of oppression ‘out there’ or ‘in here,’ inside our own individual and group identities.” Infinite responsibility means infinite guilt, a kind of Christianity without salvation: to see power in every interaction is to see sin in every interaction. All that the activist can offer to absolve herself is Sisyphean effort until burnout. Eady’s summarization is simpler: “Everything is problematic.”

This effort is not only directed at the self, but also outwards. Morality and politics are intertwined in this system so that good politics become indicative of good morality. Montgomery and Bergman skewer this tendency mercilessly: “To remain pious, the priest must reveal new sins … The new Other is the not-radical-enough, the liberal, the perpetrator, the oppressor.” Because one’s good moral standing can never be guaranteed, the best way to maintain it is to attack the moral standing of others. As Montgomery and Bergman point out, this is also a thrilling and actionable alternative to the discouragement that haunts radicals after each loss in conflict with capitalism and the state. This is how cliques and status games emerge in communities that purport to be opposed to all hierarchy, turning people into what Freddie DeBoer once dubbed “offense archaeologists.”

Bland friendships and events are the result. Conversations are awkward and tense as radicals contort to avoid the risk of hurting each other. As an anarchist, I did not engage with individuals as individuals, but as porcelain, always thinking first and foremost of the group identities we inhabited.

Escape from the paradigm of suspicion is hindered by kafkatrapping: the idea that opposition to the radical viewpoint proves the radical viewpoint. Minorities who question it have internalized their oppression, and privileged individuals who question it prove their guilt. The only thing radicals are not suspicious of is the need for relentless suspicion. As Haidt and Greg Lukianoff write of similar norms on campuses, “If someone wanted to create an environment of perpetual anger and intergroup conflict, this would be an effective way to do it.”

Failure Modes

Radical communities select for particular personality types. They attract deeply compassionate people, especially young people attuned to the suffering inherent to existence. They attract hurt people, looking for an explanation for the pain they’ve endured. And both of these derive meaning for that suffering by attributing it to the force that they now dedicate themselves to opposing. They are no longer purely a victim, but an underdog.

However, radical communities also attract people looking for an excuse to be violent illegalists. And the surplus of vulnerable and compassionate people attracts sadists and abusers ready to exploit them. The only gatekeeping that goes on in radical communities is that of language and passion—if you can rail against capitalism in woke language, you’re in.

Every group of people has some mixture of stable, vulnerable, and predatory individuals. That radicals have a poor mix does not doom them. However, radicals also dismiss longstanding norms that would protect them, in favour of experimental norms. They are built with the best intentions and are aimed at solving real problems. But intentions do not matter if one does not consider incentives and human nature.

Abusers thrive in radical communities because radical norms are fragile and exploitable. A culture of freewheeling drug and alcohol use creates situations predators are waiting to exploit. A cultural fetishization of violence provides cover for violent and unstable people. The practice of public “call-outs” is used for power-plays far more often than for constructive feedback. Radicals value responding to claims of harm with compassion and belief. But abusers exploit this the way children exploit parents and teachers—crybullying becomes a way of punishing opponents or prey. While norms such as “believe claimed victims” are important in families and close friendships where trust and accountability are real, they become weapons in amorphous communities.

One particular practice illustrates this well. The accountability process is a subcultural institution whereby survivors can make demands of perpetrators and the community must hold them accountable. Radicals are hesitant to report abusers and rapists to the police, for fear of subjecting comrades to the prison system. But turning victims into judge and jury and shared friends into executioners is a recipe for injustice that satisfies no one. And in light of the instant truth-value given to claims of abuse, accountability processes are an oddly perfect weapon for actual abusers. As one writer for the zine the Broken Teapot says, “The past few years I have watched with horror as the language of accountability became an easy front for a new generation of emotional manipulators. It’s been used to perfect a new kind of predatory maverick—the one schooled in the language of sensitivity—using the illusion of accountability as community currency.”

Entanglement with such an individual is what finally broke me from my own dogmatism. Having somebody yell at me that if I didn’t admit to being a white supremacist her friends might beat me up and that I should pay her for her emotional labor, was too much for my ideology to spin. The internal crisis it induced led to gradual disillusion. In the end, however, this was the greatest gift I could ask for.

Flight

What is the alternative to radicalism, for the disillusioned radical? She could abandon the project and commit talent and energy elsewhere. Flee the cult. As Michael Huemer says, “Fighting for a cause has significant costs. Typically, one expends a great deal of time and energy, while simultaneously imposing costs on others, particularly those who oppose one’s own political position … In many cases, the effort is expended in bringing about a policy that turns out to be harmful or unjust. It would be better to spend one’s time and energy on aims that one knows to be good.” Slow, patient steps are a more reliable road to a better world than dramatic gestures that backfire as often as not. Conversation is less romantic than confrontation, small business ownership than Steal Something From Work Day, soup kitchens than vandalism. If an individual wants to end suffering, she should think hard about why she’s joined communities that glamorize violence, vengeance, and anti-intellectualism. Having left that scene, I am amazed at how much effort we put into making the world a more painful and difficult place than it is in service of a post-revolutionary utopia.

Radicals should take stock of the progress liberal democracies have made. As Steven Pinker points out in The Better Angels of Our Nature, nobody in the West has an argument for wife-beating or denying women the vote anymore. Infant mortality rates have cratered, and extreme poverty rates are falling precipitously. With trends like these and more, liberal capitalism appears less like the arch-nemesis of humanity, and more like a miracle machine. It could even be improved by the compassion and devotion of former radicals. It is worth noting that this progress does not mean that exploitation and oppression have been solved; but it does mean that our current society is the only one to have made significant inroads against them.

Most of all, radicals should learn to abandon false truths. The only way to escape dogmatism is to resist the calcification and sanctification of values, and to learn from the wisdom of different perspectives. As Haidt argues, there are grains of truth in opposing political positions. Radicals do themselves a disservice by seeing the world of thought outside the radical monoculture as tainted with reaction and evil. There is a rich diversity of thought awaiting them if they would only open their minds to it. One of the achievements of liberalism has been a norm of free speech wherein individuals can both share and consume that spectrum of thought. Every new and challenging school of thought I discovered after anarchism rocked my worldview, as somebody who formerly thought that wisdom could only be found through “the struggle” or in esoteric French theory. Even if opposing views are not assimilated, the ability to contend with them on the intellectual field instead of silencing them is a sign of a seeker of the truth, not a guardian.

Young adults often become radicals after they realize the immensity of the cruelty and malevolence in the world. They reject a society that tolerates such suffering. They sanctify justice as their telos. But without truth to orient justice, seekers of justice will crash and crash again into reality, and will craft increasingly nightmarish and paranoid ideological analyses, burning out activists, destroying lives through jail or abuse, and leaving the world an uglier, more painful place. To paraphrase Alice Dreger, there is no justice without wisdom, and no wisdom without surrender to uncertainty in the pursuit of truth.

Conor Barnes is a student, writer, and poet. His writing has also appeared in Areo Magazine and the Mantle. You can follow him on Twitter @ideopunk
https://quillette.com/2018/12/11/sad-radicals/#comments
__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-12-2018, 07:06 PM   #351
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 26,740
Likes: 13,667 (7,885 Posts)
Default

‘Unregistered foreign agent’: Clinton Foundation oversight panel hears explosive testimony
Published time: 15 Dec, 2018 04:03
Edited time: 15 Dec, 2018 11:55

Fraud investigators have exposed the Clinton Foundation’s alleged misdeeds in a Congressional hearing, describing it as a de facto “foreign agent” devoted not to charity but to “advancing the personal interests of its principals.”

The Clinton Foundation acted as an agent of foreign governments “early in its life and throughout its existence,” according to testimony by former government forensic investigator John Moynihan, which, if true, would not only render it in violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act but also would violate its nonprofit charter, putting it on the hook for a massive quantity of unpaid taxes.

The foundation began acting as an agent of foreign governments early in its life and continued doing so throughout its existence, as such, the foundation should have registered under FARA.
https://www.rt.com/usa/446522-clinto...ampaign=chrome
__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-12-2018, 09:07 PM   #352
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 26,740
Likes: 13,667 (7,885 Posts)
Default

THE WALLS ARE CLOSING IN

__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-12-2018, 05:08 PM   #353
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 26,740
Likes: 13,667 (7,885 Posts)
Default

Joe Rogan - Exposing Social Justice with Peter Boghossian & James Lindsay

__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-12-2018, 04:21 PM   #354
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 26,740
Likes: 13,667 (7,885 Posts)
Default

Of Online $hitfests, Systemic Oppression, & Useful Idiocy
by Tyler Durden
Thu, 12/20/2018 - 19:45
Authored by Doug “Uncola” Lynn via TheBurningPlatform.com,

– Liberal democracy is antithetical to multiculturalism.

– Z-man

Of course, Z-man’s quote above would cause a gaggle of snowflakes to scream in unison: “Racism!”. And, if the past is any indicator, then the next exclamation out their collective mouths would be something like: “America has always been a nation of immigrants!” Yet what they fail to consider is how past generations of United States immigrants assimilated into American culture. This is not happening today. Indeed. It does appear liberal democracies the world over, have been sacrificed upon the altar of multiculturalism and via the thought-control mechanism enforced by the globalists: Political Correctness.



In fact, Political Correctness, as a form of thought control, has become a pillar of the New World Order. This means, any idea or perspective which could undermine the foundation of the new global orthodoxies must be challenged without delay. It’s because dangerous thinking tears at the fabric of the new religion. In the opinion of this blogger, the non-climate controlled aspect the new religion is an outgrowth of the ever-expanding and evolving theory of Intersectionality; essentially, a conception enabling “those marginalized by society (i.e. victims) to identify the entire grid of systemic oppression called the Matrix of Domination.

In simpler terms, this aspect of the new religion is just another form of racism against so-called privileged Caucasians; although no one cares to admit that in the near-mainstream public forum except for Alex Jones and Ann Coulter.

It’s what was in mind while perusing an online shitfest between two other, near-mainstream, writers and intellectuals who would both likely view this blogger as an obscure and common street thug from the wrong side of the internet.

The two ideological warriors were New York Magazine’s Andrew Sullivanand Vox’s Ezra Klein presenting their opposing views on how people’s belief systems are manifesting currently in American politics; and both articles also brought to mind some of this blogger’s past writings describing the Persistence of Their Delusion, the new religion, The Tyranny of the Collective, and Dirty Deeds Done by the People of the Slough.

In Sullivan’s December 7, 2018 essay entitled “America’s New Religions“, he claimed liberal snowflakes were bringing about the extreme escalation of political rhetoric and engagement, in order to fill their empty souls with social justice; a new type of faith, as it were.

Days later, Klein responded with his very eloquently-written article entitled “The political tribalism of Andrew Sullivan”. Therein, Klein contended extreme political escalation has always been an American fact-of-life and that Sullivan was blind to the “perspective of the groups he’s dismissing”.

Ironically, however, Klein, while very effectively addressing Sullivan’s “tribalism”, simultaneously challenged the privilege of those white and Christian, rural and male.

In other words, Ezra Klein engaged in hypocrisy to point out Andrew Sullivan’s hypocrisy.

But isn’t that how it always works with the Political Left? They continually hold their conservative opponents to account by weaponizing the integrity of said conservatives. It’s a neat trick and reminiscent of a quote I once heard the actor Jack Nicholson state in a movie. Therein, a woman asked Nicholson (playing an author): “How do you write about women so well?”

In response, he said: “First I think of a man. Then, I take away reason and accountability.”

Honestly, isn’t that way of it today? If you think about it, it’s how Robert Mueller dismisses his own involvement with Uranium One while pursuing Russian collusion against Trump.

……the FBI was led by director Robert Mueller, who is now the special counsel investigating whether Trump colluded with Russia. The investigation was centered in Maryland… There, the U.S. attorney was Obama appointee Rod Rosenstein — now President Trump’s deputy attorney general, and the man who appointed Mueller as special counsel to investigate Trump.

– McCarthy, Andrew C., (2017, Oct 21). “The Obama Administration’s Uranium One Scandal”. NationalReview.com.

America today is like living in a contentious household with Trump and other Republicans attempting to make the household great again, but with lying, nagging, and accusatory hags bitching and moaning over his crude chauvinism, bad manners, and unproven infidelity – while at the same time, with the scurrilous harridans leaving the front door of the house wide-open; even as uninvited guests come in to raid the fridge and make their beds on the floor.



In the household allegory, the earlier-mentioned writer for New York Magazine, Andrew Sullivan, would epitomize the elder son questioning the strange new beliefs of both Dad and Mom, and pointing them back to the Christian Church where the family once attended:

Now look at our politics. We have the cult of Trump on the right, a demigod who, among his worshippers, can do no wrong. And we have the cult of social justice on the left, a religion whose followers show the same zeal as any born-again Evangelical. They are filling the void that Christianity once owned, without any of the wisdom and culture and restraint that Christianity once provided.

– Sullivan, Andrew. (2018, Dec 7). “America’s New Religions” . New York Magazine.

In response, Vox’s Ezra Klein, as the other son, rose to stand before the family and say to his elder brother:

This is a relentlessly ahistorical read of American politics. America’s political past was not more procedural and restrained than its present, and religion does not, in general, calm political divides. What Sullivan is missing in these sections is precisely the perspective of the groups he’s dismissing…

…..I am not here to judge anyone’s religion, and I’ve been moved many times in the past by how Sullivan writes of his faith. But as a matter of political analysis, Sullivan is trying to close a gaping hole in his argument by defining his Christian practice as true and competing interpretations, no matter how widespread they are, as aberrant. That’s a fine hobby, but it’s not a useful interpretive lens for understanding America’s past or guiding our future.

– Klein, Ezra. (2018, Dec 11). “The Political Tribalism of Andrew Sullivan”. Vox.com.

A “fine hobby” but not “a useful interpretive lens for understanding America’s past or guiding our future”? Really?

Regardless, Klein does make astute points which might have carried more weight had he not revealed his own prejudices in his article:

But if Sullivan’s sense of history is wrong, it’s not unusual. He looks back on American history and sees a politics of becalmed proceduralism, which was often — though certainly not always — true for white men. He looks around now and he sees identity politics everywhere, political cults warring over fundamental questions of dignity and belonging.

……Another way to put it is that social justice theory encourages the consideration of privilege in order to prevent people from being so blinded by their own perspective that they look at America’s political past and declaim this the era in which we departed from political proceduralism and collapsed into illiberalism.

– Klein, Ezra. (2018, Dec 11). “The Political Tribalism of Andrew Sullivan”. Vox.com.

Of course, the “people” to whom Klein refers are white people and the “privilege” he laments is white privilege. In so doing, he has advocated the new religion of social justice theory and not Christianity, per se. In the new religion, the Collective Left seeks to overcome white privilege via its own advocacy of privilege for people possessing more melanin. This where Ezra Klein in his magnificent rebuttal, relegated his arguments to genitalia and skin pigmentation.

Obviously, this is not what Martin Luther King Jr. advocated when he dreamed of a world where people would be judged by the content of their character over the color of their skin.



Somewhere along the line the Secular Left purloined the American Civil Rights Movement when, it was, in fact, founded in the churches of Montgomery County, Alabama. Before that, it was realized in the words and efforts of William Wilberforce, and his pastor, the reformed slave ship captain, John Newton, who penned the timeless Christian hymn “Amazing Grace”.

In his rebuttal, Ezra Klein, sought equality without justice and embraced his own version of tribalism against another tribal leader who, 2,000 years ago, washed the feet of others.

It was Andrew Sullivan, however, concerned over the escalation of politics in America, who argued Christianity soothed the savages above all things temporal, and that Christianity’s dismissal today, has allowed the devotees of the new religion to set aside political civility:

But, critically, it has long been complemented and supported in America by a religion distinctly separate from politics, a tamed Christianity that rests, in Jesus’ formulation, on a distinction between God and Caesar. And this separation is vital for liberalism, because if your ultimate meaning is derived from religion, you have less need of deriving it from politics or ideology or trusting entirely in a single, secular leader. It’s only when your meaning has been secured that you can allow politics to be merely procedural.

So what happens when this religious rampart of the entire system is removed? I think what happens is illiberal politics. The need for meaning hasn’t gone away, but without Christianity, this yearning looks to politics for satisfaction. And religious impulses, once anchored in and tamed by Christianity, find expression in various political cults. These political manifestations of religion are new and crude, as all new cults have to be. They haven’t been experienced and refined and modeled by millennia of practice and thought. They are evolving in real time. And like almost all new cultish impulses, they demand a total and immediate commitment to save the world.

– Sullivan, Andrew. (2018, Dec 7). “America’s New Religions”. New York Magazine.

To that, Klein claimed it is, in fact, the insertion of religion into politics which brings about political escalation:

To state the obvious: Christians were found among both the abolitionists and the secessionists, the segregationists and the Freedom Riders. Study the moments of maximum collision in America’s past and you will find them thick with godly rhetoric and devout believers. Political rhetoric in America is filled with signifiers of Christian identity, and it always has been. It is absurd to suggest that Christianity was somehow less of a social and political identity in the past.

….Polarization is rising, and to the extent that Sullivan senses a hardening of tribal lines, he’s not wrong. But the driving force here isn’t the waning of Christianity but the politicized sorting of it, and much else…

…..The two parties are now divided over race and religion — two deeply polarizing issues that tend to generate greater intolerance and hostility than traditional policy issues such as taxes and government spending,” write Levitsky and Ziblatt. Their work finds what seems obvious: Adding religious identity into political conflict often makes it worse, not better.

The particular pathologies of politics in an age of rapid demographic and cultural change are serious and worrying. ….It demands humility of us all. That is not to say that all groups are equal, that all ideologies are the same, or that some actors are not worse than others. But if our explanation for political tribalism takes the form of “it’s everyone else’s fault,” more likely than not, we have gone awry.

– Klein, Ezra. (2018, Dec 11). “The Political Tribalism of Andrew Sullivan”. Vox.com.

And right there is where the readers witnessed the “political tribalism of Ezra Klein”. He blamed Andrew Sullivan for saying “it’s everyone else’s fault” (i.e. non-whites) when Klein, himself, has also “gone awry” by indicting whites and their privilege. Seriously, why does the rainbow coalition now forget that former U.S. President Barack Obama was elected to two terms?



It appears Andrew Sullivan advocates a form of Christianity manifesting as “my kingdom is not of this world” whereby Klein seems to be promoting the interests of those he wants to inherit the earth.

This, again, calls to mind “equality of opportunity under the law” as opposed to “equality of outcomes guaranteed under social justice”. The former is actual justice, the latter is not. In truth, social justice is an Orwellian-style misnomer and, therefore, a false premise of the new religion.

When considering truth and falsehood, honor, morality, and law, there are those identified as acting in service to themselves and those identified as acting in the interest of others.

And what is “Tribalism” if not identity?

It is a fact the multifarious tribes of the rainbow coalition perceive themselves as victims suffering under systemic oppression. Furthermore, some of the groups even claim to be more victimized than the others.

As in the aforementioned theory of “intersectionality”, the woman who first coined that term, Kimberlé Crenshaw, did so in a discussion of both feminism and race in her 1989 paper entitled: “Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics”. Certainly, there are differences between white feminists and those who are black. But which of those two groups is more victimized by the system?

In Ezra Klien’s take down of Andrew Sullivan, he referenced a political scientist by the name of Lilliana Mason as an expert in explaining “rising political tribalism”. Interestingly enough, in August of this year, Mason was quoted in Salon magazine where she said:

Our party identities have been moving into alignment with other social identities. As a result race, religion, culture, geography and to some extent gender and other identities align with political parties. This means we become much more focused on the party winning. For Republicans this means white and Christian, rural and male. What Trump did was to activate a particular type of white identity. Then he made it clear to the Republican electorate that they should be paying attention to their white identities and voting based on it. Trump was also telling these voters what they had in their heads already.

He really pointed to a group of people who were feeling vulnerable and condescended to and made fun of and said, “You guys are losers, right? We’re all losers, we are losing all the time.” Then he said, “But I’m going to make you winners, I’m going to make us win again.” So it was this almost perfect message delivered to a group of people who were ready to hear a message like that, and were committed to defeating the Democrats because the other party is so socially “other” from them.

– DeVega, Chauncey. (2018, Dec 11). “Scholar Lilliana Mason: “I’m worried about violent conflict between Democrats and Republicans”. Salon.com.

Indeed. The capacity of the Political Left for psychological projection is beyond belief. It is the likes of Klein and Mason who, perhaps disingenuously, now accuse those “white and Christian, rural and male” as victims gathering around Donald Trump as their savior. Maybe so. Yet, even more so, it is The Collective, via Identity Politics, that has formed their respective identities around their perceived oppression; even to the point of wearing their victim status as red badges of courage in their march against the Man. The White Man, of course.

They are wrong on all accounts. The threat is not from Trump, Christians, Caucasians, or those rural and male. On the contrary, the threat to all Americans consist of the corrupt transnational power brokers who seek dismantle constitutional law in the United States.



As I’ve written of before, there is a real beast rising, a Creature from Jekyll Island that grew by the magic of fractional reserve banking. Its tentacles have captured America, enslaving the citizens on the land of their ancestors:

At the same time while the beast was decimating the once free nation’s manufacturing capacities while funding wars around the globe, it was also dumbing down the country’s populace, expanding governmental welfare programs, and lulling the majority of the nation’s citizens into a contented slumber via the financial acquisition and consolidation of the nation’s media outlets and entertainment venues. Through a steady barrage of consistent and hypnotic electronic programming, the beast persuaded the inhabitants of the once free nation to abandon their vigilance to the founding principles which made the nation great originally. These principles included the affirmation of rights derived from natural law, honesty, morality, self-reliance, equality of opportunity as opposed to equality of outcomes, fiscal responsibility, and limited government. But in so doing, what was the overall objective of the beast? It was global dominion, of course; and nothing less. However, in order for the beast to achieve its goal of world domination, it first had to completely subjugate the once free nation, its constitution, and citizens, forever.

– Lynn, Doug (Uncola). (2017, Oct 27). “Stabbing With Their Steely Knives, They Just Can’t Kill the Beast”. TheTollOnline.com.

Certainly, the end-goal of the beast is depopulation as the eight stages of genocide continue right on schedule. Be assured it won’t be Christians overseeing the great purge, but rather, Marxist secularists battling on behalf of their global elite masters.

Therefore, in spite of all the eloquence and perceived intelligence of those advocating for the new religion today, and no matter how victimized they perceive themselves or others to be – they are misled, or engaging in deception, or both. This means, one way or another, they are useful idiots. Nothing less. Nothing more.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-...-useful-idiocy
__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-12-2018, 04:25 PM   #355
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 26,740
Likes: 13,667 (7,885 Posts)
Default

The Five Most Politically-Biased College Courses In America
by Tyler Durden
Thu, 12/20/2018 - 18:25
Authored by Grace Gottschling via Campus Reform,

In 2018, students at college and universities across the country had thousands of courses from which to choose. A handful of those classes, though, caught the attention of Campus Reform because of their politically biased nature.

In continuation of our 2018 Year In Review roundups, here are the five most politically biased courses of 2018.
1. Harvard Law offering class on Trump ‘impeachment and removal’

In March, Campus Reform reported on a Harvard Law course focused on “how we might expect the Constitution to constrain Trump’s execution of his powers and duties, and what #impeachment and removal by other means might resemble in the Trump era.”

The course, “Constitutional Law 3.0: The Trump Trajectory,” was taught by Laurence Tribe, an outspoken critic of the president. Tribe has written several op-eds and recently released a book titled "To End a Presidency: The Power of Impeachment” on his disdain for the current administration.
2. SDSU offers course on removing Trump from office

San Diego State University also offered a for-credit criminal justice course on removing the president from office called “Impeachment, Removal, and Special Counsel.”

Students studied “grounds for impeachment, removal, or indictment,” such as “conflict of interests, foreign emoluments, climate change, racism, religious bias, improper influence, nepotism, and a host of crimes, including conspiracy, false statements, and obstruction of justice," according to the course description.
3. University of Illinois defends new 'Trumpaganda' course

This fall, the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champagne offered a class on Trump’s “disinformation campaign” and “running war” against the media.

The journalism course, “Trumpaganda: The war on facts, press, and democracy" focused on the President’s rhetoric against the “fake news” media and the unique relationship he has with the press.
4. UMaine 'bars' prof who set up anti-Kavanaugh DC trip

The University of Southern Maine (USM) received national criticism in October after emails surfaced showing USM employees discussing a “pop-up” course offering tuition-free credit to students willing to travel to Washington, D.C. to protest against then-Supreme Court Justice nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

Following public outrage over the partisan credit offering, USM officials released a statement claiming that the school never formally approved the course. Rather, officials claimed that the “hastily arranged” trip was organized by a “rogue” retired professor. Once notified of the course’s existence, officials pulled the credit offering and ensured that no public funds were being used to support the trip.

A Campus Reform investigation later revealed, with documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, that the course was offered twice, contradicting USM’s claim that the course was “hastily arranged.” Documents also showed that the course was not just the act of one “rogue” professor, but rather a coordinated effort between several professors and administrators at the college.
5. Harvard Law course looks at ways to 'push back against' Trump strategies

In October, Campus Reform reported on yet another Harvard Law course being offered for students to “explore ways of using constitutional law and politics to push back against those strategies” of President Trump and Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

“This seminar will assess the challenges for democracy under law, for human rights, and for fact-based government posed by the successful strategies of [Sen. Mitch] McConnell, Trump, and Kavanaugh — and will explore ways of using constitutional law and politics to push back against those strategies,” the description of the class, “Strategies for Defending Constitutional Democracy Under Stress,” reads
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-...ourses-america
__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act

Last edited by iamawaveofthesea; 21-12-2018 at 04:25 PM.
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-12-2018, 04:37 PM   #356
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 26,740
Likes: 13,667 (7,885 Posts)
Default

MObama & W - This Isn't News. This Is War Crimes Apologia
by Tyler Durden
Thu, 12/20/2018 - 17:45
Authored by Caitlin Johnstone,

The fact that George W Bush has given Michelle Obama two pieces of candy is once again making headlines in mainstream outlets like Time, The Hill, and Newsweek.



He has not given her any new pieces of candy since the last time he did so at his father’s funeral. He also has not ceased to be the man who facilitated the murder of a million Iraqis and inflicted a whole new level of military expansionism and Orwellian surveillance upon our world. As near as I can tell, the only reason this story is once again making headlines is because Michelle Obama and the mainstream media have decided to bring it up again.

“He has the presence of mind and the sense of humor to bring me a mint, and he made it a point to give me that mint right then and there and that’s the beauty of George Bush,” Obama said of the war criminal in conversation at the SAP Center over the weekend, which we apparently need to know about because the news is telling us about it.

“We’re all Americans. We all care about our family and our kids, and we’re trying to get ahead,” Obama continued.

“And that’s how I feel about [Bush]. You know? He’s a beautiful, funny, kind, sweet man.”

I have always respected Michelle Obama. But continuing to glorify a mass murderer responsible for the death of over a million defenseless innocent civilians, reflects more on her own character than on that of that despicable war criminal. pic.twitter.com/kpnRujHTgv
— Amir (@AmirAminiMD) December 18, 2018

If you’re starting to feel like attempts to rehabilitate George W Bush’s image are being aggressively shoved down your throat by the mass media at every opportunity, it’s because that is exactly what is happening. Every few weeks there’s a new deluge of headlines explaining to consumers of mainstream media why they should love the 43rd president because he’s such a cutesy wootsey cuddle pie, and completely forget about the piles upon piles of human corpses he is responsible for creating for no legitimate reason at all. The last Bush appreciation blitz was less than two weeks ago.

And there is a reason for this. Make no mistake, this relentless, aggressive campaign to rehabilitate George W Bush whether you like it or not is actually a campaign to rehabilitate what he did and the mass media’s unforgivable complicity in it.

The mass media failed spectacularly to practice due diligence and hold power to account in the lead-up to the illegal and unconscionable Iraq invasion, not just the ghouls at Fox News but respected centrist outlets like CNN, the New York Times and the Washington Post as well. Bogus government reports were passed on uncritically and unquestioned, antiwar demonstrations with hundreds of thousands of protesters were ignored and downplayed, and the words “Saddam Hussein” and “9/11” were deliberately mentioned in the same breath so frequently that seven out of ten Americans still believed Saddam was responsible for the September 11 attacks months after the Iraq invasion had occurred.

In an environment where the New York Times is instructing its readers how to “help fight the information wars” against Russia, the BBC is coaching its audience to scream the word “whataboutism” whenever a skeptic of establishment Russia narratives brings up Iraq, and the US Secretary of Defense is claiming that Putin is trying to “undermine America’s moral authority,” the massive credibility hit that imperial media and institutions took by deceiving the world into the destruction of Iraq matters. Propaganda is a lot more important in cold war than in hot war since avoiding direct military confrontation limits the options of the participants, and Iraq is a giant bullet hole in the narrative of US moral authority which Moscow is rightly all too happy to point out.

Exactly this. This is a war on both morality & objective reality. People are rebranded “good” or “bad” not based on their actions, but whether or not they subscribe to a state mandated list of opinions. https://t.co/M3nZuozsZ8
— OffGuardian (@OffGuardian0) December 19, 2018

Without the claim of moral authority, none of America’s manipulations against Russia make any sense. It’s absurd for America to spend years shrieking about Russian election meddling after it openly rigged Russia’s elections in the nineties, unless America claims that it rigged Russia’s elections for moral reasons while Russia rigged America’s elections for immoral reasons. It makes no sense to have mainstream western media outlets uncritically manufacturing support for wars and coaching their audiences on how to help government agencies fight “information wars” against Russia while also criticizing RT as “state media”, unless you can say that western media functions as an arm of the US government for moral reasons while RT does so for immoral reasons. It makes no sense for the US to criticize Russian military interventionism when the US is vastly more guilty of vastly more egregious forms of military interventionism, unless the US can claim its interventionism is moral while Russia’s is immoral.

For this reason it’s been necessary to rehabilitate the image of the Iraq invasion, and since there is no aspect of the Iraq invasion itself that isn’t soaked in blood and gore, they are rehabilitating its most recognizable face instead. Mainstream media outlets are doing this both to restore their own credibility and the credibility of the US world order they serve, in order to help secure crucial narrative control as we slide ever closer to a direct military confrontation with Russia and/or China.

Whoever controls the narrative controls the world, and Iraq is a major weak point in the US-centralized empire’s narrative control. When you see a political insider like Michelle Obama constantly facilitating the mass media’s fixation on how cuddly wuddly George W Bush has become, you are not witnessing a heartwarming moment, you are not witnessing redemption, and you are most certainly not witnessing the news. You are witnessing war propaganda, plain and simple.

* * *

That was fun. So, the best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My articles are entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal, purchasing some of my sweet new merchandise, buying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone, or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers.

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-...rimes-apologia
__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2019, 11:15 AM   #357
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 26,740
Likes: 13,667 (7,885 Posts)
Default

Soros 'Person Of The Year' Indeed - The Year Globalists Pushed People's Patience To The Edge
by Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/31/2018 - 19:00
Authored by Robert Bridge, op-ed via RT.com,

Since 2015, the proponents of neoliberalism have been pushing ahead with their plans for open borders and globalist agenda without the consent of the people. The last 365 days saw that destructive agenda greatly challenged.

In light of the epic events that shaped our world in 2018, it seems the Yellow Vests – the thousands of French citizens who took to the streets of Paris to protest austerity and the rise of inequality - would have been a nice choice for the Financial Times’ ‘person of the year’ award. Instead, that title was bestowed upon the billionaire globalist, George Soros, who has arguably done more meddling in the affairs of modern democratic states than any other person on the planet.

Perhaps FT’s controversial nomination was an attempt to rally the forces of neoliberalism at a time when populism and nascent nationalism is sweeping the planet. Indeed, the shocking images coming out of France provide a grim wake-up call as to where we may be heading if the globalists continue to undermine the power of the nation-state.

It is no secret that neoliberalism relentlessly pursues a globalized, borderless world where labor, products, and services obey the hidden hand of the free market. What is less often mentioned, however, is that this system is far more concerned with promoting the well-being of corporations and cowboy capitalists than assisting the average person on the street. Indeed, many of the world’s most powerful companies today have mutated into “stateless superpowers,” while consumers are forced to endure crippling austerity measures amid plummeting standards of living. The year 2018 could be seen as the tipping point when the grass-roots movement against these dire conditions took off.

Since 2015, when German Chancellor Angela Merkel allowed hundreds of thousands of undocumented migrants into Germany and the EU, a groundswell of animosity has been steadily building against the European Union, perhaps best exemplified by the Brexit movement. Quite simply, many people are growing weary of the globalist argument that Europe needs migrants and austerity measures to keep the wheels of the economy spinning. At the very least, luring migrants with cash incentives to move to Germany and elsewhere in the EU appears incredibly shortsighted.

Indeed, if the globalist George Soros wants to lend his Midas touch to ameliorating the migrant’s plight, why does he think that relocating them to European countries is the solution? As is becoming increasingly apparent in places like Swedenand France, efforts to assimilate people from vastly different cultures, religions and backgrounds is an extremely tricky venture, the success of which is far from guaranteed.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-...-patience-edge
__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2019, 11:31 AM   #358
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 26,740
Likes: 13,667 (7,885 Posts)
Default

Antifa Exposed: "Angry White People With Money"
by Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/31/2018 - 17:45

The National Review sent journalist Kevin D. Williamson deep into Portland for an on-the-ground report on the local Antifa scene, several months after the black-clad social justice warriors squared off with conservatives from the Proud Boys and Patriot Prayer groups after Antifa crashed several permitted rallies.

And while Williamson's original story is a fascinating read, perhaps even more interesting is the post-article interview with the National Review's Madeline Kearns.

Via the National Review

Madeleine Kearns: Other than some local yahoos, what did you see in Portland that’s worthy of national news coverage?

Kevin D. Williamson: Portland is always Portland. I didn’t want to do the Thomas Friedman interview-with-the-taxi-driver thing, but the Uber driver who took me down to where the protest was happening was a Portland caricature, boasting about having been in SDS and talking about the revolution that he was sure was just around the corner. On the more normal political front, I spoke with a local union leader who gave me some pretty good insight on how the Trump phenomenon had radicalized her membership. The thing about places like Portland and San Francisco is that they aren’t nice. They have a reputation for being wooly and hippieish and silly, but they are in fact very angry places, full of very angry people. They are also highly segregated places in ways that the South and Southwest really aren’t. Angry white people with money make the world go ’round, apparently.

Madeleine Kearns: Do you think this behavior is a microcosm of polarized America? Or is it peculiar to certain environments, like what we see on college campuses?

Kevin D. Williamson: I think you get bad behavior where bad behavior is tolerated. In Portland, the blackshirts aren’t a tiny schismatic fashion. There were Democratic-campaign staffers standing out in front of Democratic-campaign events on Election Night chanting along with them.

Madeleine Kearns: You describe the police officers present as being “neutered.” How so?

Kevin D. Williamson: They watched crimes being committed and did nothing.

Madeleine Kearns: How do the police balance peacekeeping with First Amendment rights?

Kevin D. Williamson: There isn’t anything unpeaceable about the exercise of First Amendment rights. I don’t care for mass protests myself — a large crowd of people all facing one direction and chanting seems to me more properly part of a religious exercise than a political one. But if that’s your thing, then by all means go and bark at the moon. But when people start blocking traffic, pounding on the hoods of cars, damaging property, committing assaults, that’s a different thing. And I don’t think there’s really much of a First Amendment issue presented by policing ordinary crime when that crime happens in the course of a political action.

Madeleine Kearns: You’ve written that Portland’s mayor is partly responsible. In terms of policy — what do you think could be done?

Kevin D. Williamson: He might consider asking the police officers who work for him to enforce the law.

Madeleine Kearns: In what way were the anti-fascist protesters you saw fascists?

Kevin D. Williamson: They are the American Left’s answer to the Milizia Volontaria per la Sicurezza Nazionale, down to the penchant for black shirts. They perform the same function: using violence and intimidation to silence political opposition and to terrorize the political opposition. “Fascist” is a notoriously difficult word to define, but they are as close to a textbook case as you are going to find.

Madeleine Kearns: You write that their “idol is the proletariat rather than the nation.” Could you please unpack that?

Kevin D. Williamson: Utopian political movements — and all totalitarian movements are basically utopian — love the world, except for all the people in it. They all are antiliberal and they all seek to degrade the individual and individualism. Their liturgy requires an object of adoration, and it’s usually the same object: the People, or, as American populists like to put it, We the People. For traditional nationalists, it’s the Nation in abstract and idealized form; for socialists, it’s always been the proletariat, who apparently are the only people included in the People. If you’re acting in the name of the People, you can brutalize persons. The interests of the People require a gulag, the interests of the People require a death camp, and if the people have to suffer for the People, then so be it.

Madeleine Kearns: You’ve noted that these “hooligans” do not always call themselves “Antifa.” How can we identify them if not by name? What are their defining characteristics?

Kevin D. Williamson: Their defining characteristic is a behavior, not an ideology or factional plumage. Violence is violence.

Madeleine Kearns: You quoted the Freudian-Marxist social critic Erich Fromm, who wrote in 1941: “Freedom is not less endangered if attacked in the name of anti-Fascism or in that of outright Fascism.” I wonder if you could say more on that, perhaps by responding to Herbert Marcuse’s idea in his essay “Repressive Tolerance” (1965) that “liberating tolerance . . . would mean intolerance against movements from the Right, and toleration of movements from the Left.”

Kevin D. Williamson: Marcuse is sometimes oversimplified. I’ve been spending a lot of time with “repressive tolerance” for The Smallest Minority, a book I’ve been writing on the subject. Like a lot of political thinkers, he is least understood by his admirers. What Antifa thinks, and what I suppose they think Marcuse thought, if they bother to think about that sort of thing at all, is that tolerating wicked political ideas is in and of itself repressive, and, of course, they believe that the Right is the home of wicked political ideas. Hence the slogans such as “No free speech for Nazis.” But I don’t think that they are really very much informed by Marcuse. I think that they have stumbled onto the Catholic conception of “scandal” and believe that allowing a bad example to stand in public will lead more people into sin.

Madeleine Kearns: For the purposes of your reporting, you were in and amongst the Portland mob. Did you get any sense of what might attract someone to join them?

Kevin D. Williamson: Loneliness. Almost none of this is really about politics at heart. Younger people have lives disproportionately involved with sterile social-media relationships, and relationships in the real world are increasingly informed by the social-media sensibility, which is one of mutual instrumentation. We could choose any metric of success and happiness we want, and we’ve settled on the crude quantification of love and human connection. The people suffering under that particular boot-heel don’t realize that they are wearing the boot, and that they have the power to take it off of their own necks at any time they want, that they can take a little freedom out for a spin and see if they like it. They don’t need a revolution. They need Jesus.

Madeleine Kearns: Is Donald Trump — in rhetoric or in deed — partly to blame?

Kevin D. Williamson: The Israelites had their golden calf. We have our golden toilet. Donald Trump is to blame for Donald Trump. That’s enough for any one man to bear.

Madeleine Kearns: You wrote, “Once political violence is out of the box, it is hard to put it back in.” Can we expect more of this?

Kevin D. Williamson: I don’t know. Technology and political liberalism (and, since this is for National Review, I think we can use “liberalism” in its traditional sense, not in the sense of “Durka durka liberals hate Christmas!”) both have the potential to amplify the individual. The same system that brings you Steve Jobs brings you Timothy McVeigh. Liberalism creates political conditions — tolerance, openness, freedom of speech — that can be exploited by illiberal forces. That’s the basic insight of Karl Loewenstein’s “militant democracy,” which also figures prominently in The Smallest Minority. Loewenstein and other advocates of what the Germans call streitbare Demokratie argue that the defenders of the liberal-democratic order must sometimes use illiberal and undemocratic means to defend that order from existential threats. This is the constitutional principle under which the Germans and Austrians do things that we do not generally do in the United States, such as ban certain political books or prohibit certain political parties. If the blackshirts understood their own political priors — and they do not; they simply are overwhelmed by hatred and revulsion, for themselves above all — then they would understand themselves as acting in theory under the principle of militant democracy. And that, of course, is why it is rhetorically necessary for everybody you disagree with to be a Nazi: Practically anything is defensible in a fight against Nazis. And that’s how we get to the kind of political rhetoric that insists that people who don’t want to use racial criteria in public life are Nazis, people who don’t think that abortion should be used as an instrument of eugenics are Nazis, people who want the top marginal tax rate set 3 percent lower are Nazis, etc. These are stupid times.

Madeleine Kearns: What’s the cultural antidote to Antifa?

Kevin D. Williamson: One of the lessons of Animal Farm is: You can’t reason a pig out of its pigness. T. S. Eliot once described the folly of “dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good.” And then he adds: “But the man that is will shadow the man that pretends to be.” Citizenship is hard work. Being a subject is a lot easier. That’s part of the allure of being a subject of a totalitarian state. Under totalitarianism, the state does all of the political work, and people are just livestock to be milked, shorn, and, occasionally, slaughtered. Some people are very comfortable being livestock and really embrace that bovine-ovine role with all they’ve got. People have the power to start being human whenever they want. But work, including the work of citizenship, is a means, and people have to decide for themselves that the end is worth the work. Right now, these blackshirts and their admirers and imitators are comfortable in their intellectual sties.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-...e-people-money
__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2019, 12:57 PM   #359
semper_occultus
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: ..there is another system..
Posts: 369
Likes: 126 (81 Posts)
Default

The Harsh Truth About Progressive Cities

By David Dahmer - Sep 3, 2015


Madison, Minneapolis, Austin, Portland, San Francisco.

These are America’s most progressive, forward-thinking, open-minded, and social-justice-focused cities. They also have the worst racial disparities in the nation and some of the worst racial segregation.

It just doesn’t make sense on paper. It’s not supposed to be this way. But the statistics don’t lie. Rampant black and brown poverty within blocks of white affluence. Eye-popping racial disparity numbers in employment, education, health, housing, and more. Black and brown people of all socioeconomic backgrounds feeling uncomfortable and unwanted in progressive cities that are often segregated as bad as Jim Crow Deep South. In the end, there is very little “Coexisting” in the land of “Coexist” bumper stickers.

https://madison365.com/what-no-one-w...essive-cities/
Likes: (1)
semper_occultus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2019, 11:02 AM   #360
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 26,740
Likes: 13,667 (7,885 Posts)
Default

what they don't want is for people to make the connection that at the top of it all the people who control zionism and the people behind marxist communism and its various 'progressive agendas' that are hammering western society at the moment ARE THE SAME PEOPLE ie the rothschild cabal (a global mafia of inter-related bloodlines)

Gilad is getting too close to making that link

The Witch Hunt: from Pontius Pilate to the Labour Party
By Gilad Atzmon
1 day ago

A witch hunt is a dangerous game. It entails a merciless campaign directed against people who hold unorthodox or unpopular views. But, as Jewish history tells us, a witch hunt can backfire and turn the pursuer into the hunted.

Jewish past is littered with witch hunts that boomeranged. In fact, the birth of Christianity contains a classic example of this. Jesus’ persecution began with a hate campaign against a whistle blower who held some radical views, such as ‘love your neighbor’ or ‘turn the other cheek.’ Historically, it was the Sanhedrin war against Jesus that made him into Christ – the message as well as the messenger.

Jesus wasn’t the only casualty of such a campaign. The history of Jewish herem (Hebrew for excommunication), tells us that Spinoza was subjected to the apparatus of a similar highly orchestrated witch hunt. In the Jewish world, Herem is the highest rabbinical censure, such a verdict commands that the person suffer total exclusion from the Jewish community and beyond. As with Christ, it was Spinoza’s humanism and universalism, and not the dictates of the inquisitor rabbis, that planted the seeds of enlightenment and progress. While Spinoza’s Jewish contemporaries didn’t approve of the Dutch Jewish philosopher, the Goyim couldn’t have enough of his Wisdom.

The Hasbara Handbook indicates that Israel is very concerned that it will be subjected to ‘name calling.’ “Through the careful choice of words, the name calling technique links a person or an idea to a negative symbol. Creating negative connotations by name calling is done to try and get the audience to reject a person or idea on the basis of negative association, without allowing a real examination of that person or idea."(Hasbara Handbook p 22) It is interesting that the Hasbara Manual complains that Israel’s enemies employ name calling. The truth is the opposite. Name calling is actually a state policy of Israel. It is certainly Israel firsters’ most popular device. Far more concerning to me is that Jewish so called ‘anti’ Zionists use exactly the same tactics. Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) and Jewish BDS have been smearing those whom they want to cleanse out of ‘their’ solidarity movement. We have seen JVP and Mondoweiss witch hunting, name calling and issuing their Herem against Alison Weir, Ken Okeefe, Greta Berlin, yours truly and many others. What do these vile campaigns have in common? I will let you guess.

Name-calling, witch hunts and herem are designed to stop any lone voice from spreading beyond the walls of the ghetto. At his trial, Jesus was presented by the Sanhedrin as an enemy of the Roman Empire. The Rabbinical body intended Spinoza's excommunication to impact the church. When Alison Weir is attacked, she is often criticized for her alleged ‘connection’ with white nationalists in an attempt to make the attack resonate with the wider community. I have been slandered as a ‘racist’ although I have never presented a single critical reference to race or biology.

What is fascinating about the herem ritual is both its complete lack of mercy and the role it allocates to the Goy. An examination of how the British Labour Party became an inquisitor provides us with a window into the metaphysics of the witch hunt mechanism.

Since the election of Jeremy Corbyn as the party’s leader, British Labour has been openly operating as a thought policing apparatus. The party has been played as an instrument of the Zionist global witch hunt. It has been purging, evicting, suspending and expelling some of its best and most ethical members. Ken Livingstone, probably the last true socialist in the Kingdom was suspended numerous times for telling the truth about Hitler, Zionism and Palestine. Hundreds if not thousands of other members have been suspended and/or expelled for supporting human rights in Palestine.

The British public has witnessed all of this with dismay. Labour Party members watched their party with disbelief. But none of that matured into any significant protest. This has now changed. Hell broke loose when the Islington Council (Labour) decided to stop me from playing my Saxophone with the Blockheads in one of its venues. Thousands signed a petition expressing disgust with the Labour Council, Hundreds filled complains with the Council. Many others expressed their total dismay with how the Labour Party has managed to fall into every possible trap in this affair.

As is consistent with the Jewish past, the witch hunt has boomeranged. This last slander campaign against me revealed an astonishing continuum between Likud and British Labour. When the story made it to the national press, the Labour Party panicked. Like Pilate, it made the wrong decision which has backfired colossally. Instead of the people judging me, it is the Labour Party that is under scrutiny. Although many of us are sympathetic to Corbyn, the actual workings of the Labour Party have been devastating and perhaps tragic. The Labour Party is running a Stasi like operation, operating as a hateful opponent of elementary freedoms. If the Labour Party in its current form manages to win an election, it may mark the end to Britain as a free country (assuming that it still is). This might sound like a radical prediction but it isn’t original. Orwell saw it coming in 1936 while in Spain. He was slightly wrong about the date (1984). I predicted this fatal transition in my recent book Being in Time.

By no means do I compare myself to Jesus Christ or Spinoza. Instead, I am trying to point out that what is at play here is the classic ritual of a witch-hunt. This time it is the Likud UK instead of the Sanhedrins that has instigated a non ethical anti humane campaign through a proxy operator that happens to be the Labour Party. In this saga, a Labour Council was happy to play the role of Pilate. The Labour Party has been exploring this treacherous role for at least three years. Yet no one seemed to care when hundreds of Labour members were unfairly punished by their party. People have watched the absurd impunity with which Jewish pressure groups have been terrorizing the British media and political universes. But the public reacted differently in my case. First because the idea that the director of Likud UK, a body that in the eyes of many is associated with crypto fascist ideology, can interfere with British culture and politics is sickening. But there is another reason.

My offering is a message of hope. It counters the path towards destruction that is advocated by pro war Zionist enthusiasts. It transcends beyond the politicized left/right agenda to exist in the realm of the philosophical and the universal. People seem to take my side because they are expressing their fatigue with the institutional duplicitous narrative imposed on them by the media, politics and academia. People are rallying behind me because this battle is theirs as much as it is mine: they fight for my right to express what they think but are afraid to say.

To sign a petition in support of Gilad click here

Lodge a formal complaint with Islington Council: https://www.islington.gov.uk/contact...tus=inprogress

To support Gilad’s legal fund: https://donorbox.org/gilad-needs-additional-support
__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act

Last edited by iamawaveofthesea; 04-01-2019 at 11:03 AM.
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:53 AM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.