“Perhaps a lunatic was simply a minority of one.” ― George Orwell, 1984
One the most questionable "achievements" of neoliberalism is that along a theoretical reaction in economics (enforcing on
universities neoclassical economic junk) and a strategic reaction in policy (the return to political power of financial oligarchy,
the power of which was undermined by the New DealCapitalism) if creates new, more sophisticated forms of divide and conquer
policy.
However, the forms, the objectives, the dynamics of social conflict are linked in turn to the ways people relate to each other/ For example, one thousand workers disposed along an assembly line and confined within the walls of a single large factory relate to each other and develop forms of organization
and class solidarity that are different from, say, 10 workers behind computer screens in 100 factories spread over a large geographic area. One of the main targets of capital's strategies to deal with working-class struggles is therefore to disrupt the
emergence of "Class Consciousness" among workers, that constituted the material basis upon which workers' struggles and workers' organizations were founded.
Wikipedia
In political theory and particularly Marxism, class consciousness is the set of beliefs that a person holds regarding their
social class or economic rank in society, the structure of their class, and their class interests
These strategies, also commonly known by the term of "wedge strategies" occurred in many form with identity wedge
as one of the most sophisticated way to disrupt workers solidarities along ethnic lines.
The term "neoliberal identity politics" can also be used in a neutral, non-pejorative sense to encompass ‘feminism, black liberation,
gay rights, minorities right, nationalism, etc …’
Neoliberal Democrats try to substitute and disrupt "class warfare" with "identity politics". A Blairite would say: "we wanted to be a party
of power". Which in the USA led to Dem sellout to Wall Street and adoption of wedge issues. Identity politics led to "unilateral representation
of ethnic minorities", that is a politic decision based on race, a form of racism.
Identity politics has been co-opted by the neoliberal technocracy
to divert attention from wealth inequalities, the dominance of big corporations and financial oligarchy in politics, and the complete
lack of democratic accountability of elected officials.
This is why African Americans voters which have been just as let down and sold to Wall Street by neoliberal politics by Bill Clinton and Obama voted
overwhelmingly for Bill Clinton, Obama and Hillary Clinton. Such a nice politico-technological trick did them in.
But the neoliberal Dems election time identity wedge did not work all the time. One resent and spectacular failure was Presidential elections of 2016.
Neoliberal establishment candidate -- a staunch neocon and warmonger Hillary Clinton with all her identity politics tricks lost
the election to Donald Trump who positioned himself as an independent candidate not controlled by financial oligarchy:
For the last thirty years, there has been no left or right wing governments - not economically or fiscally. Third way centrism
(liberal progressiveness) embraced the primacy of unfettered market capitalism and corporate globalism, and focused exclusively
on using political power as a tool to win the culture war instead.
That's fine if you've done materially very well out of unfettered market capitalism and corporate globalism, and all that therefore
matters to you is social justice issues.
But if you were once in a secure job with a decent income and decent prospects for your children, and all of that has been
ripped away from you by unfettered market capitalism and corporate globalism, and the people responsible for preventing that -
or at least fixing it when it happens - are more concerned with policing the language you use to express your fears and pain,
and demonstrating their compassion by trying to improve the life chances of people on other continents, then social justice issues
become a source of burning resentment, not enlightenment.
There has been a crushing rejection of globalism and corporate plutocracy by Western electorates. The Western progressive left
will only survive if it has the courage to recognise that, and prioritises the fight for economic and fiscal policies that promote
the interests and prospects of its own poor and middle class, over and above the cultural issues that have defined it for a quarter
of a century.
We should always remain vigilant, but the truth is that the culture war is won. It would be tragic beyond words if that victory
was reversed by an explosion of resentment caused by the left's determination to guard old battle fields, while ignoring the reality
that its thinkers and activists are needed to right new injustices. Trump's success doesn't represent the victory of hate over
hope, it just represents the loss of hope. The left has to see that or its finished.
The left pandered to the margins. It is more important for them to impose a transsexual using a rest room with my daughter
in school than it is to just keep the boys with boys and girls with girls.
One example, but my point is that this kind
of policy alienates and offends more people than it seeks to serve. The dems let us down by pandering to the margins of our society
along with prioritizing all sorts of things that simply just don't matter to the rank and file American.
I agree. I think looking at this through the prism of race and gender is a massive red herring. Race and gender bias are symptoms
of insecurity, not causes of it. The insecurity in this case is the feeling that the country - economically, politically
and culturally - has been stolen by elites who care naught about ordinary, less privileged folk.
On another thread I also mentioned another issue which is how fractured society has become in the West, how disconnected its
different parts, a process which technology has fuelled. You can get through your life today without dealing in any significant
way with anyone who disagrees with you, which is actually very, very dangerous.
They given up "class warfare" for "identity politics". A Blairite would say: "we wanted to be a party of power" => money. Identity politics led to "unilateral representation of ethnic minorities", that is a politic decision based on race.
Yeah, Democrats has a lot to account for. They are guilty.
The working classes have been stripped of their dignity, whole communities have become wastelands and virtual ghettos. The
working class don't trust the left to sort things out for them and that is why and how a figure like Trump can come along and
say 'I will save you all' and become President.
Meanwhile, the socialist left sit around scratching their heads, unable to work out what has happened and squabble about the
spirit of socialism and ideology that in all honesty, most working class people don't give a toss about. They just want jobs that
pay a decent wage, a nice house to own, nice food on the table, two cars and nice holidays. They want to be middle class in other
words.
But democrats are not left. They right wing too. If Americans think that Democrats are left, they don´t know what left is at all.
And what socialist government has USA had. I see Americans saying that Democrats are socialists, really? Hillary left and socialist?.
Trump and Hillary are both right wing, only that Trump is more extreme.
Guardian columnists such as Hadley Freeman, Lucia Graves, Wolff, Abramson, Freedland and company should be forced to read this
article. These columnists very rarely if ever talk about the Gilded Age style inequality levels in the West, and the USA in particular.
Instead it is all about identity politics for them. Can these individuals start writing about the disastrous chasm between the
very rich and the rest please?
Definitely. Identity politics has been coopted by the neoliberal technocracy to divert attention from wealth inequalities,
the operation of big corporations in politics and the general lack of democratic accountability in governance.
The conclusion of George Orwell's essay "Politics and the English Language" includes these
two sentences: "Stuart Chase and others have come near to claiming that all abstract words are
meaningless, and have used this as a pretext for advocating a kind of political quietism. Since
you don't know what fascism is, how can you struggle against fascism?"
Doesn't this remind you of attempts today to deflect attacks on critical race theory? A
parental and governmental counterrevolution against CRT has exploded into life, and one of the
ways defenders try to protect it is to advocate a kind of political quietism -- since you don't
know what CRT is, how can you struggle against it?
Slate, a left-wing magazine, for example, tweeted last month, "Conservatives want to
cancel critical race theory. But they don't know what it is." This is gaslighting to make CRT's
opponents question their understanding and doubt the evidence of their own ears and
eyes.
It fits the progressive trope that conservatives are ignorant and stupid. Such contempt
(which is reciprocated) led, among other things, to Donald Trump's victory in 2016. And just as
it failed five years ago, it is failing again now. Which prompts the thought, if Left-liberals
are so smart, why can't they think of a new line of attack and stop repeating what is so
ineffectual?
Conservatives know very well what CRT is. It's not really a theory; it's the
unfalsifiable assertion of racial essentialism, stigmatizing white people as irredeemably
racist and privileged, and black people as systematically repressed. It is used to poison
the minds of children down to the elementary school level. Public and parental understanding of
CRT comes despite its advocates' efforts to obscure its meaning (which makes the Left's charges
of ignorance grimly ironic).
And this brings us back to Orwell's essay. His overarching argument was for clarity of
language in political debate. He demanded then, as we should demand at least as urgently today,
that language be used not to conceal meaning but to convey it.
Political argument is conducted as dishonestly in 2021 as it has been within living
memory. In a TV discussion a few weeks ago, I was confronted by Kristal Knight, former
political director of Priorities USA, a left-wing activist organization, who defined CRT as a
theory that "racism undergirds all the systems of this country, how racism exists in our
structure, and how racism was one of the foundations when our founding fathers created the
Constitution." Amazingly, this was intended as a defense.
She asserted that CRT is "not taught in K-12 education." Perhaps she should be introduced to
Bryan Lindstrom, a history teacher and union organizer in Colorado, who declared on Twitter
that "critical race theory is a component of everything I do." Many of this ilk are fully aware
that those who pretend CRT is an obscure academic discipline don't know or don't care about the
truth.
"In our time," wrote Orwell, "political speech and writing are largely the defense of the
indefensible." That's certainly true of advocacy of CRT.
Their comments came after Austin Knudsen, Republican attorney general of Montana, wrote a
legal opinion about whether Marxist-invented critical race theory (CRT) violated the U.S. and
Montana constitutions as well as various federal civil rights laws. He was responding to an
inquiry by Elsie Arntzen, Montana's superintendent of public instruction, also a
Republican.
The opinion came as public resistance to CRT grows and intensifies among parents in
communities across the country who are fighting back by protesting and taking over local school
boards. In 26 state legislatures bills have been introduced or other steps have been taken to
prevent CRT from being taught , according to
Education Week .
But those measures have rarely offered a comprehensive rationale for banning CRT, which is
something Knudsen's legal opinion provides, sources consulted for this article told The Epoch
Times. Without tying objections to CRT to the Constitution or state constitutions, CRT
opponents had left their laws more susceptible to being overturned.
Acknowledging resistance to CRT in education is "absolutely grassroots" and led by parents
at the local level, Ian Prior, a parent who helped to found and is executive director of
Virginia-based Fight for Schools ,
said Knudsen did the right thing.
" Whenever one is taking action against policies being pushed downstream from the highest
levels of government authority, having a rock-solid legal basis for those actions is absolutely
necessary to accomplish required change and do so in a way that will not fluctuate with changes
in political powe r," Prior said.
David Randall, director of research at the National Association of Scholars, told The Epoch
Times that in his view "there has been a sudden spike of outrage by ordinary people, that the
professional political class has been caught off-guard by it, and that they are struggling to
catch up with popular outrage rather than fanning it."
Although legal opinions like Knudsen's are needed, much more is required for the fight, he
said.
"Our elite institutions have practiced unconstitutional race discrimination for decades,
regardless of the Constitution and the law. They will continue to do so until the people
reassert control over their authoritarian elites. The solution must be political as well as
legal. We need Knudsen, but we also need an effective political movement to remove all the
elite discriminators from the chokepoints of power."
Adam Waldeck, founder of 1776 Action, a nonprofit group, said " the tighter and more
grounded these anti-CRT laws are the better, and there are no doubt preexisting laws on the
books against discrimination that CRT opponents should look to as well. "
"That said, the opposition to CRT started at the local grassroots level and that must
continue, particularly in regards to school boards. It's up to voters to make sure that their
officials (and relevant candidates) state exactly what they believe and support, which is
exactly why we created The
1776 Pledge to Save Our Schools. "
In his legal opinion ,
Knudsen wrote that in many instances the use of CRT and so-called antiracism programming does
discriminate "on the basis of race, color, or national origin in violation of the Equal
Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,
Article II, Section 4 of the Montana Constitution, and the Montana Human Rights Act."
CRT, he noted, calls for teaching students how white people are supposedly by their nature
racist and for engaging in racial discrimination in the name of combating it.
What Is
Critical Race Theory?
" The driving force behind CRT and antiracism is the complete and total acceptance of a
specific worldview -- one that encompasses very specific notions about history, philosophy,
sociology, and public policy. Being a so-called 'antiracist' requires individuals to accept
these premises and advocate for specific policy proposals. Individuals who do not comply cannot
truly be 'antiracist,' and are, therefore, considered racist," Knudsen wrote.
" By its own terms, antiracism excludes individuals who merely advocate for the neutral
legal principles of the Constitution , or who deny or question the extent to which white
supremacy continues to shape our institutions," he wrote. "To that end, no one can be
antiracist who does not act to eliminate the vestiges of white supremacy, i.e., embrace the
specific public policy proposals of CRT and antiracism."
"For example, critics have suggested that there is one, and only one, correct stance on
standardized testing, drug legalization, Medicare for All, and even the capital gains tax rate.
This paradigm is conveniently constructed 'like a mousetrap,'" Knudsen wrote, quoting
Christopher Rufo.
"Disagreement with any aspect becomes irrefutable evidence of its premises of systemic
racism, bias, fragility, or white supremacy. CRT and antiracism are not merely academic ideas
confined to university critical studies courses. These ideologies have begun to infiltrate
mainstream American dialogue and permeate our institutions ."
Compelled Speech
Knudsen argues that, "Trainings, exercises, or assignments which force students or employees
to admit, accept, affirm, or support controversial concepts such as privilege, culpability,
identity, or status, constitute compelled speech," which is something the First Amendment
forbids the government from forcing people to do.
"It is obvious that CRT and antiracism programming take strident positions on some of the
most controversial political, societal, and philosophical issues of our time. Compelling
students, trainees, or anyone else to mouth support for those same positions not only assaults
individual dignity, it undermines the search for truth, our institutions, and our democratic
system. "
Some schools have proposed separate housing and advisors based on race, as well as separate
professional development training , he wrote. Some universities have been sued for diversity
programs in which "they make people get down on the floor and apologize for being white."
Key elements of CRT and antiracism education and training, when used to classify students or
other Montanans by race, run afoul of the U.S. Constitution and federal and state civil rights
laws, Knudsen wrote.
"The term 'antiracism' appears reasonable and innocuous on its face. After all, our
Constitution, our laws, and nearly all our citizens are 'antiracism,'" he wrote. But
"antiracism," when used to describe radical activists' worldview, is " an Orwellian rhetorical
weapon."
Knudsen added that the National Museum of African American History and Culture's website had
a page dealing with "Whiteness," that bizarrely claimed traits such as "individualism," "hard
work," "objectivity," "progress," "politeness," "decision-making," and "delayed gratification"
were hallmarks of "white culture."
Teaching CRT
CRT supporters have lashed out at critics. Michelle Leete, Vice President of Training at the
Virginia PTA (Parent Teacher Association) wished death on CRT opponents at a public event on
July 15. Two days later Leete, who is also a vice president of the NAACP's chapter in Fairfax
County, Virginia, was
forced to resign her PTA post. The American Federation of Teachers and National Education
Association have vowed to defend their members who teach CRT.
After he was inaugurated, President Joe Biden promptly rescinded former President Donald
Trump's Executive Order 13950, which banned teaching CRT to government contractors. Trump said
the ideology was "divisive and harmful" and "like a cancer."
Critical race theory -- whose proponents frequently denounce American culture and history as
"Eurocentrism" and "whiteness" -- is "a variation of critical theory applied to the American
context that stresses racial divisions and sees society in terms of minority racial groups
oppressed by the white majority, " according to the
report of the 1776 Commission, an advisory body created by Trump, which sought to move U.S.
education away from a radical curriculum that unduly emphasized race-related injustices of the
past.
"Equally significant to its intellectual content is the role Critical Race Theory plays in
promoting fundamental social transformation," the report states, "to impart an oppressor-victim
narrative upon generations of Americans. This work of cultural revolution has been going on for
decades, and its first political reverberations can be seen in 1960s America."
Trump unveiled the commission last year as the New York Times-promoted 1619 Project gained
widespread acceptance among elites as it rode a wave of national revulsion over the death in
Minneapolis police custody last year of black suspect George Floyd which was popularly blamed
on anti-black racism by police.
The 1619 Project claims real American history began when the first African slaves arrived in
colonial America in 1619, and not on July 4, 1776 , when the colonists declared independence
from the United Kingdom. Educators helped to lay the foundation for the revisionist history
project years ago by teaching the ahistorical "A People's History of the United States," by
academic Howard Zinn, who was a member of the Communist Party USA. Millions of copies of the
book have been sold.
Leftists claim CRT promotes racial equality by highlighting the supposed damage that white
people have done to others in society. Left-wing sociology professor Robyn Autry of Wesleyan
University,
praised Biden for killing the commission, falsely claiming it promoted a "dangerous
alternative history," instead of seeking a return to the traditional way the country's history
has been taught.
Subversion
But critical race theory "is designed to subvert our system of government," Mary Grabar,
resident fellow at the Alexander Hamilton Institute for the Study of Western Civilization told
The Epoch Times.
"Distorted history, such as The 1619 Project, is used to make CRT seem plausible. CRT is
inherently anti-Constitutional and cannot be justified at the K-12 and even undergraduate
levels because students are still learning history in terms of fundamentals and facts. They
cannot perceive its Marxist underpinnings."
Grabar's new book , "Debunking
the 1619 Project," will be published by Regnery on Sept. 7. She is also author of "Debunking
Howard Zinn," published in
2019.
bikepath999 6 hours ago
that bizarrely claimed traits such as "individualism," "hard work," "objectivity,"
"progress," "politeness," "decision-making," and "delayed gratification" were hallmarks of
"white culture." -- they are, what of it? These are excellent traits that are shared by
successful people
Zero-Hegemon 5 hours ago
By CRT logic it makes Asians "white" also
MaxMax 5 hours ago (Edited)
Universities now have black only fraternities and sororities, social clubs and sometimes
even buildings. Now imagine if some white students said they wanted some white only of the
same thing.
I run a business; I will hire the best qualified, lowest cost, hardest working person
out there. I don't care what color you are. I am here to make money and make the best
product possible.
Utopia Planitia 6 hours ago
CRT is a bolshevik tactic. That's it. It is a made-up story with the purpose of dividing
people. Just like the bolsheviks did in Russia during the first communist revolution.
Farmer Dave 6 hours ago remove link
My daughter is in med school at Tulane and they teach this crap all day long. She is
definitely my daughter and doesn't hold her tongue. So far she's doing well but only time
will tell if they try to cancel her. Then, they'll have me to deal with.
Stack Trace 6 hours ago remove link
Let's all focus on CRT instead of the a-holes strip mining the wealth of our
communities. A distraction that fuels the fake red-blue divide. Folks, it's a show it's not
real. This is a repeat of the same tactics as other "fake" social division issues. Lots of
bogeyman manufactured to keep the sheep off balance instead of focusing on the real enemy:
The Fed and the institutions and individuals it enriches
Without sound money there is no fuel to support movements that can affect real and
enduring change because the communities are starved of resources to support it. The only
communities that get some support the 0.001 percent and the thin sliver of the those that
serve them directly.
Epoch times strikes me as controlled opposition. I could be very wrong but I don't buy
their messaging.
ThaBigPerm 6 hours ago
CRT = National Socialism. Reheated Kaiser Wilhelm Institute leftovers. Just swap out the
"most chosen" and "least chosen" races.
ThaBigPerm 5 hours ago (Edited)
Classical Socialism (aka International Socialism/Communism), according to its authors,
is a framework that declares history is a struggle between oppressor classes and oppressed
classes, and provides that the government should be given plenary power to enact
remediation (dictatorship of the proletariat). If you scratch out "class" from the
framework and replace it with "race", you've got National Socialism. If you then rebrand
that as Critical Race Theory, then you have Critical Race Theory.
Greater Fool Theory PREMIUM 4 hours ago
Did you read the article? The main point is that conversation is not allowed. You agree
completely or you are a racist white supremacist.
Pdunne 5 hours ago
This is total nonsense scholastically but if shaping a "Race Relations" narrative for
use in a Political Campaign then it is useful.
BLM = CRT = BAD
Keep it simple keep it on a bumper sticker.
scraping_by 5 hours ago
One interesting admission here is that CRT is justification for Affirmative Action.
Affirmative Action was Nixon's way of continuing race divisions, and generally causing
hatred and discontent among the American people. Make getting a job a zero-sum game to keep
working people at each others throats.
Trying to keep conflicts away from economics, war and peace, and other things that
really matter since the late 1960s.
UpTo11 5 hours ago
Thank the dems for attempting to only pay farmers of color.
struck down by SC setting precedence
keep pushing back 'merica!!
4medicinalpurposesonly 6 hours ago
Nothing but deflecting blame for the outcomes their policies created
"... American universities are busy establishing black only dorms and black only graduation ceremonies. I really don't care if that's what blacks want, I'm all for freedom of association. But please stop ascribing segregation to white racism. ..."
1. Civic Pride: No littering. Nice parks. Nice walking areas.
2. Honest elections.
3. Quiet evenings.
4. Good policing. Low crime.
5. Good schools and stores.
6. Respectful neighbors.
7. A cultural norm that demands that violence be a rare and last resort for everyday disputes; not the normal first resort
for any dispute.
The fact that when I have the resources to live where I want, the population just happens to be higher than average Asian population
and lower than average Black population is a result of following criteria that has nothing to do with race... but, indirectly,
does due to cultural differences we're supposed to pretend don't exist.
Joseph Katz 30 minutes ago
If people choose to live near others with whom they feel they have something in common, it is no one else's business. New York
has characteristically Italian, Irish, Chinese, Jewish, etc. neighborhoods. There is nothing wrong with that.
Robert LaPorta 52 minutes ago (Edited)
As Mark Twain is purported to have said. "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics." and "Statistics is
the art of never having to say you're wrong."
Igor Liokumovich 53 minutes ago
American universities are busy establishing black only dorms and black only graduation ceremonies. I really don't care if
that's what blacks want, I'm all for freedom of association. But please stop ascribing segregation to white racism.
Ernest Montague 57 minutes ago
I live in a city, Oakland, with a large black community. My neighborhood is quite integrated. One of the things that we see here
is that many times black people enjoy living in a community where their culture is predominant and where they feel comfortable.
There are large, middle class black neighborhoods here where the resident could easily sell and move to more diverse areas. They
don't.
Bruce Lyon 1 hour ago
Am I the only person who questions why we have all of this racial scorekeeping to begin with? The nation's GDP would go up a few
points if all of these race-obsessed bureaucrats, analysts, academics, advocates, et al were actually engaged in productive activity.
Mark A. Rosasco 1 hour ago
I don't doubt our cities are becoming more segregated, they are mostly run by democrats, horribly mismanaged, and crime is reaching
very high levels.
People who can get out are leaving and in many cases only people who are too poor to leave are trapped there and a large majority
of them are African American.
Many cities are in a serious downward spiral and are in desperate need of better policing.
The defund the police movement is the exact opposite of what is needed.
Better relations between the law abiding citizens and the police is badly needed and better training of police officers so
less people get killed.
Community leaders should be doing everything they can to stop people from resisting arrest, you don't hear much about that
issue.
Obviously none this happens by reducing or eliminating police funding.
The exact opposite is needed, increase funding.
What a leadership vacuum.
BRUCE MONTGOMERY 1 hour ago
Highly recommended that Berkeley eliminate the "Belonging Center" and fund the Woodson Center instead.
The Woodson Center does the hard work in the streets.
Yuri Vizitei 1 hour ago
I am encouraged, relieved even, that the commentators are just worked up and outraged about progressive's statistical shenanigans'.
These days of insurrections and such, since some folks want to go back when things were great (again), say 1955? I was fully
expecting to see some expressing nostalgia for those good old segregated days.
But I suppose we haven't quite gotten back there yet.
Robert D 1 hour ago
The left lies. They need to make up fake statistics to even debate a topic. These are the same people say Republicans were the
ones defunding the Police!
James Rodden 1 hour ago
It's so easy to make up any "index" which shows whatever it is you want to show. This "index" will be taken as gospel by our wonderfully
"unbiased" press and then followed by all the liberal politicians who will spout it as fact"¦.
BRUCE MONTGOMERY 1 hour ago
Why is Univ. of Calif - Berkeley allowing an advocacy center to set up shop on its campus?
Academic research is supposed to aim for objective, dispassionate findings, not ideological advocacy.
Such a center only stains the university's reputation and credibility.
carl sanders 2 hours ago
Meanwhile, China must be laughing at how the Left in this country loves to trash our country.
China is focused on domination in all areas--which means talent over feelings.
We are becoming a Nation of weak minded people who look to the Government to run their lives.
Gregory Dolinajec 2 hours ago
As a graduate of UC Berkeley I can honestly say I am amused ( and saddened) by its loss of purpose. I routinely get emails from
the Chancellor which border on comedic. This study follows her lead. Diversity trumps academic rigor. Safe spaces trump the intellectually
demanding class. Drivel, clear thought. and so on.
J Seders 2 hours ago
Just like inflation. When the outcome doesn't fit your narrative, change the metric. Then feign moral superiority
Jack Johnson 2 hours ago
Thomas Sowell wrote dozens of articles and books that completely destroy this "study."
Carlos Lumpuy 2 hours ago
College graduates separated by race and ethnicity, so they graduate with others who look like themselves.
How disgusting is that?
Where is the outrage?
What on earth are we doing to our young?
People live where they can afford to live more than any diversity.
The real American Dream is not achieved through meritless affirmative action at work or in school but through providing all people
with the opportunity to better themselves through individual effort and skill, not by specially created classes.
These false collectivist narrative constructs are not the fulfillment of the American dream but its very debasement.
We are all Americans, human beings;
But until we stop looking at each other with this prejudice, I describe,
We will never be united, colorblind, and free.
Only the truly educated are free.
Woke yet?
BRUCE MONTGOMERY 2 hours ago
Can't trust any research study coming out of academia; contaminated by ideology and identity politics.
Academic researchers will twist and contort data into pretzels to produce their ideological outcomes.
They've nearly lost all credibility.
Martin Schneider 1 hour ago
Bruce; I have thought that was true for a long time but recently I have looked up things on critical race theory and the "facts"
they bring up defy the imagination. That race is only a social construct is one of the most absurd. It completely flies in the
face of common sense
ALAN T 3 hours ago
I'm am so tired and confused. Isn't African American now that are insisting on sperate but equal? I mean we have at their insistence
separate living quarters, separate graduation ceremonies, white free days on campus ..... I mean you really can't win can you.
No matter how you attempt to accommodate their demands every action is racist.
At its recent annual meeting, the National Education Association adopted an agenda item
stating, "It is reasonable and appropriate for curriculum to be informed by academic frameworks
for understanding and interpreting the impact of the past on current society, including
critical race theory."
Becky Pringle, the teachers union's president, declared that "if this grand experiment in
democracy is to succeed," then "we must continuously do the work to challenge ourselves and
others to dismantle the racist interconnected systems and the economic injustices that have
perpetuated systemic inequities."
Asked about the NEA's decision, White House press secretary Jen Psaki said that President
Biden believes "children should learn about our history," including the view that "there is
systemic racism that is still impacting society today."
With this statement, Mr. Biden has plunged headlong into a roiling national debate about
critical race theory, and it isn't clear he can win it. The issue has become central to the
cultural agenda that Republicans hope to ride to victory in the midterm elections. The share of
Americans who believe its impact on our society will be negative is twice as large as those
with a positive assessment. Only 16% strongly support teaching critical race theory in public
schools, compared with 29% who strongly oppose it.
Between Feb. 1 and June 13, Fox News mentioned critical race theory more than 1,300 times.
Christopher Rufo, a young conservative activist who was instrumental in persuading President
Trump to issue an executive order restricting diversity training throughout the executive
branch, has a remarkably effective strategy. It's no secret: In a well-known tweet, he
described his plan for turning critical race theory "toxic" by putting "all of the various
cultural insanities under that brand category."
Elizabeth became increasing bold in stating her religious opinions openly -- as well as her
anti-slavery views and support for abolitionist John Brown.
So in 1860 her husband exercised his legal right to have her committed to an insane
asylum.
Elizabeth spent three years in the asylum before being deemed incurable. She was released
back to the custody of her husband, who locked her in a room and nailed the windows shut.
But with the help of a friend, Elizabeth managed to take her husband to court over the
confinement. A jury took only seven minutes to decide that she was healthy, sane, and deserved
her freedom.
Sadly, her case was not unique.
The records from one mental asylum from the era still survive, and they show vast amounts of
cases in which women were diagnosed as insane because they did not accept the prevailing views
of society, or of their husbands.
A common diagnosis was to rule a woman "insane by religious fantasy." In other words, she
did not believe in the exact same religious principles as her neighbors and family members.
Behaving and thinking independently was more than enough to deem a woman crazy and totally
ruin her life.
And everyone in her social circle -- friends, neighbors, family members, and even her own
husband -- was able to rat them out to the authorities for their dangerous, aberrant
behavior.
You'd think this sort of custom would have gone out of style long ago.
But thanks to a new program being developed by the White House, you too can soon report your
'insane' friends and family members who don't express approved social views.
And this new strategy includes programs for people to "seek help" from the government on
behalf of anyone they "perceive to be radicalizing".
Their objective here is to prevent violence and domestic terrorism. That sounds noble
enough.
But even basic truths about violence are completely tainted by ideology and politics.
Angry, menacing rioters rampaging through the streets, torching cars, looting stores, and
destroying property? They're "mostly peaceful", hence this White House program doesn't apply to
them.
But the man who grabs a weapon to defend his family against those angry, menacing rioters?
He's a violent radical who should be reported.
Then there's Dr. Aruna Khilanani, who earlier this month lectured at Yale University about
her fantasies of killing white people.
Again, though, she's neither considered radical nor potentially violent so she doesn't fit
into this new White House program.
Saying, however, that "a man cannot get pregnant," which was enough for
Twitter to ban a Spanish politician recently, is absolutely considered radical.
The rules are terribly confusing. Fortunately the US government will be bringing in the Big
Tech companies to monitor our behavior and keep us all in check.
It's also notable that the federal government is spending boatloads of taxpayer dollars
teaching US government employees about Critical Race Theory, which asserts that everyone is
racist and that you are either a victim or an oppressor based on your skin color.
I say this is notable because they don't spend those same taxpayer dollars on the principles
taught by Martin Luther King, i.e. that we should strive for a society where people are judged
by the content of their character, not by the color of their skin.
But MLK's view is now considered outdated by the woke progressives in charge.
And they even have 'science' to back up their assertions.
For example, the Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association
published an article last month explaining that whiteness is "a malignant, parasitic-like
condition".
And as we've all been told, you gotta trust the science!
This is rapidly becoming the accepted social view, and any departure from this thesis is
considered 'radical'.
It's ironic that most of the bureaucrats and politicians mandating this training don't have
the first clue what they're talking about.
Recently General Mark Milley, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told Congress that
teaching Critical Race Theory and "white rage" to military cadets at West Point (my alma mater)
was important.
Yet he simultaneously acknowledged that he doesn't know the first thing about Critical Race
Theory, referring to it as "whatever the theory is. . ."
And that pretty much sums up institutional leadership these days in the Land of the
Free.
Politicians in government, business executives, and now even military generals, are only
concerned about appearances, not substance.
They know nothing about Critical Race Theory. They just want to give the appearance that
they're doing something especially when everyone else is doing the same thing.
Just about every big company and organization, from Coca Cola to Disney to Major League
Baseball to the Central Intelligence Agency, has jumped on board the Woke train and embraced
these idiotic principles.
Hardly a single so-called 'leader' has stood up to say 'I agree there are problems to solve,
but this approach is totally absurd and I'm not going along with it.'
These executives have too much to lose -- power, prestige, paychecks so they fall in line
and do what everyone else is doing.
Standing apart from the crowd, risking your reputation, and raising a voice of dissent takes
courage -- something that is sorely lacking in political and corporate leadership.
This weak, pitiful leadership is the reason why the entire woke movement has snowballed out
of control: no one with any real power is willing to stand against it anymore.
It's also the reason why looting Nike stores and rioting in the streets is seen as 'mostly
peaceful'.
Yet anyone with conservative views is considered "radical", worthy of being committed to
modern-day digital insane asylum (i.e. censored by the Big Tech platforms).
Frankly, if history is any guide, this trend is most likely going to become much worse. But
one day it will subside.
It may take years. But the woke Twitter mob will eventually run out of people to hate and
start feeding on its own fanatics. It's like the Soviet Union: sooner or later the entire
idiotic ideology will collapse on itself.
y_arrow 1
Greed is King 18 hours ago
The Hitler Youth were encouraged to "snitch", and they did, on their parents, their
teachers, everybody. The NAZI Concentration Camps killed Aryans as well as ****.
Welcome to the Elite`s brave new world.
_Conax_ 15 hours ago
Insane, huh.
The soviet communist party used their mental hospitals to silence and punish their
critics. I never trusted shrinks because their profession is based on the hack theories of
bearded hare brains. Everyone either hates their father or want to boink their moms
according to those quacks.
The treatment involves zombie pills.
Are our leftists so weak they can't face the free thinking in the war of ideas?
Absolutely horrifying. And that was in the 20th century, not the 15th!
indus creed 14 hours ago (Edited)
One NY judge tried to commit Dinesh D'Souza to a mental hospital during his campaign
finance hearing. They are gonna declare all old school thinking as insane.
jakevee 18 hours ago
Sounds like North Korea.
Dr Phuckit 12 hours ago
Snitching was a major part of 1984, you got rewarded with a few bread crumbs.
Baby steps until one day you realize ....
Obamanism666 7 hours ago
Bring me the person, we will find a crime
JustSayNo 5 hours ago (Edited)
Sometime this weekend, I'm going to have to find the time to post a little write up I'd
found on the persecution of the Ulster Scots in Northern Ireland in the late 1600's- early
1700's. This included crucifixion of their Presbyterian ministers, tossing their babies
alive into pots of boiling water, hunting the men down and murdering as in the style of an
English fox hunt. This occurred at the hands of the English, and though just one example of
the atrocities spurred by the English aristocracy and bankers of the times, the fate of the
Ulster Scots was probably the worst of it. The Ulster Scots migrated to the US in droves at
the time. They tended to push out into the American wilderness, getting as far away from
the systems of English rule and governance in the American cities as possible. Justifiably,
they hated the English. It seems, that the English aristocracy and bankers are still after
the descendants of the Ulster Scots today- labeling them "domestic terrorists", blaming
them for slavery (which was really to the profit of the English banking system and
investors in trade of the times, and was not of benefit to the average American ). To the
Ulster Scots and others who had suffered in Europe, and some other parts of the world, at
the hands of the English, slavery probably seemed rather tame, and pushing out to the
wilderness and frontiers the way that the Scots did, slavery of Africans was likely not
much a part of their universe . What the Ulster Scots cared about, was freedom from the
rule and governance of the despicable English aristocracy. And with good reason. They also
tended not to talk about what had happened to them, as our Irish-American ancestors tended
not to talk about what had really happened at the hands of the English. Its time to start
talking about the Ulster Scots. Much of the our ideas about freedom, about our relationship
to government, property. about the second amendment and the importance an ability of the
people to protect itself from government, come from the Scots. We need a reminder as to why
the Scots felt this way, based on experiences. Their experience of exactly what government
will do to a people when that people is unable to defend itself, and that government is
controlled by Khazarian and other bankers.
ebear 8 hours ago
"It's like the Soviet Union: sooner or later the entire idiotic ideology will collapse
on itself."
Ozarkian 2 hours ago
The media narratives no longer work. The movers and shakers are losing control and it
should scare the hell out of them. They might actually have to work for a living.
Aireannpure 14 hours ago
Do not comment on social dogma, rhetoric and platitudes dudes.
As
Peter Hitchens noted recently "the most bitterly funny story of the week is that a defector
from North Korea thinks that even her homeland is 'not as nuts' as the indoctrination now
forced on Western students."
One of Yeonmi Park's initial shocks upon starting classes at Colombia University was to be
met with a frown after revealing to a staff member that she enjoyed reading Jane Austen. "Did
you know," Ms. Park was sternly admonished, "that those writers had a colonial mind-set? They
were racists and bigots and are subconsciously brainwashing you."
But after encountering the new requirement for the use of gender-neutral pronouns, Yeonmi
concluded: "Even North Korea is not this nuts North Korea was pretty crazy, but not this
crazy." Devastatingly honest, but not exactly a compliment to what once might have been the
land of her dreams.
Sadly, Hitchens reports that her previous experience served Yeonmi well to adapt to her new
situation: "She came to fear that making a fuss would affect her grades and her degree.
Eventually, she learned to keep quiet, as people do when they try to live under intolerant
regimes, and let the drivel wash over her."
Eastern European readers will unfailingly understand what it is that Hitchens meant to
say.
You need to drink a lot of "woke coke" and wearing exclusively "woke Nike" to digest those
recommendations without laughing.
History repeats, first as tragedy, second as farce. White Guard rebels during Russian civil
War called Bolsheviks "Tovatitcshi"(Comrades) as they prohibited to say Sir to the officers.
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I
choose it to mean -- neither more nor less." "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make
words mean so many different things."
As George Orwell has taught us, language manipulation is at the frontline (yes, I have just
broken one of the cardinal rules of his "
Politics and the English Language ," but not his final injunction to "break any of these
rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous") of politicised mind-bending. The sort of
language we are permitted to use circumscribes the thinking that we shall be allowed to engage
in. The assault on language is, therefore, an integral component of the unrelenting warfare
being waged for the conquest and control of the mind. Word elimination and reassignment of
meaning, as Orwell also presciently noted, are essential elements of the campaign to reformat
the mind and eventually to subjugate it.
A breath-taking example of how this process works was recently unveiled by the thoroughly
brain-washed students of the once prestigious Brandeis University who, this time without
prompting from their faculty elders and betters, voted to ban from their campus such odious
words and phrases as "picnic" and "you guys," for being "oppressive". "Picnic" is prohibited
because it allegedly evokes the lynching of Blacks.
The precocious young intellectuals took pains to produce an entire list of objectionable
words and phrases, shocking award-winning novelist Joyce Carol Oates who tweeted in
bewilderment: "What sort of punishment is doled out for a faculty member who utters the word
'picnic' at Brandeis? Or the phrase [also proscribed – S.K.] 'trigger warning'? Loss of
tenure, public flogging, self-flagellation?"
Oppressive Language
Possible Alternatives
Explanation
Killing it
Great job!
If someone is doing well, we
don't need to equate that to
Awesome!
murder!
Take a shot at
Give it a go
These expressions needlessly use
imagery of hurting someone or
Take a stab at
Try
something.
Trigger warning
Content note
The word "trigger" has
connections to guns for many
Drop-in
people; we can give the same
head's up using language less
connected to violence.
Rule of thumb
General rule
This expression comes from an
old British law allowing men to
beat their wives with sticks no
wider than their thumb.
Pknk
Outdoor eating
Tlie term picnic is often
associated with lynchings of
Black people in the United
States, during which white
spectators were said to have
watched while eating, referring
to them as picnics or other terms
involving racial slurs against
Black people.
Go off tlte reservation
Disagree with tlie group, defect
This phrase has a harmful
from the group
history rooted in the violent
removal of indigenous people
from their land and the Itorrible
consequences for someone that
left the reservation.
_arrow
Not Your Father's ZH 8 hours ago (Edited)
"Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and
to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind. " ― George Orwell
The constant reconstruction of language is a highly effective tool when employed against
weak minds... as most folks have only a loose association with the words in their
heads...
As meanings of words are changed the ideas associated with those words change...
consequently a society can be transformed into a different society without ever answering a
single argument...
1748 (in Chesterfield's "Letters"), but the thing itself apparently was rare before c.
1800 as an English institution [OED]; it originally meant "a fashionable social affair (not
necessarily out of doors) in which every partaker contributed something to the general
table;" from French piquenique (1690s), perhaps a reduplication of piquer "to pick, peck,"
from Old French (see pike
(n.1)), or the second element may be nique "worthless thing," from a Germanic source.
As in many other riming names, the elements are used without precision, but the lit.
sense is appar. 'a picking or nibbling of bits,' a snatch, snack .... [Century
Dictionary]
The word also turns up 18c. in German, Danish, Swedish. Later "pleasure party the
members of which carry provisions with them on an excursion, as to some place in the
country." Figurative sense of "something easy" is from 1886. Picnic basket is by 1857.
Picnic table is by 1858, originally a folding table used for outdoor dining.
Meanwhile the top Japanese, Chinese, Russian, Indian etc. schools concentrating on STEM
are laughing their asses off.
John Grady 6 hours ago
Activism is now a career path so to differentiate yourself as an activist you have to
have an angle so you look busy. Endless bickering about minutia makes it look like they're
doing something.
Little wonder that here and there sanity nostalgia is gripping the Western world, at least
those isolated portions of it that are not internalising the sinister "new normal." But it is
seemingly to no avail. All commanding positions are firmly in the hands of lunatics, who are
determined to turn a once great and exemplary civilisation into an asylum.
As George Orwell has taught us, language manipulation is at the frontline (yes, I have just
broken one of the cardinal rules of his "
Politics and the English Language ," but not his final injunction to "break any of these
rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous") of politicised mind-bending. The sort of
language we are permitted to use circumscribes the thinking that we shall be allowed to engage
in. The assault on language is, therefore, an integral component of the unrelenting warfare
being waged for the conquest and control of the mind. Word elimination and reassignment of
meaning, as Orwell also presciently noted, are essential elements of the campaign to reformat
the mind and eventually to subjugate it.
A breath-taking example of how this process works was recently unveiled by the thoroughly
brain-washed students of the once prestigious Brandeis University who, this time without
prompting from their faculty elders and betters, voted to ban from their campus such odious
words and phrases as "picnic" and "you guys," for being "oppressive". "Picnic" is prohibited
because it allegedly evokes the lynching of Blacks.
The precocious young intellectuals took pains to produce an entire list of objectionable
words and phrases, shocking award-winning novelist Joyce Carol Oates who tweeted in
bewilderment: "What sort of punishment is doled out for a faculty member who utters the word
'picnic' at Brandeis? Or the phrase [also proscribed – S.K.] 'trigger warning'? Loss of
tenure, public flogging, self-flagellation?"
All three punishments will probably be applied to reactionary professors who go afoul of the
list's rigorous linguistic requirements.
Not to be outdone by the progressive kids on the East Coast, avant-garde
California legislators have passed a law to remove the pronoun "he" from state legal texts.
The momentous reform was initiated by California's new attorney general, Rebecca Bauer-Kahan,
who after looking up the job requirements made the shocking discovery that the law assumed that
the attorney general would be a man.
Upon review, it turned out that the state code and other legal documents were enabling
unacceptable concepts by using pronouns "he," "him" and "his" when referring to the attorney
general and other state-wide elected officials. Appalled, Ms. Bauer-Kahan denounced these
linguistic lapses for not representing "where California is and where California is going." She
inarguably was right on that score at least, which has perhaps also something to do with the
massive exodus of California residents to less complicated parts of the country.
When lawmakers of a state which is rapidly turning into a North American Calcutta have no
concerns more pressing than to revise the use of pronouns in official documents, that sends a
clear message where that state is going, exactly as the smart and thoroughly up-to-date woman
said.
But as a Pakistani
immigrant father in Seattle, state of Washington, discovered to his chagrin, the linguistic
clowning can have very serious personal and political consequences. After checking in his
16-year-old autistic son for treatment in what he thought was a medical facility, Ahmed was
shocked to receive a telephone call where a social worker explained to him that the child he
had originally entrusted to the medical authorities as a son was actually transgender and must
henceforth, under legal penalty of removal, be referred to and treated as a "daughter."
Coming from a traditional society still governed by tyrannical precepts of common sense and
not accustomed to the ways of the asylum where in search of a better life he and his family
inadvertently ended up, the father (a title that like mother, now officially "number one
parent," is also
on the way out ) was able to conceive his tragic predicament only by weaving a complex
conspiracy theory:
"They were trying to create a customer for their gender clinic . . . and they seemed to
absolutely want to push us in that direction. We had calls with counsellors and therapists in
the establishment, telling us how important it is for him to change his gender, because
that's the only way he's going to be better out of this suicidal depressive state."
Since in the equally looney state of Washington the age when minors can request a
gender-change surgery without parental consent is 13, the Pakistani parents saw clearly the
writing on the wall and, bless them, they came up with a clever stratagem to outwit their
callous ideological tormentors. Ahmed "assured Seattle Children's Hospital that he would take
his son to a gender clinic and commence his son's transition. Instead, he collected his son,
quit his job, and moved his family of four out of Washington."
Perhaps feeling the heat from the linguistic Gestapo even in his celebrity kitchen, iconic
chef Jamie Oliver has come on board. Absurdly, Jamie vowed
fealty to the ascendant normal by dropping the term "Kaffir lime leaves" from his recipes ,
in fear that the alleged "historically racist slur" would offend South Africans. No evidence at
all has been furnished or demanded of complaints from South Africa in that regard. But it
speaks volumes that someone of Jamie's influence and visibility should nevertheless deem it
prudent to anticipate such criticism even though, should it have materialised, it of course
would not originate from South Africa but from white Western political correctness
commissars.
Jamie is now busy, but not just cooking. He is going over his previously published recipes
in order to expunge all offensive references to kefir leaves. Orwell aficionados will recall
this precious passage from 1984 : "Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book
rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed,
every date has been altered." And now every recipe as well. The dystopia fits, does it not, to
a tee even something as seemingly trivial as a cooking show?
But it is not just recipes. Children's fairy tales are also fair game for 1984 revision.
Hollywood actress Natalie Portman ( Star Wars , The Professional , Thor ), inspired
apparently by the new cultural normal, has taken it upon herself not to write, but to re-write,
several classic fairy tales to make them "gender-neutral," so "children can defy gender
stereotypes." Predictably, pronouns were again a major target:
"I found myself changing the pronouns in many of their books because so many of them had
overwhelmingly male characters, disproportionate to reality," quoth Natalie as she put her
linguistic scalpel to such old favourites as The Tortoise and the Hare , Country Mouse and
City Mouse and The Three Little Pigs .
Need we go on, or does the sharp reader already get the general drift? How about
State University of New York student Owen Stevens , who was suspended and censured for
pointing out on his Instagram the ascertainable biological fact that "A man is a man, a woman
is a woman. A man is not a woman and a woman is not a man." (Owen was snitched on by fellow
students, readers from the former Eastern bloc will be amused to learn.) Or the Nebraska
university basketball coach who was suspended for using in a motivational speech the
mysteriously offensive word "plantation"? Or the hip $57,000-a-year NYC school that
banned students from saying "mom" and "dad" , from asking where classmates went on vacation
or wishing anyone "Merry Christmas" or even "Happy Holidays"? Or
female university student Lisa Keogh in Scotland who said in class "women have vaginas"
(who would be better informed than she on that subject?) and are "not as strong as men", who is
facing disciplinary action by the university after fellow classmates complained about her
"offensive and discriminatory" comments? Or
Spanish politician Francisco José Contreras whose Twitter account was blocked as a
warning for 12 hours after he tweeted what some would regard as the self-evident truth that
"men cannot get pregnant" because they have "no uterus or eggs"?
As
Peter Hitchens noted recently "the most bitterly funny story of the week is that a defector
from North Korea thinks that even her homeland is 'not as nuts' as the indoctrination now
forced on Western students."
One of Yeonmi Park's initial shocks upon starting classes at Colombia University was to be
met with a frown after revealing to a staff member that she enjoyed reading Jane Austen. "Did
you know," Ms. Park was sternly admonished, "that those writers had a colonial mind-set? They
were racists and bigots and are subconsciously brainwashing you."
But after encountering the new requirement for the use of gender-neutral pronouns, Yeonmi
concluded: "Even North Korea is not this nuts North Korea was pretty crazy, but not this
crazy." Devastatingly honest, but not exactly a compliment to what once might have been the
land of her dreams.
Sadly, Hitchens reports that her previous experience served Yeonmi well to adapt to her new
situation: "She came to fear that making a fuss would affect her grades and her degree.
Eventually, she learned to keep quiet, as people do when they try to live under intolerant
regimes, and let the drivel wash over her."
Eastern European readers will unfailingly understand what it is that Hitchens meant to
say.
ay_arrow
Plus Size Model 9 hours ago
No worries! We're talking about two different things. You explicitly mentioned meanings
of words in your initial post. Now you're also alluding to what a psyop officer would
describe as manipulating the cognitive environment of a target group. Cognitive
manipulation is a much larger toolbox and involves things like perception management,
information management, memory retrieval, what old timers refer to as symbol manipulation,
etc.
In psychological warfare literature, symbols are somewhat of a mental bookmark. You can
really mess people up by altering the bookmarks slightly or changing around the files they
reference in a prolonged campaign.
The Nazi swastika is probably the most successful symbol manipulation campaign ever. It
means different things to different people and these meanings have evolved substantially
over time. Each new generation and is indoctrinated with different presentations of the
swastika. The wide latitude of interpretation and extreme views associated with it have
consistently created huge social flash points over the past 90 years.
Lorenz Feedback 9 hours ago
I think somethings are being overlooked on this point, Semantic prosody concerns itself
with the way unusual combinations of words can create intertextual 'resonance' and can
suggest speaker/writer attitude and opinion. Consider the difference with using very
powerful versus utterly compelling when presenting an argument. Some words shape narratives
better than others and trigger a response well known to advertisers and propagandists...and
help shape public opinion.
Yes... changing the context of words has a huge impact...
ie the word white is now seen in the context of numerous pejoratives...
Cautiously Pessimistic 10 hours ago
I fit in here in America less and less with each passing year. I feel like a stranger in
my own country at times. I am sure that is by design.
Max Power 9 hours ago
On the other hand, as soon as people encounter real problems like hunger, bankruptcy, or
homelessness, all this ivy league brainwashing evaporates in an instance. Just a stupid
game played by wealthy white libtards believing in fairytales.
So even in 1971 corporate American understood usefulness of critical race theory and "black
bolshevism" for their needs. Otherwise Bell would never get a tenure in Harvard -- the bastion of
neoliberalism and corporatism.
As the theory is a typical pseudoscience in the best style of Academician Lysenko, it is
natural that " Far more Americans have learned about critical race theory from its opponents
than from the theorists themselves."
The idea that "struggle for racial equality is worthwhile even though it will never succeed."
remiinds me Eduard Bernstein's "movement toward goal is everything; goal is nothing" see
Eduard Bernstein's
Revisionist Critique of Marxist Theory and Practice Bernstein was a member of the German
Social Democratic party which was a particularly strong and important member of the Second
International conference. Bernstein's thoughts are encapsulated in his book, Evolutionary
Socialism, published in 1899.
Notable quotes:
"... ...Far more Americans have learned about critical race theory from its opponents than from the theorists themselves. ..."
"... The political scientist Adolph Reed, Jr., whose work focuses on race and inequality, wrote about a conference he attended at Harvard Law School in 1991, where "I heard the late, esteemed legal theorist, Derrick Bell, declare on a panel that blacks had made no progress since 1865. I was startled not least because Bell's own life, as well as the fact that Harvard's black law students' organization put on the conference, so emphatically belied his claim." Mr. Reed dismissed the idea as "more a jeremiad than an analysis." ..."
"... Like the French existentialist Albert Camus, who saw Sisyphus's eternal effort to roll a boulder uphill as a symbol of human endurance in an absurd world, Bell demands "recognition of the futility of action" while insisting "that action must be taken." ..."
"... To the journalist and historian James Traub, who profiled Bell for the New Republic magazine in 1993, this amounted to a recipe for paralysis: "If you convince whites that their racism is ineradicable, what are they supposed to do? And what are blacks to do with their hard-won victim status?" ..."
In their book "Critical Race Theory: An Introduction," Mr. Delgado and Jean Stefancic list
several of its core premises, including the view that "racism is ordinary, not aberrational,"
and that it "serves important purposes, both psychic and material, for the dominant group,"
that is, for white people. In recent years, these ideas have entered the mainstream thanks to
the advocacy of the Black Lives Matter movement, which was catalyzed by several high-profile
cases of police violence against Black people, as well as the New York Times's 1619 Project and
bestselling books like Robin DiAngelo's "White Fragility" and Ibram X. Kendi's "How to Be an
Antiracist." Critical race theory also informs instruction at some schools and other
institutions.
...Far more Americans have learned about critical race theory from its opponents than
from the theorists themselves. That may be inevitable, since their writing was mostly
aimed at other scholars. But at least one major work is more accessible: "Faces at the Bottom
of the Well," the 1992 book by Derrick Bell, who is often described as the founder or godfather
of critical race theory.
Bell died in 2011, but the response to his work foreshadows today's controversies. In
"Faces," he blends the genres of fiction and essay to communicate his powerfully pessimistic
sense of "the permanence of racism" -- the book's subtitle. Bell's thought has been an
important influence on some of today's most influential writers on race, such as Ta-Nehisi
Coates and Michelle Alexander.
Derrick Bell was born in Pittsburgh in 1930, and after serving in the Air Force he went to
work as an attorney in the Civil Rights Division of the Eisenhower Justice Department. He left
the job in 1959 after being told that he had to resign his membership in the NAACP to avoid
compromising his objectivity. That experience reflects a major theme in Bell's work: Can
traditional legal standards of objectivity and neutrality lead to justice for Black Americans,
or does fighting racism require a more politically engaged, results-oriented approach to the
law?
In 1971, Bell became the first Black professor to receive tenure at Harvard Law School. As
he writes in "Faces," "When I agreed to become Harvard's first black faculty member I did so on
the express commitment that I was to be the first, but not the last, black hired. I was to be
the pioneer, the trailblazer." But the school was slow to hire more Black faculty, leading Bell
to leave in protest in 1990. He ended up spending the last part of his career at NYU Law
School.
... ... ...
The political scientist Adolph Reed, Jr., whose work focuses on race and inequality,
wrote about a conference he attended at Harvard Law School in 1991, where "I heard the late,
esteemed legal theorist, Derrick Bell, declare on a panel that blacks had made no progress
since 1865. I was startled not least because Bell's own life, as well as the fact that
Harvard's black law students' organization put on the conference, so emphatically belied his
claim." Mr. Reed dismissed the idea as "more a jeremiad than an analysis."
In the conclusion to "Faces," Bell argues that the struggle for racial equality is
worthwhile even though it will never succeed. Like the French existentialist Albert Camus,
who saw Sisyphus's eternal effort to roll a boulder uphill as a symbol of human endurance in an
absurd world, Bell demands "recognition of the futility of action" while insisting "that action
must be taken."
To the journalist and historian James Traub, who profiled Bell for the New Republic
magazine in 1993, this amounted to a recipe for paralysis: "If you convince whites that their
racism is ineradicable, what are they supposed to do? And what are blacks to do with their
hard-won victim status?"
... ... ...
These experiences inform "Faces at the Bottom of the Well," which is made up of nine fables,
some with a science-fiction twist. In one story, a new continent emerges in the Atlantic Ocean,
with an atmosphere that only African-Americans can breathe. In another, the U.S. institutes a
system where whites can pay for permission to discriminate against Blacks -- a kind of
cap-and-trade scheme for bigotry.
The question implies that state actors are specially qualified or motivated to subsidize
minority opinion in order to rectify the unfair treatment of minorities -- that the state is
the most qualified entity for intervening in opinion to favor minorities. But it is easily
demonstrated that the market provides more incentives to advocate for the fair treatment of
minorities than does the state. Markets encourage legal equality among buyers and sellers. The
state, meanwhile, has no monopoly on equal treatment -- to say the least. Quite to the
contrary, states have more incentives to discriminate against particular groups, as state
prerogatives often depend on discrimination. Consider the treatment of the Japanese and Germans
in America during World War II, or the treatment of Middle Easterners after 9/11. (Notice how
discrimination against Middle Easterners morphed into the consternation about "Islamophobia"
when the prerogatives of the state shifted from "the war on terror" under George W. Bush to the
incorporation of Islamic immigrants into the electorate under Barack Obama.)
Thus, we should be quite skeptical when states impose the opinion of minorities on the
majority through special programs in schools and elsewhere. Such programs likely involve
"positive discrimination" against particular groups, consistent with state objectives.
In fact, discrimination is precisely what is involved in the teaching of critical race
theory in schools, the military, the intelligence agencies, and in other government agencies
today. Critical race theory is a minority opinion that even most blacks do not agree with. It
is being foisted on the majority to establish discrimination against "whites," in order to
destroy a political contingent deemed inimical to the Democratic Party–run state. It is a
means for marginalizing oppositional elements and driving others into the voting ranks of the
Democratic Party by means of ideology. The state imposition of minority opinion does not serve
minorities.
Sounds like a great book for Tucker to recommend to that Army Chief of Staff!
Notable quotes:
"... I call it ROLE -- The Racism Of Low Expectations. This phenomenon has done ten times more to damage Black lives than can be attributed to CRT or institutionalized racism. ..."
"... A subset of ROLE is MVT. This is Manufactured Victimhood Theory. This comes about from influential Black "leaders" who, instead of teaching Blacks the truth about how to live good lives (work hard, develop skills, etc.), they told them to apply as their life strategy "say you are a victim." ..."
Recently the Joint Chiefs of Staff remarked that the US military should teach CTR to our
military essentially because they shoild teach all theories.
That doesn't make sense to me but I would like to put another theory into the public
sphere. I call it ROLE -- The Racism Of Low Expectations. This phenomenon has done ten times
more to damage Black lives than can be attributed to CRT or institutionalized racism.
A subset of ROLE is MVT. This is Manufactured Victimhood Theory. This comes about from
influential Black "leaders" who, instead of teaching Blacks the truth about how to live good
lives (work hard, develop skills, etc.), they told them to apply as their life strategy "say
you are a victim."
I am hoping that ROLE and MVT will become part of all aspects of American life -- all
levels of education, the military, businesses, the media, etc.
If the goal really is to improve Black lives, ROLE and MVT should be the rage over the
next few years.
Tom F
John Callahan 4 hours ago
Corporate America 'makes money critiquing itself.' The rest of us pay the price in
diminished freedom.
Wokeism is fascism dressed up in new clothes- the censorship, demonization of
groups and individuals and the physical violence against people and property remain the same.
Corporate America has one overriding interest- making money. Paying the left (and yes,
fascism is of the left) through critiquing itself and token monetary donations is a get out
of jail free card for Corporate America.
"Capitalism knows only one color: that color is green; all else is necessarily
subservient to it, hence, race, gender and ethnicity cannot be considered within it."
- Thomas Sowell
Dom Fried 4 hours ago
It will end the same. Almost, because there will be nobody to stop it.
Ed Baron 3 hours ago
Very well said, John. Fascism is a fundamental element or subset of Leftist or Marxist
thought. It demands conformity of the individual to the new "woke" state and it punishes any
who dissent. It's not incidental that American Leftists, including FDR, loved Mussolini prior
to WWII. That bromance has been washed clean, and attributed instead to the Right. Such a
typical transference technique used by Marxist.
Alex Guiness
I interpret your supposition 'White male global warming', as meaning White Males are
particularly flatulent hence are producing Green House Gases with their diets of greasy meats
(some on sticks), carnival funnel cakes, corn dogs, Philly cheese-steaks, Popeyes fried
chicken, all washed down with Bud Light. Would it kill them to have a salad now and then? How
can their spouses stand to be around them unless they are also consuming the same foods.
Imagine what it must be like at a sermon in a Lutheran Church, the whitest church of all.
They leave the doors open else a spark could set the whole place ablaze.
carol Perry
Thanks for today's chuckle Alex.
Alex Guiness
read my smurfs comment. i just posted it
Lynn Silton
Mr. Ramaswamy is right in every way! I don't belong to the Woke Church. I'll never join.
America is an inspirational country as is all it's written declarations. We, the people rule.
No religion can overrule it. We will not allow religious 'honor killings.' They are murder
here. We will not allow Wokism here it is the murder of our hopes and dreams which belong to
everybody regardless of appearance. I don't even know how appearance (of all things) became a
religion. The whole thing is so sick, people of all shades are speaking out and we will put
this crazy idea down. Here, we marry across all appearances. New people are often different
in appearance than parents. Woke will die of that alone. That's why we have an immigration
'problem' . People love our constitution and Declaration of Independence. People love that
they rule here, not the government. That's our creed and promise. Help protect it!!
The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Mark Milley, responded sharply to questions
from Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., on Wednesday about the examination of critical race theory in the
U.S. military.
"I've read Mao Zedong. I've read Karl Marx. I've read Lenin. That doesn't make me a
communist. So what is wrong with understanding" having some situational understanding about the
country for which we are here to defend?" Milley said.
He continued brusquely: "And I personally find it offensive that we are accusing the United
States military, our general officers, our commissioned, noncommissioned officers of being,
quote, 'woke' or something else, because we're studying some theories that are out there."
C-SPAN captured Gaetz shaking his head while the Joint Chiefs chairman spoke.
The exchange came at a House Armed Services Committee hearing to discuss the 2022 Defense
Department budget.
Until recently, critical race theory was anything but a household phrase. Rather, it was
used to describe an approach to studying institutional racism, as NPR's
Barbara Sprunt has reported . But it has become a culture war issue, and the phrase has
been stretched well beyond its initial meaning, as conservatives in particular have used the
phrase to raise concerns about race in venues including state legislatures and local school
boards.
"... He defines "wokeism" as a creed that has arisen in America in response to the "moral vacuum" created by the ebbing from public life of faith, patriotism and "the identity we derived from hard work." He argues that notions like "diversity," "equity," "inclusion" and "sustainability" have come to take their place. ..."
"... "Our collective moral insecurities," Mr. Ramaswamy says, "have left us vulnerable" to the blandishments and propaganda of the new political and corporate elites, who are now locked in a cynical "arranged marriage, where each partner has contempt for the other." Each side is getting out of the "trade" something it "could not have gotten alone." ..."
"... Wokeness entered its union with capitalism in the years following the 2008 financial panic and recession. Mr. Ramaswamy believes that conditions were perfect for the match. "We were -- and are -- in the midst of the biggest intergenerational wealth transfer in history," he says. Barack Obama had just been elected the first black president. By the end of the crisis, Americans "were actually pretty jaded with respect to capitalism. Corporations were the bad guys. The old left wanted to take money from corporations and give it to poor people." ..."
"... The birth of wokeism was a godsend to corporations, Mr. Ramaswamy says. It helped defang the left. "Wokeism lent a lifeline to the people who were in charge of the big banks. They thought, 'This stuff is easy!' " They applauded diversity and inclusion, appointed token female and minority directors, and "mused about the racially disparate impact of climate change." So, in Mr. Ramaswamy's narrative, "a bunch of big banks got together with a bunch of millennials, birthed woke capitalism, and then put Occupy Wall Street up for adoption." Now, in Mr. Ramaswamy's tart verdict, "big business makes money by critiquing itself." ..."
"... Davos is "the Woke Vatican," Mr. Ramaswamy says; Al Gore and Larry Fink, CEO of BlackRock , are "its archbishops." CEOs "further down the chain" -- he mentions James Quincey of Coca-Cola , Ed Bastian of Delta , Marc Benioff of Salesforce , John Donahoe of Nike and Alan Jope of Unilever -- are its "cardinals." ..."
"... He describes this sort of corporate imposition -- "a market force supplanting open political debate to settle the essence of political questions" -- as one of the "defining challenges" America faces today. "If democracy means anything," he adds, "it means living in a one-person-one-vote system, not a one-dollar-one-vote system." Voters' voices "are unadjusted by the number of dollars we wield in the marketplace." Open debate in the public square is "our uniquely American mechanism" of settling political questions. He likens the woke-corporate silencing of debate as akin to the "old-world European model, where a small group of elites gets in a room and decides what's good for everyone else." ..."
"... The wokeism-capitalism embrace, Mr. Ramaswamy says, was replicated in Silicon Valley. Over the past few years, "Big Tech effectively agreed to censor -- or 'moderate' -- content that the woke movement didn't like. But they didn't do it for free." In return, the left "agreed to look the other way when it comes to leaving Silicon Valley's monopoly power intact." This arrangement is "working out masterfully" for both sides. ..."
"... Coca-Cola follows the same playbook, he says: "It's easier for them to issue statements about voting laws in Georgia, or to train their employees on how to 'be less white,' than it is to publicly reckon with its role in fueling a nationwide epidemic of diabetes and obesity -- including in the black communities they profess to care about so much." (In a statement, Coca-Cola apologized for the "be less white" admonition and said that while it was "accessible through our company training platform," it "was not a part of our training curriculum.") ..."
"... Nike finds it much easier to write checks to Black Lives Matter and condemn America's history of slavery, Mr. Ramaswamy says, even as it relies on "slave labor" today to sell "$250 sneakers to black kids in the inner city who can't afford to buy books for school." All the while, Black Lives Matter "neuters the police in a way that sacrifices even more black lives." (Nike has said in a statement that its code of conduct prohibits any use of forced labor and "we have been engaging with multi-stakeholder working groups to assess collective solutions that will help preserve the integrity of our global supply chains.") ..."
"... Mr. Varadarajan, a Journal contributor, is a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and at New York University Law School's Classical Liberal Institute. ..."
"... Seems to me in a nutshell he is saying that these woke corporations are all hypocrites. No surprise there hypocrisy is a defining characteristic of the woke left and you need to assume that characteristic yourself to be able to work within their bounds. ..."
"... Wokeists argue that theirs is not a religion because it doesn't center on a transcendent being. I see Wokeism as a religion that gathers multiple Secularist sects into a big tent. These sects include Environmentalism, Genderism, Anti-Racism, and more. ..."
"... One thing all religions share in common is the elevation of questionable premises to unassailable truths which they defend with religious zeal. Some questionable premises elevated to unassailable truths by Wokeism are that humans are making the Earth uninhabitable, gender is an individual choice, and race is the most important human characteristic. There are more. ..."
A self-made multimillionaire who founded a biotech company at 28, Vivek Ramaswamy is every
inch the precocious overachiever. He tells me he attended law school while he was in sixth
grade. He's joking, in his own earnest manner. His father, an aircraft engineer at General
Electric, had decided to get a law degree at night school. Vivek sat in on the classes with
him, so he could keep his dad company on the long car rides to campus and back -- a very Indian
filial act.
"I was probably the only person my age who'd heard of Antonin Scalia, " Mr. Ramaswamy, 35,
says in a Zoom call from his home in West Chester, Ohio. His father, a political liberal, would
often rage on the way home from class about "some Scalia opinion." Mr. Ramaswamy reckons that
this was when he began to form his own political ideas. A libertarian in high school, he
switched to being conservative at Harvard in "an act of rebellion" against the politics he
found there. That conservatism drove him to step down in January as CEO at Roivant Sciences --
the drug-development company that made him rich -- and write "Woke, Inc," a book that takes a
scathing look at "corporate America's social-justice scam." (It will be published in
August.)
Mr. Ramaswamy recently watched the movie "Spotlight," which tells the story of how reporters
at the Boston Globe exposed misconduct (specifically, sexual abuse) by Catholic priests in the
early 2000s. "My goal in 'Woke, Inc.' is to do the same thing with respect to the Church of
Wokeism." He defines "wokeism" as a creed that has arisen in America in response to the "moral
vacuum" created by the ebbing from public life of faith, patriotism and "the identity we
derived from hard work." He argues that notions like "diversity," "equity," "inclusion" and
"sustainability" have come to take their place.
"Our collective moral insecurities," Mr. Ramaswamy says, "have left us vulnerable" to the
blandishments and propaganda of the new political and corporate elites, who are now locked in a
cynical "arranged marriage, where each partner has contempt for the other." Each side is
getting out of the "trade" something it "could not have gotten alone."
Wokeness entered its union with capitalism in the years following the 2008 financial panic
and recession. Mr. Ramaswamy believes that conditions were perfect for the match. "We were --
and are -- in the midst of the biggest intergenerational wealth transfer in history," he says.
Barack Obama had just been elected the first black president. By the end of the crisis,
Americans "were actually pretty jaded with respect to capitalism. Corporations were the bad
guys. The old left wanted to take money from corporations and give it to poor people."
The birth of wokeism was a godsend to corporations, Mr. Ramaswamy says. It helped defang the
left. "Wokeism lent a lifeline to the people who were in charge of the big banks. They thought,
'This stuff is easy!' " They applauded diversity and inclusion, appointed token female and
minority directors, and "mused about the racially disparate impact of climate change." So, in
Mr. Ramaswamy's narrative, "a bunch of big banks got together with a bunch of millennials,
birthed woke capitalism, and then put Occupy Wall Street up for adoption." Now, in Mr.
Ramaswamy's tart verdict, "big business makes money by critiquing itself."
Mr. Ramaswamy regards Klaus Schwab, founder and CEO of the World Economic Forum in Davos,
Switzerland, as the "patron saint of wokeism" for his relentless propagation of "stakeholder
capitalism" -- the view that the unspoken bargain in the grant to corporations of limited
liability is that they "must do social good on the side."
Davos is "the Woke Vatican," Mr. Ramaswamy says; Al Gore and Larry Fink, CEO of BlackRock , are "its
archbishops." CEOs "further down the chain" -- he mentions James Quincey of Coca-Cola , Ed Bastian of Delta , Marc Benioff of
Salesforce , John
Donahoe of Nike and
Alan Jope of Unilever
-- are its "cardinals."
Mr. Ramaswamy says that "unlike the investigative 'Spotlight' team at the Boston Globe, I'm
a whistleblower, not a journalist. But the church analogy holds strong." He paraphrases a line
in the movie: "It takes a village to raise a child, then it takes a village to abuse one. In
the case of my book, the child I'm concerned about is American democracy."
In league with the woke left, corporate America "uses force" as a substitute for open
deliberation and debate, Mr. Ramaswamy says. "There's the sustainability accounting standards
board of BlackRock, which effectively demands that in order to win an investment from
BlackRock, the largest asset-manager in the world, you must abide by the standards of that
board."
Was the board put in place by the owners of the trillions of dollars of capital that Mr.
Fink manages? Of course not, Mr. Ramaswamy says. "And yet he's actually using his seat of
corporate power to sidestep debate about questions like environmentalism or diversity on
boards."
The irrepressible Mr. Ramaswamy presses on with another example. Goldman Sachs , he says with obvious relish,
"is a very Davos-fitting example." At the 2020 World Economic Forum, Goldman Sachs CEO David
Solomon "issued an edict from the mountaintops of Davos." Mr. Solomon announced his company
would refuse to take a company public if its board wasn't sufficiently diverse. "So Goldman
gets to define what counts as 'diverse,' " Mr. Ramaswamy says. "No doubt, they're referring to
skin-deep, genetically inherited attributes."
He describes this sort of corporate imposition -- "a market force supplanting open political
debate to settle the essence of political questions" -- as one of the "defining challenges"
America faces today. "If democracy means anything," he adds, "it means living in a
one-person-one-vote system, not a one-dollar-one-vote system." Voters' voices "are unadjusted
by the number of dollars we wield in the marketplace." Open debate in the public square is "our
uniquely American mechanism" of settling political questions. He likens the woke-corporate
silencing of debate as akin to the "old-world European model, where a small group of elites
gets in a room and decides what's good for everyone else."
The wokeism-capitalism embrace, Mr. Ramaswamy says, was replicated in Silicon Valley. Over
the past few years, "Big Tech effectively agreed to censor -- or 'moderate' -- content that the
woke movement didn't like. But they didn't do it for free." In return, the left "agreed to look
the other way when it comes to leaving Silicon Valley's monopoly power intact." This
arrangement is "working out masterfully" for both sides.
The rest of corporate America appears to be following suit. "There's a Big Pharma version,
too," Mr. Ramaswamy says. "Big Pharma had an epiphany in dealing with the left." It couldn't
beat them, so it joined them. "Rather than win the debate on drug pricing, they decided to just
change the subject instead. Who needs to win a debate if you can just avoid having it?" So we
see "big-time pharma CEOs musing about topics like racial justice and environmentalism, and
writing multibillion-dollar checks to fight climate change, while taking price hikes that
they'd previously paused when the public was angry about drug pricing."
Coca-Cola follows the same playbook, he says: "It's easier for them to issue statements
about voting laws in Georgia, or to train their employees on how to 'be less white,' than it is
to publicly reckon with its role in fueling a nationwide epidemic of diabetes and obesity --
including in the black communities they profess to care about so much." (In a statement,
Coca-Cola apologized
for the "be less white" admonition and said that while it was "accessible through our company
training platform," it "was not a part of our training curriculum.")
Nike finds it much easier to write checks to Black Lives Matter and condemn America's
history of slavery, Mr. Ramaswamy says, even as it relies on "slave labor" today to sell "$250
sneakers to black kids in the inner city who can't afford to buy books for school." All the
while, Black Lives Matter "neuters the police in a way that sacrifices even more black lives."
(Nike has said in a statement that its code of conduct prohibits any use of forced labor and
"we have been engaging with multi-stakeholder working groups to assess collective solutions
that will help preserve the integrity of our global supply chains.")
... ... ...
Mr. Varadarajan, a Journal contributor, is a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute
and at New York University Law School's Classical Liberal Institute.
Rod Drake 53 minutes ago
Seems to me in a nutshell he is saying that these woke corporations are all hypocrites. No
surprise there hypocrisy is a defining characteristic of the woke left and you need to assume
that characteristic yourself to be able to work within their bounds.
In addition, I have been
saying for some time discrimination based on political belief desperately needs to be
included as a prohibited basis. Where are the Republicans, while the greatest civil rights
violation of our time is going on right under their noses?
Terry Overbey 1 hour ago
I love reading stories about people who are willing to take on the woke political class. For
most people, even if they strongly disagree, their only option is to bite their tongue and go
along. People aren't stupid. If you buck the system, you don't get promoted, you don't get
good grades, you don't get into elite schools, you don't get the government job.
Thank you Mr Ramaswany.
James Ransom 1 hour ago
Well. If nothing else, he just sold me a book. I think we should say that "Wokeism" tries to
"Act Like" a religion, not that it is one. Because of this fakery, we do not need to give it
"freedom" in the sense that we have "Freedom of Religion."
These misguided Americans perhaps need to be exposed to a real religion. Christianity and
Buddhism would be good choices; I don't know about Hinduism, but my point is that "Wokeism"
is more like a mental disorder. We should feel sorry for its victims, offer them treatment,
but not let them run anything.
marc goodman 1 hour ago
Wokeists argue that theirs is not a religion because it doesn't center on a transcendent
being. I see Wokeism as a religion that gathers multiple Secularist sects into a big tent.
These sects include Environmentalism, Genderism, Anti-Racism, and more.
One thing all religions share in common is the elevation of questionable premises to
unassailable truths which they defend with religious zeal. Some questionable premises
elevated to unassailable truths by Wokeism are that humans are making the Earth
uninhabitable, gender is an individual choice, and race is the most important human
characteristic. There are more.
Humans need to believe in something greater than themselves. We fulfill this need with
religion, and historically, the "greater something" has been a transcendent being. Wokeism
fulfills this need for its adherents but without a transcendent being. Ultimately, Wokeism
will fail as a religion because it can't nourish the soul like the belief in a transcendent
being does.
Grodney Ross 2 hours ago (Edited)
Judgement will be passed in November of 2022. I don't see this as a Democrat vs Republican
issue. I think it's a matter of who is paying attention vs. those who are not. We live in a
society where, generally, the most strident voices are on the left, along with the most
judgmental voices. When the "wokeless" engage in a manner that conflicts with views of the
woke, they are attacked, be you from the left or the right, so you keep your mouth shut and go
about your day.
I believe that this coming election will give voice to those who are fatigued and fed up
with the progressive lefts venom and vitriol. If not, we will survive, but without a meaningful
first amendment,14th amendment, or 2nd amendment.
Barbara Helton 2 hours ago (Edited)
Being woke, when practiced by the wealthy and influential, can be extremely similar to
bullying.
"... It helped defang the left. "Wokeism lent a lifeline to the people who were in charge of the big banks. They thought, 'This stuff is easy!' " They applauded diversity and inclusion, appointed token female and minority directors, and "mused about the racially disparate impact of climate change." So, in Mr. Ramaswamy's narrative, "a bunch of big banks got together with a bunch of millennials, birthed woke capitalism, and then put Occupy Wall Street up for adoption." Now, in Mr. Ramaswamy's tart verdict, "big business makes money by critiquing itself." ..."
"... Davos is "the Woke Vatican," Mr. Ramaswamy says; Al Gore and Larry Fink, CEO of BlackRock , are "its archbishops." CEOs "further down the chain" -- he mentions James Quincey of Coca-Cola , Ed Bastian of Delta , Marc Benioff of Salesforce , John Donahoe of Nike and Alan Jope of Unilever -- are its "cardinals." ..."
It helped defang the left. "Wokeism lent a lifeline to the people who were in charge of
the big banks. They thought, 'This stuff is easy!' " They applauded diversity and inclusion,
appointed token female and minority directors, and "mused about the racially disparate impact
of climate change." So, in Mr. Ramaswamy's narrative, "a bunch of big banks got together with a
bunch of millennials, birthed woke capitalism, and then put Occupy Wall Street up for
adoption." Now, in Mr. Ramaswamy's tart verdict, "big business makes money by critiquing
itself."
Mr. Ramaswamy regards Klaus Schwab, founder and CEO of the World Economic Forum in Davos,
Switzerland, as the "patron saint of wokeism" for his relentless propagation of "stakeholder
capitalism" -- the view that the unspoken bargain in the grant to corporations of limited
liability is that they "must do social good on the side."
Davos is "the Woke Vatican," Mr. Ramaswamy says; Al Gore and Larry Fink, CEO of
BlackRock , are "its
archbishops." CEOs "further down the chain" -- he mentions James Quincey of Coca-Cola , Ed Bastian of Delta , Marc Benioff of
Salesforce , John
Donahoe of Nike and
Alan Jope of Unilever
-- are its "cardinals."
That Leftist "wokeism" is the brainchild of a religious cult should've been obvious decades
ago. The purely religious belief in anthropogenic global warming, for example, which closely
mimics the spiritual rituals of ancient cultures by worshiping nature over man. The hierarchy
of color and gender as fetishes through which human relative value can be determined also
mimics the hierarchy of priests or shamans in other religions. Thus, a fairly vapid group
like BLM is exalted based purely on the melanin content of their skin, even though their
claims are ridiculously flawed (They "care" about the lives of 90 or so armed felons killed
by police, but call the 7,000+ black people killed by Blacks a "distraction"). Like many
religions that plagued humanity throughout history, they will torment and punish all
"deniers." Four years of the Trump Presidency made this clear. He faced the Grand Inquisition
because he refused to kneel.
Wokism is an attempt on financial elite to distract and divide and distruct people from the
crisi of neoliberalism in the USA. This is a pretty dirty game.
There are lots of reasons why wokeism spread like wildfire once America lost its collective
mind during the pandemic, quarantine, self-induced recession, and rioting of 2020.
Wokeism was never really about racism, sexism, or other -isms. Instead, for some, it
illustrated a psychological pathology of projection: fobbing one's own concrete prejudices onto
others in order to alleviate or mask them.
So should we laugh or cry that Black Lives Matter's self-described Marxist co-founder turns
out to be a corporate grifter?
Patrisse Cullors has accumulated several upscale homes and is under investigation by the IRS
for allegations of the misuse of funds from one of her foundations.
Is it the case that the more Cullors professes Marxist ideology and damns toxic whiteness,
so all the more she feels at home living in a $1.4 million Topanga Canyon home, in an almost
exclusively ritzy white neighborhood?
Consider outspoken liberal icon Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.). He's one of the
Senate's most woke. Yet Whitehouse turns out to be a mostly unapologetic member of a de facto
all-white prestigious "beach club" of elites in Newport, Rhode Island. Is Whitehouse committed
in the abstract to rooting out white privilege so he can concretely relax amid it with fellow
bluebloods?
Barack and Michelle Obama occasionally venture out of either their multimillion-dollar
Washington, D.C. mansion or their Martha's Vineyard estate to lecture the country on its
systemic racism. They express worry over the dangers that apparently white people pose to the
very safety of their own daughters.
Does such sermonizing square the circle that the Obamas have no desire to return to their
Chicago home""a city where nearly 700 African-American males were murdered in 2020, the vast
majority by other black men? So far, Chicago in 2021 is on a trajectory to suffer over 30
percent more murder victims than last year.
Joe Biden about every two weeks lectures America on its racism. And he unleashed the
bureaucracies of the federal government to root out mythical white supremacist
conspiracies.
Does Medieval penance explain Biden's fixation on systemic racism? After all, when he
condemns anonymous white racists, does his outrage mitigate his son Hunter's habitual use of
the N-word and anti-Asian riffs?
No Washington politico has compiled a longer record of racialist put downs than Joe Biden.
So apparently, the more Biden hunts for a white racist under every bed, the less necessary it
becomes to look in the mirror or at least to beg his son Hunter to knock off his racist
slurs.
The second catalyst of wokeism is the distraction it provides from scary problems that
threaten the very existence of American civilization. While the country consumes itself in
demanding more than 12 percent representation of black actors in television commercials, it is
nearing $30 trillion in national debt. Eventually, the astounding red ink will require
recessionary belt-tightening, more inflationary money printing, or both.
The woke Biden Administration cannot stop 2 million immigrants this year from crossing
illegally and with exemption into the United States. Almost all are in need of free American
health care, housing, food, and legal subsidies. Violent crime is spiking at an astonishing
rate. Yet few dare say why that is""or how to stop it.
America also cannot face the likely truth that Chinese researchers engineered a
gain-of-function virus""with oversight from the Communist Chinese military, and subsidies from
Drs. Anthony Fauci and Peter Daszak.
So instead of offering real solutions to these crises, we war with each other whether the
deceased children's book author Dr. Seuss or the plastic toy Mr. Potato Head was racist or
otherwise exclusionary.
When our elites are clueless about national debt, inflation, illegal immigration, crime,
soaring gas prices, and a global pandemic, they reassure themselves that at least they can
cancel out Father JunÃpero Serra or knock down another statue of Robert E. Lee.
Finally, the hysterias of wokism are being channeled for profit""if they do not already
reflect the reality of many of our most woke being the richest among us.
One reason why Oprah Winfrey, Meghan Markle, and LeBron James hype charges of white racism
is that their oppression reminds America that one can become rich as Croesus yet remain
sympathetic victims.
For next-generation grifters, like Ibram Xolani Kendi (a.k.a. Ibram Henry Rogers) and Robin
DiAngelo, to claim that America was, is, and always will be racist, means more than just
speaking gigs and book sales.
The solutions for the pseudo-crises they invent are mass reeducation of self-confessional
whites""with lucrative consulting fees for both, and tens of thousands of others.
America is systematically being conned by those who disguise their hypocrisy, who manipulate
the guilt-ridden, who have no interest in solving America's most dangerous problems, and who
get or stay richer by hyping an America in need of massive rebooting - and with it their own
careerist remedies.
It seems that the wokesters who claim that they are "anti-racists" still can't tolerate the
memory of a man who defeated history's most murderous racist. The Thursday defacing of a statue
in Canada is the latest effort to cancel Hitler's implacable foe.
A Downtown statue of Sir Winston Churchill has been vandalized after someone dumped red paint
all across the replica of the former British prime minister...
Churchill, who served as prime minister from 1940 to 1945 and again from 1951 to 1955, is
seen as a national hero for his leadership during the Second World War but held many views
that would be deemed racist.
Perhaps the 20th century's greatest adversary of communist and fascist dictatorships,
Churchill has of course been found wanting by today's dictators of political fashion. This
week's vandalism follows several such instances over the last year involving a U.K. statue of
Churchill in London's Parliament Square. In Canada, Mr. Labine reports:
Elisebeth Checkel, the president of the Sir Winston Churchill Society of Edmonton, said this
is the first instance of the statue being vandalized that she's heard of and was disappointed
to see it happen.
She said Churchill has a complicated legacy and believes it is important to look at him in a
balanced way.
"If we look at any historical figure, we will find the same thing," Checkel said. "If we look
at almost any person from the 1880s, we would find their views were if not repugnant to us
nowadays, we would find they were disagreeable for sure. If you look at Churchill's later
actions and life as he grew, as we all hope to do, his views did change. The balance should
be celebrated because without Churchill we would not even have the right to protest in this
country."
Licia Corbella
writes in the Calgary Herald that this week's vandalism of the statue is "another act of
woke totalitarianism." She adds:
Mark Milke, president of the Sir Winston Churchill Society of Calgary, says it's chilling to
contemplate what the world would be like now had Churchill not been there.
"Imagine if Churchill hadn't been there and the United Kingdom either did a peace treaty with
Hitler or fell during an invasion," said Milke...
"Nazi Germany would have controlled much of Europe... with the Soviet Union controlling the
other half and Imperial Japan raping Asia. Canada and the U.S. would have been pretty much
alone in the world..."
"Churchill is not a Civil War general from the South fighting to protect slavery. He's not
Joseph Stalin or Chairman Mao or Adolf Hitler," continued Milke.
No he's not. In fact Churchill was a stalwart opponent of the ideologies promoted by all
three of the 20th century's most infamous mass murderers. "For the historically illiterate who
like to throw paint on statues," Ms. Corbella notes the bloody legacy of Churchill's enemies
and adds:
What never seems to get mentioned is these statues are works of art. This destruction is not
unlike the Taliban destroying the Buddhas of Bamiyan in 2001. These woke folk are
Talibanesque.
As for Churchill, Ms. Corbella asks: "If we allow his legacy to be torn down, whose, pray
tell, can stand?"
Fortunately Ms. Corbella is not standing alone. Alberta Premier Jason Kenney tweets :
People should continue to debate Churchill's complex legacy & record, but vandalizing
public property like this is shameful.
No member of the greatest generation can meet the standards of contemporary wokeness. But we
should still honour those who secured our peace and freedom.
Canadian Parliament member Pierre Poilievre adds :
Don't schools teach history anymore?
Now the woke warriors attack the statue of Winston Churchill--the greatest anti-fascist of
all time. He beat Hitler and Mussolini for crying out loud.
Do these vandals wish he had lost?
Coincidentally it was on this day 81 years ago when Churchill addressed the British House of
Commons after the German army had overrun France. Said
Churchill:
I expect that the Battle of Britain is about to begin. Upon this battle depends the survival
of Christian civilization. Upon it depends our own British life, and the long continuity of
our institutions and our Empire. The whole fury and might of the enemy must very soon be
turned on us. Hitler knows that he will have to break us in this Island or lose the war. If
we can stand up to him, all Europe may be free and the life of the world may move forward
into broad, sunlit uplands. But if we fail, then the whole world, including the United
States, including all that we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new
Dark Age made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science.
Let us therefore brace ourselves to our duties, and so bear ourselves that, if the British
Empire and its Commonwealth last for a thousand years, men will still say, "This was their
finest hour."
If wokesterism could last for a thousand years, would it ever result in a great
civilization?
"Stop indoctrinating our children. Stop teaching our children to hate the police. Stop
teaching our children that if they don't agree with the LGBT community that they're homophobic.
You have no idea each child's life," she said, adding "You don't know what their family
lifestyle consists of, you don't know the makeup of their life."
https://youtu.be/zxu3wdiXRF0
Ibrahim shut down school board members' objections several times - in between calling out
two teachers for posting their political beliefs online. When board members told her she wasn't
allowed to reference people by name, Ibrahim claimed those teachers called "for the death of a
former president," and that students who don't support Black Lives Matter should be "canceled
out."
"Why are we not allowed to say names? Why am I not allowed when they purposefully expose
themselves on social media, talking about calling for the death of a former president, or
saying that any child who doesn't believe in Black Lives Matter should be canceled out. Is this
what my tax dollars are paying for?" she asked.
"You're emotionally abusing our children and mentally abusing them," Ibrahim continued
RDinSC 1 hour ago
Never vote for anyone at any level of political office who does not openly and sincerely
oppose CRT and any and all woke indoctrination.
RedDog1 1 hour ago
I'm a super anti-racist. I'm especially against woke neo-racism.
BLOTTO 52 minutes ago (Edited)
Wait until she finds out that Drag Queen Roxy is reading 'The Hips on the DQ go swish
swish swish' to the kids at the local library.
Pooper Popper 1 hour ago
She Rocks!!!!!
Bang!!
high5mail 36 minutes ago
When I listen to this woman and look around me at all the fools who buy into the
"system" as it is, too scared to do what she is doing, it saddens me at the apathy and
cowardice of the general public which will sell their souls for protection on a non deadly
virus and take an unproved vaccine to virtue signal.
She is a modern day Joan of Arc. I would stand beside her in an instant. How many others
would do that or demand the same things she is demanding? Most are too busy trying to
figure out what gender they think they should be or trying on racist social agendas in the
"woke" category.
Some quotes by notable feminists, not all of whom are women:
The nuclear family must be destroyed Whatever its ultimate meaning, the break-up of
families now is an objectively revolutionary process. Linda Gordon
I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth,
like an apple in the mouth of a pig. Andrea Dworkin
The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the
human race. Sally Miller Gearhart, in The Future – If There Is One – Is
Female
If life is to survive on this planet, there must be a decontamination of the Earth. I
think this will be accompanied by an evolutionary process that will result in a drastic
reduction of the population of males. Mary Daly
If anyone is prosecuted for filing a false [sexual assault] report, then victims of
real attacks will be less likely to report them. David Angier
Men who are unjustly accused of rape can sometimes gain from the experience.
Catherine Comins
Two GOP lawmakers this
week launched a campaign calling on whistleblowers in the military to come forward with their
experiences in training programs that promote critical race theory or "diversity, equity, and
inclusion."
"We won't let our military fall to woke ideology," Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas), a former
Navy SEAL, wrote in a tweet on Friday while
linking to a website
where informants can submit their accounts.
"With written permission, we will anonymously publish egregious complaints on social media
and tell the country what's happening in our military."
"For too long, progressive Pentagon staffers have been calling the shots for our
warfighters," said Crenshaw about the web page posted in conjunction with Sen. Tom Cotton
(R-Ark.), a former Army captain.
House Homeland Security Committee member Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas) speaks during a hearing
in the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill in Washington, on Sept. 17, 2020. (Chip
Somodevilla/Getty Images)
They hope that service members "will anonymously publish egregious complaints on social
media" in order to "tell the country what's happening in our military," according to
Crenshaw.
"Progressive Pentagon staffers have been calling the shots for our warfighters," the
lawmaker added, "and spineless military commanders have let it happen. Now we are going to
expose you."
Earlier this month, the U.S. Space Force confirmed it relieved Lt. Col. Matthew Lohmeier of
his duties after he alleged that Marxism and critical race theory -- which draws heavy
inspiration from Marxist critical theory -- are both being spread in the military via training
courses that are required by Department of Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and other high-level
officials.
"Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting, Space Operations Command commander, relieved Lt. Col. Matthew
Lohmeier of command of the 11th Space Warning Squadron, Buckley Air Force Base, Colorado, May
14, due to loss of trust and confidence in his ability to lead," the Space Force said in
mid-May, adding that Lohmeier's remarks in a podcast and in his self-published book
"constituted prohibited partisan political activity." The Space Force's statement didn't
provide an example.
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) speaks during a hearing to examine United States Special Operations
Command and United States Cyber Command, on Capitol Hill in Washington on March 25, 2021.
(Andrew Harnik-Pool/Getty Images)
Last week, Lohmeier met with Cotton, who tweeted after their meeting
that he's concerned "by what I heard" and promised to press "senior military leaders for
answers."
Critical race theory denounces U.S. and Western culture as a systematic form of oppression
that negatively impacts minority groups. Critics of the ideology -- which is sometimes referred
to as being "woke" -- have said its proponents apply the Marxist tactic of "class struggle" to
divide people along lines of race, gender, and ethnicity to label them "oppressors" and the
"oppressed."
At the state level, legislatures and governors have taken action against critical race
theory as well as The New York Times' "1619 Project," by barring them from being promoted in
schools and in government institutions.
The governors of Tennessee, Idaho, Arkansas, and Oklahoma have already signed anti-critical
race theory bills. In Texas, Arizona, and Iowa, similar measures have been proposed,
according to an analysis .
DonGenaro PREMIUM 2 hours ago
Crenshaw is a neocon *****.
I have more respect for Leftists - at least one knows where they stand.
Rid'n Dirty 2 hours ago
I'm glad to get help from anywhere it comes from but Cotton is a tool of Paul Singer the
greatest vulture capitalist in America. Singer destroyed Cabelas and their employees of 40
years to force a buyout by BassPro. Singer walked off with over $100 million for doing
nothing.
Cotton never saw any part of the illegal surveillance state that he wouldn't vote for,
eagerly. The guy with the eye patch is controlled by the same NeoCons. Who represents
us?
Giant Meteor 2 hours ago
Generally speaking this is called controlled opposition, or as I like to call it, really
fake **** ...
Rashomon 2 hours ago (Edited)
The level of absurdity here is astounding. The fact that so called representatives are
having to ask military personnel to snitch on "wokeness" is proof in and of itself that we
are in clown world. Nevermind that wokeness is even a thing.
vasilievich 1 hour ago (Edited)
BTW, not all Catholics are monsters out of the Inquisition. My wife and I are regular
attenders at Mass, readers at morning Mass a day every other week. One of our relatives has
been a missionary priest in Brazil for a missionary order. I have no reason to believe that
they're not very good and self-giving people. We know the faults of some members of the
Church, including priests. We don't worship them, idealize them. We should pray for their
reform, as I was just reading last night in Matthew, and we won't leave God in His
Sacraments because of them.
Krink26 2 hours ago
Obama more than decimated the flag officer ranks and replaced them with his yes men. It
has come home to roost. This isn't something that just appeared with the new admin, it's
just gone hypersonic. One of my closest friends retired about three years ago a highly
decorated Navy pilot in JSOC. I clearly remember him talk a lot about this in 2013-14 - the
start of Obama's second term. (The same time I witnessed my corporate environment become a
woke hell) I stayed with him earlier in the month and he told me that he knew two seals
that are leaving because of this crap. One with 14 years and the other with 17 years in.
That's talent, grit and experience you don't want to lose because of inclusivity.
PhilLeotardo 1 hour ago
Crenshaw carries water for Israel. That's all you need to know about this clown.
taglady 2 hours ago
Crenshaw pushed red flag laws and censoring of college students on the Israel issue.
"... The Black Liberation Movement has made millionaires out of their grifter leaders and enabled the left to remain in power in every city in which rioting occurred. Their local opposition has been cleansed or cowed into submission. The movement continues its success as seen by its adoption by corporations seeking to reduce the power and influence of middle class Americans and by politicians seeking to entrence their power electorally. ..."
The continuing hypocrisy of Black Lives Matter was displayed vividly over the past
weekend– BLM
declared solidarity with Hamas but said nothing about a slew of murders and shootings
targeting black
communities .
There were at least 11 mass shootings in the country over the weekend that combined left
at least 17 people dead and 35 more wounded, according to CNN reporting and an analysis of
data from Gun Violence Archive (GVA),
local media and police reports.
I found it curious that none of the reporting made any mention about the race of the victims
or the perpetrators. Left me wondering so I did some digging. It appears that the majority of
these mass shootings involved black Americans as perpetrators or victims.
At least 55 people were shot across Chicago over the weekend, 12 of them fatally,
including a 15-year-old boy who
was shot in the head on the front porch of a home in Lawndale, and three double
homicides.
These shootings took place in predominantly black neighborhoods.
Of course. Much political and social capital has been squandered in recent years, all in
an attempt to adumbrate the singular reality that the deeply engrained social pathologies
in the "black community" have more to do with their failure to thrive than white systemic
racism does. We, meaning white America, cannot help them with this no matter how much self
abnegation we indulge in. Black America needs to adopt standards of belief and behavior
that are socially, culturally, and economically functional and they need to teach their
children those values. I have seen this happen with a certain fragment of that demographic,
but it needs to happen more widely. This may be offensive to some readers, but there is
truth in it.
Reply
Do blacks themselves need to be uniquely empowered (and protected) to speak up against
black on black violence? What has prevented the peace-seeking black community members from
taking charge of their own neighborhoods.
What Reign of Terror are they living under that those of us outside these communities do
not understand.
Latino gangs terrorize latino communities as well. The violent tyranny of the few
against the decent lives of the many is very, very wrong and should not exist in our
country. But it is a daily reality in our rapidly devolving inner city neighborhoods.
Reply
These minority neighborhoods can't have it both ways:
They can't object to successful methods like stop and frisk and then complain
about crime. "Snitches get stiches" is another "cute" saying encouraging crime.
After a time trying to help people who won't help themselves and are often openly
hostile, the cops grow cynical and less proactive; can you blame them?
Because it's "racist" to criticize any form of minority behavior, there can not be an
honest discussion about solutions to this problem and the beat goes on.
People (including the self-hating, phony "guilty" white liberals, BTW) who can live in
segregated neighborhoods continue to live in segregated neighborhoods.
I used to live in CT – very liberal blue state – totally segregated; BLM
signs on the "right" lawns.
Reply
TV
Yes here in Mpls the same blue haired tattooed
Nose ring wokes make up a large majority of
The BLM protests. The obligatory signs festoon
Whole neighborhoods. Do they march or picket
The areas where the majority of the shootings occur
And whose victims are all black? Ha! Too dangerous.
The near North side aka Nomi has had continuous
Gunfire for near 1200 days. Now they have running
Gun battles with "Ak" type fully automatic weapons.
It's become a tragedy writ large. Not a virtue
Signal to be seen.
Reply
Yes, it's hard to believe that so many are taken in by the rhetoric of Black Lives
Matter when there's evidence on a near-daily basis of black-on-black violence and murder.
It's truly a crime that so-called leaders don't decry it and demand a call to action for it
to stop, a crime that there's so little public discourse about underclass blacks basically
exterminating each other with impunity. It's a taboo subject, and can't be broached without
accusations of racism. We only hear righteous outrage when a member of the black underclass
is killed by a cop.
Reply
Why does the charge of "racism" cause so many to immediately recoil and retreat? It is
just a word, yet it has risen to weaponized effectiveness.
What does this word trigger in so many people who will immediately back down and
retreat. Pretty powerful tool -until more don't blink and don't stand down at its mere
mention.
Always felt there was an implied threat of "black violence' that accompanied every one
of Obama's political moves. We need to cleanse that threat out of our own psyches or else
this nation will be held hostage by a mere word.
Reply
Isn't this an interesting bit of Democrat deja vu, including charges of rigged
voting machines in 2008 the GOP would use to prevent Obama from winning and thereby
triggering a Second Civil War -- "the streets will run with blood .if Obama loses
.."
Thanks to two great political pundits – Erica Jong and Jane Fonda. They did
capture the zeitgeist of the times however, and continue to do so. The threat of black
violence, if you don't do what we went.
Fast forward to 2020 – and the world yet again feared "the streets would run
with blood", but this if Trump won re-election and Democrat Biden did not win.
But this time it bloody well appears it was the Democrats who rigged the voting
processes. Yet again it appears it is the Democrats accusing the GOP of what they were
already doing themselves.
Reply
The Black Liberation Movement has made millionaires out of their grifter leaders and
enabled the left to remain in power in every city in which rioting occurred. Their local
opposition has been cleansed or cowed into submission. The movement continues its success
as seen by its adoption by corporations seeking to reduce the power and influence of middle
class Americans and by politicians seeking to entrence their power electorally.
Some people who were black were shot by others who were black? Quit saying that, you,
you, what's the word: racist!; as none of that has been proved in court. Did any of these
'leaders' care about all those shootings in the Sanctuary City of Chicago when President
Hope and Change was in charge? (2016)
Total shootings 4379 Shot and wounded 3664 Shot and killed: 715
Assailant race by percentage
Whoa: you're saying the left behaves hypocritically and is willing to take losses in
order to get what they want?
Such insight!
Ethnic hypocrisy is the ancient problem here, but this focus on contemporary black
antics obscures the issue and is simply another avoidance strategy.
The recent missile duel in the eastern Mediterranean has shown that white conservatives
are more willing to stand up for the safety of non- or dual-citizens overseas than they are
for safety of their own white constituents, whom they refuse even to name.
There is nothing wrong with Obama with his financial success to buy in predominantly
white Martha's Vineyard. The question that blacks should ask however is are those leaders
who use racism and race to gain political power doing much to alleviate the social and
economic issues they face?
There are many successful blacks in all walks of life. Why aren't they celebrated and
used as role models instead of someone like George Floyd?
Reply
When you first went on the "BLM website" you immediately were linked to ActBlue
– a fund-raising arm of the Democrat party. There was no independent or "private"
donation link for BLM. Calling BLM "private" in this case would be a stretch for me
after that initial experience with BLM.
So the bigger question is, why is the State Dept etc pushing an arm of the Democrat
Party fund-raising machine within government operations? Did BLM formally dissociate
completely with ActBlue?
Reply
Because the State Dept., like the rest of the Democrat party, has accelerated
faster and faster to the left.
They've been selling out America for decades and now, like the rest of the Democrat
party, the last mask has dropped.
Reply
Having grown up in Chicago and still living nearby I would say "predominantly black"
neighborhoods is a media fiction, part of the narrative to displace the blame onto others
than black. I assure you these are black neighborhoods, once white now ruined for
generations. I have sympathy for blacks, so much so that I suggest we organize to supply as
much ammo as possible to help them rid the hood of evil doers. Mostly 9mm, drop off crates
in front of playgrounds and street corners so they can be easily found.
Reply
Larry's point that BLM doesn't care about Black lives is graphically shown and described
by this Officer Tatum podcast (it's short) of local newscasts, not shown by national news,
of Black children murdered by Blacks.
"You can never be woke enough, that's the problem," Rogan stated in a recent conversation with stand-up comedian Joe List about
the effect cancel culture is having on comedy.
"It keeps going. It keeps going further and further and further down the line, and if you get to the point where you capitulate,
where you agree to all these demands, it'll eventually get to straight white men are not allowed to talk ," he added.
"Because it's your privilege to express yourself when other people of colour have been silenced throughout history," Rogan continued,
emphasising the justification of woke proponents.
"It will be, you're not allowed to go outside. Because so many people were imprisoned," Rogan continued, adding "I'm not joking,
it really will get there. It's that crazy."
"We just gotta be nice to each other, man. And there's a lot of people that are taking advantage of this weirdness in our culture,
and then that becomes their thing. Their thing is calling people out for their privilege, calling people out for their position.
You know, so, it's f***ing crazy times."
The topic is a continuation of a conversation Rogan had
last
week with Dave Chappelle , who said he hopes 'we all survive' cancel culture.
The host was immediately proven on point by the woke mob on Twitter who took issue with Rogan believing it's a bad thing that
straight white men are being silenced, and some failing to be able to hold more than one thought in their head at once:
In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch. We need you to sign up for our free newsletter
here . Support our sponsor –
Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.
Also, we urgently need your financial support here
.
The Biden Administration has gone out of its way to show itself as absolutely
"woke-compatible" and even as a champion of "wokeness" (Foggy Bottom has just allowed US
embassies and consulates to fly the "gay pride" flag next to the Stars and Stripes. I bet you
they won't do that in Riyadh!). According to the hyper-politically correct Wikipedia , "woke" refers to the "
awareness of issues that concern social justice and racial justice ". This definition
is, however, misleading because, for example, it clearly is not intended to cover, say, social
injustice meted out to poor whites. In other words, wokeness is a one way street. What wokeness
does mandate is for my son (who is studying biology) to be told in his class that he is the
carrier of "white guilt" even though his ancestors never interacted with blacks, let alone
blacks in the USA.
As I have mentioned in the past, I do not consider categories such as "black" or "white" as
analytically helpful since they are not properly defined. That, however, does not mean that I
am not willing to use them in a specific context where the parties to an ideological dispute
refer to themselves, or to others, as black or white. By the way, "Asian" is another useless
category as, depending on whom you ask, it would include Pakistanis (who sure ain't yellow) and
lump them together with (brown) Indonesians and (yellow) Japanese people. The fact that these
categories are used in the western political discourse means that I cannot ignore them solely
because I find them ambiguous and misleading. Furthermore, the category "African" whether used
with "American" or not, is not helpful either since it would include people otherwise
considered white; say Elon Musk, even though nobody thinks of Musk as African-American.
Finally, the category black might include Tamils or Australian aborigines, but it is rarely, if
ever, used in that sense. Thus, when I will use the words black or white below, it will be in
the largely accepted US meaning of "descendants of African slaves" and "descendents of white
colonists" even though I am acutely aware of the reality of interbreeding (by rape or by mutual
consent) between these two groups and even though the woke ideology blames *all* so-called
"whites" for their putative racism and their supposedly "privileged" position in the US society
due to its alleged "systemic racism", even when they are new immigrants to the USA.
I don't think that I have tackled the issues of race or racism before, mostly because I am
horrified by all the nonsense one can hear as soon as these topics are mentioned. It is,
however, indisputable that the woke ideology is the main ideology of the Biden Administration
and this is why it cannot simply be ignored. Of course, other ideological trends of the US
ruling class (messianism, imperialism, self-worship, capitalism, etc.) have not been abandoned;
instead, they have been "wokified" in the sense that the woke ideology is now used to give
these traditional US ideologies some kind of politically-correct imprimatur , a kind of
"when we do that in the name of wokeness we are doing something morally right" label placed on
an otherwise deeply discredited set of "western values".
Of course, there is an apparent paradox here: how can the woke ideology be used to try to
give a semblance of respectability to a set of western ideologies when the woke ideology is
also rabidly anti-western?! The woke ideology is most definitely anti-western, and not in the
sense of condemning the West's thousand years of bloody wars and imperialism, that would at
least make some sense, but it is anti-western in the sense that it places an equal sign
between, say, J.S. Bach and the rapper "Ice Cube" with a "logic" along the following line: "
hey, who are you to say that Bach was more talented than the rapperIce Cube?! That is
racist!!! " Even mathematics are now considered "racist "! And
anybody disputing that is, of course, a racist.
What is missing here is the element of proof. Some kind of rules of evidence which could be
appealed to; let's use the modern term to "˜fact check' most of the assumptions made by
the supporters of the woke ideology.
For example, in my Swiss high school we had a huge mural declaring that "all races are
equal". No evidence for that statement was ever given. In fact, during my entire academic life
(1 undergrad and 2 graduate degrees) I have never seen any real evidence for this thesis. (I
have seen plenty of evidence disputing this, beginning with US Army IQ tests). By the way, that
does not at all mean that I affirm the opposite (that races are somehow unequal), only that in
a dogmatic statement like "all races are equal" even the term "equal" is extremely ambiguous
and, frankly, meaningless. Let's compare this statement to another famous one by Saint Paul
(Galatian 3:26-28 KJV):
"For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus . For as
many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ . There is neither Jew
nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are
all one in Christ Jesus . And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs
according to the promise .".
Unlike the vapid "all races are equal", Saint Paul clearly states that all humans are "
children of God " and he further explains how this happens when he says " by faith in
Christ Jesus ". He then clarifies that " all are one in Christ Jesus " (being "
one " in Christ is unambiguous, unlike being " equal "). And Saint Paul concludes
by explaining that through Christ there is a new generation of mankind " ye Abraham's seed,
and heirs according to the promise ". Unlike the woke ideology, Christianity does
truly unite all human beings, and Christianity does so without ever denying or
obfuscating the very real differences which makes all humans very much un equal to each
other, including a total equality in rights and privileges inside the Christian religion.
First, Saint Paul mentions our common filiation as children of God through Adam, to which he
immediately adds a further common filiation of those who have "put on Christ" by means of
baptism. The evidence here, the proof of the statement, is clear: baptism. One can, of course,
disagree with Saint Paul, but not accuse him of ambiguity (especially in the light of all the
other Apostolic and Patristic statements providing contextual support for this!).
Compare that with the woke ideology which categorically splits mankind into two groups: the
oppressed "minorities" and the (always) "white" oppressors, which even contradicts the actual
history of Africa which was invaded and colonized by (non-White) Arabs before the Europeans got
involved (something which the US blacks who take on Islamic names either don't know or try hard
to ignore).
The woke ideology also completely ignores racism internal to the so-called "Blacks". A good
friend of mine is a (very dark skinned) lady from Mali who traveled all over our planet and
told me one day that the worst anti-African racism she was ever subjected to was in Ethiopia
(whose population is just as dark skinned as my lady friend). I also knew a medical doctor from
Soweto who told me that there was plenty of hatred between South African blacks which he called
"racist hate". Of course, most US blacks know close to nothing about the history of Africa,
past or current (Arabs and black Africans still fight each other in many regions of Africa!)
and yet they think of themselves as "Africans" which makes absolutely no sense (especially from
the point of view of actual Africans, Arab, black or white).
I just used one example (racial equality), but the woke ideology has failed to prove pretty
much every one of its key dogmas. "Systemic racism" is another good one which appears to be
proven by none, accepted by (almost?) all.
Of course, none of the above proves any single aspect of the woke ideology wrong, but I
hasten to add that the burden of proof is upon the party proclaiming a thesis, and not upon
those this thesis is being forced upon. Likewise, there is plenty of anecdotal evidence of
racism in the United States (including numerous cases of black on white and black on Asian
racial violence!), but irrespective of the actual figure of such incidents, the sum of these
incidents, however large, does not somehow automatically become evidence of things like
"systemic racism" or "white supremacy" (correlation does not imply causation).
Yet, somehow, the proponents of wokeness immediately get offended when their beliefs are
challenged and simply accuse any naysayers of "racism". One example: in the new woke-reality, "
twerking " is
a delightful form of "culture" which cannot be criticized, especially so by whites. To call it
a vulgar display of objectified women accompanied by noise which does not rise to any
imaginable definition of "music" is, of course, totally crimethink!
Apparently, for the woke-freaks, "diversity" does not include diversity of ideas, of
opinions. As Orwell astutely noticed, "some are more equal than others". Wokeness does not even
deny that! Hence its "Cancel culture" aspect, along with the violence of the BLM/Antifa
mobs.
For some, this is just a big money-making scheme for corporate "America" which is now
flooding all its advertisements with the "correct" races in total disregard to that race's real
percentage of the population and small money-making scheme for those who hope to get their
hands on some free money. As for the US homo-lobby, this is a surefire way to achieve power and
influence which they could not otherwise even dream about. In other words, Wokism is about
money and power, not justice.
Some might think that this is no big deal, that anti-racism is by definition good, as is the
notion that homosexuals should not be deprived of their civil rights on account of their sexual
dysfunction. But wokeness has already gone way further than these initial demands and it has
now turned into an obligatory form of virtue signaling !
By now most of us have seen new woke-compatible CIA recruitment ads. Frankly, when I saw it
I sincerely rejoiced, as a woke-CIA will be far less effective than the one which considered
homosexuality a major security risk (blackmail and comorbid psychopathology). But wokeness
submission is not just a CIA thing, check out this comparison of recruiting videos (thanks to
American Kulak for sending me all the videos below!!!):
Truth be told, I am not exactly heartbroken about the condition of the US armed forces as
such, but when I think of the many decent and honorable US officers I had the chance to meet in
my life, I do feel sorry for them as I can, I think, imagine their sadness and disgust.
Finally, I have to admit, to my great sadness, that this does not affect only the USA.
Pretty much the same form of collective insanity has clearly taken over the EU (with a few
countries still trying to resist). Wokism has become a global phenomenon.
Yes, the West went from the genius of Baroque to the insipid vulgarity of YouTube.
And so here is my question: why is there so little pushback?!
Yes, there is the accusation of racism. I get it. But the more people this accusation is
applied to, the more meaningless it becomes (the same goes for that old "anti-Semitism"
canard!). And, besides, nobody can live an honorable life without ever becoming the target of a
false and ugly accusation. All we can do is 1) ignore it 2) flush our mental toilet and 3)
resume the struggle.
I also understand that woke-compatibility is a "must" for new hires (you gotta love that
"corporate America"!). But what about all those of us who already have a career and who won't
be fired just because we push back against an ideology which not only is based on absolutely
nothing (it has zero empirical evidence to back its key tenets) but which destroys competence
(the famous US meritocracy) and replaces it with what I can only call an extremely intolerant
pseudo-diversity which is every bit as intolerant as the major totalitarian ideologies of the
20th century! Why are we silent?
Most of us know about the hidden scandal of the (apparently, neverending) lowering of
competency criteria in many professions (ask a firefighter!). But this is now even affecting
airlines ! I dread the day when a "diverse" crew will smash an airliner into the
ground because "mathematics is racist!". I am sure the skies will still be friendly, but will
they be safe?!
I wonder what it would take to finally get some serious reaction to this collective
insanity.
So what can we do? I submit that Alexander Solzhenitsyn's advice to the
Russian people living under the Soviet system could also be taken as a model by those
in the West who don't want their countries to be turned into some wannabe Wakanda:
When violence bursts onto the peaceful human condition, its face is flush with
self-assurance, it displays on its banner and proclaims: "I am Violence! Make way, step
aside, I will crush you!" But violence ages swiftly, a few years pass""and it is no longer
sure of itself. To prop itself up, to appear decent, it will without fail call forth its
ally""Lies. For violence has nothing to cover itself with but lies, and lies can only persist
through violence. And it is not every day and not on every shoulder that violence brings down
its heavy hand: It demands of us only a submission to lies, a daily participation in
deceit""and this suffices as our fealty.
And therein we find, neglected by us, the simplest, the most accessible key to our
liberation: a personal nonparticipation in lies! Even if all is covered by lies, even
if all is under their rule, let us resist in the smallest way: Let their rule hold not
through me!
And this is the way to break out of the imaginary encirclement of our inertness, the
easiest way for us and the most devastating for the lies. For when people renounce lies, lies
simply cease to exist. Like parasites, they can only survive when attached to a person.
We are not called upon to step out onto the square and shout out the truth, to say out
loud what we think""this is scary, we are not ready. But let us at least refuse to say what
we do not think! ("¦) Our way must be: Never knowingly support lies!
Having understood where the lies begin (and many see this line differently)""step back from
that gangrenous edge! Let us not glue back the flaking scales of the Ideology, not gather
back its crumbling bones, nor patch together its decomposing garb, and we will be amazed how
swiftly and helplessly the lies will fall away, and that which is destined to be naked will
be exposed as such to the world.
This method of not allowing lies to survive through oneself is absolutely legal, non-violent
and does not require any organization or money. Most importantly, this method does not require
any unifying ideology. In other words, this method is a moral/ethical defense against any
totalitarian ideology. Best of all, it requires no money or power, and it is immediately
liberating to anybody using it. It is even compatible with the modern idea of "be the change
you want to see in the world".
The alternative is much scarier. As with any totalitarian ideology Wokism can also trigger a
strong blowback reaction and there is a very real risk of such a pushback reaction that it
could result in the birth of a new form of Fascism which could be even worse than Wokism. And
this is why I think that doing nothing and hoping that this will all somehow magically go away
is dangerously delusional.
Totalitarian ideologies must be confronted openly and frontally. Nothing else will do and
everything else is nothing but surrender.
I'm going to play devil's advocate here. If the entire US military is moving toward
robotics and missiles, what difference does it make that the operator is a trans-gender
mental lunatic? In fact, some of these depraved folks may perfectly fit the bill for
committing massive war crimes. There is no conscience in their mental depravity to begin
with.
Because woke culture warriors are no threat to men with money. Men with money fear
macho economic socialists in the Joe Stalin mode, and these people no longer exist. This is
what so many people on the conservative/nationalist right don't get. There is no push back
because rich whites have nothing to fear from theatrical woke BS.
The only victims are working and lower middle whites, who have no awareness of class
politics, are more interested in fixing their cars or riding around on dirt bikes..
And so here is my question: why is there so little pushback?!
American, like most humans, have to eat. Keep a roof over their heads. Etc.
As far back is the 1950s Europeans considered Americans deeply conformist. Even when they
went into non-conforming mode (eg, the beatniks in that decade) they all conformed to the
pack.
But now is not then: Jobs for mavericks are now scarce. Lighthouses are automated, no need
for lighthouse keepers. The old merchant ships have been replaced by container ships that
need few hands on deck or anywhere else. Have a good job, you also have to keep it. And it
often takes effort.
All the people from Jimmy the Greek in the last century on are rarely prosecuted. They are
almost always fired or forced to resign. Individual economics warns against being the nail
that sticks out.
This MIGHT be why Antifa, BLM etc has no problem getting a mob together: Torching a few
buildings, blocking traffic, getting white cops fired, is a great way to relieve stress and
burn off frustration.
BUT that only works for one side. Others must tread carefully and not push if they can't
afford to fall.
@anonymous
serve openly in the US Military"¦.And you can thank Admiral Mike Mullins for this.
Mullins knew exactly what he was doing:social engineering the larger American Society-and he
enjoyed being interviewed in his US Navy Uniform on the front covers of magazines that serve
the interests of the homosexual community. Yes, I am very suspicious that Admiral Mike
Mullins is a homosexual who has no problem with Public Libraries allowing Satanic looking
Tranny Freaks reading children's books to very young children. This is what Admiral Mike
Mullins has unleashed upon American Society. Admiral Mike Mullins would tell Conservative
Christian Chaplains who had issues with homosexuals serving openly in the US
Military:""˜YOU NEED TO PURSUE ANOTHER CAREER PATH""¦..
I've observed these white people, overwhelmingly female, display an incomprehensibly
religious fervor for BLM. I've never seen anything like this in my long lifetime.
These people are worshipping negroes, while at the same time, negroes are slaughtering
them.
After c.1980, the West, already showing the signs of crumbling due to economic implosion
and social, moral and intellectual decay, was led up two garden paths to the certain end
about to engulf it.
One was neo-conservatism, a project of formerly Trotsykite Judeofascist supremacists, many
former acolytes of the sinister Leo Strauss, who saw the USA as a puppet to destroy their
enemies, ie the Soviet, the Arab world and, as Jabotinsky said, "˜"¦anyone who
gets in our way'. This was the PNAC crowd who predicted the "˜New Pearl Harbor' of 9/11
because their friends in MOSSAD no doubt told them it was finally in the works, after years
of planning and "˜predictive programing' of the US public.This mob thought that the
world was theirs to do with as they pleased, after Gorbachev and Yeltsin, but they had not
bargained on Putin and on China's meteoric rise, hence their psychopathic loathing of
both.
The other dead end was neo-liberal capitalism, another predominately Jewish enterprise, from
the University of Chicago yeshiva and Milton Friedman et al. That created the great upward
transfer of wealth to the elites, in which Jews were and are massively over-represented, and
the steady immiseration of the vast bulk of US citizens, and those in puppet regimes in the
UK, the EU and other countries subjected to the economic shock therapy of the economic
hit-men of the "˜Washington Consensus'.
After forty years of these twin terrors the USA and much of the West are more unequal than
ever, more heavily indebted than ever, their industries defunct and economic activity
concentrated on the FIRE parasite rackets, and other forms of rentier extraction, millennial
pursuits of various Jewish elites. Israel itself is terminally belligerent and insatiably
cruel, and riven by inequality and political and religious fanaticism, but at least they can
be united by hatred and blood-lust, as we see today. The USA, in contrast, must rely on
"˜Divide and Rule' tactics, of which the deranged wokeism is the latest manifestation,
growing out of that other divisive strategy, Identity Politics. Wokeism simply pits the
downtrodden against other downtrodden, to the elites' delight. One faction, the Demoncrazy
Deep Statists, pits the wokebots against the Reptilian MAGAbots, while both are excited to a
racist frenzy by the prospect of annihilation in the Great Clash of Civilizations war with
Russia and/or China. All so the plutocrats can keep piling up their loot ad astra.
Foggy Bottom has just allowed US embassies and consulates to fly the "gay pride" flag
next to the stars and stripes. I bet you they won´t do that in Riyadh!
Au contraire
It is precisely intended to be flown in Riyadh, Warszaw, Moscow and Urumqi;
no different from siccing dogs and activist womxyn on the Muzzie helots,
sending incompetent Jews as ambassadors to Germany and Austria
or corporate heavyweights to South America.
The parallels to wokism and Orwell are obvious ""
the more shameless, stupid and obvious the lies they force us to repeat ("2+2=5"),
the better to break our will with.
"" Sending the Soros Barbie to harangue Erdogan was in the same vein,
and it backfired gloriously (I´m a bit conflicted re: Recep
Tayyip´s
passive-aggressiveness, but it has something deeply satisfying;
clearly that´s the way to go "¦ it is not coincidence Charles Boycott
was
a rent enforcer in Ireland "" maybe we cannot fight, but we can refuse to cooperate.
Tell them what you think of them "" so what if it makes their hair fall out ).
What kind of "˜pushback' do you expect when it's the political and mainstream
media establishments doing the "˜pushing'?
There is "˜pushback' by groups and individuals, as well as in alternative media, but
this is subject to censorship due to arbitrary ToS (e.g. no "˜misgendering' on Twitter)
and by platform providers (with no warning or justification, WordPress deleted the very
popular "˜Chateau Heartiste'; he can now be found on Gab ).
When you can lose your job by saying "˜White lives matter', or even "˜All
lives matter', people notice.
Because deep down inside everybody is some kind of cop, and we're scared.
We're scared of the bigger cop: The fed, the judge, death comes from above, the media, our
boss, our marriage, or getting disappeared""and for WHAT? Some clueless idiot who thinks
freedom is free?? Poor-bastard real life cops have to get up on stage and show how scared
they really are when it comes to doing what is right. Like walking around naked in public
with a target on their back. That's why the cops get crazy when you suggest they could do a
better job of the scam known as no good deed goes unpunished. Sanity? Got it. The woke public
"education systems" are full of queers and demons having rights to your children 8 hours a
day enforced by the fed and the judge and the media, and who at the least successfully
indoctrinate your child with hopelessness. The chaos is ascendant, overwhelming and
despressing in nature Okay people! Everybody on 3 push back "¦one "¦ two. Hello
"¦can you hear me in the back ?
The liberals are crazy with unworldy power""shock and awe crazy""but the right wing is
crazier to believe that the left wokeness can be overcome on worldy terms. The right wants to
think they can pushback, but they are scared because deep down inside, they know the liberals
are driven and enforced by powers much bigger than any earthly principal. A dark battlefield
saying used to go, "If they've got thermal, we're fucked." Indeed, the liberal left and their
enforcers can now see you wherever and whoever you are, and what's worse, you know it. Oh,
but let's go out and die. Mission? Sanity? For what?
That's why all the erstwhile tough guys don't push back, and the ones who do, get hated on
"¦ "stop it man, you're causing trouble." As for the rest of the poseurs, they have it
easy. Without having to actually walk the walk, they get to sit around and criticize the
ones who could , but won't push back.
On the plus side, explicitly left wing governments tend to have a short shelf life.
Probably the worst kind of left wing governments are those which are kinda right wing.
Tony Blair got Britain into a pointless war in Iraq and bought in massive numbers of
economic migrants. Bill Clinton pushed NAFTA which resulted in a huge surge of Hispanic
immigration. However, conservative voters didn't even notice what was happening because they
assumed these guys were sensible middle-of the-road politicians. In contrast Biden's and
company's in your face woke politics will galvanize the American right and probably achieve
little of long term consequence.
@Anonymous
ollective guilt for all the world's problems and no right to self determination.
An absurd, barbaric standard which is never applied to any other group.
Little Victoria Rose Smith was beaten and tortured to death by a fat racist black woman
spewing BLM propaganda on Twitter. Cannon Hinnant was executed while riding his bicycle in
his front yard.
But of course vermin like you don't care about the innocent victims.
You will just dismiss it or pretend it's not happening while venerating slime like the
rapist Jacob Blake or home invader George Floyd.
My entire lifetime the USA has thought that it would win wars with military
technology"¦and then subsequently was dragged into 20 year long savage guerilla
warfare.
"We can just airstrike them" was a common refrain when the Afghanistan war was announced
in 2001.
Twenty years later, Biden pulls the last troops out.
"I cannot shoot him"¦he's too gorgeous"
For that matter the thugs that took over USA cities have an IQ of 90 & have zero
education. But they have more primitive moral courage.
Technology is far more advanced now than 1992 during the LA Riots"¦and yet the
riots were worse.
@Anonymous
I only partially agree. White people in general do not personally hate other races. However,
they do like to self segregate into their own white communities as you yourself have just
pointed out.
In my native UK, you have a lot of "secret segregation" whereby native white Brits live in
their own towns and villages away from the ever growing multi-kulti cities. Its quite amazing
to actually leave a white British town or village and venture into the cities. It basically
feels like living on an Indian reservation in America!
Dont get me started on how segregated all the various groups are in the cities too!
So whilst white people pay lip service to the cult of diversity, they very rarely actually
practice it.
Machiavelli explained how wokeist phenomena can serve the powerful in 1513, "One of the
great secrets of the day is to know how to take possession of popular prejudices and
passions, in such a way as to introduce a confusion of principles which makes impossible all
understanding between those who speak the same language and have the same interests."
What we are seeing today is the latest installment of the never-ending story called
"divide and conquer." The traditional goals of progressives are ending militarism, empowering
working people, providing a decent social safety net, and most of all, building a functional,
genuinely democratic government committed to limiting the corrupting power of great wealth.
These goals are race and gender neutral; they are basic human rights for all. They are
passionately opposed by society's worst predators, always have been, always will be, until
the influence of the predator class has been neutralized, and they are called to account for
their crimes.
Today's campaigns of moral absolutism widen the gaps among America's diverse peoples and
classes because such division is crucial to maintaining the power of the elites by deflecting
attention from their far more dangerous, institutionalized abuses of power. Boutique activism
converts ordinary people into partners in advancing those interests, in a dangerous form of
psychologically manipulative narrative control.
But "woke", not being based in objective reality, has no legs and will not endure.
Universities and other organizations are making a good faith effort to conform, the same way
they once excluded women and blacks when discrimination was fashionable. Ultimately the
demands of their donors and consumers will prevail, and change, and change again.
@Trinity
sianic militarism. When, especially during the Occupy movement, I saw that there were young
libertarians who seemed to share many of the same concerns and join in with the lefty
Occupiers, it seemed like a positive development that promised a unification, beyond
ideology, of intelligent concerned citizens who wanted to clear the air of the rampant
criminality of officialdom.
And then, all of a sudden, the SJW phenomenon burst on the scene and it all became about
Blacks and trannies and women. What happened?
It has been my feeling all along that the term "woke" was hijacked and applied to these
clueless narcissistic Gen-Z-types, who themselves had been infiltrated and manipulated. Who
did this? It smells like a psy-op to me.
It's a fool's errand trying to make sense of Applied Woke. Most Americans are ill-equipped
to do so because we grew up schooled in American common sense.
Say what you will, until recently the US of A got decent grades, impressive ones if
grading on a curve, for avoiding last century's bright ideas (e.g. communism; fascism).
That filtered down to the family and individual level, even for immigrants, under the
rubric of Assimilation.
Yet as the American Republic (and empire) has hit some rough sledding, coincident
unfortunately with the rise of CCP China, there's some bad modeling going on at the
moment.
The American ruling, governing and business classes like China's secret sauce. What's not
to like as long as you're sitting in the right place or willing to do or say anything to put
yourself and your family there.
This author is right to bring up Russia and Christianity. Though, as I've mentioned
before, I simply don't understand why those in the best position to inform about the lessons
we should be learning from post-Soviet Union Russia don't do so even though the rhythming is
so glaringly obvious it's almost a joke at this point.
At best "Biden" is a Yeltsin 1996-99. In other words, as if that isn't bad enough, it
doesn't account for his double and technical sleights of hand in the show. What you
characterize as "woke-compatible" is Antifa/BLM Brown Shirts integrated into the
Democrat/Deep State mix.
The salient struggle at the moment is taking place within these factions over whether,
after having succeeded in a monumental election steal, to govern as if 2020 was a "˜One
and Done' or that they will have to compete to win in 2022 and 2024.
Official, government and corporate, handling and messaging concerning Woke ideology and
the freaks themselves is one of the better indicators because there is simply no way a party
competing to win the consent of the governed can engage in a loud and proud endorsement or
even acquiescence to their madness.
This MIGHT be why Antifa, BLM etc has no problem getting a mob together: Torching a few
buildings, blocking traffic, getting white cops fired, is a great way to relieve stress and
burn off frustration.
That may explain the mass protest movements, but the police records out of Portland show
Antifa as a roughly even mix of children of the upper class, low level DNC wonks and drug
addicts. The three categories often overlap, of course.
Florida's Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis said Friday that he opposes teaching critical race theory
in the state's public schools, calling the ideas pushed by its advocates as "based on false
history" and "teaching kids to hate their country and to hate each other."
DeSantis made the remarks at a Friday press
conference in Pensacola, where he announced the
signing of a bill temporarily establishing several statewide tax-free periods on items like
storm supplies and back-to-school products.
"It's offensive to the taxpayer that they would be asked to fund critical race theory,
that they would be asked to fund teaching kids to hate their country and to hate each other,"
DeSantis said.
Floridа Gov. Ron DeSantis is seen during a meeting at the governor's office in
Tallahassee, Fla., on April 1, 2021. (The Epoch Times)
In a
recent interview on NTD's "Focus Talk," Yiatin Chu, an Asian mother of two and co-chair of
the New York chapter of the Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism (FAIR), described
critical race theory as pushing the idea that disparate outcomes, such as academic competency
scores, can be reduced to a single variable""race.
Advocates of the theory, which she said is increasingly being taught at pre-college levels,
push the socialist notion of equality of outcome, and blame differences in outcomes on
entrenched privilege while dividing people into "oppressors" and their victims, the
"oppressed."
Republicans across the nation are trying to prevent the teaching of critical race theory in
classrooms.
Recently, South Dakota's Republican Gov. Kristi Noem took aim at both the "1619 Project" and
critical race theory and, like DeSantis, voiced opposition to their incorporation in school
curriculums.
"The 1619 Project relies upon the concept of Critical Race Theory to further divide
students based on the color of their skin," Noem wrote in a series of tweets
Friday.
"This is inappropriate and un-American. It has no place in South Dakota, and it certainly
has no place in South Dakota classrooms."
In this screenshot from the RNC's livestream of the 2020 Republican National Convention,
South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem addresses the virtual convention on Aug. 26, 2020. (Courtesy of
the Committee on Arrangements for the 2020 Republican National Committee via Getty Images)
The "1619 Project," inaugurated with a special issue of The New York Times Magazine,
attempts to cast the Atlantic slave trade as the dominant factor in the founding of America
instead of ideals such as individual liberty and natural rights. The initiative has been widely
panned by historians and political scientists, with some critics calling it a bid to rewrite
U.S. history through a left-wing lens.
Nikole Hannah-Jones, creator of the 1619 Project, responded to the GOP criticism
of the project during an interview with MSNBC on May 3, saying the 1619 curriculum being
allowed in schools is a matter of free speech.
"This isn't a project about trying to teach children that our country is evil, but it is a
project trying to teach children the truth about what our country was based upon, and it's
only in really confronting that truth""slavery was foundational to the United States, we,
after the slavery, experienced 100 years of legalized discrimination against black
Americans," said Hannah-Jones.
"Mitch McConnell and others like him want for our children to get a propagandistic,
nationalistic understanding of history that is not about facts, but it is about how they
would want to pretend that our country is."
Proponents of critical race theory
have argued that it's needed to demonstrate what they say is "pervasive systemic racism"
and facilitate rooting it out.
Critics draw parallels between critical race theory and Marxism, arguing that the concept
advocates for the destruction of institutions, such as the Western justice system, free-market
economy, and orthodox religions, while demanding that they be replaced with institutions
compliant with the critical race theory ideology.
Criminals who repeatedly targeted an auto shop in Spring Lake, North Carolina by leaving
racist graffiti referencing the KKK and Nazis turned out to be two African-American men after
the owner caught them on camera.
Business owner Dwyane Haynesworth (who is black) took action after having a car stole off
his lot and then discovering the racist graffiti, which included a drawing of a swastika.
After setting up the security cameras, that same night the criminals returned and broke into
more vehicles before smashing windows and attempting to hot wire one of the cars.
The footage revealed the culprits to be two black men.
"By now, police must know to narrow down their list of suspects whenever racist graffiti
is left at the scene of a crime. That doesn't fit the modus operandi of Caucasians,"
writes Dave Blount
.
"Leftists who demonize and attempt to defund or otherwise hamstring the police are not
siding against whites in favor of blacks, despite the way the liberal establishment frames
it. They are siding against Dwyane Haynesworth in favor of punks who pointlessly destroy
other people's property."
While the criminals in this instance clearly weaponized the racist graffiti in a bid to
deceive authorities, fake hate crimes have become an all too common occurrence in America over
the last five years.
Back in 2019, we
highlighted the case of Amari Allen, a 12-year-old African-American girl who claimed a
group of white boys cutting off her dreadlocks.
The entirety of the mainstream media, as well as lawmakers like Rashida Tlaib, fell for and
amplified the story before Allen admitted she made it all up.
The gunman in Boulder who killed 10 people at a supermarket back in March also routinely
threatened his classmates with threats of filing fake hate crime charges after violently
attacking them, eyewitnesses told the media.
"... If you find it useful that some counties are leaving Oregon and joining Idaho, or the conflict between the left and the right, democrats vs republicans, or whites vs blacks, or whites vs muslims, or vs lations is meaningful, you are simply doing the bidding of the masters, who thrive on pitting communites against each other, and are responsible for destroying the whole country. The easiest and the most fruitful way to bring about a real, benficial change to America would require bringing the American people, regardless of their color or creed together, to easily get rid of their overbearing masters. Regardless of what you claim to be, the fact that you embrace and advance the destructive strategy of pitting the American people agianst one another, and also spew so much hatred of Muslims, exposes your real agenda! ..."
"... The United States doesn't have "rulers" in as much as it has "owners". Consider ..."
One of the most promising movements, " Greater Idaho ," just won a huge
victory. Five counties
voted to leave Oregon and join Idaho. More counties in eastern Oregon may
join . Idaho Governor Brad Little admits creating a new state may be difficult but
says , "They're
looking at Idaho fondly because of our regulatory atmosphere, our values. That doesn't surprise
me one bit."
This should be just the beginning. Frederick County in western Virginia could join West
Virginia. West Virginia State Senator Charles Trump
supports the idea. It could also be a compromise to the DC statehood question. Northern
Virginia is a cancerous outgrowth of federal employees. Booting it
out of real Virginia and tying it to a DC state would mean greater self-government for both
regions.
... ... ...
Existing institutions can be the basis for reform and revolution. From the Parliament that
challenged the king in the English Civil War, the Continental Congress that made the American
Revolution, and the state legislatures that voted for secession, we see a clear pattern in the
way we Anglos operate. We are legalistic, even when it comes to revolution. We don't have the
French tradition of mass protests to topple governments. Our revolutions are according to
Robert's Rules of Order. Even the January 6 protesters who marched into the Capitol did so
because they thought they were saving democracy.
I can understand the frustrations and rage of certain folks.
If you're a worker on an oil rig, a truck driver, a policeman, or some such jobs, there's
bound to be moments when you're angry as hell. So, even though such people say crazy things
once a while, I can understand where they're coming from. They need to blow off steam.
But the professor class? These lowlife parasites sit on their asses and talk shi*. They
produce nothing and make a living by spreading nonsense. And yet, they act like they are
soooooooooo angry with the way of the world. If they really care about the world, why hide in
their academic enclaves?
Academia needs a cultural revolution, a real kind, not the bogus "˜woke' kind made up
of teachers' pets.
Hopefully we can reform into a nice looking North American Federation once this mess hits
a bloody climax of some sort or another. Greater Idaho sounds wildly fun. I still wish we
formed the States Cascadia and Arcadia, personally.
The empire WILL become weaker if it promotes incompetents to positions of high
responsibility and authority and enlists women into the armed forces. An empire cannot
sustain itself with sub standard soldiers, administrators, leaders and law makers. This woke
crap will destroy itself. Historians in the future will look back and say "what the hell were
they thinking?".
If the IQ of officer candidates drops below 110 (it's 120 on average currently for the
Marine Corps and has been declining for 40 years) then the positions will be left vacant.
Dumb people can't do the job.
Since Cromwell and even more so the overthrow of James 2 by the invader Dutch William 3
the Amsterdam Jew banker puppet Britain has been nothing more than a Jewish banking
headquarters.
If you find it useful that some counties are leaving Oregon and joining Idaho, or the
conflict between the left and the right, democrats vs republicans, or whites vs blacks, or
whites vs muslims, or vs lations is meaningful, you are simply doing the bidding of the
masters, who thrive on pitting communites against each other, and are responsible for
destroying the whole country. The easiest and the most fruitful way to bring about a real,
benficial change to America would require bringing the American people, regardless of their
color or creed together, to easily get rid of their overbearing masters. Regardless of what
you claim to be, the fact that you embrace and advance the destructive strategy of pitting
the American people agianst one another, and also spew so much hatred of Muslims, exposes
your real agenda!
Dear Mr. Hood, anything undertaken to change a nation's political organization will always
lead to violence. If there is one thing history shows, it is precisely that. If you are
trying to change Idaho's state borders, that qualifies as a drastic change in the US
political organization, if only because if successful, it would set an example that would
find many, many followers, as you are implying yourself.
What the US promotes and condones abroad (secession of Panama from Colombia in 1903,
occupation of Cyprus by Turkey in 1980, occupation of the Western Sahara by Morocco in 1976,
secession of Kosovo, creation of Southern Sudan, etc., etc.) it does not want to see at home.
Of course you are also aware that in the 1860s, Secession has been met with brutal
violence.
In this respect, it comes as a relief lo learn that the Deep State is busy trying to turn
the US Army and the CIA into open psychiatry wards.
Very interesting that video ad on the girl "raised by two moms." Poor thing: knowing only
two dykes (her father must certainly be Hans Brinker), all her life she has been yearning to
meet real men. Apparently, she did not find them in college, where the boys are being
terrorized by feminists and forced to become faggots. Thus only the army remains as a place
where one might still find a few real men, the kind that one sees so finely portrayed in the
Russian army ad.
(Come to think of it, that US army ad may also be an attempt at subversion of prevailing
policy!)
America is in danger, not because of some external threat, but because our rulers
are the Republic's greatest enemies.
The United States doesn't have "rulers" in as much as it has "owners". Consider
it private property to put things in proper perspective "" then! Stake your claim. Forget the
law(they own that too) and the idea of a republic "" owners don't like to share. The banking,
tax code, and debt have got you by the balls, and they'll always keep you thumbed under.
Psaki was always a walking joke, the spokeswoman with the hidden goal to discredit any
administration she serves. Gaffes are her trademark: "Psaki is the only person on the face of the
earth that makes Biden look intelligent." Logically after her statement Psaki should resign to
make way for a minority candidate, preferably to certified descendant of a former slave. Anything
less is merely virtue signaling.
Like is the case with pornography normal person sense racism when he sees it. 1619 project
does not pass this test. It looks more like "political gangsterism" of some clique, quite similar
to Mao's "cultural revolution"
It is interesting to read the list of corporations which finance this "Cultural revolution
2.0" in the USA as an attempt to save neoliberalism and political power of financial
oligarchy.
Notable quotes:
"... It's actually a brilliant strategy. They have their own voters completely ignoring everything you mentioned, and they have divided the country over these other problems that are created out of thin air. The two Teams want everyone focused on climate change and racism while they loot the country ... ..."
"... 1619 drivel has one purpose--to divide and sow discord. ..."
"... The Spanish were pouring slaves into the Americas a hundred-plus years - before 1619. And, the United States wasn't even a country until 1789. ..."
White House press secretary Jen Psaki on Thursday said it is responsible for colleges to
teach the idea that racism is embedded in the American system, dismissing criticism that such
teaching aims at indoctrinating American youth.
In a
White House press briefing , Psaki was asked about a proposed legislation by Sen. Tom
Cotton (R-Ark.) that would place an one percent tax on the value of the endowments of the
country's wealthiest private colleges, and use that money to support vocational education and
training.
The reporter noted that Cotton's proposal would affect institutions that teach "un-American
ideas" such as those of critical race theory and the New
York Times's "1619 Project," which argue the United States was founded as, and remains, a
racist nation.
An outspoken critic of the 1619 Project, Cotton last year introduced the "Saving American History
Act of 2020" that would reduce federal funding to public schools where the highly
controversial narrative is taught as actual U.S. history. The bill is currently in
consideration in the Senate Education and Labor Committee.
Kreditanstalt 4 hours ago (Edited)
I've never understood why, faced with military aggression, raging income inequality,
asset-price manipulation, rigged "markets", rigged wages, rigged prices, soaring price
inflation, falling living standards, massive debts, public & private...in the last few
years the pseudo-non-issues of "man-made climate change" and "racism" have suddenly been
pushed and pushed...
It beggars belief.
Pdunne 2 hours ago remove link
1619 certainly presents a different perspective. I suspect some of it is incorrect but
that is why people should review it and understand at least the basics of this in American
History.
Bringing Africans to American fundamentally changed the country, that is something to be
understood.
StephenHopkins 2 hours ago
Irish were slaves, **** were slaves there are slaves for sale right now in Libya. Do
something.
Politinaut 2 hours ago
Fundamentally changed? You mean destroyed it. Complete cancer. Our ancestors screwed up,
then paid the toll of correction with 650k soldiers and untold white civilian lives lost. One
dead white man or woman for every 3 slaves to right our ship.
And yet, the retards on the left want to egg this dead conflict on to line their pockets
and destroy the system. I think not.
LetThemEatRand 4 hours ago
It's actually a brilliant strategy. They have their own voters completely ignoring
everything you mentioned, and they have divided the country over these other problems that
are created out of thin air. The two Teams want everyone focused on climate change and racism
while they loot the country ...
TightLiner 3 hours ago
I doubt this woman has ever driven down an MLK Blvd.
GreatUncle 2 hours ago
The woman is a f^7king twat ... critical race theory in itself is indoctrination let alone
all the other stuff.
Plus Size Model 3 hours ago
An important part of indoctrination is rewriting the past. Most people just don't know how
pervasive slavery has been throughout history. First off, it's not easy to define and life
was very very rough up until about the 20th century. Indentured servitude also comes to mind,
child labor is terrible and was also prevalent until the 20th century, primitive factory work
as well as mining was dangerous and lots were permanently injured or killed, there were press
gangs for war, etc.
Completely overlooking antiquity and the east, slavery was ubiquitous almost everywhere up
until the 19th century . THIS INCLUDES ALL RACES, NATIONALITIES AND CREEDS .
Here's just a few instances of slavery that have been written out of the history books
most here are familiar with.
The Barbary slave trade refers to slave markets on the Barbary Coast of North Africa,
which included the Ottoman provinces of Algeria, Tunisia and Tripolitania and the independent
sultanate of Morocco, between the 16th and middle of the 18th century. The Ottoman provinces
in North Africa were nominally under Ottoman suzerainty, but in reality they were mostly
autonomous.
European slaves were acquired by Barbary pirates in slave raids on ships and by raids on
coastal towns from Italy to the Netherlands, Ireland and the southwest of Britain, as far
north as Iceland and into the eastern Mediterranean.
The Ottoman eastern Mediterranean was the scene of intense piracy. As late as the 18th
century, piracy continued to be a "consistent threat to maritime traffic in the Aegean."
For over three centuries, the military of the Crimean Khanate and the Nogai Horde
conducted slave raids primarily in lands controlled by Russia and Poland-Lithuania as well as
other territories.
Their main purpose was the capture of slaves, most of whom were exported to the Ottoman
slave markets in Constantinople or elsewhere in the Middle East. Genoese and Venetians
merchants controlled the slave trade from Crimea to Western Europe. The raids were a drain of
the human and economic resources of eastern Europe . They largely inhabited the "Wild Fields"
"" the steppe and forest-steppe land which extends from a hundred or so miles south of Moscow
to the Black Sea and which now contains most of the Russian and Ukrainian population . The
campaigns also played an important role in the development of the Cossacks.
Here's a video of British miners from 1901. Tell me they don't look like slaves. Lots of
them won't even make it to middle age. I'd argue that the majority of them have lung disease.
You can see some men are obviously malnourished.
If you are against racism don't build your self-esteem based on your race; be an
individual.
AlfieDolittle 3 hours ago
It's utter garbage anyway, the Africans who arrived in 1619 weren't slaves, they were
indentured labourers who signed up for 7 years after which they were given a plot of land.
This was a common way of working at the time, even for whites.
It was one of their fellow blacks, Anthony Johnson, who challenged indenture in the courts
as he wanted to hold on to them for life..
Shouldn't it be the previous year, 1618? Namely when Africans captured and sold their
fellow blacks for dirty lucre and a bottle of wine?
Giant Meteor 3 hours ago
Politicians white and black have successfully used all this race baiting to deflect
attention away from their own grifting, and glaring failures, of the people they claimed they
were helping, for the last 50 plus years.. Today we see the resulting train wreck, and of
course the doubling down on the latest insanity ....
On the other hand there is Jen, and her ilk .. the new breed. They are so dumb, they don't
even know they're dumb .. This is the promise and legacy of "public education."
The film "Idiocracy" .. was not suppose to be a documentary ..
Giant Meteor 3 hours ago (Edited)
During an interview with conservative Mark Levin, Robert L. Woodson Sr., president and
founder of the Woodson Center, said that what is happening today is a "perversion of the
civil rights movement," and that claims of "institutional racism" are a "ruse," a "lie" to
deflect attention from certain black leaders who have failed to help their communities
because they pushed policies that do not work.
Woodson, whose organization works directly with people and groups in neighborhoods
nationwide, also denounced the idea that the "legacy of slavery and discrimination" is
responsible for problems in some black communities, such as unemployment, crime, and
out-of-wedlock births. "That's another lie," he said.
"I don't know what systemic racism is. Maybe someone can explain what that means," Robert
Woodson
Woodson, who left the civil rights movement goes on to state ..
"In the past 50 years, $22 trillion has been spent on poverty programs. Seventy percent
goes not to the poor but those who serve poor people," he said.
"So many of those people taking office use this money to create a class of people who are
running these cities, and now after 50 years of liberal Democrats running the inner cities,
where we have all of these inequities that we have, race is being used as a ruse, as a means
of deflecting attention away from critical questions such as why are poor blacks failing in
systems run by their own people?"
Robert L. Woodson, Sr. founded the Woodson Center in 1981 to help residents of low-income
neighborhoods address the problems of their communities. A former civil rights activist, he
has headed the National Urban League Department of Criminal Justice, and has been a resident
fellow at the American Enterprise Foundation for Public Policy Research. Referred to by many
as "godfather" of the neighborhood empowerment movement, for more than four decades, Woodson
has had a special concern for the problems of youth. In response to an epidemic of youth
violence that has afflicted urban, rural and suburban neighborhoods alike, Woodson has
focused much of the Woodson Center's activities on an initiative to establish Violence-Free
Zones in troubled schools and neighborhoods throughout the nation. He is an early MacArthur
"genius" awardee and the recipient of the 2008 Bradley Prize, the Presidential Citizens
Award, and a 2008 Social Entrepreneurship Award from the Manhattan Institute.
Teach that ...
wellwaddyaknow 3 hours ago remove link
1619 drivel has one purpose--to divide and sow discord.
2021: Current Secret "Buzz" words. Remember "multi-culturalism"? This dangerous thinking
has mutated to "critical race theory"
mabuhay1 3 hours ago
1619 is a hoax and a sham and needs to be banned from ANY level of education, except as an
example of just how far stupid people will attempt to fool others and push their
ideology.
Brazillionaire 2 hours ago
Hoax and sham yes. They are not stupid. They're evil.
nsurf9 4 hours ago (Edited)
The Spanish were pouring slaves into the Americas a hundred-plus years - before 1619.
And, the United States wasn't even a country until 1789. And, before that, North America
was occupied as Spanish, French and British colonies - with a lot of Native Indians.
END 60+ YEARS OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION - SYSTEMIC DISCRIMINATION - NOW !!!!
WorkingClassMan 2 hours ago remove link
EVERY country that was ever founded was built on or with "racism," in mind. That is one of
the benefits of a monoracial society--you don't have competing racial factions tearing the
unity of a nation apart.
That said, the 13% are really narcissists to think they are important enough to have
fought at least two wars over. Overpriced farm equipment that should have been RTS'd from the
get-go.
Nik-ole Hanna (or is it Jones?) is an overpaid antiwhite who doesn't know how to check her
black privilege. In her paradise of Africa, a country--for example--named Rwanda had two
BLACK ethnic groups. To outsiders they just looked the same--black.
But to each other, they were VERY different. And, a few years ago, the Hutus (or is it the
Tutsis? I don't care) decided to slaughter the other group. Hundreds of thousands died
officially, likely many more. And they had NO racist crackas to get involved.
She should go to Rwanda or Liberia or Somalia or Sudan where slavery still exists! No
racist crackas.
Rep. Maxine Waters of California, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, joined
demonstrations this weekend in Minnesota. She told supporters that if the Chauvin trial
verdict goes the wrong way, "we've got to not only stay in the street but we've got to fight
for justice."
You may recall a president got pilloried a while ago for urging his supporters to "fight"
for their desired outcome. It was noted then that the term is a well-worn rhetorical phrase
that doesn't necessarily amount to a literal incitement to violence. But there can't be much
doubt about the import of what Ms. Waters said. She made her remarks in Brooklyn Center, a few
miles from the barricaded Minneapolis courthouse where the Chauvin trial is taking place and
the site of the killing last weekend of a black man by a police officer. The place has been
aflame for the past week in an orgy of rioting.
The Handler standard, or the Maxine maxim "the idea that we don't really need a trial to
know whether someone is guilty of a heinous crime" has always had its adherents. There have
surely been miscarriages of justice "acquittals of guilty people and convictions of innocent
ones" throughout history. The jury system is never perfect.
But what's frighteningly new about our current climate is that the rejection of apparently
unwelcome trial outcomes is now part of the dominant progressive critique of our longstanding
political and civic order. If U.S. institutions are the product of white-supremacist
exploitation "as is essentially the consensus of the people who run the government, most
corporations, and leading cultural institutions" then the judicial system itself is inherently
and systemically unjust. If the principle of equality before the law is to be supplanted by the
objective of "equity" in outcome, then only outcomes that serve the higher objective of
collective racial justice can be considered legitimate.
So trials that produce the "wrong" verdict are not just miscarriages of justice. They are an
indictment of the entire system.
The ascendancy of this new progressive radicalism adds a frightening element to the unease
the nation feels this week as the jury deliberates in Minneapolis. By all accounts the trial of
Mr. Chauvin has been rigorous, methodical and fair. The prosecution seemed to make a strong
case that Mr. Floyd died at least in part as a result of the officer's actions. The defense may
have sowed some doubts about whether Mr. Chavin's intent rose to the level of culpability
required of the most serious charges.
But under our new rules, the jury's verdict will be tolerated only if it goes the "right"
way.
This rejection of the legitimacy of the judicial process is rooted in the same neo-Marxist
ideology""a race- and identity-based interpretation of structuralism""that holds sway over the
minds of much of our ruling class.
To the old Marxists, the capitalists were the exploiters. In "The ABC of Communism,"
published in 1920, Bolshevik leaders Nikolai Bukharin and Yevgeni Preobrazhensky used language
that sounds strikingly familiar today. They denounced the courts as instruments of "bourgeois
justice," which was "carried on under the guidance of laws passed in the interests of the
exploiting class," and recommended instead the establishment of "proletarian courts."
In one of the more savage ironies of history, some two decades later the authors themselves
were tried by such courts under Josef Stalin and sentenced to death.
Yet even Stalin thought some kind of judicial proceeding was necessary. Our modern
revolutionaries would dispense even with show trials.
E
Eli Hauser SUBSCRIBER 2 weeks ago (Edited)
Red Queen Rules. Sentence. Verdict. Accusation. Admission of Guilt.
Mark Robbins SUBSCRIBER 2 weeks ago
Liberals have no need for trials with an assumption of innocence. At all times, they KNOW
what is right.
Chris Madison SUBSCRIBER 2 weeks ago
We are living through a "throw the baby out with the bath" moment. Extremists are labeling
anything which doesn't go their way as "systemically racist." If there is no jurisprudence
and due process, no system of laws addressing a variety of crimes, but only the cry for
"justice now" without defining what justice looks like according to law, then anarchy has
taken the place of justice. Ms. Handler is entitled to her opinion. I am glad she is not in a
position of leadership. Congresswoman Maxine Waters likes to make statements which "stir the
pot," potentially raising the "rage level" across our nation. She should know better, but
doesn't. Our nation is on the cusp of a moment when we must intentionally decide who we are
legally, morally, and Constitutionally. Emotions are insufficient for this moment.
Christopher Jones SUBSCRIBER 3 weeks ago
This essay would have tremendous weight if there was not a video of the murder. Absent that
it is stupefyingly ignorant. "The prosecution seemed to make a strong case that Mr. Floyd
died at least in part as a result of the officer's actions." Really, sir? A video literally
showing the officer kneeling on Mr. Floyd's neck until he passed out and later died. Are you
suggesting that he would have died on his own had the officer not done this?
You are attempting to seem reasonable with your pleas for due process, but you just come
across as obtuse. A video of a man murdering another man and your like, no I don't believe
it. There has to be another explanation.
Tad Story SUBSCRIBER 2 weeks ago
So your saying Mr. Floyd's use of a Highly addictive and equally deadly narcotic on top of
already severe heart condition to which your camera did not display played no role as to the
outcome? Considering the use of Fentanyl is 900 times more deadly than crack-cocaine I feel
it needed to be discussed and weighed, to which it was but the mob had their torches ready
and that carried as much or even more weight, Maxine made sure of that..
beryl silver SUBSCRIBER 2 weeks ago (Edited)
The article failed to mention the words protesters need "to get more confrontational" Maxine
Waters used.
Michael Lapolla SUBSCRIBER 3 weeks ago
It has been obvious to us that the state of Minnesota offered Derek Chauvin as a sacrifice on
the altar of expediency. Witness the immediate and joyous victory laps by the state AG. It
just took a while and a show trial. It is obvious that the jury had no stomach for another
outcome. This is what you vote for - this is what you get.
And we have a Capitol police person murdering an unarmed trespasser, but our DOJ sees and
hears no evil and utters not a word.
What a national embarrassment. Go back to sleep Minnesota.
FRANK HERMAN SUBSCRIBER 2 weeks ago
He wasn't on his neck. Even the prosecution witness admitted, that when looked at from other
angles, that the cop was on his shoulder blade.
Tim Taylor SUBSCRIBER 3 weeks ago
Something to think about in the current culture of policing:
Most dangerous jobs in U.S. 1. Logging 2. Aircraft pilots/flight engineers 3. Derrick
operators 4. Roofers 5. Garbage collectors 6. Iron workers. 7. Delivery drivers 8. Farmers.
9. Firefighting supervisors 10. Power linemen 11. Agricultural workers 12. Crossing guards
13. Crane operators 14. Construction helpers. 15. Landscaping supervisors 16. Highway
maintenance workers. 17. Cement masons 18. Small engine mechanics. 19. Supervisors of
mechanics 20. Heavy equipment mechanics. 21. Grounds maintenance workers 22. Police
Officers.
What Maxine does not seem to understand is that demonizing the police works against gun
control efforts.
The more that the citizenry believes the police cannot be trusted to protect them, the
more citizens will seek to protect themselves, including purchasing and carrying
firearms.
Kenneth Gimbel SUBSCRIBER 3 weeks ago
Whew. I guess Minneapolis won't be torched tonight. Or, maybe, just a little bit to satisfy
the mob.
Verne Thibodeaux SUBSCRIBER 3 weeks ago (Edited)
There are a lot of "undocumented shoppers" who are very disappointed today.
Michael Havey SUBSCRIBER 3 weeks ago
As I've been saying since the first day of the trial, only the dumbest, most gullible, least
informed Americans believed that Derek Chauvin was innocent.
DK Brand SUBSCRIBER 3 weeks ago (Edited)
All that without due process being applied? See, you are the problem when the vast majority
of people who saw the video were horrified and felt the officer was guilty of his death. But
we have a system of laws and due process protects everyone, even the seemingly obviously
guilty. There are people who are caught red handed every day who receive the same due
process. So stop crowing about your imaginary opponents and accept that our system has worked
as designed.
William Coburn SUBSCRIBER 3 weeks ago (Edited)
innocent
He did not need to be found innocent, just not guilty.
Nidge M SUBSCRIBER 3 weeks ago (Edited)
Talk about dark comedy ........
IF Chauvin is convicted the seemingly not very legally au fait Maxine Waters just handed
his team perfect grounds to appeal against any conviction.
The whole situation is peturbing at a frightening number of levels 'though.
What will US cities do if 10%, 20% even 70% their Cops quit?
What will they do even if they don't quit but 'work to the letter of the rules' and slow all
action to a crawl?
Its not too unthinkable given the record of violence the very large man Chauvin was
kneeling on in the course of the arrest.
And add to that the somewhat inept but from the video plausible Police woman now
incacerated for shooting instead of tasering another career criminal .......... Which from
this distance appears to be a based on political rather than legal considerations.
Would you be a cop?
Meanwhile politicians from both main US parties appear to be giving their blessing to
those who wish to userp the rule of law .......... That's viable is it?
Nidge M SUBSCRIBER 3 weeks ago (Edited)
No, Floyd was not resisting arrest actively & constantly for 9 minutes.
But
Floyd was a very large male with a record of extream violence, drug abuse and
unpredictability.
Its hardly novel for an aprehended person to fake placidity, then when their restrainers
relax to explode into extream violence.
I am not asserting what Chauvin did was right or wrong ........ But I do think its a
reaction which anyone who has had to deal with violent offenders would regard as a pretty
understandable reaction.
I also wonder might those who are so ready to jump on the bandwagon, grandstanding &
howling in condemnation precipitate something far beyond their expectations.
I wonder too what would happen if the majority of those so quick to condemn were handed
responsibility for doing the policing job people like Chauvin have to do.
How would you do it?
Lori Crossley SUBSCRIBER 3 weeks ago
I don't think anyone wants policing like Chauvin did it. It led to the death of a man. There
were a lot of potential outcomes to this arrest. I would not blame any officer for being
overly cautious based on Floyd's arrest record - and yes, it does count.
But Chauvin was not alone in making this arrest. He had assistance which was not utilized.
Do people fake injury to get away from police officers? I am sure they do.
But there were 9 long minutes when that was not happening. There are thousands of police
officers who leave their homes each day to walk into potentially violent situations. And they
do their job and go home at night (with little thanks) and did not make the same choice
Chauvin did. His trial was fair and the verdict is in. The process worked for Chauvin - not
so much for Floyd.
Mark Allen SUBSCRIBER 3 weeks ago
I grew up on the block where the police station is located, in an apartment often captured in
the footage of the rioting. And while it did make the local papers, the national news has
failed to report that the folks living in those apartments cannot sleep (due to the rioters)
and have to put wet towels over their windows to keep out the teargas (due to the police).
And the irony in this is that the overwhelming majority of those apartment dwellers are
working-poor, persons of color.
Let that sink in.
Scott Mote SUBSCRIBER 3 weeks ago
For the regressives and BLMers, those apartment dwellers are just collateral damage. Maybe
BLM will move them into a BLM mansion.
John Smith SUBSCRIBER 3 weeks ago
Great insights Mr. Baker.
Strange how video evidence clearly convicts the subject in the minds of leftists. They
appear to be able to assign motive and punishment based on their emotional appraisal. We have
a sitting California Congresswoman stating this on video tape.
Well, we are not to believe every video tape. Remember Jussie Smollett? They did the same
to the unnamed racists, who assaulted Mr. Smollett - according to his version of events. All
muscular non black males were guilty, until individually cleared. The usual leftists in
politics, media, and entertainment joined Jussie.
Unfortunately, Jussie's version of events was false. He hired two black men to "assault"
him, then put together his soap opera version of the script. Since both stories could not be
true, no one went to jail. This is what politicians with law degrees have contributed to our
Republic.
Yes, he still faces felony charges. But it is more than two years hence. Speedy trial?
Paul Stroud SUBSCRIBER 3 weeks ago
For all of most of our lives we've been able to rely on a civil society that recognized its'
faults, if even after a period of time, and took hard steps to correct them. This is now at
risk as acceptable "civil disobedience" becomes "violent disobedience". We can no longer look
at other parts of the world that are continually wrenched apart by violent, factional
conflict and destruction and think, "oh, at least it can't happen here". It is happening
here, and it is escalating. I hope I am wrong, but I fear for our children and grandchildren.
"... The Global Financial Syndicate will use all kind of distractions to mask the MONETARY power and divide the populace to continue its control & dominance through monetary imperialism. The world is a playground for "evil spirits." ..."
One need to understand the STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENT correctly, clearly, and comprehensively
to live & light our world. What is your strategic construct of the national and
international control system?
The Global Financial Syndicate will use all kind of distractions to mask the MONETARY
power and divide the populace to continue its control & dominance through monetary
imperialism. The world is a playground for "evil spirits."
How does the Financial Empire increase its control & POWER over a region? It likes
turning each region into its suzerainty and an Animal Farm (Top-Down Control Structure -
Democracy/Republic/...) internally by controlling its money supply through the
central-private banking system.
Global Financial Empire's strategy:
– Capture LANDS
– Constitutionalize to control the suzerainty & LIVES
– Create LOANS through private creation of money by the private banking system
(Credit/Debt) & give preferential access-terms to kleptocrats (Kleptocrats/Finance --
> Business/Media -- > Politicians/Bureaucrats -- > people)
– Conserve control & power through Consumerism - lifestyles (Labor &
Leisure)
Monetary Power = Lands x Lives x Loans. The key CONTROL elements of the Financial Empire
within a suzerainty are:
– credit/debt - LOANS
– consumerism/desires - LIFESTYLE
– circuses/distractions. - LOST & trivial
When it comes to the international realm it seeks following freedoms:
– freedom of capital movement,
– freedom of trade,
– freedom to provide services, particularly financial
– freedom for warfare
The Global Financial Syndicate controls, finances and corrupts policies such as those in
the U$A administration by its financing the substitution of national leaders with employees
of the Financial Syndicate, such as Biden, Draghi, Yellen, Juncker, Macron,... Globalization
is meant to establish the global financial syndicate's rule everywhere, hierarchically from
top to bottom, in contrast to the democratic right of citizens to self-determination and the
responsibility of governments towards their citizens.
Who wants to make us all, whether we be nations or individuals, slaves to debt?
"... My life story is very similar to yours -- blue collar upbringing, worked graveyard shift in factories during college, made it all the way to Wall Street --- and I completely agree with you. The Democratic Party might have been the party of the working-class families many years ago, but it's absolutely not that now. ..."
"... The most interesting aspect of party realignment in almost every country is the movement of the Anglo-Saxon elites to the parties of leftist authoritarianism, whether in the UK, US, or Canada. Since elites have always had “fluid” political values, one can only assume that they see tyranny as our destiny. ..."
I am a retired attorney but was reared in a blue collar home. I have not lost the values I
learned where my father returned home from work six days a week as a railroad brakeman.
Thanks to my pre-law curriculum I am well read in history and literature. My undergrad major
was history and my minor literature.
Having acquired a love for reading in college I have read both all my life but it has not
changed me from the son my father reared. I worked construction and general labor jobs to
help pay for college and law school and am very aware of how hard those jobs are and I have a
healthy respect for the men and women who provide us with the essential goods and services we
all need.
I therefore have no use for attitude of most on the left and some on the right who have no
respect for average working people and small business.
It seems many in Britain have the same outlook. My Dad was very proud I became a lawyer
but I am just as proud of the job he performed to give me that chance.
SUBSCRIBER 5 hours ago
I therefore have no use for attitude of most on the left and some on the right who have no
respect for average working people and small business. It seems many in Britain have the same
outlook.
My life story is very similar to yours -- blue collar upbringing, worked graveyard
shift in factories during college, made it all the way to Wall Street --- and I completely
agree with you. The Democratic Party might have been the party of the working-class families
many years ago, but it's absolutely not that now.
SUBSCRIBER 4 hours ago
Most democrat leaders are career politicians like Obama, Biden, Pelosi and Schumer. They
never had a real job and paid any taxes. They love raising taxes for big government and dole
out. Can’t wait for midterm election and take back the congress. R
SUBSCRIBER 14 hours ago
The most interesting aspect of party realignment in almost every country is the
movement of the Anglo-Saxon elites to the parties of leftist authoritarianism, whether in the
UK, US, or Canada. Since elites have always had “fluid” political values,
one can only assume that they see tyranny as our destiny.
A US Space Force commander was reportedly
relieved as commander of the 11th Space
Warning Squadron
"due to loss of trust and confidence in his ability to lead," after he appeared on a podcast to
promote
his
book
which claims that the US military has been infiltrated by a neo-Marxist agenda which is transforming military culture
and policy.
"Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting, Space Operations Command commander,
relieved Lt. Col.
Matthew Lohmeier of command
of the 11th Space Warning Squadron, Buckley Air Force Base, Colorado, May 14, due to loss
of trust and confidence in his ability to lead," the Space Force told the
Washington
Examiner
in a statement.
"This decision was based on public comments made by Lt. Col. Lohmeier in a recent podcast. Lt. Gen. Whiting has initiated a
Command Directed Investigation (CDI) on whether these comments constituted prohibited partisan political activity."
Lohmeier
self-published
Irresistible
Revolution: Marxism's Goal of Conquest & the Unmaking of the American Military
this
week.
The book, according to the description, explores the "impact of a neo-Marxist
agenda" and the manner in which the "
Black
Lives Matter
movement, anti-racism, postmodernism, [and] political correctness" affect the national security of the
United States.
Lohmeier said
that he had informed his superiors, public affairs staff, and lawyers for the military about the book prior to publication
,
but it was not subject to a pre-publication review.
Department of Defense Directive 1344.10 prohibits active-duty personnel from engaging in
"partisan political activities."
Service members are, however, permitted to express
their personal opinions on political candidates and issues in their personal capacity and when
not
in uniform
. Lohmeier denied intending to participate in partisan politics. -Washington Examiner
"My intent never has been to engage in partisan politics. I have written a book about a particular political ideology
(Marxism) in the hope that our Defense Department might return to being politically nonpartisan in the future as it has
honorably done throughout history," Lohmeier, and Air Force Academy graduate, told
Military.com
.
The demotion comes after Lohmeier criticized Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin's diversity
and inclusion "agenda."
"I don't demonize the man, but I want to make it clear to both him and every service member this agenda -- it will divide us.
It will not unify us," he said, after Austin imposed a 60-day force-wide extremism "
stand-down
"
to determine how to rid the military of extremism following the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.
Lohmeier says
he was asked to give his troops extremism training and was given a
"70-page" booklet of "talking points."
The booklet reportedly began with an overview of the Capitol riot, and
included examples of "white nationalists that have been caught at some point in the last decade and punished for it and kicked
out of the military, or a radical Islamic terrorist."
"The diversity, inclusion and equity industry and the trainings we are receiving in the military ... is rooted in critical
race theory, which is rooted in Marxism," said Lohmeier, who also knocked the Defense Department for saying that the military
has "too many white pilots" during a pilot shortage.
Citing a diversity initiative in which service members read So You Want to Talk About
Race by Ijeoma Oluo, in which the U.S. is referred to as a "white supremacist nation," Lohmeier told the Information
Operation podcast that the young service members are inundated by a "hyperpoliticized work environment where diversity and
inclusion initiatives are being pushed constantly."
Lohmeier added that conservatives in the military who are willing to voice their
opinions are painted as "extremists."
-Washington Examiner
"What you see happening in the U.S. military at the moment is that if you're a conservative, then you're lumped into a group
of people who are labeled extremists, if you're willing to voice your views. And
if
you're aligned with the Left, then it's OK to be an activist online because no one's gonna hold you accountable
," he
added.
According to Pentagon spokesman John Kirby, "There were members, sadly, of the active-duty force participating and espousing
these radical beliefs," adding "We don't know the full breadth and depth of it."
Of note,
Lohmeier's book is currently the #1 seller in Amazon's Military Policy, as
well as Communism & Socialism sections
.
BarnacleBill
1 hour ago
Yes. America's state of
permanent warfare
pits
its weapons against the dwellers in mud huts everywhere. While the generals and colonels pretend to prepare to defend
the country against the latest bogeyman (Russia, the Taliban, North Korea), the lower ranks are ordered to kill
hut-dwellers wherever they can find them. Increasingly, this has meant a war against women and children - as
practised by Israel this past week, as we see. I noted this new (and safe) war in my personal online journal nearly
ten years ago. It's not Pulitzer Prize stuff, but it reports the situation very fairly. Hit the link for the whole
two-minute read. I wrote there about today's "grunts",
They
are sociopaths, pretty much by definition, and we should be very afraid of them. They will be our children's and
grandchildren's guardians and torturers
.
https://barlowscayman.blogspot.com/2012/10/the-war-against-women.html
techengineer
7 minutes ago
Lohmeier is exactly right.. The are pushing the liberal/marxist dog**** on everyone and the young men and
women are eating it up.. And the managers are although don't believe the liberal dog**** don't want to lose
their jobs so they play along..
It's disgusting!
GunnerySgtHartman
2 hours ago
remove
link
This is Obama's politicization of the military bearing fruit. The military appointments made by Obama were
purely on ideological grounds; those appointments are now in positions of authority in the Pentagon and are
now spreading their evil gospel.
Virgil Krenshaw
PREMIUM
2 hours ago
That's why coups (or, in this case, counter coups) are typically executed by colonels not generals.
RedDog1
2 hours ago
The Obama regime finished what the Clinton regime began.
Virgil Krenshaw
PREMIUM
2 hours ago
(Edited)
When you're criticizing wokism, you're engaging in partisan politics. When you're promoting wokism, you're
not being partisan at all.
Marcuse argues that "the realization of the objective of tolerance" requires "intolerance toward
prevailing policies, attitudes, opinions, and the extension of tolerance to policies, attitudes, and
opinions which are outlawed or suppressed." He makes the case for "liberating tolerance", which would
consist of intolerance to right-wing movements and toleration of left-wing movements.
[5]
Marxists have been working towards this for
decades
American Dissident
2 hours ago
remove
link
Fun Fact: He knew The System would destroy his career for dissent, but he spoke up anyway. It will take men
like this for us to win. Lt. Col. Matthew Lohmeier deserves to be honored.
overbet
2 hours ago
(Edited)
Buying his book is a good start. Support him and encourage others. Gift it to a liberal.
An
Outstanding Rebuttal to CRT from a Frontline U.S. Military Officer
5.0 out of 5 stars
An
Outstanding Rebuttal to CRT from a Frontline U.S. Military Officer
Reviewed in the United States on May 14, 2021
Verified Purchase
Critical Race Theory (CRT), the fraudulent spawn of another failed ideology – Marxism
– is a mind-cancer invading American society. It has metastasized to the point it is now being taught in the nation's
military academies, effectively a "new gospel" of how the world should work. At base, however, it is simply the latest spin
on an utterly-failed theory under which over 100 million people – as a conservative estimate – were slaughtered trying to
make Marxism "work". And that's in the 20th century, alone. Our children don't know this because our schools don't teach
this.
Lt Col Lohmeier demonstrates he, at least, is well aware of Marxism's dangers, no matter how they are disguised and
re-gift-wrapped. A clear scholar of Marxism's history and failures, in his outstanding work Lt Col Matthew Lohmeier exposés
this "new" ideology, CRT, a mind-virus of the type evolutionary psychologist Gad Saad refers to as "The Parasitic Mind", in
the psychologist's book of the same title. Lohmeier recounts how Marxism has morphed from a class-warfare "struggle" –
really, a man-made conflict set up to cause differing societal classes to wage war on one another – into the race-based
"struggle", CRT. This "new" ideology comes complete with its "intersectionalism" add-on, just to make sure everyone is
covered by *some* "oppressed" "group" of one flavor or another. So the Boogey Man is everywhere. Racism is everywhere. Just
because you can't see it directly, you know it's there: It's "institutional racism", after all.
Lt Col Lohmeier analyzes such false claims under the searing light of the truth, showing the actual damage caused to
today's military and the potential for far worse damages to both our military and our society, if this movement is not
stopped dead in its tracks. And Lohmeier has the credibility and facts to back up his analysis: A highly-decorated,
current-active-duty, "fast-burner" (early selection to ranks) squadron commander who commands a premier, frontline U.S.
Space Force squadron, Lt Col Lohmeier provides a "boots-on-the-ground" look at what's happening to the U.S. military as a
result of CRT's brainwashing agenda.
Lt Col Lohmeier has taken the extraordinary step of publishing the book while on active duty, fully aware of the risks such
publication might raise. But the message is too critical to wait. Lohmeier "gets" that, knowing the stakes nonetheless.
This book is a wakeup call. Every American should read it – certainly every U.S. military servicemember, at the very least:
Forewarned is forearmed. Get this book. Read it. And learn about the fight to come: the fight to save our nation from this
Marxist cancer.
>
5.0 out of 5 stars
I
lived in the USSR
Reviewed in the United States on May 11, 2021
Verified Purchase
WAKE UP!!! I lived in the USSR. What is taking place in the United States RIGHT NOW is
textbook Marxist/communism. The history explained by the author in this book is unimpeachable and accurate. This book will
help anyone who reads it quickly and easily gain a clear understanding of what is currently happening in America; and why.
The warning at the end of the book is chilling and true to history.
As for Apple, let's start with the statement that most Apple product are overrated and
overpriced. Despite price, they are more of a fashion statement then technology marvels. Owning
Apple is a lot like using Chanel por Dolche and Gabbana perfume. This is a statement that you are
special.
Now by adopting "woke bolshevism" Apple will inevitably slide deeper into mediocrity.
I'm biased, because I know Antonio Garcia-Martinez and something like the same thing once
happened to me, but the decision by Apple to bend to a posse of internal complainers and
fire him
over a passage in a five-year-old book is ridiculous hypocrisy. Hypocrisy by the complainers,
and defamatory cowardice by the bosses -- about right for the Invasion of the Body Snatchers
-style era of timorous conformity and duncecap monoculture the woke mobs at these places are
trying to build as their new Jerusalem.
Garcia-Martinez is a brilliant, funny, multi-talented Cuban-American whose confessional
memoir Chaos Monkeys
is to big tech what Michael Lewis's Liar's Poker was to finance. A onetime high-level Facebook
executive -- he ran Facebook Ads -- Antonio's book shows the House of Zuckerberg to be a cult
full of on-the-spectrum zealots who talked like justice activists while possessing the business
ethics of Vlad the Impaler:
Facebook is full of true believers who really, really, really are not doing it for the
money, and really, really will not stop until every man, woman, and child on earth is staring
into a blue-framed window with a Facebook logo.
When I read Chaos Monkeys the first time I was annoyed, because this was Antonio's third
career at least -- he'd also worked at Goldman, Sachs -- and he tossed off a memorable
bestseller like it was nothing. Nearly all autobiographies fail because the genre requires
total honesty, and not only do few writers have the stomach for turning the razor on
themselves, most still have one eye on future job offers or circles of friends, and so keep the
bulk of their interesting thoughts sidelined -- you're usually reading a résumé,
not a book .
Chaos Monkeys is not that. Garcia-Martinez is an immediately relatable narrator because in
one breath he tells you exactly what he thinks of former colleagues ("A week before my last
day, I had lunch with the only senior person at Goldman Sachs who was not an inveterate
asshole") and in the next explains, but does not excuse, the psychic quirks that have him
chasing rings in some of the world's most rapacious corporations. "Whenever membership in some
exclusive club is up for grabs, I viciously fight to win it, even if only to reject membership
when offered," he wrote. "After all, echoing the eminent philosopher G. Marx: How good can a
club be if it's willing to have lowly me as a member?"
... ... ...
At one point, as a means of comparing the broad-shouldered British DIY expert favorably to
other women he'd known, he wrote this:
Most women in the Bay Area are soft and weak, cosseted and naive despite their claims of
worldliness, and generally full of shit. They have their self-regarding entitlement feminism,
and ceaselessly vaunt their independence, but the reality is, come the epidemic plague or
foreign invasion, they'd become precisely the sort of useless baggage you'd trade for a box
of shotgun shells or a jerry can of diesel.
Out of context, you could, I guess, read this as bloviating from a would-be macho man
beating his chest about how modern "entitlement feminism" would be unmasked as a chattering
fraud in a Mad Max scenario. In context, he's obviously not much of a shotgun-wielder himself
and is actually explaining why he fell for a strong woman, as the next passage reveals:
British Trader, on the other hand, was the sort of woman who would end up a useful ally in
that postapocalypse, doing whatever work -- be it carpentry, animal husbandry, or a shotgun
blast to someone's back -- required doing.
Again, this is not a passage about women working in tech. It's a throwaway line in a comedic
recount of a romance that juxtaposes the woman he loves with the inadequate set of all others,
a literary convention as old as writing itself. The only way to turn this into a commentary on
the ability of women to work in Silicon Valley is if you do what Twitter naturally does and
did, i.e. isolate the quote and surround it with mounds of James Damore references. More on
this in a moment.
After trying the writer's life, Antonio went back to work for Apple. When he entered the
change on his LinkedIn page, Business Insider did a short, uncontroversial
writeup . Then a little site called 9to5Mac picked up on
the story and did the kind of thing that passes for journalism these days, poring through
someone's life in search of objectionable passages and calling for immediate disappearance of
said person down a cultural salt mine. Writer Zac Hall quoted from Apple's Inclusion and
Diversity page:
Across Apple, we've strengthened our long-standing commitment to making our company more
inclusive and the world more just. Where every great idea can be heard. And everybody
belongs.
Hall then added, plaintively, "This isn't just PR speak for Apple. The company releases
annual
updates on its efforts to hire diversely, and it puts its money where its mouth is with
programs
intended to give voice to women and people of color in technology. So why is Apple giving
Garcia Martinez a great big pass?"
From there the usual press pile-on took place, with heroes at places like The Verge sticking
to the playbook. "Silicon Valley has consistently had a white, male workforce," they wrote,
apparently not bothered by Antonio's not-whiteness. "There are some in the Valley, such as
notorious ex-Googler James Damore, who suggest this is because women and people of color
lack the innate qualities needed to succeed in tech ."
Needless to say, Antonio never wrote anything like that, but the next step in the drama was
similarly predictable: a group letter by Apple employees claiming, in seriousness, to fear for
their safety. "Given Mr. García Martínez's history of publishing overtly racist
and sexist remarks," the letter read, "we are concerned that his presence at Apple will
contribute to an unsafe working environment for our colleagues who are at risk of public
harassment and private bullying." All of this without even a hint that there's ever been
anything like such a problem at any of his workplaces.
Within about a nanosecond, the same people at Apple who hired Antonio, clearly having read
his book, now fired him, issuing the following statement:
At Apple, we have always strived to create an inclusive, welcoming workplace where
everyone is respected and accepted. Behavior that demeans or discriminates against people for
who they are has no place here.
The Verge triumphantly reported on Apple's move using the
headline , "'Misogynistic' Apple hire is out hours after employees call for investigation."
Other companies followed suit with the same formulation. CNN : "Apple
parts ways with newly hired ex-Facebook employee after workers cite 'misogynistic' writing."
CNET : "Apple reportedly cuts ties with employee amid uproar over misogynistic
writing."
Apple by this point not only issued a statement declaring that Antonio's "behavior" was
demeaning and discriminatory, but by essentially endorsing the complaints of their
letter-writing employees, poured jet fuel on headline descriptions of him as a misogynist. It's
cowardly, defamatory, and probably renders him unhirable in the industry, but this is far from
the most absurd aspect of the story.
I'm a fan of Dr. Dre's music and have been since the N.W.A. days. It's not any of my
business if he wants to make $3 billion
selling Beats by Dre to Apple , earning himself a place on the board in the process. But if
2,000 Apple employees are going to insist that they feel literally unsafe working alongside a
man who wrote a love letter to a woman who towers over him in heels, I'd like to hear their
take on serving under, and massively profiting from, partnership with the author of such
classics as "Bitches Ain't Shit" and "Lyrical Gangbang," who is also the subject of such
articles
as "Here's What's Missing from Straight Outta Compton: Me and the Other Women Dr. Dre Beat
Up."
It's easy to get someone like Antonio Garcia Martinez fired. Going after a board member
who's reportedly
sitting on hundreds of millions in Apple stock is a different matter. A letter making such
a demand is likely to be returned to sender, and the writer of it will likely spend every
evaluation period looking over his or her shoulder. Why? Because going after Dre would mean
forcing the company to denounce one of its more profitable investments -- Beats and Beats Music
were big factors in helping Apple turn
music streaming into a major profit center . The firm made $4.1 billion in that
area last year alone.
Speaking of profits: selling iPhones is a pretty good business. It
made Apple $47.9 billion last year, good for 53% of the company's total revenue. Part of
what makes the iPhone such a delightfully profitable product is its low production cost, which
reportedly comes from Apple's use of a smorgasbord of suppliers with a penchant for forced
labor -- Uighurs said to be shipped in by the thousand to help make
iPhone glass (Apple denies this), temporary "dispatch workers" sent in above
legal limits , workers in "iPhone city"
clocking excessive overtime to meet launch dates, etc. Apple also has a storied history of
tax avoidance, offshoring over a hundred billion in revenues, using Ireland as a corporate
address despite no physical presence there, and so on.
Maybe the signatories to the Apple letter can have a Chaos Monkeys book-burning outside the
Chinese facility where iPhone glass is made -- keep those Uighur workers warm! Or they can have
one in Dublin, to celebrate the €13bn tax bill a court recently ruled Apple didn't have to pay.
It's all a sham. The would-be progressives denouncing Garcia-Martinez don't seem to mind
working for a company that a Democrat-led congressional committee ripped for using " monopoly
power " to extract rents via a host of atrocious anti-competitive practices. Whacking an
author is just a form of performative "activism" that doesn't hurt their bottom lines or their
careers.
Meanwhile, the bosses who give in to their demands are all too happy to look like they're
steeped in social concern, especially if they can con some virtue-signaling dink at a trade
website into saying Apple's mechanically platitudinous "Shared Values" page "isn't just PR
speak." You'd fire a couple of valuable employees to get that sort of P.R.
When I was caught up in my own cancelation episode, I was devastated, above all to see the
effect it had on my family. Unlike Garcia-Martinez, I had past writings genuinely worth being
embarrassed by, and I felt that it was important, morally and for my own mental health, to
apologize in public. I didn't fight for my career and reputation, and threw myself on the mercy
of the court of public opinion.
I now know this is a mistake. The people who launch campaigns like this don't believe in
concepts like redemption or growth. An apology is just another thing they'd like to get, like
the removal of competition for advancement. These people aren't idealists. They're just
ordinary greedy Americans trying to get ahead, using the tactics available to them, and it's
time to stop thinking of stories like this through any other lens.
nobaloney 4 hours ago
[neo]Liberal white women are the worst. The death of America.
Nicholi_Hel 2 hours ago remove link
The main thing that " is on it's way out" are all of your "smart" schizophrenic liberal
hags. They are fleeing the big cities (especially CA) in droves because their psychopathic
politics turned their states into crime ridden, dangerous ****holes with costs of living they
can no longer afford.
Unfortunately they are flooding into red states like Texas bringing with them stale
Marxism, tired feminism, couched slogans, sad cliches and of course their anti depressants
and genital herpes.
gregga777 4 hours ago
Au contraire, mon ami! Look at how wondrously successful they've made US corporations like
General Motors and The Boeing Company! /obviously sarcasm
SummerSausage PREMIUM 3 hours ago
Let's not forget the wonderous leadership of Carly Fiorina (HP), Elizabeth Holmes
(Theranos) and Marissa Mayer (Yahoo)
McGantic 4 hours ago (Edited)
I completely disagree.
I find liberal women of certain other races to be far more offensive.
Nothing is worse than loud, uncouth jogger women with their in-your-face screaming and
howling.
The definition of unsophisticated and to be avoided at all costs.
These liberal white women at least have some semblance of manners and intelligence.
espirit 3 hours ago
Just different tribes of howler monkeys...
rawhedgehog 4 hours ago
precisely the sort of useless baggage you'd trade for a box of shotgun shells
I think that covers about 90% of the surface population currently, not just Bay Area
fems.
Agent Smith 3 hours ago
Not sure how many you'd get in exchange for an obese whining vaccine damaged genetic
mutant. Maybe you could tout them as self propelled food?
Fool's Gold 3 hours ago
Made me laugh 😅
Notenoughtoys 4 hours ago
Matt Taibbi is brilliant - Wish all the ZH articles were as well written as this !
Seriously_confused 3 hours ago
Taibbi is half and half. He wants to tell the truth, but he wants to keep his woke friends
so he often whimps and whiffs. He can write, but he has his head up his behind in much of his
thinking. Every once in a while he comes up for air and writes something like this. The rest
is wankerific
rawhedgehog 4 hours ago (Edited)
The company releases annual updates on its
efforts to hire diversely
Yet where is their annual report on their use of slave labor in China and how that makes
for a more inclusive and bright world. **** THIS CULTURE OF MORONS AND THOUGHT PUPPETS!
Matt, I enjoyed this article of yours but you need to make more noise exposing how slavery
and the commoditization of human lives is the bedrock of modern tech.
"They're just ordinary greedy Americans trying to get ahead, using the tactics available
to them, and it's time to stop thinking of stories like these through any other lens."
That about sums it up.
Calculus99 3 hours ago
What a miserable place Apple must be to work in, always having to watch yourself for fear
of the mob (even if you're part of that mob).
The internal moral in these giant corps must be shot to pieces.
skippy dinner 2 hours ago
Lots of other corporations sell cool gear. There is no need to buy Apple stuff.
It's only because of conformist acquiescence to peer-group pressures that people buy
it.
The problem is the ahoLes who buy sht from that fing company - AppleFaceBookGoogle.
It is so easy to dump thEm - it is literally no effort.
Problems is there are a lot of people who dont care - about anything.
Nicholi_Hel 3 hours ago
I have no sympathy for the peter puffers that worked or work for Goldman Sachs, Facebook
and or Apple.
This pickle smoocher worked for all three, now we are supposed to break out the tissues
and violins because a group of vicious, screeching Bolsheviks ankle bit one of their own.
"Inside BLM co-founder Patrisse Khan-Cullors' million-dollar real-estate buying binge.
Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrisse Khan-Cullors has gone on a real-estate buying binge in
recent years, snagging four high-end homes for $3.2 million in the US alone, according to
property records.":
Actor and Grammy Award winning musician Donald Glover says that television shows and movies
are becoming increasingly boring because "people are afraid of getting cancelled."
ZeroHedge
The Who legend Roger Daltrey says the 'woke' generation is creating a miserable world that
serves to stifle the kind of creative freedom he enjoyed in the 60s.
The iconic frontman made the comments during a recent appearance on Zane Lowe's Apple Music
1 podcast.
"I don't know, we might get somewhere because it's becoming so absurd now with AI, all the
tricks it can do, and the woke generation," said Daltrey.
"It's terrifying, the miserable world they're going to create for themselves. I mean, anyone
who's lived a life and you see what they're doing, you just know that it's a route to nowhere,"
he added.
The singer noted how he was lucky to have lived through an era where freedom of speech was
encouraged, not silenced.
"Especially when you've lived through the periods of a life that we've had the privilege to.
I mean, we've had the golden era. There's no doubt about that," he said.
No doubt the US/UK deep state, now more than ever, are busy trying to sow conflict and
division in Eurasia, to divide-and-rule Mackinder's "World Island" and hence the world.
The phenomenon of "cancel culture" is a toxic one metastasizing into a woke revolution war
empowered by Big Tech and Big Business. Those unfamiliar with being canceled involve publicly
shaming others and boycotting celebrities and companies. However, the art of canceling has
progressed well beyond canceling public figures and is now used to garget average folks. The
result can be devastating for ordinary people who may face the consequences of losing their
jobs, losing friends and family, or having their social media accounts terminated.
Comedian Dave Chappelle partook in a video interview with Joe Rogan on "The Joe Rogan
Experience" podcast about cancel culture. He told Rogan that he recognizes the change people
are attempting to bring through activism and accountability for prominent folks but denounced
cancel culture:
"I'm very lucky to be able to see people who are great at things up close," Chappelle said.
"Even on this podcast ... it's one of the joys of my life getting to know these people and
knowing and seeing them be human."
Chappelle said, "I hope we all survive it," while referring to the cancel culture storm
gripping society. "That's why that cancel culture shit bothers me. I'm not even opposed to the
ideas behind some of these cancelations. I get it."
Rogan said, "the inclination, all of it, is to make the world a better place." He said
social media and public shaming have "gotten abused and misused by the wrong people and bad
actors, but at the end of the day, the thing they think they're trying to do is eliminate bad
aspects of our culture."
Last year, Chappelle criticized cancel culture, saying audiences have become "too brittle,"
adding that "everything you say upsets somebody."
Chappelle hasn't been the only well-known person to speak out against cancel culture, Curtis
Jackson, known as "50 Cent," recently said cancel culture is "
unfair " and "targeting straight men" who "don't have any organizations to back them
up."
Jackson said he wouldn't get canceled because "hip-hop culture loves things that are
damaged. It loves people who are already broken from experience."
A study by a top education think tank, Civitas,
found that free speech at the world's leading universities is being eroded at a rapid rate
due to "cancel culture."
Cancel culture may have had good intentions to hold people accountable for things they did
or say. Instead, it has backfired and produced a toxic environment that limits freedom of
speech and alienates anyone with opposing views. Society can't move forward if liberals cancel
anyone they don't like - there needs to be an open forum where all voices are heard.
"... No, people get their belief systems (religious, political, economic, cultural) from their identity groups. **Then** (if called upon) they apply the intellect to rationalize the beliefs that they **already** hold. ..."
"... Rationalizing the Russiagate nonsense was seemingly inevitable with the 24/7 help of the MSM, and the continuous chirping of Democrat politicians. The intellect was not a lighthouse beacon that led intelligent Democrats through the fog of 24/7/52 issued propaganda, rather; the intellect was the tool that solidified vaporous forms into false-reality. ..."
My two cents. People are mimics. It is fascinating when you realize this.
People don't muse, contemplate and chew over the circumstances and issues in their environment and then resolve - "aha! I have
got it." That is not where people get their belief systems. For example, a million and more people didn't all independently study
the Bible and then realize that their interpretation was fully consistent with those of the Roman Catholics and therefore they
should go join the Catholic Church.
No, people get their belief systems (religious, political, economic, cultural) from their identity groups. **Then** (if
called upon) they apply the intellect to rationalize the beliefs that they **already** hold.
The epiphany came to me when I observed intelligent people falling for Russiagate. WTF !! I thought intelligent people
would get it. Russiagate would be a flash-in-the-pan that would disappear in a few days (or less!). Boy was I wrong. The intellect
does not rule, group identity does. Those that identified Democrat (generalizing here, of course) fell in step with the beliefs
common to Democrats, including Russiagate.
Rationalizing the Russiagate nonsense was seemingly inevitable with the 24/7 help of the MSM, and the continuous chirping
of Democrat politicians. The intellect was not a lighthouse beacon that led intelligent Democrats through the fog of 24/7/52 issued
propaganda, rather; the intellect was the tool that solidified vaporous forms into false-reality.
To find one's identity in groups is deeply human. People are dominated by their need to be group-accepted. It is unsurprising
that group acceptance and group identity produce what we call fashion - fashion in style, fashion in vocabulary, fashion in beliefs.
This applies to Wokism. People are mimics.
For years, I and others have argued for body camera (and police interrogation cameras) to be
used in every jurisdiction. Despite the obvious value of such cameras, jurisdictions like Los
Angeles County have resisted and still do not have this basic protection for both officers and
citizens alike. Likewise, prosecutors in cities like Chicago
long opposed the filming of officers by citizens .
The recent controversy over a traffic stop in L.A. shows the importance of such body
cameras. In the video, an officer pulls over a self-described teacher for using her cellphone
while driving and is met with a barrage of racist slurs. The officer was only able to show his
side in the encounter because he paid for his own camera. It is absurd that Los Angeles County
forces officers to pay for their own cameras to guarantee a record of such encounters. In LA
County, it is bring your own camera (BYOC) or engage in policing at your own risk.
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.453.0_en.html#goog_1736936555
NOW PLAYING
Wall Street Bounces, After Selloff Fed Boosts Liquidity
SoftBank Said to Plan $14 Billion Sale of Alibaba Shares
China’s Companies Have Worst Quarter on Record, Beige Book Says
U.S.-Saudi Oil Alliance Under Consideration, Brouillette Says
ETF Volumes Surge in Current Market Environment
Investors Have Given Up on a V-Shaped Recovery, BNY's Young Cautions
The African-American teacher is shown in the video immediately attacking the hispanic
officer with a litany of racist slurs and insults from repeatedly calling him a
“murdererâ€...
"Yes, I started to record because you're a murderer," she says.
"You're threatening to kill me and my son," she says at one point in the encounter.
...and then it escalated as the woman is heard telling the deputy,
"You're always going to be a Mexican. You'll never be white, you know that, right?"
"You'll never be white, which is what you really want to be," she says after signing a
citation. "You want to be white."
Police say the woman is well known for bringing baseless charges against officers.
Here is the body cam video of the April 23 incident in San Dimas:
https://www.youtube.com/embed/Jwy9lB2q8YE
The officer remains calm despite the litany of insults.
My anger at the video was not just over the racist slurs but the fact that this officer had
to equip himself in Los Angeles.
As many of us have argued for 20 years, these cameras
protect officers and the public alike . If this officer did not have this videotape, this
could have been an incident where there are two wildly different accounts between the driver
and the officer. If a harassment claim is filed, the matter would likely be treated as unproven
rather than untrue. It would remain on the officer’s record that he was
accused for racism and harassment.
While many politicians are now calling for body cams, it was not long ago that they remained
silent on the issue or failed to object (or
joined ) as
police departments demanded delays in the release of such records. In April 2018, the LAPD
began releasing body
cam footage to the public from officer-involved shootings.
One of the issues delaying such deployment has been the insistence of officers to have
greater control in turning on and off cameras. There should be no such debate in terms of the
cameras operating as all times in public movements and encounters
play_arrow
GeneKelly 2 hours ago
She does NOT have the right to say : "You're threatening to kill me and my son," except to
the extent that she is prepared to face civil and criminal penalties for slander and false
accusations.
Unknown 5 hours ago
The Neoliberal brainwashing worked as planned to divide Americans.
This one-to-one replay of Red Guards - Wikipedia but with quite
different sponsors ;-) "Hóng Wèibīng was a mass student-led paramilitary social movement mobilized and guided by Chairman Mao
Zedong in 1966 through 1967, during the first phase of the Chinese Cultural Revolution
Notable quotes:
"... there is an on-going effort to create fads/movements in which the public becomes caught-up and distracts the from reality. ..."
"... The more binary and controversial the better. Red/Blue. I used to be a big fan of sports but have the opinion it is a pointless waste of time and my life is better for that realization. ..."
"... Characteristics of the Woke: They always attack, especially with insults, like "paranoia nonsense". They never address the actual point made, instead they reinterpret the point to make it appear pure evil. Which allows them to attribute the worst possible motivations on the person they are attacking. Naturally they invent things the other person hadn't even mentioned, like climate change. ..."
"... Again the whole woke 'identity' culture that cancels dissent and promotes 'minorities' in positions of power is simply woke fascism. Just as military recruitment is about turning violent video games real for young men, so too is CIA recruitment about inviting the 'woke' for murder and mayhem in the name 'freedom' without which the woke could not wake. ..."
I think that there is an on-going effort to create fads/movements in which the public
becomes caught-up and distracts the from reality.
The more binary and controversial the
better. Red/Blue. I used to be a big fan of sports but have the opinion it is a pointless
waste of time and my life is better for that realization.
Additionally/tangentially, I feel there is a habit in the English language in particular
to create new words to describe things these words are not well define and generate a lot of
discussion and heat about things that nobody knows what they are actually talking about and
end up arguing the meaning of the words.
People who don't know the new words must try to catch
up or be left out of the discussion. I don't direct this at your discussion. I just wonder how
we might see things if we were constrained to a limited vocabulary - as I am as a programmer
of sorts.
Characteristics of the Woke: They always attack, especially with insults, like "paranoia
nonsense". They never address the actual point made, instead they reinterpret the point to
make it appear pure evil. Which allows them to attribute the worst possible motivations on
the person they are attacking. Naturally they invent things the other person hadn't even
mentioned, like climate change.
Again the whole woke 'identity' culture that cancels dissent and promotes 'minorities' in
positions of power is simply woke fascism. Just as military recruitment is about turning
violent video games real for young men, so too is CIA recruitment about inviting the 'woke'
for murder and mayhem in the name 'freedom' without which the woke could not wake.
I will believe that any of this is worth a shit when Snowden wades in with his
opinion...until then its just another distraction
The CIA is why we can't have "wokeism" about the right issue like global private/public
finance.....where is Occupy 2.0?
The current wokeism is like the pet rocks of old days.....would want folks to focus that
woke on the inherited class structure of the private property West, would we?
"... you make the best point: you have to have something seriously "wrong" with your mind to want a job with these spooks in the first place. you can't spell "sociopath" without "c-i-a". ..."
I asked Google (and thus Wikipedia) what cisgender means?
cisgender /sɪsˈdʒɛndə/ adjective
Denoting or relating to a person whose sense of personal identity and gender
corresponds with their birth sex. "this new-found attention to the plight of black trans folks by primarily cisgender allies
is timely and necessary"
On the same page as the search result is a teaser headline:
"How An (the) Ad About Cisgender Backfired Spectacularly"
I've formed the opinion that the BIC (the Billionaires In Charge) want societies atomised
to reduce the likelihood of a revolution involving rope, and nooses. So guess how surprised
I'm not that the BIC's loyal servants/savants, the CIA, are attempting to popularise such
vacuous tosh as yet another addition to the LBGTQUERTY "landscape?"
you make the best point: you have to have something seriously "wrong" with your mind to
want a job with these spooks in the first place. you can't spell "sociopath" without
"c-i-a".
both the bold - and to a lesser extent the italics - are terms people use to sound
interesting when they're not. especially the tendency toward self-diagnosis that westerners
have; "i'm not dumb with no attention span ...i have " ADHD " or "i don't have
low self esteem or work-related anxiety based on the inner knowldge of how inept i am...i
have " imposter syndrome ".
the woke types tend to be this kind of malleable and empty vessel...which is what the
"company" wants.
Thanks for bringing this issue to the main page in a brief article, b. I linked to
this
article, "CIA & The Woke Totalitarian Generation" , on the Week in Review thread, but
it generated no additional comment despite its being one of several recent essays on the
issue of the contrived Wokeism "culture" that Alastair Crooke's written about on several
occasions over the past months and Pepe Escobar made the focus of his most recent essay.
Crooke argues that Wokeism is the peculiar and singular outcome of the American Malaise
prominently exposed by Christopher Lasch in his 1994 Revolt of the Elites , which
we've seen in the trenches as the war being waged against the State and citizenry by the
Neoliberal Rentier Class that was explained well in this Renegade Inc
interview from last year .
The Outlaw US Empire is clearly trying hard to get its
Neoliberal vassals to adopt the Woke insanity, which proves beyond doubt Putin's assertion
that the Liberalism of the West has died or worse evolved into something profane and
loathsome.
"...they are terrorists. They hate me. They hate my uniform. They don't care if I die
..."
We have been
discussing the termination of public employees and others for their postings on social
media or public displays. The latest case is out of New Jersey where former Hopewell Township
police officer Sara Erwin was fired recent over a June 2020 posting on Facebook in which she
referred to Black Lives Matter (BLM) protesters as "terrorists."
There remains an uncertain line of what political or social views are tolerated and what are
barred on social media. Indeed, Sgt.
Mandy Gray was suspended and demoted for simply liking the June 2020 post.
Gray was the first female officer hired in Hopewell Township and became the first female
sergeant in 2019, according to
NJ.com.
Erwin insists that she posted the statement after she and her colleagues were faced with
violent protests and family members who were traumatized by images on television of officers
being attacked. Erwin reportedly wrote i:
" Last night as I left for work I had my two kids crying for me not to go to work. I don't
think I've ever felt the way I did last night. And then I watched people I know and others I
care about going into harms way. I love my police family like my own. So when you share posts
and things on Facebook I'd really appreciate if you'd THINK before doing so. I've seen so
many black lives matter [sic] hashtags in these posts. Just to let you know -- they are
terrorists. They hate me. They hate my uniform. They don't care if I die. "
Hopewell
Township Mayor Julie Blake and the town's council made the decision to fire her in an
unanimous vote to accept the recommendations of a hearing officer.
As will come as little surprise to many on this blog, my default is in favor of free
speech.
My concern is the lack of a consistent rule. For example, would the town have fired Erwin if
she said the same thing about another group like the Proud Boys or the NRA?
I can understand the objection to the posting. BLM is a group committed to fighting police
abuse and regularly engages in protests. For an officer to express such bias against BLM can
exacerbate tensions in such protests. However, officers also have a right to be able to express
themselves . The balance of those interests should, at a minimum, have favored a reprimand
rather than a termination for Erwin. If not, the town should establish a clear standard as to
what public employees are allowed to express on political and social issues. This includes
whether certain groups can be criticized but not others.
The action taken by Hopewell Township raises more questions than answers on where this line
is drawn in terms of free speech.
ay_arrow
Billy the Poet 1 hour ago
I can understand the objection to the posting. BLM is a group committed to fighting police
abuse and regularly engages in protests. For an officer to express such bias against BLM can
exacerbate tensions in such protests. However, officers also have a right to be able to
express themselves. The balance of those interests should, at a minimum, have favored a
reprimand rather than a termination for Erwin. If not, the town should establish a clear
standard as to what public employees are allowed to express on political and social issues.
This includes whether certain groups can be criticized but not others.
Turley reminds us that rules must be followed consistently if they are to have validity
but I think the larger point is that there are no rules anymore. The former rule book is now
used exclusively as a bludgeon by entitled parties.
'The Who' legend Roger Daltrey says the 'woke' generation is creating a miserable world that
serves to stifle the kind of creative freedom he enjoyed in the 60s.
The iconic frontman made the comments during a recent appearance on Zane Lowe's Apple Music
1 podcast.
"I don't know, we might get somewhere because it's becoming so absurd now with AI, all the
tricks it can do, and the woke generation, " said Daltrey.
" It's terrifying, the miserable world they're going to create for themselves. I mean,
anyone who's lived a life and you see what they're doing, you just know that it's a route to
nowhere, " he added.
The singer noted how he was lucky to have lived through an era where freedom of speech was
encouraged, not silenced.
"Especially when you've lived through the periods of a life that we've had the privilege to.
I mean, we've had the golden era. There's no doubt about that," he said.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/Q-ONJ8UuvhU
Daltrey also slammed the negative impact that social media has had on the world, saying it
has undermined truth.
"It's just getting harder to disseminate the truth. It's almost like, now we should
turn the whole thing off. Go back to newsprint, go back to word of mouth and start to read
books again," he said.
While Daltrey's comments may not be mind-blowing, any celebrity speaking out against the mob
that has cannibalized culture is something to be applauded.
Once again, this only tends to happen with older celebrities who have already passed their
peak of fame and entered icon status. They are beyond cancellation.
For any up and coming celebrity, or even one who is at the top of their game, to question
'generation woke' is career suicide.
Which makes it all the more ludicrous to continue to see identitarians, notably the LGBT
movement, continue to claim they are 'fighting oppression' when their mantras are echoed by
every cultural institution, media outlet and corporate entity in the west, while anyone who
utters a whimper of dissent is swiftly cancelled.
A controversial new law in California requires
publicly traded companies headquartered in the state to include at least one woman on their
board of directors. Supporters of those types of laws even contend that gender quotas could
boost firm profitability. However, the literature indicates that gender quotas are unlikely to
enhance firm performance. What is also shocking is that research argues that quotas may
actually be damaging to the presumed goal of increasing the role of women on corporate
boards.
No Help for Corporate Profits
According to a 2014 study titled " Women on Boards and Firm Financial
Performance: A Meta-analysis " published in the Academy of Management Journal the
relationship between female board representation and market performance is nearly zero.
Similarly, a later study featured in the journal PLOS One complements the previous
conclusion by submitting that a "higher representation of females on corporate boards is
neither related to a decrease, nor to an increase in financial performance, confirming findings
from a similar meta-analysis on this topic."
Moreover, using a quota system to elevate women, unfortunately, fuels perceptions of
tokenism. "Such females might be perceived as "tokens'' to meet society's expectations or those
of important stakeholders, and could therefore be marginalized and not be taken seriously on
the board, which might subsequently hinder their and the entire board's performance, '' the
authors note. Further, Noland, Moran, and Kotschwar (2016) in a shrewd assessment of gender quotas
conclude that the "results find no impact of board quotas on firm performance, but they suggest
that the payoffs of policies that facilitate women rising through the corporate ranks more
broadly could be significant."
The effects of gender quotas appear to be nugatory and, in some cases, expensive. Economic
research reveals that in Norway , gender quotas
reduced firm performance because female directors were on average younger and less experienced.
Although some studies link stronger firm performance to female management, deeper analyses show
that these results are driven by the propensity of high-quality firms to appoint competent women.
Furthermore, because gender quotas are often instituted as a response to demands for
diversity, after complying, companies lose interest in pursuing initiatives to cultivate a
nurturing environment for women. As Kathleen A. Farrel and Philip L. Hersch (2005) observe
," Rather than the demand for women directors being performance-based, our results suggest
corporations responding to either internal or external calls for diversity . Consequently, as
firms satisfied minimal expectations, they no longer actively sought greater diversity . We
fail to find convincing evidence that gender diversity in the corporate boardroom, on average,
is a value enhancing strategy."
No Help for Junior-Level Employees
In fact, though elites advocate gender quotas, the literature implicates them for failing to
uplift low-level female employees. Discussing the inability of gender quotas to improve
prospects for junior staff, the
Economist writes: "Perhaps the most puzzling shortcoming of the quotas is that they have
had no discernible beneficial effect on women at lower levels of the corporate hierarchy."
Neither do quotas increase the representation of women in senior management in firms where the
policy is standard practice.
Another strike against gender quotas is that the evidence refutes the assumption that quotas
are beneficial since women bosses are likely to invest in female employees. The truth is that
women are not more likely to promote other women, hence expecting gender quotas to induce
favorable outcomes for female employees is questionable. In the research article " Meet the New Boss Same as
the Old Boss? Female Supervisors and Subordinate Career Prospects ," David J. Maume
demonstrates the futility of expecting female bosses to make a difference. If an organization
selects for people with masculine traits, then the women who are promoted will perpetuate the
existing culture. "The cog in the machine perspective emphasizes that organizational
structures, cultures, and policies remain pervasively male-oriented, and that careerist female
managers will have to conform to organizational preferences to promote the careers of male
subordinates . The results are consistent with the notion that female managers are cogs in the
machine, in that female supervisors have little or no effect on the career prospects of female
subordinates, and instead foster men's career prospects," Maume explains.
Interestingly, research duly informs us that gender quotas can erect barriers to female
employment. Research led by Pierre Deschamps illuminates the
unintended consequences of institutionalizing quotas. According to Deschamps, hiring committees
affected by quotas are considerably less likely to employ women. Deschamps asserts that quotas
may have reduced the incentive to recruit women by fostering a false semblance of gender
equity.
Legislation like California's board mandates for female board members is being pushed on the
grounds that it fundamentally shifts the balance in corporate America in favor of female
employees and managers. Moreover, many even justified the change on the grounds these laws
would improve corporate governance and profitability. Yet, there is no evidence such legal
changes have accomplished any of these goals. Rather, new mandates only serve to further
politicize the selection of board members while doing nothing to enrich these firms' customers
or employees.
23 play_arrow 1
Macho Latte 3 hours ago (Edited)
My comment about the 1964 Civil Rights Act not applying to white men was deleted because I
used a quote from LBJ that included the slang for the Spanish word for black. I guess some
snowflake or Karen was triggered.
"I'll have them n------s voting DemonRat for the next 200 years"
B52Minot 5 hours ago
And then the next demanded disclosure is what everyone is paid to be on the Board and why
are the "women" not getting the same pay?? No doubt the Board will increase their male
members by one to off-set this woman's vote if deemed by "management" to be the wrong
decision....
ted41776 4 hours ago
don't get me wrong, i have worked with many incredible and very talented people... women,
men, all different races and ethnicities, straight, gay, trans, etc etc. but unless you come
to an interview with as much if not more talent than every other candidate, you need to just
stay home
my point is, hiring should be based purely on talent. the very moment you introduce other
factors, it actually begins to harm people. as an organization, purely driven by profit, are
you better off hiring someone who is 80% talent and 20% "other" attributes or someone who is
100% talent which brings in revenue and leads to success? if any other company out there is
looking for 100% talent, yours is pretty much guaranteed to be out of business unless you
play some corrupt political games and keep a thumb on the competition
and as an individual, imagine being the person knowing full well that a more talented
person didn't get the job and you did because of your "other" attributes. if that were me, it
would make me not want the job and make me feel like a worthless pos. but that's just me
Boondocker 4 hours ago
funny, used to be you couldn't get a security clearance with you were a trans, now the CIA
is recruiting them (of course, our enemies are licking their chops over the number of easily
compromised individuals). Mental health thing.....
Fat Beaver 4 hours ago (Edited)
Whenever i see a woman ceo or a woman at the helm of anything, i know for certain that
company or country is on it's last legs...women are good at a lot of things but administering
leadership is definitely not one of them...and naturally should not be...
They make great dr's, nurses...even surgeons...but if they run the hospital...say goodbye
to the hospital...likewise for most industries and the government...
Drink Feck Arse Girls @ edifice 4 hours ago
Yes, I can confirm this. Spent nearly 20 years in healthcare business and IT. Wherever
women ran things, it was a mess. I can't even count how many times consultants were brought
in to clean up after them.
natashav 4 hours ago
I totally agree and I am a woman.
Maybe there is a woman out there who did a good job, but I can't think of any off the top
of my head? Queen Elizabeth? She never seemed like a whiny bit-ch.
Huxley's Ghost 3 hours ago
Agreed but female doctors/clinicians in my experience were ok until you challenge or
question them, especially if you are another woman. Insecurity runs deep.
Zorch 3 hours ago
I had as a surgeon the female chief resident at a first class teaching hospital. She was
stellar in all respects including management of her team.
But I'd guess she was an exception. It was an exceptional institution.
Jack Offelday 5 hours ago
Women and minorities should be deeply offended. Lowering the bar to meet "quotas" is the
definition of discrimination.
ThenegativeSpeculator 4 hours ago
It also means that once the quota is filled. There will NEVER be another one added.
TacoNasty 4 hours ago
US Military had to dramatically lower the bar to allow women to pass combat fitness
tests.
I kind of wish the US would get in a difficult dismounted-combat war, draft women, and
have millions of women KIA.
That would stop all this equality BS and women thinking they are equal faster than a
finger snap.
Zorch 3 hours ago
I don't think we have to worry about getting in a nasty dismounted-combat war. What we
should hope for is that it happens soon, while we still have people who can diagnose the
stupidity and lead the rebuilding.
TaiwanRealChina 4 hours ago (Edited)
The solution is easy: men on the board should just put on wigs, claim they're women, and
go about their day. If they say otherwise, call them transphobic.
One day I'm going to do this with a SBA woman owned license.
phillyla 4 hours ago
^^THIS^^ Do it!!!
I interviewed for a SBA woman owned business back in 2003. The 'owners' weren't involved
in the business at all. Two guys ran the business their wives were the owners. they were also
capitalizing on locating their business in an economic development zone and they wanted to
hire me because I lived in an economic development zone *** code so they would get extra
government funding.
Unfortunately my husband had a massive stroke and I was unable to work so I don't know how
it turned out.
TacoNasty 4 hours ago
I used to work for a defense contracting company that did this. US gov't decided they
would only hire businesses owned by women. So, the guy that built and ran the business
appointed his wife CEO and "sold" her the company.
It worked like gangbusters for years. Everyone was so impressed with a "woman owned"
business being competent for a change. Then she divorced him and screwed him over on the
business because she had ownership and a "paper trail". He lost everything and she became
suddenly rich. Then, with in a year, it was bankrupt and she lost everything. US Gov't tried
to go after her for incompetence/criminal negligence she screwed up some of the contracts so
bad after she forced him out.
Mile High Perv 41 minutes ago
Excellent example of the Cobra effect
high5mail 5 hours ago
Simple. Just identify as a female on the job application. That is all that is
required.
B52Minot 5 hours ago
And show up either wearing a pants suit or dress....and there you have it ...you are a
woman even if you have a beard....but do not tell anyone you really are a man off
duty....just call me Mrs.....and then wonder who my partner is?
fauxhammer 4 hours ago
Far fewer board meetings is what happens.
Miniminer1 4 hours ago
The boards will hire the quietest or the best looking woman. A yes sir girl and they'll
keep her out of decisions, an 'expense' for the board .
Riprake 4 hours ago
Yep; you don't even have to look like a woman, wear a woman's clothes, or have a
feminine-sounding name. Just identify as one, and according to the tranny panderers' rules,
no one is allowed to question your identity .
Budnacho 4 hours ago
10 years from now you will see most women back at home raising kids and out of the
workforce. The last 100 year experiment has failed....and it's becoming quite obvious to
those with eyes.
natashav 4 hours ago
AGREE.
I am a woman and you are spot on.
My life was stunted because of the CIA and their f-cking feminist revolution.
My life is halfway over so hope the next generation has a better quality of life.
TacoNasty 4 hours ago
The only people that will do in the coming social collapse are going to be people that
stuck with the old ways... like the Amish and other religious "fanatics".
A farm, a wife, and a healthy son, and you can survive anything.
Single and renting a (((tribe))) owned apartment while you fall into debt in a diverse
city with no land to grow anything, no where to fish, no where to hunt, and no family or gun?
You're done for when the SHTF.
Eventually, all of America will look like Bosnia during its collapse. The only question is
when.
Huxley's Ghost 3 hours ago
Budnacho--Yup, it's shocking how many YOUNG guys are forgoing the harpies fembots; guys in
general shutting down long term (30+yrs) marriages with wives who abandoned them after she
got the kids, houses and toys--spending hubbies money like water but treating them like
whipped dogs.
Mile High Perv 36 minutes ago
The silver lining of the economic implosion caused by the stupid lockdowns in response to
a fake virus by the incompetent people in charge.
Most 'soft' jobs will be gone and likely replaced by automation. Women employment will
take a disproportionate hit.
krda 20 minutes ago
Trudeau has apparently been complaining that the Covid recession has hit women hardest
because most of their jobs are non-essential.
Odin McHaggis 5 hours ago
What happens is the work place turns into a hen house and nobody focuses on the task at
hand.
Walter Melon 5 hours ago
It will look a lot like America in 2021
MattyIce 4 hours ago
Most elementary schools are like this
TacoNasty 4 hours ago
This happened where I work... all women all the way to the top.
They focus on stuff like Social Justice and "checks in" zoom calls to see how everyone is
feeling. First thing that happened was all the women stopped doing real work. Next thing that
happened was all the competent men stopped doing work.. because why should they carry
unproductive employees?
liberty_mind 5 hours ago
Diversity quota results in more qualified candidates being rejected just to meet the
numbers
eatapeach 5 hours ago (Edited)
More noise and less good jokes at the meetings!
2banana 4 hours ago
What happens when you don't hire the best?
It should be law that democrats are forced to use affirmation action doctors and lawyers
and pilots...
NotaSheep 5 hours ago
Moreover, using a quota system to elevate women, unfortunately, fuels perceptions of
tokenism.
That would be because it IS tokenism. 100%.
radical-extremist 4 hours ago
Carly Fiorina single handedly destroyed Hewlett-Packard, to the point it barely survived
the acquisition of Compaq Computer. She thought buying a PC company in 2002 would be her
legacy...LOL. HP's daughters on the BOD really pushed for a female CEO at the time. Woke
before woke was a thing.
espirit 4 hours ago
Thank God GM has Mary Barra...
/s
Taffer 4 hours ago
Imagine being stupid enough to be a white man in the military right now helping to keep
this anti-white man crap going?
TheAntiGov 4 hours ago
After serving an illegal gets more benefits.
natashav 4 hours ago
Young men must shift focus to building their families and communities.
Create local defensive units. Train.
Create new supply chains and barter clubs.
Everything is local now.
Back to basics.
Back to focusing on destroying Agenda 2030.
The focus is on destroying companies like Monsanto, Amazon, and Pfizer.
Destroy the EPA. Cripple them.
These are the real enemies of humanity.
Ratch 5 hours ago
"Although some studies link stronger firm performance to female management, deeper
analyses show that these results are driven by the propensity of high-quality firms to
appoint competent women"
This is the key point for all those people who say diversity makes a company more
successful. Diversity does not drive success, these companies are already successful enough
that they can afford Diversity, and they only hire diversity because it will make them look
good. They know full well the people they are bringing on are deadwight.
CovidFloozy 5 hours ago
Go look at the C-Suites of all of these so-called "progressive" companies and then tell me
how much they care about "diversity".
natashav 4 hours ago
I am a woman and I HATE working with other women.
There was only one woman I adored working for back when I was a teenager and interned at a
police department. She was one of the guys. I suppose that's why I liked her so much.
She treated me so well.
Haven't had that experience since.
There are a few of us out here who aren't obsessive nasty c-nts,
so don't write all of us off.
radical-extremist 4 hours ago
I found if you disagree with a decision a woman makes, they take it personally as
"mansplaining" and get very nasty.
espirit 4 hours ago
Only if you're a man.
Otherwise it's wo-mansplaining.
...or bi-splaining, etc...
Pernicious Gold Phallusy 4 hours ago
For years I've been asking women in the workplace whether they would prefer working in an
office where they were the only woman among men, or in a mixed-sex office. So far the answers
are 100% what you would expect.
Mile High Perv 33 minutes ago
Hey .... that resembles my wife
krda 1 hour ago
Pretty much every woman I know hates working for female managers.
So does the business, which rapidly goes downhill when females are made managers.
Von Hayek 5 hours ago
A controversial new law in California requires publicly traded companies headquartered in
the state to include at least one woman on their board of directors.
Most corps are headquartered in Delaware, Nevada for non-vaginal reasons.
And now, for vaginal and other reasons, all corps will be headquartered in Delaware or
Nevada.
A very simple fix.
Chairman Xi the Pooh 5 hours ago
Find the hottest one possible if your being forced to hire a woman.
Postal PREMIUM 4 hours ago
So she can clean you out with claims of sexual harassment? No thanks. Hire a middle-aged,
slightly overweight MILF: Not butt ugly, but not likey to attract attention, either.
cuomostouch 3 hours ago
It's funny how that backfires on feminists. Now when you see a woman in a higher position,
you will think the same thing as when you see a black or some minority: that they didn't earn
it, they're just a quota hire.
chiquita 3 hours ago
The bigger backfire there is right in the article--the assumption that women at higher
management levels will give women at lower levels more opportunities, but the data shows they
don't. There are a lot of reasons for that, including the fear of not being the only one at
the top, which is a pretty powerful feeling and that pesky imposter syndrome, which must be
pretty overwhelming for anyone who is placed in a position that isn't earned.
krda 1 hour ago
Women hate other women, because they treat life as a zero-sum game. If they can't have the
alpha, at least they can do their best to ensure no-one else does.
chiquita 3 hours ago
In a conversation between two former NFL players about transgenders in women's sports,
they digressed into how in the NFL if you couldn't keep up or run fast enough, you were out.
Period. There was a line of guys who were good enough waiting to take your spot. This appears
to be true in all of professional sports, no? This is the way all jobs should be--no quotas,
no affirmative action, no nepotism (well okay, in family owned/family run private businesses,
the family gets to work there), no good old boys/school ties--the best, brightest, most
qualified should get the jobs. If they can't keep up, the next in line comes in. Private
industry shouldn't have to put up with mandates about who they hire into what jobs.
yerfej 4 hours ago
How about an easier fix. Why don't women start women's companies and only hire women and
pack the board with women nad celebrate women by being effective women.
Yippie21 4 hours ago
Like why isn't Mary Kay Cosmetics brought up more often? Pink Caddies for everyone!
Pausebreak 2 hours ago
It works well for Avon now.../s
Kim Jong Un IV 2 hours ago
There was an all women company in Florida that built bridges / overpasses.
krda 1 hour ago (Edited)
I forget the details, but some chick tried that with an all-female software company some
years ago. When it all collapsed, she was on the Internet talking about how she'd never hire
another woman.
ThenegativeSpeculator 4 hours ago
I used to believe that people could make it to the top on their merits. Now unfortunately,
every singe woman or minority I see in a management position or position of authority is
viewed as an incompetent diversity hire.
I hate it, but it is how it is now. Think black female police chief.
milo_hoffman212 4 hours ago
That is because 99.999% of the time they would NEVER get to where they are if they did not
help push up the fake diversity numbers for the company. I have known far more who were
incompetent and obviously got massive diversity 'benefits', than ones who were actually equal
in ability to others in the same position.
krda 1 hour ago
I love it when they whine about their 'imposter syndrome', believing that they're not
really good enough for the job.
Well, duh. That's because they weren't hired for competence.
Stuck on Zero 5 hours ago
I want Elizabeth Holmes on my board.
leefool 4 hours ago
you call it a board?
Savvy 4 hours ago
Now that's funny. LOL
Frank Booth 4 hours ago
ill take marissa mayer
TacoNasty 4 hours ago
She was super hot when she was young. But, dude, she's like 70 now.
mtl4 5 hours ago
If you want to compete in men's sports you need to up your game not slow it down to empty
the bench.
Nimby 4 hours ago
Fortunately, Bob from accounting identifies as a woman, so we're good.
Educated_Redneck 4 hours ago
The board can identify as women. Problem solved. If the CA government does not like that,
then sue for transgender discrimination. Even better!
TrustbutVerify 3 hours ago
Yes, with an all male board the board members could just identity as female 3 days a week!
Problem solved.
hanekhw 5 hours ago
Easy. Select Caitlin Jenner.
One Moment Please 4 hours ago
Nikki Haley is on the Board of Directors of the Boeing Corporation.
That's all you need to know.
And she knows phucqueall about airplanes besides flying First Class.
Obamaroid Ointment 4 hours ago
I'm no fan of Nikki but she did resign from the Boeing board when they went begging to
government for ChinaFlu-19 handouts.
One Moment Please 4 hours ago
Thank you.
I may have painted too harsh a picture of the lady.
Obamaroid Ointment 3 hours ago
Your intincts are correct, Nikki is a backstabbing GOPe Swamp RINO not to be trusted and
should only be seen in a harshest of light. But on the topic Boeing she deserves a little
credit and no blame. Although she was SC governor at the time it was the SC Boeing workers
kicking out the union who deserve all the kudos for bringing the 787 Dreamliner production
from the Seattle ****hole to North Charleston.
B52Minot 4 hours ago remove link
Sooner or later....likely very much later unfortunately...women will realize all this
"liberal"...??Progressive?? approach and diatribe supporting "women's rights" is a
fraud/sham..nothing but a convenient method to look pro-women to the gullible but in reality
the Dems/"radicals" are just providing a false-front of "support" to women which does exactly
the opposite for their true needs/desires for more independence/freedoms/rights/equality. Too
bad so many women are going to find out the hard way when they are 40-50 that what the Dems
"plans" for their rights/equality are the scam that keep the Dem radical in position and they
are on the outside looking in...without anything to support them but social security into the
future.......
milo_hoffman212 4 hours ago (Edited)
>What happens?
Easy, all men in the company should file a complaint with the US Federal EEOC, and charge
the company with violating -- 42 U.S.C. §§2000e-2 Title IV.
EC. 2000e-2. [Section 703]
(a) Employer practices
It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer -
(1) to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to
discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions,
or privileges of employment, because of such individual's race, color, religion, sex, or
national origin; or
(2) to limit, segregate, or classify his employees or applicants for employment in any
way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities or
otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee, because of such individual's race,
color, religion, sex, or national origin.
Time for white men to start filling legal complaints for violation of sex and racial
discrimination, and stop pretending like it is not happening. Either the law applies to all,
or it is no law.
Cardinal Fang 4 hours ago remove link
It's funny that the fact that women can be just as incompetent as men had been completely
left out of the equation.
As always, it's just a numbers game.
Yippie21 4 hours ago remove link
Why isn't there a city anywhere with a all-female fire department? Why not for justice??!!
How about 50% garbage truck drivers? Why isn't that the goal? How about all-female Police
department? What electricity company is being forced to hire 50% female line-persons?
Ok, how about the cities streets departments that are 50% female for fixing potholes and
streets? How about the 50% females mandated for the IT department? Security guards?
Landscaper crews? Tree trimmers? How about linking farm subsidies for corporate farms to 50%
farm-hands being female?
Women and their beta enablers only want avenues and mandates for the top jobs... when
they'll poo-poo the menial or men-dominated jobs that women want nothing to do with and no
one will ever demand they help even out the diversity. Nope. They just want the top tier
stuff and will laugh in your face for what I just laid out above.
BagOfChips 4 hours ago
At present, I report to a woman, to another woman, to a diverse woman, to a diverse man to
the CEO. Not one level is adequately qualified for their role until you get to the CEO, and
his abilities are questionable given the team he has underneath him.
Yippie21 4 hours ago
That reflects my entire career working for the Government, except after about 1990, every
top manager was Female/Diversity. Every spot beneath where a white male was, was always
filled with a diversity after that person retired.
HowardBeale 4 hours ago
"What Happens When Governments Force Corporate Boards To Appoint More Women?"
More blowjobs?
Drink Feck Arse Girls @ edifice 4 hours ago
I've slept with a couple of my female bosses. Don't recommend. I was on my out of the
company anyways. My recommendation would be to not talk to anyone at work unless it is
strictly business related. And even then, use non gendered words and keep it as generic and
simple as possible.
TacoNasty 4 hours ago
A lot of people don't realize that situations like that can be a civil count matter in the
US.
So, you don't get a pass just by getting fired or quitting your job. She can come back
decades later (even if she instigated or asked for the relationship) and sue you for
everything you have.
She can even claim it was "rape" and get a criminal case brought against you.
Drink Feck Arse Girls @ edifice 3 hours ago remove link
Yes, I regret doing it. I'd kick myself in the balls if I could go back in time. And tell
myself to invest in AAPL.
krda 1 hour ago remove link
One company I was interviewed for the female boss wanted to hire me because she thought I
was hot. I ended up taking a job somewhere else, but I sometimes wonder what my life would
have been like if I'd gone for that one.
Detective Miller 4 hours ago remove link
What always happens when you FORCE people to do things to satisfy a sick, degenerate
ideology? That's what happens with this.
Yippie21 4 hours ago remove link
Huh. Nothing in the article about the effect on men. You know, who by merit, may just have
landed those jobs but are held down or not hired? Talk about a purposely toxic environment
that institutionalizes women-hate and actual anger.
This is good news for corporate leaders. Now they can hire their moms, daughters, girl
friends, strippers, and any other hot chick that strikes their fancy and not be bothered with
****ling questions about qualifications and competence.
Pausebreak 3 hours ago
Niki Haley was on the board at Boeing and look how well that turned out.
HabitualLineStepper 9 minutes ago
Same for HP and Yahoo.
Vizzini 4 hours ago
Same thing that always happens. Every quota beneficiary will be assumed to be an
incompetent quota-filler. That assumption will be mostly correct.
Nelbev 5 hours ago
California should force corporations to appoint blacks and other ethnicities
proportionately, same by religion, then LBGT, then mentally disabled people to boards so
there is more equity. It is woke. It is fair. Do same with police, state legislatures, all
jobs. What could go wrong?
Serapis 4 hours ago
Powerful and self-respecting people tend to react better to persuasion than coercion.
The heavy hand of state coercion almost always creates resistance even where people would
otherwise be sympathetic to the cause.
People don't like to be told what to do any more than my dog likes being scolded for his
canine treacheries.
NoPasaran 4 hours ago
"In fact, though elites advocate gender quotas, the literature implicates them for failing
to uplift low-level female employees." - that is EXACTLY how it is in financial industry!
Catullus 4 hours ago (Edited)
I work with and for extremely successful women in a sales role, and my wife is a VP at a
hospital. To a person, what they've said to me when I ask them why they don't want a higher
title and pay is that they don't want that. There is a huge fear that the trade-off for those
jobs is your personal time and relationships with your family. And so what you attract are
people in those roles that weighed it and chose the title and pay.
radical-extremist 4 hours ago
BOD's don't run companies. Aside from maybe one or two members they have very little power
to do anything. Which goes to show how ignorant and naive feminists are to begin with
regarding how corporations actually work.
I worked at a large company that hired a young attractive, sharp-dressed woman and put her
in a fancy corner office visible from the lobby. After a few weeks she started venturing out
and talking to people. We asked her what she was supposed to be doing and she said she didn't
know, no one had told her yet. Eventually she bought several large plants to put in front of
the window. Within 4 months she quit out of frustration and boredom. We used to call these
tokens "Director of Special Projects".
Merit and character should be the only factors in leadership roles. Fvck diversity.
It's not anyone's fault that men, probably 95+% of the time are better leaders. Women have
their own talents that they are better at than men (not trying to make misogynist jokes
here.....yet).
This "i need to prove how good of a man I can be, even though I'm a woman, so that my
daddy who worked too much will show me attention" ideology needs to end. Girls need to stop
being raised to think that being a shiity man is what they are supposed to do. Double down on
the things you're good at, stop trying to fix what you're not good at.
Yippie21 4 hours ago
A lot of women I used to work with HATED working for other women. The chance for the
workplace to go toxic is incredibly high when the women start fighting with one another ...
and they don't let grudges go.
fleur de lis 3 hours ago remove link
Absolutely correct.
Estrogen poisoning starts cat fights that never end.
The people tearing down statues and being "woke" at every little thing seem to wander
about and flop around in a state of perpetual confusion. They have no guiding principles or
the hand of righteousness to steady them. They are hollow ! Every waking hour of their lives
is consumed with all this nonsense.
They want to smash everything without really knowing why. They are happiest when all is
ruin and then look around in dismay at what they have done and what they will now have to
live with. This fills their emptiness because there is nothing else to do so. Folks like this
burn out either destroyed by others, frequently destroying themselves, first the soul, then
the body. What kind of a jackass torches his own neighbourhood, in effect shits in his soup
bowl ?
The woke and cancel culture do ! It must be fun for them but after the laughter comes
those tears.
In 2020, we saw the enshrinement of techno-feudalism – one of the overarching themes
of my latest book,
Raging Twenties .
In lightning speed, the techno-feudalism virus is metastasizing into an even more lethal,
wilderness of mirrors variant, where cancel culture is enforced by Big Tech all across the
spectrum, science is routinely debased as fake news in social media, and the average citizen is
discombobulated to the point of lobotomy.
Top political analyst Alastair Crooke has attempted a
sharp breakdown of the broader configuration.
Geopoliticallly, the Hegemon would even resort to 5G war to maintain its primacy, while
seeking moral legitimization via the woke revolution, duly exported to its Western
satrapies.
The woke revolution is a culture war – in symbiosis with Big Tech and Big Business
– that has smashed the real thing: class war. The atomized working classes, struggling to
barely survive, have been left to wallow in anomie.
The great panacea, actually the ultimate "opportunity" offered by Covid-19, is the
Great Reset advanced by Herr Schwab of Davos: essentially the replacement of a dwindling
manufacturing base by automation, in tandem with a reset of the financial
system .
The concomitant wishful thinking envisages a world economy that will "move closer to a
cleaner capitalist model". One of its features is a delightfully benign Council for Inclusive Capitalism in partnership
with the Catholic Church.
As much as the pandemic – the "opportunity" for the Reset – was somewhat
rehearsed by Event
201 in October 2019, additional strategies are already in place for the next steps, such as
Cyber Polygon ,
which warns against the "key risks of digitalization". Don't miss their "technical exercise" on
July 9 th , when "participants will hone their practical skills in mitigating a
targeted supply chain attack on a corporate ecosystem in real time."
A New Concert of Powers?
Sovereignty is a lethal threat to the ongoing cultural revolution. That concerns the role of
the European Union institutions – especially the European Commission – going no
holds barred to dissolve the national interests of nation states. And that largely explains the
weaponizing, in varying degrees, of Russophobia, Sinophobia and Iranophobia.
The anchoring essay in Raging Twenties analyzes the stakes in Eurasia exactly in terms of
the Hegemon pitted against the Three Sovereigns – which are Russia, China and Iran.
It's under this framework, for instance, that a massive, 270-plus page bill, the Strategic
Competition Act , has been recently passed at the US Senate. That goes way beyond
geopolitical competition, charting a road map to fight China across the full spectrum. It's
bound to become law, as Sinophobia is a bipartisan sport in D.C.
Hegemon oracles such as the perennial Henry Kissinger at least are taking a pause from their
customary Divide and Rule shenanigans to
warn that the escalation of "endless" competition may derail into hot war –
especially considering AI and the latest generations of smart weapons.
On the incandescent US-Russia front, where Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov sees the lack of
mutual trust, no to mention respect, as much worse than during the Cold War, analyst Glenn
Diesen
notes how the Hegemon "strives to convert the security dependence of the Europeans into
geoeconomic loyalty".
That's at the heart of a make-or-break saga: Nord Stream 2. The Hegemon uses every weapon
– including cultural war, where convicted crook Navalny is a major pawn – to derail
an energy deal that is essential for Germany's industrial interests. Simultaneously, pressure
increases against Europe buying Chinese technology.
Meanwhile, NATO – which lords over the EU – keeps being built up as a global
Robocop, via the
NATO 2030 project – even after turning Libya into a militia-ridden wasteland and
having its collective behind humiliatingly spanked in Afghanistan.
For all the sound and fury of sanction hysteria and declinations of cultural war, the
Hegemon establishment is not exactly blind to the West "losing not only its material dominance
but also its ideological sway".
So the Council on Foreign Relations – in a sort of Bismarckian hangover – is now
proposing a
New Concert of Powers to deal with "angry populism" and "illiberal temptations", conducted
of course by those malign actors such as "pugnacious Russia" who dare to "challenge the West's
authority".
As much as this geopolitical proposal may be couched in benign rhetoric, the endgame remains
the same: to "restore US leadership", under US terms. Damn those "illiberals" Russia, China and
Iran.
Crooke evokes exactly a Russian and a Chinese example to illustrate where the woke cultural
revolution may lead to.
In the case of the Chinese cultural revolution, the end result was chaos, fomented by the
Red Guards, which started to wreak their own particular havoc independent of the Communist
Party leadership.
And then there's Dostoevsky in The Possessed , which showed how the secular Russian
liberals of the 1840s created the conditions for the emergence of the 1860s generation:
ideological radicals bent on burning down the house.
No question: "revolutions" always eat their children. It usually starts with a ruling elite
imposing their newfound Platonic Forms on others. Remember Robespierre. He formulated his
politics in a very Platonic way – "the peaceful enjoyment of liberty and equality, the
reign of eternal justice" with laws "engraved in the hearts of all men".
Well, when others disagreed with Robespierre's vision of Virtue, we all know what happened:
the Terror. Just like Plato, incidentally, recommended in Laws. So it's fair to expect that the children of the woke
revolution will eventually be eaten alive by their zeal.
Canceling freedom of speech
As it stands, it's fair to argue when the "West" started to go seriously wrong – in a
cancel culture sense. Allow me to offer the Cynic/Stoic point of view of a 21st century global
nomad.
If we need a date, let's start with Rome – the epitome of the West – in the
early 5th century. Follow the money. That's the time when income from properties owned by
temples were transferred to the Catholic Church – thus boosting its economic power. By
the end of the century, even gifts to temples were forbidden.
In parallel, a destruction overdrive was in progress – fueled by Christian iconoclasm,
ranging from crosses carved in pagan statues to bathhouses converted into churches. Bathing
naked? Quelle horreur!
The devastation was quite something. One of the very few survivors was the fabulous bronze
statue of Marcus Aurelius on horseback, in the Campidoglio/ Capitoline Hill (today it's housed
in the museum). The statue survived only because the pious mobs thought the emperor was
Constantine.
The very urban fabric of Rome was destroyed: rituals, the sense of community, singin' and
dancin'. We should remember that people still lower their voices when entering a church.
For centuries we did not hear the voices of the dispossessed. A glaring exception is to be
found in an early 6th century text by an Athenian philosopher, quoted by Ramsay MacMullen in
Christianity and Paganism in the Fourth to Eight Centuries .
The Greek philosopher wrote that Christians are "a race dissolved in every passion,
destroyed by controlled self-indulgence, cringing and womanish in its thinking, close to
cowardice, wallowing in all swinishness, debased, content with servitude in security."
If that sounds like a proto-definition of 21st century Western cancel culture, that's
because it is.
Things were also pretty bad in Alexandria. A Christian mob killed and dismembered the
alluring Hypatia, mathematician and philosopher. That de facto ended the era of great Greek
mathematics. No wonder Gibbon turned the assassination of Hypatia into a remarkable set piece in
Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire ("In the bloom of beauty, and in the maturity of
wisdom, the modest maid refused her lovers and instructed her disciples; the persons most
illustrious for their rank or merit were impatient to visit the female philosopher").
Under Justinian – emperor from 527 to 565 – cancel culture went after paganism
no holds barred. One of his laws ended imperial toleration of all religions, which was in
effect since Constantine in 313.
If you were a pagan, you'd better get ready for the death penalty. Pagan teachers –
especially philosophers – were banned. They lost their parrhesia : their license
to teach ( here is Foucault's
brilliant analysis).
Parrhesia – loosely translated as "frank criticism" – is a tremendously
serious issue: for no less than a thousand years, this was the definition of freedom of
speech (italics mine).
There you go: first half of the 6th century. This was when freedom of speech was canceled in
the West.
The last Egyptian temple – to Isis, in an island in southern Egypt – was shut
down in 526. The legendary Plato's Academy – with no less than 900 years of teaching in
its curriculum – was shut down in Athens in 529.
Guess where the Greek philosophers chose to go into exile: Persia.
Those were the days – in the early 2nd century – when the greatest Stoic,
Epictetus, a freed slave from Phrygia, admirer of both Socrates and Diogenes, was consulted by
an emperor, Hadrian; and became the role model of another emperor, Marcus Aurelius.
History tells us that the Greek intellectual tradition simply did not fade away in the West.
It was a target of cancel culture.
In lightning speed, the techno-feudalism virus is metastasizing into an even more
lethal, wilderness of mirrors variant, where cancel culture is enforced by Big Tech all
across the spectrum, science is routinely debased as fake news in social media, and the
average citizen is discombobulated to the point of lobotomy.
Those that can think for themselves are ahead of the curve.
"If we need a date, let's start with Rome – the epitome of the West – in the
early 5th century. Follow the money. That's the time when income from properties owned by
temples were transferred to the Catholic Church – thus boosting its economic
power."
Yes, then, as now, follow the money.
The current "woke" culture didn't naturally well-up from within the population.
This "thing" has been artificially engineered, manufactured and steered in the direction
"the money" forces want it to go.
From Covid to the French Revolution to Rome – all made to LOOK natural, as if they
just appeared out of the blue or were a natural progression that couldn't be stopped, but
when you pull back the curtain you see the hands of "the money" firmly on the steering
wheel.
Some people say the Bible was invented during this time in order to bring down Rome.
They're probably right.
History tells us that the Greek intellectual tradition simply did not fade away in the
West. It was a target of cancel culture.
Killed then misrepresented: In The Darkening Age , Catherine Nixey rolls out all
the details. Christianity's greatest crime was the rise of a level of superstition and fear
never before witnessed. Even stone atheists will cringe at the lies -- propagated at the top
-- that Church leaders pushed on their victims. It was worse than some of us suspected.
Nixey's book is not a fun read.
The Greek philosopher was spot on with his observation:
"a race dissolved in every passion cringing and womanish in its thinking, close to
cowardice, wallowing in all swinishness "
If by "womanish in its thinking" he was referring to nothing but emotional (and being
Greek it's likely) he was right on the money, then and now. From BLM to the selling of the
Covid death vaccinations, emotion has become the West's preferred form of discourse. What
killed the Elder Culture now destroys their late-era survivors with a mass nervous
breakdown.
Hey Pepe, study the Punic Wars and try to understand what Rome had against Carthage.
Because the Romans would never demonise their enemies would they? I mean who could imagine
that? The Romans were lovely people and would never do anything perverse or barbaric, no
honestly.
Repressive and non-repressive governments ,democratically elected governments and those
governments imposed from outside ,all have been cancelling messages that they do not like
"Who is "the money"?"
Pepe gives us the answer --
"The woke revolution is a culture war – in symbiosis with Big Tech and Big Business
– that has smashed the real thing: class war. The atomized working classes, struggling
to barely survive, have been left to wallow in anomie."
The "woke" are tools to fracture nations, a people, patriotism, social norms, families,
morality, the future & anything which could possibly hinder the progress of the 600 odd
(multi-billionaire) families who RULE this planet.
The woke revolution is a culture war – in symbiosis with Big Tech and Big
Business – that has smashed the real thing: class war.
this is why it's very important to be deliberately offensive. saying "nigger" is a
revolutionary act. but in the age of the beta male, revolutionaries are too few to succeed
and are punished.
"If they want to boycott us why don't we boycott them," Paul said during an appearance on
Fox News on Tuesday. "This is the only thing that will teach them a lesson. If Coca-Cola wants
to only operate in Democrat states and have only Democrats drink them, God love 'em. We'll see
how well they do when half the country quits drinking Coca-Cola."
"Let me be crystal clear and unequivocal, this legislation is unacceptable, it is a step
backward and it does not promote principles we have stood for in Georgia, around broad access
to voting, around voter convenience, about ensuring election integrity, and this is frankly
just a step backwards," Quincey said.
A slew of other companies followed, including Delta Air Lines, JP Morgan Chase and Major
League Baseball, which pulled its annual All-Star Game out of Atlanta over the bill's
passage.
Democrats have argued the bill makes it harder for many people, particularly minorities, to
vote. Republicans say the bill is needed to beef up election security amid a growing distrust
among conservatives with the electoral process following the 2020 elections.
Coca-Cola is headquartered in Atlanta.
Former President Trump last week called on his supporters not to support Coca-Cola and other
companies that have voiced opposition to the Georgia elections bill and similar measures being
proposed by Republicans around the country.
"For years the Radical Left Democrats have played dirty by boycotting products when anything
from that company is done or stated in any way that offends them. Now they are going big time
with the WOKE CANCEL CULTURE and our sacred elections," Trump
said in a statement over the weekend. "It is finally time for Republicans and Conservatives
to fight back- we have more people than they do- by far! Boycott Major League Baseball,
Coca-Cola, Delta Airlines, JPMorgan Chase, ViacomCBS, Citigroup, Cisco, UPS and Merck. Don't go
back to their products until they relent. We can play a better game than them."
A group of GOP state lawmakers in Georgia wrote a letter to the CEO of the Georgia Beverage
Association asking their office no longer be stocked with Coca-Cola products.
"Given Coke's choice to cave to the pressure of an out of control cancel culture, we
respectfully request all Coca-Cola Company products be removed from our office suite
immediately,"
the letter reads . "Should Coke choose to read the bill, share its true intentions and
accept their role in the dissemination of mistruths, we would welcome a conversation to rebuild
a working relationship."
An anti-discrimination group is challenging Coca-Cola's attempt to impose racial quotas on
outside counsel.
Writing on behalf of the Project on Fair Representation, D.C. attorney Boyden Gray accused
Coca-Cola of violating the Civil Rights Act with a new rule, which would punish contracted law
firms unless a certain percentage of their billed associates are "diverse attorneys."
In
the letter , a copy of which was obtained by the Washington Free Beacon , Gray
argues that policy violates federal law, which "prohibit[s] all forms of racial discrimination
in private contracting." Coca-Cola "appears to be following the view of 'antiracist' activist
Ibram X. Kendi," with their new requirement, Gray writes.
Former Coca-Cola counsel Bradley Gayton, who last week was appointed to serve as a strategic
consultant to the company's CEO, announced
in January that law firms partnering with Coca-Cola would face a 30 percent reduction in
payment unless 30 percent of the firm's billed associates and partners came from diverse
backgrounds. Half of those associates must also be black.
While the practice may have been implemented with good intentions, quotas "perpetuate"
racial categorization, Gray told the Free Beacon.
"Coke's outside counsel policy may be well-intentioned, but racial quotas and the notion of
group rights perpetuate pernicious racial categories and rest on a false, offensive, and racist
notion that blacks and other racial minorities cannot compete," Gray said. "Federal law
prohibits this kind of racially discriminatory balancing. It is not enough for Coke to pause
this policy; it needs to publicly revoke it. Coke should disavow race-based contracting,
period."
Gray is acting on behalf of the Project on Fair Representation, a nonprofit legal group that
fights racial and ethnic discrimination. The group's president, Edward Blum, told the Free
Beacon he believes the company must withdraw the rule immediately.
"It is obvious to all observers that Coca-Cola's recently enacted law firm contracting
policies are illegal. The company should publicly withdraw these racial quota requirements
immediately."
Blum helped organize Students for Fair Admissions' lawsuit against Harvard, which claims the
university discriminates against Asian-American applicants. The group recently
petitioned the Supreme Court to take up their case. Blum is also the architect of
Fisher v. University of Texas , the last case that mounted a frontal attack on
affirmative action before the High Court.
Federal law bans race discrimination in private contracting, as Gray's letter notes.
Lawsuits regarding contract discrimination go straight to federal court, unlike others that
first must go through a years-long agency process. And unlike other anti-discrimination laws,
there's no cap on monetary damages under the fair contracting. Coca-Cola could be on the hook
for a hefty financial penalty.
The soda company landed in hot water in February after leaked documents from an internal
diversity and inclusion training session
asked workers to "be less white." Coca-Cola did not respond to the Free Beacon 's
request for comment in time for publication.
The idea that someone can't succeed in America because of their skin color, gender,
whatever, is as stupid as it is bigoted. Weirdly, it seems to always be espoused by people
who've "somehow" beaten the odds. How many times have you seen a black Ivy League professor on
TV talking about "systemic racism"? How'd they get a tenured, high six-figure gig, book deals,
speaking engagements, and a cable news contributor contract in such a rigged system?
They never answer that question because the only people who'd ask it of them are their
colleagues on TV and they're on the same team. But the answer is obvious: they worked for it;
they earned it.
The woke crowd doesn't want minorities to realize that, and neither do racists. Both want to
keep people down because it serves their needs.
Racists want segregation; wokesters want segregation too. One in the name of bigotry, one in
the name of "tolerance." Does the motive really matter if the outcome is the same?
In fact, to listen to the demands of the leftists in the streets, you'd think they were the
Klan.
"Black people can't succeed without government help," "They can't get ahead without a
government program," "They'll only end up in jail if they don't get handouts." Again, seemingly
different motivations, but all those statements could've been uttered by either group.
The infantilizing of black people by the progressive left is actually worse than anything
the Klan is doing because the KKK is a non-entity in American life in the 21st century. In my
book, I wrote about the size of the KKK. The Southern Poverty Law Center estimates there are
between 5,000-8,000 members of the KKK in 2016, down from about 4 million a century earlier.
That's a huge drop – to go from millions to a rounding error smaller than the average
attendance of a WNBA game as the population tripled should be cause for celebration. But
leftists will tell you racists are everywhere and running the show.
Boycott Nike Campaign : 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
Share via E-mail More share options
On Monday, Nike rolled out a new ad campaign featuring Colin Kaepernick, the former 49ers quarterback who gained national attention
when he began taking the knee during the national anthem to protest racism and police brutality. Nike’s new ad features a black
and white photo of an unsmiling Kaepernick. The words written across his face read “Believe in something. Even if it means sacrificing
everything.â€
Kaepernick hasn’t played for the NFL since he became a free agent in 2017, but he continues to be in the public eye. Just last
week, a judge ruled
that Kaepernick’s lawsuit against the NFL for alleged collusion can go forward. Nike’s new ad campaign has garnered a lot of
attention, with people on both sides of the issue reacting intensely. Serena Williams, who also is a Nike spokesperson, tweeted that
she is now “prouder than ever†to be part of the “Nike family.â€
At the same time, many people, angry at what they see as Colin Kaepernick’s unpatriotic politics, have announced that they will
boycott Nike.
Looks like an attempt to redirect anger against neolibel elite into racial antimosity does nto work well. A least for this UNZ commentariant.
They are not folled by woke nonsense.
In any case it looks like the USA is a divided country.
Never underestimate the insanity of Zionists, be they full Jews, half-Jews, or soulless Jew-wannabes like Joe "I am a Zionist"
Biden. We're in unprecedented territory -- an empire run by Zoglodytes. They'll run it into the ground sooner or later, but just
how quickly and at what cost to the humanity is anyone's guess.
Of course, none of it would be possible but for the Anglo-elites doing deals with ((bankers)) in search of post-Imperial easy-living.
In fact, that's probably what caused WW2.
Today, gangsters from every creed, race and religion want in on the Zionist action, and happily signal to their criminal lodestar
that they're "all in" with virtually unlimited aid, wars and diplomatic support in Congress for the Jewish state.
The New World Order. How do you like it, whitey? You just had to listen to the gold-plated promises of the Jew confidence man.
The streets will be paved with gold, right?
If you're white and in the armed forces/police, you're a moron.
The fact is Americans are nothing but the Jew's bitch, killing for them. There isn't one American, who's defended their country,
well, you'll have to go back to the war of independence for that. Every, serving member of the armed forces is a mercenary, paid
by the US taxpayer, to kill fire Israel as they establish greater Israel.
So STOP looking at your armed forces as heroes. They aren't, not one, single one! See them for what they are, braindead, brainwashed,
fighting machines, WHO DON'T FIGHT FOR YOU! And that's what's worrying. Throughout history every armed force has been turned against
its own nation and its just a matter of time with the US. THEY WILL use them against you, to push nationwide vaccination.
The armed forces, like the police, are your enemy and I strongly suggest that if you know anyone in them, or a friend whose
family members are in them, tell them to leave ASAP before they institute martial law. Remember, the armed forces don't serve
you, so leaving them is doing the people good while staying within is causing them harm.
I'm suspicious of Biden's planned withdrawal from Afghanistan. The troops will probably get reassigned to the Middle East or
the Polish Border. Trump's "withdrawal" from Syria just amounted to shipping those troops to Iraq.
The Biden administration is a revolutionary one. It is not American and doesn't pretend to be. Like Lenin's early revolutionary
Bolshevik government it is comprised of mostly Jews and racial/ethnic minorities who are antagonistic towards the majority population
and its history and traditions.
I believe that the Jews, radical blacks and others who are really in charge of the Biden administration have no plans to relinquish
power in 2024 even if they lose the election. Since the courts refused to provide a legal remedy for battleground states breaking
their own elections laws to massively increase Democrat mail-in ballots then they will just do it again unless Republicans can
win the gubernatorial elections in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. But that might not be possible with mail-in ballot schemes
that were illegally put in place.
Will whites support a globalist regime that picks fights abroad and wars against them at home? The mood of the country is
comparable to East German during the 1980's. Resignation and apathy. The last election was a fraud, the media are liars, the courts
are political, privacy and free speech aren't being protected, and half the country declares it hates the other half.
Go ahead, try to conjure a false flag to rally Team America
There are no signs whites are about to repudiate the Evil Empire. Trace Adkins, Gerald McRaney are on tv advertisements imploring
whites to provide financial support to the fools who came back crippled from fighting in Israel's wars.
"Will Whites Support A Globalist American Empire That Picks Fights Abroad and Wars Against Them At Home?"
The answer is YES, they will.
Why?
Because they've been zombified by 150 years of corporate media whose only purpose is to use subliminal messages 24/7 to control
them. Worse of all, they pay monthly fees in order to be zombified!
Wait for the next false flag attack against the US "Interests" at home or abroad and you'll see how the zombies behave.
Elites, oligarchs, plutocrats, super-rich, whatever, but don't slime the Yankees.
And while I agree with much of this, don't forget that in the late 1960's the elites imported Mexicans to specifically replace
blacks. And then cried a river of tears at how blacks were mysteriously losing ground!!!!
Oh and also: nobody NEEDS cheap labor to run factories. History has shown that without cheap labor factories run perfectly
well. It's just that the elites need cheap labor to stay elite
The real enemy of the American working class and middle class all of them is neoliberalism ! Coupled with a two party plutocracy
that disenfranchises the same Americans who desperately need a more equitable society! Nothing to do with Russia or China we caused
it all by ourselves!
This is why there needs to be White Liberation from Jewish Supremacism. But Jewish Power tries to preempt this by making a
big stink about 'white supremacism'.
No more white support for Jewish supremacist tyranny over Palestinians and mass murder of Arabs/Muslims. If, after 2020, any
white person still harbors sentimentality about Jewish Power, he or she is cuck-roach. Useless and worthless.
Currently, an indebted, belligerent, imperialist U.S. is being propped up by naïve, well-meaning whites.
These "well-meaning whites" are the enemy. "Well-meaning whites" have always been the greatest enemy of Whites. A lot of people
here consider Jews to be our greatest enemies. But why are they here in such huge numbers and why are they in control? It started
with the Powdered-Wig Gang (a.k.a. the Founding Fathers) giving them citizenship on the basis of their shit "Enlightenment" ideology,
which held that religion was merely a private matter and of no importance. No country at the time gave Jews citizenship save Poland,
which had fallen under their sway and paid an exceedingly high price for it. Then France followed the American example when they
had their own powdered-wig revolution.
The tragedy of the US is that nearly every fair-skinned, non-Jewish individual who has any influence here is a "well-meaning
White". Generations of brainwashing have done that. Their latest bit of tomfoolery is the belief "Uncle Tim" Scott, a dim, charmless,
venal, ugly black mediocrity, will be their savior. By the way, the first time I laid eyes on Uncle Tim, I said myself, "They're
going to want to make that fellow president." That's no reason to brag, however, because "well-meaning whites" are nothing if
not predictable.
"Well-meaning whites" have no common sense and can't learn from experience. They could not conceive the idea "diversity" is
the problem. "Diversity" elected Joe Biden, through bloc-voting by non-Whites and by she-boons in black-dominated counties bringing
in suitcases of fake ballots, but guess what: as far as "well-meaning Whites" are concerned, "diversity" in the form of "Uncle
Tim" Scott is the solution.
What it comes down to is that if Whites want the White race to survive, then "well-meaning whites", who can accurately be called
"liberals", have to go. Whites cannot afford to be sentimental about "well-meaning whites".
@xyzxy the Zio-western imperialists decided ( ie "backed down") not to risk crossing them.
Incidentally JK I don't disagree with this position --
"Rather than feeling anger or shame at this national humiliation, instead I feel something like schadenfreude against them --
along with righteous indignation on behalf of the countless patriots used up and spat out by a System unworthy of their sacrifice."
But perhaps you could spare a few words & emotions for the poor bloody average Afghans who have died in their 100's of 1000's
in this vicious, stupid war.
A lack of sympathy for & indeed basic knowledge of, other peoples is part of the reason the US constantly gets stuck in these
ridiculous wars. (Had they the "leaders" we have now , the Vietnam War would probably have limped to a halt sometime in
the late 80's).
Hmm. Kirkpatrick doesn't seem to realize that 911 was sort of an official beginning to the elites domestic threat problem?
There was never a reason to enter Afghanistan because Afghanistan never attacked us and nor did Osama Bin Laden.
As long as ppl believe the official story there will always be a reason the American citizen can support for invading middle east
countries
Like the holocaust, it is a lynch pin lie that is the pre-requisite for all sorts claims and behaviors that without them would
otherwise not give validation
I doubt Russia has any regard for Turkey – it has a very long history of wars against them and knows just how treacherous they
are.
Russia alone is powerful enough to end life in USA
USA has lost Europe already- Merkel is aligning with China
Americans think Russian gas binds Germany rather than export markets like China and the fact EU needs semiconductors and Asia
is where they are produced
No one takes USA seriously any more it is peripheral as in 19th century. You forget Europeans cannot travel to US and frankly
fear to do so anyway
This cannot be said nearly enough. WASP culture is WASP elites hating all 'other' whites and pretending not to hate
a few non-WASP white groups when they (the WASPs) can use them against the whites they most hate or fear at the moment. WASPs
discard all groups they use as soon as they no longer need them to wage some type war against still other whites.
The Scotch-Irish are probably the best example of what WASPs think of even those who serve them most ruthlessly.
The mood of the country is comparable to East German during the 1980's. Resignation and apathy.
The last election was a fraud, the media are liars, the courts are political, privacy and free speech aren't being protected,
and half the country declares it hates the other half.
Go ahead, try to conjure a false flag to rally Team America.
It does look like resignation and apathy – which is sort of logical – given that all centers of power are in the hands of the
totalitarians (same as in the old East Germany).
The totalitarian Communist East German regime actually collapsed when it became caught up in the mass demonstrations of neighbouring
countries (Poland Feb. 1989 and Hungary the following month). The Communists didn't have the political will/ability to suppress
demonstrations on this scale and ceded power. Two points here are 1) that the public in each country overwhelmingly opposed the
government 2) each country was ethnically united (Poles in Poland, Hungarians in Hungary and Germans in East Germany) and viewed
their oppression as sourced externally (the Soviet Union).
The US looks different, since the population is split both politically and ethnically. So if anything is going to happen (unlikely)
then it's either a civil war, a military coup or a world war (nuclear) removing most major American cities + Israel.
@anonymouseperson c accountants uncovering the depths of Israel and its fifth column's theft of many tens of billions of our
war matériel and of our most guarded military secrets, which were then sold to China in concert with the Greenspan/Goldman Sachs
plan to transfer of our industrial intellectual assets and over 50,000 factories to China in preparation for a new order based
on joint Israeli-Chinese technocratic hegemony.
My point is that the uninterrupted, elaborate efforts at 9/11 concealment legally constitute, by themselves, sufficient proof
of the Pentagon's complicity and guilt in 9/11 and, therefore, make it an alien occupation force that serves Israel, its fifth
column, and no other. A war completing the "Bolsheviks" effective extermination of white Christian Russia at the same time as
exterminating white Christian America appears to be the objective of International Jewry, whom alone Joe Biden and his Pentagon
answer to.
When I was in the US Army, I never met anyone who signed up to 'fight for the Anglo-Zionist empire'. We were there for a variety
of reasons, no job, to get training, money for college, adventure or maybe running away from a crazy girlfriend. As the grandson
of immigrants, I was probably the most patriotic, the rest of the guys, not so much. Young men will always join the military,
whether the military oppresses its people or not. How many Irishmen served in the British military when they had few civil rights
back home? In the military, a young White man can learn a trade, learn military tactics, earn money for college and become a real
asset to his community. You can also get killed or maimed, but at 18 or 19, we didn't think about that.
Will Whites Support A Globalist American Empire That Picks Fights Abroad and Wars Against Them At Home?
If they are members of Congress, the military leadership, the police, the FBI, the NSA, the CIA, the MSM, or the leadership
of either political party the answer is clearly a resounding YES!!
I believe a large percentage of whites in America have a Stockholm syndrome of some kind going on. The title of the article
has rolled two very separate issues into one. As far as continuing to support wars abroad that aren't benefiting the average person
of whatever color is not an issue that can be specifically directed at Marxist oriented regimes such as that of Obama/Hillary
and now Sleepy Joe & Camel Toe. One can never forget the years of the faux conservative Bushlet regime. Whites as a group more
overtly support the military than do other racial groups (even though blacks and Hispanics make up a large percentage of our military).
They are very reluctant to criticize American foreign policy as unpatriotic and somehow react to military interventions as if
they were a sporting event.
Their concept of patriotism is very puerile. Many never ask the question of who benefits? (bankers, weapons manufacturers
and Zionists). As far as the war on whites is concerned, here is where the Stockholm syndrome comes more into play. Our people
have been psychologically beaten into submission by accepting whatever the Marxist intelligentsia throws at them.But there is
also a cultural flaw primarily among Northern European Protestant whites which consists of being perceived as NICE. Stop being
NICE, especially to people who wish you dead. Is this some sort of perversion of Christianity? Maybe. Rather than throwing the
whole Gospel message out the window, a recalibration of one's Christianity needs to happen as well. The churches have not been
our friend either.
Corporations
have taken advantage of Republicans for too long. I won’t take their PAC
dollars anymore.
... ... ...
In my nine years in the Senate, I’ve received $2.6 million in
contributions from corporate political-action committees. Starting today, I no longer accept
money from any corporate PAC. I urge my GOP colleagues at all levels to do the same.
For too long, Republicans have allowed the left and their big-business allies to attack our
values with no response. We’ve allowed them to ship jobs overseas, attack
gun rights, and destroy our energy companies. We’ve let them smear
Republicans without paying any price.
As America’s greatest basketball player observed years ago, Republicans
buy sneakers, too. We cast votes, too. And we pay attention when CEOs come after our own just
so they can look good for a few editorial pages and radical activists.
To them I say: When the time comes that you need help with a tax break or a regulatory
change, I hope the Democrats take your calls, because we may not. Starting today, we
won’t take your money either.
Mr. Cruz, a Republican, is a U.S. senator from Texas.
The ambassador rose to give the not-so-loyal toast.
He began with the inevitable nod to the two nations' divergent histories, noting that some
time earlier, in their great wisdom, his compatriots had decided to go it alone.
"Oh yes!" cried the prince from a sedentary position, fortified, no doubt, by a couple of
glasses of the embassy's very good wine. "And how's that working out for you?"
It was a good question then, and it's more apt than ever now given America's current
predicament. The people that once boldly threw off the tyranny of a distant monarch now seem to
be meekly submitting to the diktats of a regnant class and ideology that tolerate less
independence of thought and action than King George III did
... Today the woke movement questions the very idea of truth. Intermixed with millenarian
frenzy and American Puritanism, Maoist mob rule and hyper-liberal culture war, there is a strand
that echoes Duranty's crypto-Nietzschean philosophy.
Notable quotes:
"... Live Not By Lies ..."
"... "You have to suffer for the truth because that's what makes you authentic. That's what makes that truth credible. If I'm not willing to suffer, my truth might as well be nothing more than an ideology," she tells me. ..."
"... Suffering is a part of every human's life. We don't know why we suffer. But your suffering is like a seal. If you put that seal on your actions, interestingly enough, people start to wonder about your truth -- that maybe you are right about God. In one sense, it's a mystery, because the Evil One wants to persuade us that there is a life without suffering. First you have to live through it, and then you try to pass on the value of suffering, because suffering has a value. ..."
It is for the cause of helping good and decent people to endure this coming destruction, and
to suffer for truth, no matter what the totalitarians throw at them, that I have written
Live Not By Lies . A passage that you have not yet seen:
Mária Komáromi teaches in a Catholic school in Budapest. She and her late
husband, János, were religious dissidents under the communist regime, and bore many
burdens to keep the faith alive.
"You have to suffer for the truth because that's what makes you authentic. That's
what makes that truth credible. If I'm not willing to suffer, my truth might as well be
nothing more than an ideology," she tells me.
Komáromi elaborates further:
Suffering is a part of every human's life. We don't know why we suffer. But your
suffering is like a seal. If you put that seal on your actions, interestingly enough,
people start to wonder about your truth -- that maybe you are right about God. In one
sense, it's a mystery, because the Evil One wants to persuade us that there is a life
without suffering. First you have to live through it, and then you try to pass on the value
of suffering, because suffering has a value.
...Suffering for truth has dignity and weight; accepting lies because they make you more
comfortable is contemptible. The fact that public intellectuals like Fran Maier and John Gray
recognize the totalitarianism within wokeness, and how wokeness in power compels everyone to
affirm lies, tells me that neither I, nor the survivors of Soviet communism who talked to me
for the book, are being alarmist.
Rod Dreher is a senior editor at The American
Conservative . Joanis B • 9 months ago • edited
It's hard to see such famines, albeit politically determined ones, occurring in the US or
Western Europe, considering the way developed economies function today: based on consumption,
not national production (largely outside of the agricultural, financial products, service
sector, etc, arms industry). What not only USSR and Maoist China, but also British Imperial
Ireland and India, had in common was a situation of both extreme poverty and imperial
despotism.
So yes Stalin and Mao were horrible, but, honestly, considering what
neoliberalism/neoconservatism has done to the world since 9/11, I think most of the world
perceives the US to be the greatest aggressor of post Cold War times (and it has nothing to do
with Wokism, though Wokism might be a reaction to it).
P.S. I would add, only have facetiously, it's not a good idea to be around when empires
implode, whether it be the Russian, Chinese, French (Algeria, Indochina), German, or even the
British (certainly in the context of Indian partition).
Back in the good old days, when things were more innocent and simple, the psychopathic
Central Intelligence Agency had to covertly infiltrate the news media to manipulate the
information Americans were consuming about their nation and the world. Nowadays, there is no
meaningful separation between the news media and the CIA at all.
Analysis: US
blinks first on Russia-Ukraine tensions
Journalist Glenn Greenwald just highlighted an interesting point about the reporting by The
New York Times on the so-called
“Bountygate†story the outlet broke in June of last year
about the Russian government trying to pay Taliban-linked fighters to attack US soldiers in
Afghanistan.
“One of the NYT reporters who originally broke the Russia bounty story
(originally attributed to unnamed ‘intelligence
officials’) say today that it was a CIA claim,†Greenwald
tweeted .
“So media outlets - again - repeated CIA stories with no questioning:
congrats to all.â€
Indeed, NYT’s original
story made no mention of CIA involvement in the narrative, citing only
“officials,†yet this latest article speaks as though it had
been informing its readers of the story’s roots in the
lying, torturing , drug-running , warmongering Central
Intelligence Agency from the very beginning. The author even writes “The New
York Times
first reported last summer the existence of the C.I.A.’s
assessment,†with the hyperlink leading to the initial article which made no
mention of the CIA. It wasn’t until later that The New York Times began reporting that the CIA
was looking into the Russian bounties allegations at all.
The Daily Beast , which has itself uncritically published many articles
promoting the CIA “Bountygate†narrative, reports the
following:
It was a blockbuster
story about Russia’s return to the imperial “Great
Game†in Afghanistan. The Kremlin had spread money around the longtime central
Asian battlefield for militants to kill remaining U.S. forces. It sparked a massive outcry
from Democrats and their #resistance amplifiers about the treasonous Russian puppet in the
White House whose admiration for Vladimir Putin had endangered American troops.
But on Thursday, the Biden administration announced that U.S. intelligence only had
“low to moderate†confidence in the story after all.
Translated from the jargon of spyworld, that means the intelligence agencies have found the
story is, at best, unproven â€" and possibly untrue.
So the mass media aggressively promoted a CIA narrative that none of them ever saw proof of,
because there was no proof, because it was an entirely unfounded claim from the very beginning.
They quite literally ran a CIA press release and disguised it as a news story.
In totalitarian dictatorships, the government spy agency tells the news media what stories
to run, and the news media unquestioningly publish it. In free democracies, the government spy
agency says “Hoo buddy, have I got a scoop for you!†and the
news media unquestioningly publish it.
In 1977 Carl Bernstein published an article titled “ The CIA and the Media
†reporting that the CIA had
covertly infiltrated America’s most influential news outlets and had
over 400 reporters who it considered assets in a program known as
Operation Mockingbird . It was a major scandal, and rightly so. The news media is meant to
report truthfully about what happens in the world, not manipulate public perception to suit the
agendas of spooks and warmongers.
Nowadays the CIA collaboration happens right out in the open, and people are too
propagandized to even recognize this as scandalous. Immensely influential outlets like The New
York Times uncritically pass on CIA disinfo which is then spun as fact by cable news
pundits . The sole owner of The Washington Post is a CIA contractor ,
and WaPo has never once disclosed this conflict of interest when reporting on US intelligence
agencies per standard journalistic protocol. Mass media outlets
now openly employ intelligence agency veterans like John Brennan, James Clapper,
Chuck Rosenberg, Michael Hayden, Frank Figliuzzi, Fran Townsend, Stephen Hall, Samantha
Vinograd, Andrew McCabe, Josh Campbell, Asha Rangappa, Phil Mudd, James Gagliano, Jeremy Bash,
Susan Hennessey, Ned Price and Rick Francona, as are known
CIA assets like NBC’s Ken Dilanian, as are
CIA interns like Anderson Cooper and CIA applicants like
Tucker Carlson.
This isn’t Operation Mockingbird. It’s so much worse.
Operation Mockingbird was the CIA doing something to the media. What we are seeing now is the
CIA openly acting as the media. Any separation between the CIA and the news media, indeed even
any pretence of separation, has been dropped.
This is bad. This is very, very bad. Democracy has no meaningful existence if
people’s votes aren’t being cast with a clear
understanding of what’s happening in their nation and their world, and if
their understanding is being shaped to suit the agendas of the very government
they’re meant to be influencing with their votes, what you have is the most
powerful military and economic force in the history of civilization with no accountability to
the electorate whatsoever. It’s just an immense globe-spanning power
structure, doing whatever it wants to whoever it wants. A totalitarian dictatorship in
disguise.
And the CIA is the very worst institution that could possibly be spearheading the movements
of that dictatorship. A little research into the many, many horrific
things the CIA has done over the years will quickly show you that this is true; hell, just
a glance at what the CIA was up to with the
Phoenix Program in Vietnam will.
There’s a common delusion in our society that depraved government
agencies who are known to have done evil things in the past have simply stopped doing evil
things for some reason. This belief is backed by zero evidence, and is contradicted by
mountains of evidence to the contrary. It’s believed because it is
comfortable, and for literally no other reason.
The CIA should not exist at all, let alone control the news media, much less the movements
of the US empire. May we one day know a humanity that is entirely free from the rule of
psychopaths, from our total planetary behavior as a collective, all the way down to the
thoughts we think in our own heads.
May we extract their horrible fingers from every aspect of our being.
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 at my website or on Substack , which will get you an email
notification for everything I publish. My work is
entirely reader-supported , so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around,
liking me on Facebook
, following my antics on Twitter , or
throwing some money into my tip jar on Ko-fi , Patreon or Paypal . If you want to read more you can buy
my books . For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying
to do with this platform,
click here . Everyone, racist platforms excluded,
has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else
I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge.
It's imprudent to weigh in on issues that don't directly affect the company.
A few CEOs have expressed their point of view about the new Georgia voting law. They have
issued statements indicating their opposition on the basis that the law will suppress voting.
Other senior executives, retired and active, have joined them. I know most of them by
reputation and some personally. They are people of goodwill, who sincerely care about the
nation, their companies and their employees and customers. Most have done excellent work as
leaders of their companies. All have my respect and I believe have earned the respect of the
public. But I believe they are wrong to take public positions on this law.
I believe both that voting ought to be relatively simple for citizens and that verification
of eligibility to vote should be strict as a matter of principle. It is clear that any
verification of ballot integrity will increase difficulty. In my view, the Georgia law reaches
a reasonable trade-off between those two objectives.
But the reason I think CEOs should be silent on this issue isn't because I disagree with
their judgment on the merits. It's because I think it is wrong for executives to take a company
position on public-policy questions that don't directly affect their business, for four
reasons.
First, while these CEOs have the right to their own opinions, they can never speak merely as
individuals; they always speak for and represent the companies they head. As CEOs they have the
right, and perhaps the obligation, to speak out on matters affecting their organizations, but
unless they have asked their boards for approval before speaking, they don't have that right on
unrelated matters.
Second, inevitably their announcements on purely political issues will alienate many of
their employees and customers. Those positions will always lead to unintended consequences. In
the Georgia situation, it immediately prompted Major League Baseball to move the All-Star Game
to Denver, which then brought on charges of hypocrisy because of baseball's close ties to two
dictatorships -- Cuba and China. It also generated calls to boycott two major Atlanta-based
companies. This won't be the end of the backlash.
Third, these and other executives will be pressured in the future to comment, pro or con, on
other states' voting laws. That will lead to further charges of hypocrisy, more boycotts, more
publicity, more ill will. At the end of the day corporations and the idea of capitalism will be
in lower repute.
Fourth, and perhaps most important, there is no limiting principle to this problem. If
business heads can be pressured to comment on issues unrelated to their businesses, they will
be compelled to weigh in on more current events and issues and will have no basis for refusing
to respond. What do you think of catch and release at the border, what do you think of no-bail
laws in New York? It will go on and on.
Boycott Nike Campaign : 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
Share via E-mail More share options
On Monday, Nike rolled out a new ad campaign featuring Colin Kaepernick, the former 49ers quarterback who gained national attention
when he began taking the knee during the national anthem to protest racism and police brutality. Nike’s new ad features a black
and white photo of an unsmiling Kaepernick. The words written across his face read “Believe in something. Even if it means sacrificing
everything.â€
Kaepernick hasn’t played for the NFL since he became a free agent in 2017, but he continues to be in the public eye. Just last
week, a judge ruled
that Kaepernick’s lawsuit against the NFL for alleged collusion can go forward. Nike’s new ad campaign has garnered a lot of
attention, with people on both sides of the issue reacting intensely. Serena Williams, who also is a Nike spokesperson, tweeted that
she is now “prouder than ever†to be part of the “Nike family.â€
At the same time, many people, angry at what they see as Colin Kaepernick’s unpatriotic politics, have announced that they will
boycott Nike.
An advanced society functions by creating a series of institutions, telling them what it
wants them to do, and funding them to do it. Institutions like the police, fire departments,
courts and schools do the jobs society creates them to do. But one American institution --
higher education -- has decided to repurpose itself. It has set aside the job given to it by
society and substituted a different one.
Higher education had a cluster of related purposes in society. Everyone benefited from the
new knowledge it developed and the well-informed, thoughtful citizenry it produced. Individual
students benefited from the preparation they received for careers in a developed economy. Yet
these days, academia has decided that its primary purpose is the promotion of a radical
political ideology, to which it gives the sunny label "social justice."
That's an enormous detour from the institutional mission granted to higher education by
society -- and a problem of grave consequence. For the purpose that academia has now given
itself happens to be the only one that the founding documents of virtually all colleges and
universities take care to forbid pre-emptively. The framers of those documents understood that
using the campuses to promote political ideologies would destroy their institutions, because
ideologies would always be rigid enough to prevent the exploration of new ideas and the free
exercise of thought. They knew that the two purposes -- academic and political -- aren't simply
different, but polar opposites. They can't coexist because the one erases the other.
The current political uniformity of college faculty illustrates the point. It meets the
needs of the substitute purpose very well, but only by annihilating the authorized one.
Analytical thinking requires exploring a range of alternatives, but political crusades require
the opposite: exclusive belief and commitment. That's how far off course academia has gone in
its capricious self-repurposing.
Though most Americans aren't happy about this, academia has no qualms. No matter how many
times the lack of intellectual diversity on politicized, one-party campuses is decried as
unhealthy and educationally ruinous, the campuses won't listen. There was once internal debate
about higher education's direction between traditional academic scholars and radical political
activists, but that debate is long over. The activists, now firmly in control, have no interest
in what the dwindling ranks of scholars have to say.
Menthol cigarettes are racist. Regular flavored cigarettes don't kill as many black people
as menthol cigarettes and will henceforth be canceled. Because black people will ever only
smoke menthol cigarettes and never smoke regular flavored cigarettes, right?
On menthol, African American health groups and researchers say it is clear that Blacks
have been disproportionately hurt by the cigarettes, which studies show are more addictive
and
harder to stop using than non-menthol cigarettes.
In the 1950s, only about 10 percent of Black smokers used menthol cigarettes. Today, that
proportion is more than 85 percent, three times the rate for White smokers . African
Americans die of tobacco-related illnesses, including cancer and heart disease, at higher
rates than other groups, according to studies.
I smoked 3 packs of cigarettes a day most of my adult life and I can tell you without
hesitation or qualification that anyone who believes canceling one kind of cigarettes will get
people to stop smoking should be fired for rank stupidity.
GodEmperor0fMankind 1 hour ago
He cant even get his son to stop smokin crack
ted41776 47 minutes ago
while naked in bed with underage relatives? allegedly
Hedgehog77 1 hour ago
But smoking meth and ****ting on the sidewalk is just fine.
onasip123 1 hour ago
When Menthol cigarettes are outlawed, only outlaws will have Menthol cigarettes.
dukeofthefoothills 1 hour ago
Biden: "If you smoke regular cigarettes, you're not Black, man."
Nature_Boy_Wooooo 1 hour ago
This is so awesome.
awake283 1 hour ago
When I smoked, I really only smoked menthols. Does that mean I was appropriating black
culture?
-- ALIEN -- 1 hour ago
Reparations need to be made!
Gentleman Bastard 1 hour ago
Looks like a black market opportunity for menthol cigarettes just opened up.
HRH of Aquitaine 2.0 1 hour ago
Yep great minds think alike.
Lord Raglan 39 minutes ago (Edited)
Oregon legalized cocaine but they've outlawed straws.
Must be frustrating.
There's classic liberal logic for you.
holmes 1 hour ago
Blacks like menthol cigs better. So these cigs are racist. So does that make fried chicken
racist also?
the6thBook PREMIUM 1 hour ago
Shouldn't blacks be upset that they are banning their cigarettes? Trying to make blacks
smoke white cigarettes?
cowdiddly 37 minutes ago
Well, Obama did warn you that this Dotard was dumb as a rock.
A federal politician travels to the scene of a controversial trial to threaten a riot if the
jury doesn’t deliver the “correct†verdict.
Rule of law is such an antiquated idea.
In front of God and country (and journalists with cameras) Rep. Maxine Waters â€"
from behind a face mask/face shield combo for COVID safety, of course â€"
declared:
“We’re looking for a guilty
verdict… If nothing does not happen [sic], then we know that we have got
to… stay in the streets…I hope we get a verdict that
says guilty, guilty… And if we don’t, we cannot go
away.â€
When asked what she thinks protesters should do, Waters explicitly told them to
“get more activeâ€:
"We’ve got to stay on the street. We get more active,
we’ve got to get more confrontational . We’ve got to make
sure that they know that we mean business.â€
The subtext, of course, is that previous protests were not confrontational or
“active†enough. What exactly would a “more
active†Minneapolis riot round #2 look like?
Maxine Waters, incidentally, theoretically represents LA â€" quite a long drive
from Minneapolis or, for that matter, Washington, D.C. Waters most likely flew in on a
chartered jet, though, and left the driving to the proletariat.
The judge in the case, Peter Cahill,
replied to Chauvin’s lawyers’ motion that he declare
a mistrial due to Maxine Waters’ threatening rhetoric on the streets of
Minneapolis:
“I wish elected officials would stop talking about this case, especially
in a manner that’s disrespectful to the rule of law and to the judicial
branch and our function… I’m aware the Congresswoman
Waters was talking specifically about this trial… if (representatives) want
to give their opinions, they should do so in a manner that is consistent with their oath to the
Constitution to respect the co-equal branch of government… Their failure to
do so, I think, is abhorrent .â€
This is practical proof that the trustees of the fictitious democracy fantasy we are all
forced to accept don’t believe in the legal process or rule of law
â€" as if Americans required more evidence of their Congressional
representatives’ failings, over and over and over.
Outside of rule of law, the federal government and the corporations that functionally own it
treat the American citizenry to a host of abuses:
Warrant-free mass surveillance
Endless foreign wars with no legal declaration of war
‘In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a
speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State.â€
Imagine, for a moment, the mental process of a juror in the Floyd case, a resident of
Minneapolis â€" the same city in which Maxine Waters threatened mass violence if the
jury you belong to fails to render a “guilty†verdict. Perhaps
you live in one of the same neighborhoods that was essentially leveled in the riots of June
2020.
Maybe, for some masochistic reason, you enjoyed shopping at your local Target before
“protesters†pillaged it and you couldn’t
buy waffle batter and Korean electronics or whatever.
Or, maybe you really liked the guys at the local AutoZone who helped you out with sourcing
car parts â€" the ones who don’t have a job anymore because they
don’t have a building to work in
after protestors torched it .
Yes, you have been instructed not to view news surrounding the trial as all jurors are. But
now, after coming home from a long day at court, Waters’ tirade is all over
your social media as you scroll through your newsfeed.
How could it not be? A sitting member of Congress not only sanctioned but encouraged riots
in the same case that you, again, are charged with rendering an impartial verdict in.
Even if you wanted to ignore Waters’ threats to remain in good faith as a
juror and try your best to deliver justice, you couldn’t. Humans, however
Stoic, are not robots.
What are you going to do? Is impartiality possible in such circumstances when
it’s your own city, maybe even your own neighborhood, on the chopping block
at the whim of a faceless, nameless mob?
Or are you going to bow to the pressure and give the mob the verdict it wants â€"
and hope and pray that’s enough to satisfy them and prevent more lootings
and burnings (though that’s certainly no guarantee).
If Waters believed in rule of law, a basic Constitutional function of the government, why
would she not let the process finish?
In the weeks leading up to her calls for riots on the streets in the event of an acquittal,
every legal analyst worth his or her salt predicted a guilty verdict on all counts.
So, why would you disrupt the process days before the guilty verdict demanded by the mob,
tainting the jury pool potentially and, as a result, nullifying the entire court proceedings
and mandating a retrial?
“Congresswoman Waters may have given you something on appeal that may
result in this whole trial being overturned.â€
Of course she gave cause for appeal, by any rational standard or analysis. A sitting member
of Congress traveling to the scene of active protests to fan the flames of rage and threaten
riots on camera that almost literally everyone â€" including the jurors in the case
â€" have seen.
This is not a mere case of Congressional misconduct â€" those happen every day.
This is the instantiation of mob rule as a substitute for law. Justice is now dispensed at the
whim of popular opinion, which is not gauged by any scientific means like polling but rather
through raw expression of power on the streets.
Where this ends is anyone’s guess, but it’s not likely
to be anywhere decent. Some more multinational corporations that worship at the altar of
neoliberalism might get their Minneapolis stores torched along with rule of law, at least, and
no one will mourn the loss.
Ben Bartee is a Bangkok-based American journalist with opposable thumbs. Contact him via
his portfolio or on
LinkedIn
.
You can help protect us from BIG TECH DE-PLATFORMING by joining our email list.
This is the single biggest way to ensure we can't be silenced for speaking out against
censorship, and the elite/ cabal's plans for a "Great Reset"-- their New World Order meant to
render you impoverished and powerless.
This stupid woman is doing nothing but foment increased racial tension and disgust for
black culture. Black leadership of the likes of Sharpton, Jackson and this evil brain dead
congresswoman is disgraceful and self serving. Their idiotic messages are never about
self-reliance, living by acceptable moral standards, abiding by the law, valuing education,
valuing family, treating others with respect, etc.........but rather always hate filled,
victimhood mentality, and that someone else is responsible for keeping you down. Why on earth
are these self serving pieces of shyte leaders not seen for who they are (race baiting,
hustlers with no real agenda for improving race relations) by their black constituents?
Bioweapon 6 hours ago remove link
Why isn't she arrested for inciting violence? You know it's all aimed at White people and
their businesses and homes of which the remain the vast majority across the state.
left blank 8 hours ago (Edited)
maxine waters refuses to live in Compton neighborhood she represents.
just like the others' in a long list of California politicians who take orders from the
annual bohemian grove meeting of corporations , who then use taxpayer funded govt agencies to
impose their list of 25 rules - to overthrow and topple the usa
In China’s Cultural Revolution, Mao and his extreme leftists sought to
grab power and keep their opposition and public in a state of confusion by extremist
political sloganeering, creating constant chaos, and attacking tradition and rule of law.
They do it without fear of retribution because they cover themselves in sanctimony and
victimhood.
Waters isn’t very smart, but she knows what she’s
doing here.
optimator 6 hours ago (Edited)
a dedicated ruthless 10% of the population that means business is usually enough to grab
control of the government. Russia 1918, American Revolution, etc.
Something strange is occurring in the gutter of "liberal comedy"... After four years of constant attacks on anything 'Trumpian'
and constant ignorance of anything 'Left', one man has begun to realize that there is plenty of farce on both sides of the aisle
and virtue-signaling to your cocktail party co-conspirators just doesn't pay the bills anymore (
cough CNN cough ).
Last week, Comedian Bill Maher used his HBO show to highlight some awkward 'facts' and ask some uncomfortable questions about
media and politicians approach to COVID .
This week, he has taken aim at the heart of the problem - American Millennials and Gen Z and their total ignorance of history.
"In India, young people touch old people's feet to show reverence. In Japan, there's a national 'respect for the aged' day.
You know the reason why advertisers in this country love the 18-34 demographic... because it's the most gullible .
A third of people under 35 say they're in favor of abolishing the police ...not defunding, but doing away with a police force
altogether... which is less of a policy position and more of a leg tattoo.
36% of Millennials think it might be a good idea to try Communism... but much of the world did try it... I know most of Millennials
think that doesn't count because they weren't alive when it happened... but it did happen, and there are people around who remember
it. Pining for communism is like pining for BetaMax or MySpace.
So when you say 'you're old, you don't get it', get what? Abolish the police? ...and the Border Patrol? ... and Capitalism?
... and cancel Lincoln?
No, "I get it"... the problem isn't that I don't get what you're saying or that I'm old. The problem is that your ideas are
stupid .
If you say "let's eat in the bathroom and shit in the kitchen" , yeah, that's a new idea, but I wouldn't call it interior design.
You think someone 80 is hopeless because they can’t use an iPhone? Maybe the one who is hopeless is the one who can’t stop
using it .
You think I'm out of it because I'm not on Twitch? Well maybe I 'get Twitch' but I just think people watching other people
play video games is a waste of fucking time .
20% of Gen Z agree with the statement that "society would be better off if all property was owned by the public and managed
by the government" and another 29% say 'they don't know if that's a good idea'...
Here's who does know... anyone who wasn't born yesterday!"
Watch the full monologues here (timestamped to begin at 5:13)
Manthong 8 hours ago (Edited)
You know when Bill Maher is right...
I hate when that happens.
But if you listen to the whole piece, he is shilling for a fool who is wholly owned and he is wrapping truth around deception
and falsity... very crafty.
But that's what they do.
various2 5 hours ago
Billionaires do not allow their direct peasants millionaires to deviate from left-right allocation. If he utters a word of
nationalism, he would be canceled fast.
Billionaires destroy America, and need firmly control over common peasants.
Money printing billionaires bought out all big tech and big media as fast as they become public.
Only Trump was allowed to speak certain limited truths like “China - enemy globalist proxyâ€, “Russia is America’s only
ally on a planetâ€.
But that was an experiment in compromise that billionaires failed.
Macho Latte 4 hours ago (Edited)
Maher is part of the problem, not part of the solution. His salary depends on that. The only reason he has "changed" his tune
is because he got permission to do it or he was told to do it.
DemonRats: The EVIL that lives among us.
Max Hunter 3 hours ago
He didn't change his tune that much, if you watch the first 5 minutes he is drooling all over Biden and shilling the orangeman
bad mantra.
Enormous sums of money have poured into racial justice groups since the May, 2020 murder of
George Floyd by the Minneapolis Police Department. "The foundation widely seen as a steward of
the Black Lives Matter movement says it took in just over $90 million last year," according to
a
February Associated Press review , while at least $5 billion was raised by groups associated with that
cause in the first two months alone following Floyd's death.
Two weeks after the Floyd killing, The New York Times said
that the "money has come in so fast and so unexpectedly that some groups even began to turn
away and redirect donors elsewhere," while "others said they still could not yet account for
how much had arrived." Propelled by the emotions and nationwide protest movements that emerged
last summer, corporations, oligarchs, celebrities and the general public opened their wallets
and began pouring money into BLM coffers and have not stopped doing so.
Where that money has gone has been the topic of numerous media investigations as well as
concerns expressed by racial justice advocates. AP noted that BLM's sharing of financial data
in February "marks the first time in the movement's nearly eight-year history that BLM leaders
have revealed a detailed look at their finances." That newfound transparency was prompted by
what AP called "longstanding tensions boil[ing] over between some of the movement's grassroots
organizers and national leaders -- the former went public last fall with grievances about
financial transparency, decision-making and accountability."
In December, ten local BLM chapters severed
ties with the national group amidst questions and suspicions over the handling of
activities and finances by one of its co-founders, Patrisse Cullors, who had assumed the title
of Executive Director. On April 10, The New York Post
published an exposé on what it called Cullors' "million-dollar real estate buying
binge." The paper noted that as protests were unfolding around the country, the BLM official
was "snagging four high-end homes for $3.2 million in the US alone, according to property
records," including a California property valued at $1.4 million. The article also revealed
that the self-described Marxist and her partner "were spotted in the Bahamas looking for a unit
at the Albany," an "elite enclave laid out on 600 oceanside acres," which "features a private
marina and designer golf course." The Post included photos of several of the properties
obtained from public real estate listings.
... ... ...
How is it possible that the ACLU is all but invisible on one of the central free speech
debates of our time: namely, how much censorship should Silicon Valley tech monopolists be
imposing on our political speech? As someone who intensively reports on these controversies, I
can barely remember any time when the ACLU spoke up loudly on any of these censorship debates,
let alone assumed the central role that any civil liberties group with any integrity would, by
definition, assume on this growing controversy.
In lieu of the traditional, iconic and organization-defining willingness -- eagerness -- of
the ACLU to defend free speech precisely when it has been most
controversial and upsetting to
liberals , what we now get instead are cowardly, P.R.-consultant-scripted excuses for
staying as far away as possible: "We don't have anyone who is closely plugged into that
situation right now so we don't have anything to say at this point in time." That sounds like
something Marco Rubio's office says when asked about a Trump tweet or that a corporate
headquarters would say to avoid an inflammatory controversy, not the reaction of a stalwart
civil liberties group to a publicly debated act of political censorship.
In this particular case, it is not difficult to understand the cause of the ACLU's silence.
They obviously cannot defend Facebook's censorship -- affirmatively defending the stifling of
political speech is, at least for now, still a bridge too far for the group -- but they are
petrified of saying anything that might seem even remotely critical of, let alone adversarial
to, BLM activists and organizations. That is because BLM is one of the most cherished
left-liberal causes, and the ACLU now relies almost entirely on donations and grants from those
who have standard left-liberal politics and want and expect the ACLU to advance that
ideological and partisan agenda above its nonpartisan civil liberties principles. Criticizing
BLM is a third rail in left-liberal political circles, which is where the ACLU now resides
almost entirely, and thus it again cowers in silence as another online act of censorship which
advances political liberalism emerges. Indeed, BLM is an organization which the ACLU frequently
champions:
Like so many liberal-left media outlets and advocacy groups, the ACLU was suffering
financially before they were saved and then enriched beyond their wildest dreams by Donald
Trump and the #Resistance movement he spawned. "The American Civil Liberties Union this week
laid off 23 employees, about 7 percent of the organization's national staff,"
announced The Washington Post in April, 2015. But in the Trump era, the money flowed in
almost as quickly and furiously as post-Floyd money to BLM. In February, 2017, said AP , the
group "is suddenly awash in donations and new members as it does battle with President Donald
Trump over the extent of his constitutional authority, with nearly $80 million in online
contributions alone pouring in since the election." So that is the donor base it now
serves.
The ACLU's we-know-nothing routine for abstaining from commenting on Facebook's censorship
of the BLM article is, for so many reasons, preposterous. The group funds what it calls its
Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, and some of its best lawyers oversee it. Clearly they focus
on these issues. And the ACLU in general has taken a firm and borderline-absolutist position
against online censorship by Silicon Valley monopolies: principles whose application to this
particular case would be easy and obvious. The ACLU has a section of its website devoted to
"Internet Speech," and its position on such matters is stated explicitly :
The ACLU believes in an uncensored Internet, a vast free-speech zone deserving at least as
much First Amendment protection as that afforded to traditional media such as books,
newspapers, and magazines .The ACLU has been at the forefront of protecting online freedom of
expression in its myriad forms. We brought the first case in which the U.S. Supreme Court
declared speech on the Internet equally worthy of the First Amendment's historical
protections.
In a July, 2018
article published on the group's site entitled "Facebook Shouldn't Censor Offensive
Speech," the group praised Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg's controversial pledge "to keep
Facebook from diving deeper into the business of censorship" as "the right call."
Unlike in response to the BLM controversy, the ACLU had no trouble back then recognizing
that "what's at stake here is the ability of one platform that serves as a forum for the speech
of billions of people to use its enormous power to censor speech on the basis of its own
determinations of what is true, what is hateful, and what is offensive." The ACLU's stated
policy on these controversies could not have been clearer: "given Facebook's nearly
unparalleled status as a forum for political speech and debate, it should not take down
anything but unlawful speech, like incitement to violence. " In light of that principle, how is
it remotely hard to denounce Facebook's censorship of the Post 's article given that it does
not even arguably fall within the scope of those narrow exceptions?
Because the ACLU still employs a few old-school civil libertarians among its hundreds of
lawyers and staff, those employees manage to do work and express views that are consistent with
the ACLU's old-school civil liberties agenda even when contrary to the interests of liberal
politics. But the tactics used by the ACLU in those cases to downplay or hide those aberrations
are as transparent as they are craven.
When three Silicon Valley monopolies united to
remove the social media app Parler from the internet in January, 2021 after influential
Democratic lawmakers demanded it -- one of the most brute acts of monopolistic censorship yet
-- an ACLU lawyer, Ben Wizner, was cited in The New York Times as labelling Parler's
destruction "troubling," telling the paper: "I think we should recognize the importance of
neutrality when we're talking about the infrastructure of the internet." But on the ACLU's
highly active and influential Twitter
account -- the group's primary platform for promoting its work, expressing its views, and
soliciting donations, where it has two million followers and often tweets up to fifty times a
day -- the group said absolutely nothing about the removal of an entire social media app from
the internet:
... ... ...
4 hours ago
The ACLU was founded in the 1920's by a group of leftist lawyers for the purpose of
providing legal support for Communists. That is all one needs to know to understand what they
are all about. play_arrow 27 play_arrow
MRob 2 hours ago
Listen to the interview of Ira Glasser with Rogan, he's the former head of the ACLU and
guy who really transformed it from a small enterprise to an household name. Listen and it
becomes clear he's a frothing at the mouth left wing ideologue, and a fcking hypocrite at
that. He entire argument about not enacting laws to ban free speech, is that if you do, you
opponents (on the right) will be able to use those laws against you. Which leads to the
obvious conclusion - it is OK to restrict your opponents free speech, if they cannot do the
same to yours, so the goal is to manoeuvre yourself into that position. As the left has done
today. He didnt mention that it was morally unacceptable to ban free speech, and that it
leads to totalitarian evils. The concept of a free market of ideas, wasnt discussed once.
At another point in the discussion, he said that everything in politics could be
interpreted in multiple ways, that there is never an absolute "correct" everyone will agree
on. And then later he said that it was a fact that a vote for Trump was a vote for racism,
white supremacism, bigotry etc. An absolute fact, that you just couldnt argue with. WTF. I
stopped listening at that point. I was interested to begin with, but by the end, and on
further reflection of the discussion, I despise the man with a passion.
Ms. Erable 4 hours ago (Edited) remove link
'Stalwart civil liberties group'?
Back away from the crack pipe, dude. The (((ACLU))) has never been about civil liberties.
play_arrow
hegger 3 hours ago (Edited)
So much LGBTQ+ symbolism.
These people create both an individual and a collective identity based solely on what they
do with their d1cks/vag1nas in their free time.
That's it. Lizard brain stuff. No greater ideals, no thousand-year philosophy, no plans
for the future, no interest in science or the arts.
If you haven't noticed, the United States is reorganizing itself into two Americas -- blue
and red. Although there is a president of the United States, state governors are in many ways
now driving the national narrative in this new America.
The president and the vice president are who they are now because six Republican-controlled
states forwarded questionable electoral votes, and Vice President Mike Pence missed a historic
opportunity to challenge those votes. The current president and vice president seem trapped in
foggy and abstract ideological slogans rather than providing executive leadership. Vague
generalities and virtue signaling aren't replacements for executive leadership.
And who are the true executive leaders of the two Americas? Florida and Texas on one side,
California and New York on the other side. Their governors essentially dominate the bully
pulpit formerly occupied by a sitting president. Many of the rest of the American states have
aligned with one side or the other.
The American political conversation has become a modern Dr. Seuss's "Sneetches With Stars"
on steroids as Americans are now beginning to group, assemble, and march separately according
to our ideologies. Both sides have equal ownership of this behavior -- neither side should be
excused or let off the hook on this matter.
Two Americas/Two Systems
A part of this blue/red separation is the manifest " Digital
Apartheid " that is being applied by the
blue side to the red side to create two social media systems. This Digital Apartheid is
pervasive and driven by the new, vicious, lockstep, "social justice" mantra that has taken over
the automatons who lead U.S. social media.
We are experiencing an unprecedented shakedown by groups such as Black Lives Matter (
BLM ) and
Antifa who broadcast through their relentless bullhorn of social media and old media.
There are now two business systems in America -- blue and red. Many of the businesses that
lead major market sectors have now revealed themselves to be de-facto thought police to enforce
Social Justice.
MyPillow CEO
Mike Lindell is the poster child of this, as he has been targeted for elimination by the
self-appointed high priests of "wokism."
We're also finding out there are
two financial systems in America, as those with capital now act as the gatekeepers of who
receives capital and who is excluded. Bank of America has become "Bank of who I decide to allow
access to the capital system." That's a
far cry from the intent of its founder, who wanted to make sure all had access. The modern
bank staff has now become an appendage of the virtue-signaling synchronized chorus.
There are now
two media systems in America. The Hollywood award shows are now a Roman circus of
self-loathing, lecturing, and virtue signaling. Few are watching these award shows -- in fact,
few are watching legacy media as ratings collapse.
It's curious from an agnostic business perspective how CNN even survives at this point in
time. Somehow the citizen's pocketbook is being fleeced by corporations and advertisers who
recycle ad revenue through "woke" media to keep them alive when it's patently obvious the
viewership has imploded -- but that's the beauty of the new era of crony capitalism (which is a
transition phase to socialism).
The citizens of our nation have consciously or unconsciously chosen sides. If you're angry
at yourself for not being woke enough and have righteous virtue-signal signs in your yard
lauding BLM, you're likely on the blue side. If the drivel of virtue signaling makes no sense
to you, you're probably on the red side.
The author of the article you link too is a bit late to his wokening. It is a digital
iron curtain; I commented on that here almost a year ago. His initial comments on " trapped
in foggy and abstract ideological slogans rather than providing executive leadership." are
off. They are imposing by executive action precisely the cultural transformations their
ideology demands.
It would be interesting to further divide these transformations into those
sourced from their own ideology and those derived from the corporate sponsors
behind their PAC oxygen supply. Both subsets would contain interesting lists of
names and connections.
We already have the command economy, and command media, of a socialist state. The
mechanism just has a stage of indirection, to borrow a term from the software world. If
you're a money losing business of any kind you can always raise money by floating shares or
issuing bonds that are miraculously bought by "the market", ahem, Blackrock. That they get
to skim their vig in the process is a "feature not a bug". Business then devolves into a
contest to see who can be most craven to the official party narrative. With the Fed
printing money in the form of zero interest "loans" to insider controlled hedge funds and
investment banks like it was going out of style, this can continue until the dollar
inflates away or the Fed, through the banks, owns just about everything. Market
Socialism!
Excellent analysis of the current state of the Red vs Blue situation. I live in the
epicenter of The ongoing SJW disaster , Minneapolis. The Downtown, which was once lauded as
" the Minny Apple", is no more. Between the Covid and Chauvin trial it is an ongoing
disaster.
I walk the skyway system twice a week yearly and Have done so for 50 years.
Approximately 150k People used to work there with all the attendant Amenities. Stores
restaurants bars etc. were the Lifeblood of the ever growing and liveable space. On a 2 to
3 mile walk through the 8 plus mile Labyrinth I might encounter 50 to 100'people if That.
Noon hour used to be in the thousands.
Two retail stores, Target and Walgreens, the only Two open. Fights and assaults common
near those Stores. The defund clowncil rescinded the no Loitering ordinance. This is the
result.
All major store fronts have been boarded Up and the world has seen the fencing and
Barricades everywhere. The future here is bleak Indeed. The Mayoral and council are up for
Re-election this November. If no changes the U-haul caravans and for sale signs will sprout
Like the proverbial mushrooms. It was a nice Run despite the climate.
That is such a sad report. On a visit to Minneapolis a few years back staying at a
downtown hotel (the converted bank hotel) We hit the streets the next morning looking
for breakfast, only to find almost no street life in this major city. How strange we
thought, for such a major and apparently healthy looking city.
It was only later in the day we learned street life was all going on inside the
remarkable Skyway – what a magical world that was, and what a perfect way to
create year round community vitality.
You can join the rapid decline of California city street life too – taken over
by vagrants, closed shops and sad out door dining operations. And a recent rash of
crazy people with guns, knives, obscene conduct in public, gang fights and out of
control vehicles jumping curbs and running into flimsy restaurant parklets..
Something has clearly gone very wrong in pubic decorum and decency expectations. But
we do have docks for electric bicycles. So you can at least try to get away faster than
if by toot.
IMO, the article glossed over the risk posed by big corporations moving from storing
their data on "the cloud/AWS" in today's revolutionary political alliance with big biz,
especially the tech biz and even more especially tech biz owned by "socially active"
megalomaniacs like Bezos.
I've recently been involved in some related corporate discussions. The lure of cost
savings and scalability represented by the cloud is swaying decision making in its favor.
No one seems to be seriously looking at the downside. Once the data and extract/reporting
processes are out on AWS, if the political activist powers that be decide they don't like a
corporation for whatever reason, they have that corporation's ability to access the data
and do business held hostage. That would be a nuclear sized disaster in an industry sector
like insurance, but is, really, pretty damaging to any industry since everything about
business is now highly data driven. If Bezos decides to shut you out, you're done for. You
would not be able to re-build internal infrastructure in time to save your operation.
Would a Bezos pull that trigger? I think so, when the time is "right".
Look at how companies like Nike are willing to alienate 50% of their potential
customer base. Ditto Facebook, professional sports The list of woke kamikaze corporations
is growing longer every day. They appear willing to take the losses if it beats their enemy
("deplorables" like you and me) into compliance in the long run.
While I agree woksterdom is a mile wide and an inch deep, the other side of the coin is
that we are not going back to some proverbial happy place. American culture(why is the
United States the only country in the world without a term specifying the citizen? No
United Statian.) is built on several centuries of geographic, economic, industrial and
technological growth, topped off with 40 years of exponential debt to keep the party going.
What happens when we try looking inward?
We are not the Old World, with millennia of cultural history to fall back on, when he
current civil structures implode. Contrary to Dick Cheney, debt doesn't matter, until it
does. We are determined to max out the national credit card and the most everyone seems to
do, is point to the other guy wasting it, not looking in the mirror.
I've been saying for over a decade, our kids are not going to be wondering what side of
whichever Middle Eastern conflict we will be pouring money and material, but how many
countries the US break into. Now it is happening. As for a deeper observation, logically a
spiritual absolute would be the essence of sentience, from which we rise, not an ideal of
wisdom and judgement, from which we fell. The fact we are aware, than the details of which
we are aware. The Ancients were not ignorant of monotheism, but as there was no division
between culture and civics, it equated with monoculture. One people, one rule, one god.
Democracy and republicanism originated in pantheistic cultures, as that was how they
modeled multicultural societies, with many aspects and distinctions, from two sexes to the
regeneration of the population. The Romans adopted Christianity as the Empire solidified
and any remnants of the Republic were shed. Though the Trinity was a nod to the Greek year
gods. Father, son, mother. Consequently the default political model for the West, for the
next 1500 years, was feudalism and monarchy, all about the Big Guy at the top. When the
West went back to more populist forms of government, it required the separation of church
and state, culture and civics. The problem with confusing the ideal with the absolute, is
that it creates the belief one's aspirations should be universal and beyond question. An
ideological basis for both the current left and right. Though the pendulum swings back and
forth, depending on the momentum. Where are we today? Is anyone about to seriously question
their cultural assumptions, or just keep blaming the other side?
John, It's an old Cosa Nostra trick. Get them in debt to you and then pull the plug.
When they can't pay, ruthlessly take control of the business.
Speaking of La Cosa Nostra, something that impressed me, negatively, about Italy,
especially the South, is how there isn't even sufficient electrical power for people to
properly bath or wash their clothes. So much for the strength of ancient cultures.
People in the US take way too much for granted. We suffer from something like
"Affluenza" and are committing cultural suicide nit picking our collective conscience
because we don't realize that we have already pretty much achieved relatively as close
as humans can get to utopia.
1929 isn't ancient history, unimageable today. It is only an idiotic decision or two
away, and idiotic decisions are now the norm because an exceedingly ideological
government is trusted by 50% and seizing control anyhow.
Totally agree that the current economic policy is not sustainable. Only wise and
cautious leadership could steer us back to a sustainable path. We don't have any of
that.
IMO, we don't have socialism. What we have seen over the past 50 years is a steady
evolution to classic fascism. The merging of Big Business and Big Government. The merging
of the National Security State and Big Corporate & Financial Interests.
The pandemic response exemplifies it best. The government through edict shut down and
bankrupted small businesses while they allowed big business and big finance to further
consolidate their market power. We now have the most concentrated market power in American
history. Even greater than a century ago which led to the reforms like anti-trust and
Glass-Steagall, which have all been successfully eroded. We now have the greatest wealth
inequality and concentration of economic and political power.
The 2 Americas is the tale and theater designed to further entrench power. The bottom
90% in both blue & red America have allowed themselves to be enslaved, precisely
because of their infatuation with narrow cultural identities and the faux culture wars.
The behind-the-scenes puppeteers of both blue & red America are the same. Obama used
the race and BLM canard to political gain. His personal social network however are the
Richard Branson's and David Geffen's. His own $12 million home is on "white supremacist"
Martha's Vineyard. Trump sold the Deplorables on Draining the Swamp and then proceeded to
hire the Swamp to run his administration. Mitch McConnell epitomizes the duplicity.
The left/right, Red/Blue, Liberal/Conservative faux battles are precisely the
entertainment that the "owners" as George Carlin labeled them want, to keep the bottom 90%
distracted & divided. What has changed from the Roman "bread & circuses"?
>IMO, we don't have socialism. What we have seen over the past 50 years is a
steady evolution to classic fascism. The merging of Big Business and Big Government.
The merging of the National Security State and Big Corporate & Financial
Interests.<
Agree. This isn't socialism at all; it's capital- F Fascism.
Andrei, Never under-estimate the stupidity of the typical American.
My grandfather barely survived the Armenian genocide, made his way to America,
joined the Army, was so strac he was promoted directly from private to sergeant in WW1.
After service, he organized Armenian business owners in Detroit to arm themselves and
successfully fight off the Purple Gang (a Jewish mafia, predecessors of the Italian
mafia in Detroit). He made actually money during the depression. Real tough guy.
He was offered an opportunity to invest in Disney Land (world?) on initial offering.
He laughed it off as a con. Who would pay good money to travel across the country to
spend time with unskilled actors in stupid cartoon mouse costumes? My father, another
street wise tough guy, WW2 vet, and by that time, an attorney and advisor to the
family, agreed. Idiotic concept.
When I was a young man my father and I sat down and did a ballpark calculation of
what that offering would have been worth, at present, had my grandfather gone for it.
It was a staggering amount. It was a lesson the old man wanted me to learn.
I understand what you are saying about "big tech" versus the real thing. However,
the so called big tech people don't need to be very real or stellar to be highly
influential. True quality has always been, and only can be, appreciated by a small few.
The masses are always appeased by shallow, crude, garbage. It's a sad truth that the
few tend to overlook, because it's offensive to them. Cynics exploit it.
Events of the last few days have made one thing crystal clear: The Democratic Party (and
therefore the nation) is being led by two doddering old fools who should be domiciled in a rest
home, not the Oval Office and the Speaker's Chamber.
How that baleful reality coexists with Wall Street's expectation of an awesome economic
future and stock prices which never stop rising to the sky is one of the great enigmas of our
times. Or maybe it's just because $10 trillion of fiscal and monetary "stimulus" in the past
year can turn the proverbial sow's ear into a silk purse. For a time.
By now, of course, we expect idiocy from Sleepy Joe, especially on the economic front.
Accordingly, at his virtual global summit he will be reading-out from the White House
teleprompter the demented agenda of the Climate Change Howlers. Therein he will promise to cut
greenhouse gases by 50% by the end of this decade, which calamity we can also promise would cut
America's debt-entombed economy to its knees.
That comes after Tuesday's White House contretemps when he first prayed for a guilty verdict
in the Chauvin trial even as the jury was sitting in its deliberations, and then, afterwards,
made the risible claim that this tragedy was the spawn of systemic racism.
In fact, Nanny State over-reach was the underlying cause of George Floyd's arrest and unjust
death -- just as it is the source of most of America's unfortunate violence between police and
unarmed citizens, back, white and otherwise.
In both cases, of course, we find Sleepy Joe fronting for the hideous core agenda -- race
baiting and climate hysteria -- of a Democratic Party which has lost its way and has been taken
over by a camarilla of woke zealots.
Indeed, if there were any doubt about the latter, Nancy Pelosi's truly venal deification of
George Floyd should remove it once and for all.
Yes, the man was a victim, but he was also a drug-addicted criminal lout and grifter, who
deserves no place of honor anywhere; and who's estranged family deserves sympathy and support,
but not a $27 million gift of blood money from a woke city council that takes Minneapolis one
step closer to its demise every time it meets.
"And thank God, the jury validated what we saw, what we saw," Pelosi said in front of the
U.S. Capitol Building as she delivered remarks with the Congressional Black Caucus. "So,
again, thank you George Floyd for sacrificing your life for justice. For being there to call
out to your mom. How heart-breaking was that? To call out to your mom, 'I can't breathe.' But
because of you – and because of thousands, millions of people around the world who came
out for justice – your name will always be synonymous with justice."
For crying out loud. George Floyd didn't sacrifice himself in the cause of justice. He got
hopped up on a lethal dose of fentanyl and then foolishly resisted arrest when the original
officers on the scene attempted to place him in the backseat of a squad car.
That is to say, the entire narrative culminating in Nancy Pelosi's hideous idolization of
George Floyd has been blatantly wrong from the get go. This case is not about racial justice at
all, to say nothing of striking a blow against so called "white privilege".
For want of doubt, we need to repeat the facts. That's because they show that episodes like
the George Floyd case do not fit the stereotypes of either the BLM and its race-card playing
progressive/Dem allies or, for that matter, the Foxified Right's knee-jerk defense of the
nation's over-empowered, over-budgeted, over-militarized police.
Needless to say, the George Floyd case was not an aberration. During the recent past there
were 38 such police killings of unarmed black citizens in 2015, and then 19, 21, 17 and 9
during 2016 through 2019, respectively. That's 104 black lives lost to the ultimate abuse of
police powers.
Of course, the number should be zero police killings of unarmed citizens. There is no
conceivable excuse for heavily armed cops -- -usually working in pairs or groups -- to cause
the death of lone, unarmed civilians, regardless of race or anything else.
And in this case that was especially so, and not withstanding several mitigating
factors.
For instance, the Minneapolis police officers originally attempted to put George Floyd
safely in the back seat of a squad car after his arrest for the petty crime of attempting to
pass a counterfeit $20 bill, but he resisted them intensely for up to five minutes. That's
plain as day in the other videos -- those from the cops' body-cams.
The trial evidence from these body-cams also showed that during this struggle around the
squad car Floyd said he couldn't breath six times owing to a severe medical reaction to the
fatal level of fentanyl in his blood and the methamphetamines that he had ingested shortly
before the incident. These reactions were surely compounded by the man's "severe" and
"multifocal" arteriosclerotic heart disease and clinical history of hypertension, which the
Minneapolis medical examiner said was the underlying cause of his death.
Yet after Floyd was cuffed and placed prone on the street, as he himself had requested, and
the officers had called for an ambulance owing to his obvious medical distress, the arrest went
haywire and Chauvin exposed himself to Manslaughter 2, at least, for no plausible or
justifiable reason.
That's because Floyd had been unarmed throughout the incident, was hand-cuffed and incapable
of flight or harming others and was surrounded by four armed officers. Accordingly, he was no
threat to them, nor anyone else, and he therefore presented no policing reason for the extended
knee-hold on the back of his neck -- especially after the surrounding crowd had warned the
police that Floyd was in self-evident dire distress.
So as we see it, Chauvin's conviction on second degree manslaughter does indeed comport with
the Minnesota statute, which reads as follows:
..by the person's culpable negligence whereby the person creates an unreasonable risk ,
and consciously takes chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another;
But here's also where the Woke/Progressive Left narrative goes even more haywire. Floyd's
death was due to an arrest which shouldn't have happened and bad police behavior that has
nothing to do with race .
As to the former point, what should have been on trial in this case was not "systemic
racism", but the Nanny State for grotesquely excessive use of force to enforce a petty
counterfeiting complaint that should not be police business in the first place. It's the job of
retail store owners to handle petty counterfeiters or people who unknowingly pass bad
greenbacks and to absorb the cost of self-protection just like they do in the case of refusing
charges on bad credit cards.
So there is zero reason why George Floyd should ever have been arrested.
As to bad police behavior, you do not have to look too hard to see that it's essentially
color-blind and that being non-black is no guarantee against the same unjust fate.
During the same five-year period in which 104 black lives were lost, a total of 127 unarmed
white lives were wasted by the police, as well. That included 32 white killings in 2015
followed by 22, 31, 23 and 19 in 2016 through 2019, respectively.
Overall, 302 unarmed citizens were killed by the police during those five years, with the
balance accounted for by 71 deaths among Hispanic and other victims. That is, the real issue is
illegal and excessive police violence, not racial victimization.
Indeed, the fact that 34% of these police killings involved black citizens compared to their
13% share of the population is not primarily a sign of racism among police forces, although it
is continuously construed to be.
It's actually evidence that the Nanny State, and especially the misbegotten War on Drugs, is
designed to unnecessarily ensnare a distinct demographic -- young, poor, often unemployed urban
citizens -- in confrontations with the cops, too many of which become fatal.
Alas, young black males are disproportionately represented among this particular
inharms'-way demographic, and that's the reason they are "disproportionately" represented in
the 302 cases cited above.
Stated differently, the Nanny State results in too many black victims of plain old
injustice, even if that is not necessarily the intent of the crusaders and zealots who have
launched the state into anti-liberty wars on drugs, vice and victimless iniquities and
peccadillos.
That is to say, statism in the sphere of law and order is every bit as dysfunctional as it
is in the realm of economics, yet neither conservatives nor progressives recognize it.
Conservatives want way too much law and police empowerment in the service of cultural norms
that are none of the state's damn business in the first place; and progressives confuse the
often brutal and unjust over-reach of law enforcement agencies as a manifestation of racism,
when it is actually just policing expectorations in behalf of inappropriate missions such as
the enforcement of drug laws.
Indeed, the main trouble in America today is not overt racism or even simmering racial
animosity. The real evil is the relentless aggrandizement of state power in the form of the
Nanny State -- a conflation of too many laws, crimes, cops, arrests and thereby opportunities
for frictions between the state and its citizenry and for abuse by the gendarmes vested with
legal use of violence.
In a word, some citizens sometimes can't breathe their last breath because in far too many
instances liberty can't breathe in today's unhinged Nanny State, either.
Among the most recent notorious cases, of course, are George Floyd's fatal arrest for
allegedly passing a counterfeit $20 bill; Eric Garner (NYC 2014), subdual for selling untaxed
cigarettes; Rayshard Brooks for falling asleep drunk in his car at a subsequently incinerated
Wendy's in Atlanta; and Breonna Taylor of Louisville for being awake in her own apartment at
1:30 AM when police barged in with guns blaring in a drug enforcement raid.
These are anecdotal cases, of course, but the big picture statistics tell the same story. In
the most recent year of complete data (2018), there were 9.3 million arrests in the US
excluding traffic enforcement charges of DUI. Yet among this massive number of arrests, those
involving serious crimes against persons and property accounted for just 521,000 or 5.6%. These
included:
Negligent murder and manslaughter: 11,970;
Rape: 25,205;
Armed robbery: 88,128;
Aggravated assault: 395,800;
That's it. That's the contribution to core public safety delivered by the 850,000 sworn law
enforcement officers in the USA -- about 0.6 arrests per year for serious crimes per law
enforcement officer.
As for what they were doing the rest of the time and the other 8,777,000 arrests that
occurred in 2018, we can say this: They clearly provided more occasion for conflict between
citizens and the gendarmes and for policing actions to go haywire, as in the George Floyd case,
than any additional increments of public safety.
After all, the single largest category of arrests in 2018 was for drug abuse violations,
which totaled 1,654,282.
In fact, while total arrests for all crimes in 2018 were no higher than they were in 1977
despite a 100 million/50% growth in the US population, and had actually dropped from a peak of
nearly 13 million in 2006, the opposite trend was extant in the case of the nation's
misbegotten War on Drugs arrests.
As shown by the chart below, drug arrests in 2018 were nearly at peak levels and were up by
more than 171% since 1977 -- the vast majority of which are made for drug possession generally,
and marijuana possession most often.
War on Drugs Arrests, 1980-2016
Not surprisingly, the next largest arrest category after drugs is one called "other
assaults" for which 1,063,535 arrests were made in 2018. Yet the FBI's own definitions raise
considerable doubts as to why these are even a proper matter for law enforcement by the
state:
Other assaults (simple) - Assaults and attempted assaults where no weapon was used or no
serious or aggravated injury resulted to the victim. Stalking, intimidation, coercion, and
hazing are included.
Then, of course, we have all the victimless and vice crimes, including the following number
of arrests:
Prostitution and commercialized vice: 31,147;
Sex offenses excluding rape and prostitution: 46,937;
Gambling: 3,323;
Liquor law offenses: 173,152;
Curfew and loitering law violations: 22,031;
Vagrancy: 23,546;
Public drunkenness: 328,772;
Disorderly conduct: 329,152;
Forgery and counterfeiting: 50,072;
Weapons carrying and possession: 168,403;
All other offenses: 3,231,700.
The latter huge number tells you all you need to know. The UCR lists 27 enumerated
categories of crime including all of those itemized above–plus the usual suspects like
fraud and embezzlement for which there were about 135,000 arrests in 2018. Yet when the whole
lists is exhausted, 32% of arrests occurred for crimes that are so minor even the FBI is
embarrassed to enumerate them!
So, yes, we do think there are way, way too many crimes and cops, and that decriminalizing
and de-funding law enforcement are the only route to reducing police violence.
But by the same token, the unwarranted and often mendacious racializing of police
malfeasance, which the George Floyd case has brought to a fever pitch, will only insure
retrogression. That is, it will unleash a blind rallying to the defense of law enforcement by
conservative Republicans, blue collar whites and the Foxified Right, thereby insuring a
continuing failure to attack and drastically curtail the Nanny State regime, which is the real
source of policing injustice.
Of course, don't expect Nancy Pelosi or Sleepy Joe to be any more enlightened on the matter
than Sean Hannity. These doddering old fools are now enthrall to the wokedom of the
progressive-Left; and, as Maxine Water's blatant performance as agent provocateur in
Minneapolis the night before the verdict makes clear, these people want the problem to fester
and metastasize, not be alleviated.
Indeed, it is probably not too far fetched to say that Congresswoman Waters' call for a
guilty verdict or else a new round of violent uprisings amounted to an insurance policy. Three
guilty verdicts could not trigger the latter, but a judicial appeal resulting in a mistrial
order surely would.
In other words, the Democratic Party has fallen into the grip of vicious leftist zealots and
power-hungry authoritarians. And the events of the last two days suggest that two dangerously
wrong-headed and ugly narratives -- -race-baiting and climate hysteria -- now stand at the
center of the Dem agenda because the party's two supreme leaders are too weak and too senile to
resist the mob.
So we'd say to the feverish punters of Wall Street, yes, embrace the putative Economic Boom
impending and buy the Greatest Financial Bubble in history, if you must.
But, really, if the events which culminated in Tuesday's triumph of mob justice do not scare
the living bejesus out of you, then, well, you probably deserve to suffer the thundering
financial gotterdammerung which is surely coming your way. 60,006 194 NEVER MISS THE NEWS
THAT MATT
In our summer of discontent, of protests and then riots in what many view as a racial reckoning following the death of
George Floyd at the hands of police, we've seen previously radical ideas such as defunding the police become the norm.
Not only that, we've seen liberal institutions such as The New York Times bow before "woke" mobs and cancel all who don't
conform to the whims of the radical left.
And we've seen corporate America almost universally endorse Black Lives Matter, a radical organization with Marxist roots.
Two writers in particular have risen in popularity on the left, dominating national bestseller lists while gathering
increased media attention: Robin DiAngelo, a lecturer and author of "
White
Fragility: Why It's So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism
," and Ibram X. Kendi, director of the Center for
Antiracist Research at Boston University and author of "
How
to Be an Antiracist
."
Although their works are distinct, both writers promote an ideology they call "anti-racism."
These two authors are shaping the modern discussion over "wokeness" and the ideas that are becoming politically mainstream
in America, at least on the American left.
It's critical to have an understanding of what they believe.
For instance, why would a mob opposed to white supremacy attack statues of both a slaveholder and an abolitionist?
Is this an example of mindless, wanton destruction? Or perhaps the rioters are embracing a larger set of ideas that creates
a ruthless dichotomy between racists and anti-racists?
According to both DiAngelo and Kendi, there really are only two paths any person may take: racism or anti-racism. Being
"not racist," as Kendi writes, is not good enough, nor does it mean one isn't a racist.
DiAngelo defines "white fragility," the topic of her book, as a process whereby white people return to "our racial comfort,
and maintain our dominance within the racial hierarchy."
"Though white fragility is triggered by discomfort and anxiety, it is born of superiority and entitlement," DiAngelo
writes. "White fragility is not weakness per se. In fact, it is a powerful means of white racial control and the protection
of white advantage."
Essentially, if a white person is uncomfortable talking about race or denies his fundamental whiteness, as well as his
racism, he is guilty of white fragility.
In fact, according to the arguments of both DiAngelo and Kendi, even a denial of racism can be construed as evidence of
racism.
As several other writers,
including
Mark Hemingway at The Federalist
, have noted, this is what's called a Kafka trap, a rhetorical device "where the more
you deny something, the more it's proof of your guilt."
Kendi and DiAngelo argue that racism is not just an individual act of discrimination or prejudice toward a person or a
people based on their race.
Instead, racism is redefined as a collective condition leading to inequities in society.
Kendi argues that those whom many Americans see as actual racists are far less dangerous than the real threat of widespread
acceptance of color blindness. He writes:
The most threatening racist movement is not the alt right's unlikely drive for a White ethnostate but the regular
American's drive for a 'race-neutral' one. The construct of race neutrality actually feeds White nationalist victimhood
by positing the notion that any policy protecting or advancing non-white Americans toward equity is 'reverse
discrimination.'
Kendi decries "assimilationists" as being essentially as bad as "segregationists."
Kendi opposes the assimilationists, as he defines them, because he says they attribute behavior to the unequal outcomes for
different races.
In fact, even asking the question of why different groups of people have statistically differing outcomes in a society may
be construed as racist.
DiAngelo adopts Kendi's construction of racism, writing that "if we truly believe that all humans are equal, then disparity
in condition can only be the result of systemic discrimination."
The argument essentially is that any racial discrepancies in society are examples of racism.
So, if a society has a disproportionate number of rich white people compared to rich black people, that is racism. If one
race has a higher mortality rate from a disease than another, again the culprit is racism.
Kendi is, of course, highly selective in the statistics he cites to demonstrate that "there may be no more consequential
White privilege than life itself."
As Coleman Hughes
wrote
for City Journal
: "By selectively citing data that show blacks suffering more than whites, Kendi turns what should be a
unifying, race-neutral battle ground -- namely, humanity's fight against deadly diseases -- into another proxy battle in the War
on Racism."
Hughes, like Kendi, is black.
2. Colorblindness Is the Problem, and Racist
The concept of equal opportunity is fundamentally rejected by the doctrines of DiAngelo and Kendi. They argue that in a
deeply racist society conditioned to white supremacy, equal opportunity under the law perpetuates only more inequality.
Both DiAngelo and Kendi rebuke the idea of colorblindness in how we treat race. DiAngelo does so more in a cultural sense.
She argues that colorblindness is essentially a sign of white privilege, a manipulation of the message of Martin Luther
King Jr. to perpetuate more racism.
"Color-blind ideology makes it difficult for us to address these unconscious beliefs," DiAngelo writes. "While the idea of
color blindness may have started out as a well-intentioned strategy for interrupting racism, in practice it has served to
deny the reality of racism and thus hold it in place."
White people must build their racial "stamina," DiAngelo argues, to overcome their white fragility.
The way for white people to do this is by recognizing, embracing, and critically examining collective "white identity" as
an antidote to white fragility. DiAngelo writes that "as an insider," she can speak for the white experience, but that she
uses her white identity as a way to "challenge racism."
DiAngelo lays on white people the responsibility -- the burden, one might say -- of attacking and defeating racism and
"whiteness."
3. Racism Is Solved Through Discrimination
Kendi leans more strongly into creating laws that specifically promote anti-racism. To be effective, he says, they must be
discriminatory.
Discriminatory laws, Kendi argues, can be desirable and in fact necessary as a way to promote equity:
If discrimination is creating equity, then it is anti-racist. If discrimination is creating inequity, then it is racist.
Someone reproducing inequity through permanently assisting an overrepresented racial group into wealth and power is
entirely different than someone challenging that inequity by temporarily assisting an underrepresented racial group into
relative wealth and power until equity is reached. The only remedy to racist discrimination is anti-racist
discrimination. The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination.
As long as the discriminatory finger is on the button of "equity," however Kendi and the anti-racists define it, it is
good.
Christopher Caldwell, author of "
The
Age of Entitlement: America Since the Sixties
,"
wrote
for
National Review that Kendi rejects the notion -- stemming from many civil rights advocates -- "that everything will be well as
long as we treat people with equality, neutrality, and respect."
"It is illegitimate. It is a 'racist' obstruction," Caldwell added.
Kendi proposes an anti-racist amendment to the Constitution,
which
he wrote about
in a short piece in Politico. It's worth quoting in full:
To fix the original sin of racism, Americans should pass an anti-racist amendment to the U.S. Constitution that
enshrines two guiding anti-racist principals [sic]: Racial inequity is evidence of racist policy and the different
racial groups are equals.
The amendment would make unconstitutional racial inequity over a certain threshold, as well as racist ideas by public
officials (with 'racist ideas' and 'public official' clearly defined). It would establish and permanently fund the
Department of Anti-racism (DOA) comprised of formally trained experts on racism and no political appointees.
The DOA would be responsible for preclearing all local, state, and federal public policies to ensure they won't yield
racial inequity, monitor those policies, investigate private racist policies when racial inequity surfaces, and monitor
public officials for expressions of racist ideas. The DOA would be empowered with disciplinary tools to wield over and
against policymakers and public officials who do not voluntarily change their racist policy and ideas.
This proposal by Kendi effectively would end self-government and nullify the Bill of Rights. A cadre of intellectuals
ensconced in the Department of Anti-racism would have the power to decide who can and can't run for office, and which laws
can or can't be passed based on their interpretation of what is racist.
Again, racist being defined by Kendi as "one who is supporting a racist policy through their actions or inaction or
expressing a racist idea."
Which policies fall under the rubric of being racist or anti-racist?
"Every policy in every institution in every community in every nation is producing or sustaining either racial inequity or
equity," Kendi writes.
For those who believe they can escape the ugly culture war implications of these ideas and focus on economic or fiscal
policies, it's worth noting that embracing socialism and fighting capitalism is a critical element in promoting
anti-racism.
Therefore, a supporter of lower capital gains taxes -- or even someone who isn't actively opposing lower capital gains
taxes -- may be barred from running for or serving in office by a team of unaccountable bureaucrats in a permanently funded
federal agency.
Gone is the very bedrock of the system created by the Founders, the Constitution that has bent the flawed but exceptional
American system toward liberty and justice.
"History Does Not Repeat Itself, But It Rhymes" -- Mark Twain (attributed). This is a naked
fight for political power using very questionable means.
Marxist ideology revolving around class and special role of "proletariat" as the oppressed
class which strives for liberation and overthow "oppressors" in order to build more a just
society, is more or less replaced by race. In woke movement, blacks are the new proletariat.
Corporations, especially those headquartered in Georgia, have come out against the
legislation signed by Governor Kemp. Republicans describe the bill as one that addresses
election integrity while Democrats call it a voter suppression law – "Jim Crow 2.0".
Coca-Cola and Delta were among
the first to make a point to virtue-signal after the governor signed the bill, only to be
exposed as taking part in the process and giving input into the legislation. Both were fine
with the law until the governor signed it and grievance activists did their thing. Coke soon
discovered that not all of its consumers think that companies should be making policy –
that 's the job of lawmakers- and now it is trying to clean up the mess it made for itself.
Churches have increasingly played a part in American politics and this is an escalation of
that trend. Evangelical churches have shown support for conservative and Republican candidates
while black churches get out the vote for Democrats. This threat of bringing a large-scale
boycott over state legislation is a hostile action against the corporation. It's political
theatre. Groups like Black Voters Matter, the New Georgia Project Action Fund (Stacey Abrams),
and the Georgia NAACP are pressuring companies to publicly voice their opposition and the
religious leaders are doing the bidding of these politically active groups.
When SB 241 and HB 531 were working through the legislative process, the groups put pressure
on Republican lawmakers and the governor to abandon the voting reform legislation. They also
demanded that donations to any lawmakers supporting the legislation be stopped. The Georgia
Chamber of Commerce tried to remain bipartisan while still voicing support for voting rights
but then caved and expressed "concern and opposition" to some provisions . At the time,
several large Georgia companies were targeted by activists, including Aflac, Coca-Cola,
Delta Airlines, Home Depot, Southern Company and UPS.
The Georgia Chamber of Commerce previously reiterated the importance of voting rights
without voicing opposition against any specific legislation. In a new statement to CNBC, the
Georgia Chamber said it has "expressed concern and opposition to provisions found in both HB
531 and SB 241 that restrict or diminish voter access" and "continues to engage in a
bipartisan manner with leaders of the General Assembly on bills that would impact voting
rights in our state."
Office Depot came out at the time and supported the Chamber's statement. The Election
Integrity Act of 2021, originally known as Georgia Senate Bill 202, is a Georgia law
overhauling elections in the state that was signed into effect by the governor and we know what
happened. Office Depot has not delivered for the activists as they demand so now the company
faces boycott drama. The
religious leaders are taking up where the activist groups left off.
African Methodist Episcopal Bishop Reginald Jackson said the company has remained "silent
and indifferent" to his efforts to rally opposition to the new state law pushed by
Republicans, as well as to similar efforts elsewhere.
" We just don't think we ought to let their indifference stand ," Jackson said.
The leader of all his denomination's churches in Georgia, Jackson had a meeting last week
with other Georgia-based executives to urge them to oppose the voting law, but said he's had
no contact with Home Depot, despite repeated efforts to reach the company.
Faith leaders at first were hesitant to jump into the boycott game. Now the political
atmosphere has changed and they are being vocal. Jackson focused on pressuring Coca-Cola first.
After that company went along to get along, before it realized its error, Jackson moved his
focus onto other companies.
"We believe that corporations have a corporate responsibility to their customers, who are
Black, white and brown, on the issue of voting ," Jackson said. "It doesn't make any sense at
all to keep giving dollars and buying products from people that do not support you."
He said faith leaders may call for boycotts of other companies in the future.
So, here we are with Home Depot in the spotlight. There are
four specific demands leveled at Home Depot in order to avoid further action from the
activists.
Rev. Lee May, the lead pastor of Transforming Faith Church, said the coalition is "fluid
in this boycott" but has four specifics requests of Home Depot: To speak out publicly and
specifically against SB 202; to speak out against any other restrictive voting provisions
under consideration in other states; to support federal legislation that expands voter access
and "also restricts the ability to suppress the vote;" and to support any efforts, including
investing in litigation, to stop SB 202 and other bills like it.
" Home Depot, we're calling on you. I'm speaking to you right now. We're ready to have a
conversation with you. You haven't been ready up to now, but our arms are wide open. We are
people of faith. People of grace, and we're ready to have this conversation, but we're very
clear those four things that we want to see accomplished ," May said.
The Rev. Timothy McDonald III, senior pastor of the First Iconium Baptist Church, warned
this was just the beginning.
"It's up to you whether or not, Home Depot, this boycott escalates to phase two, phase
three, phase four," McDonald said. "We're not on your property -- today. We're not blocking
your driveways -- today. We're not inside your store protesting -- today. This is just phase
one."
That sounds a lot like incitement, doesn't it? Governor Kemp is speaking out, he has had
enough. He held
a press conference to deliver his comments.
"First, the left came for baseball, and now they are coming for Georgia jobs," Kemp said,
referring to MLB's decision to move this year's All-Star Game from Atlanta over the new laws.
"This boycott of Home Depot – one of Georgia's largest employers – puts partisan
politics ahead of people's paychecks."
"The Georgians hardest hit by this destructive decision are the hourly workers just trying
to make ends meet during a global pandemic. I stand with Home Depot, and I stand with nearly
30,000 Georgians who work at the 90 Home Depot stores and 15 distribution centers across the
Peach State. I will not apologize for supporting both Georgia jobs and election integrity,"
he added.
"This insanity needs to stop. The people that are pushing this, that are profiting off of
it, like Stacey Abrams and others, are now trying to have it both ways," Kemp said. "There is
a political agenda here, and it all leads back to Washington, D.C."
The governor is right. The activists are in it to federalize elections, not to look out for
Georgians, who will lose jobs over these partisan actions. The law signed by Kemp increases
voting rights, it doesn't limit them .
As Townhall.com's Spencer Brown details , Chauvin's lawyers pointed out that jurors were
not sequestered during the case and therefore may not be free from outside influence in the
form of news updates they may have inadvertently or purposefully seen along with ongoing
violence in the community surrounding the Chauvin trial and approaching verdict.
Among their concerns, Chauvin's defense team pointed to Waters and her appearance with
demonstrators in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, over the weekend.
Even though the judge denied the defense's motion for mistrial, he highlighted the damage
her rhetoric may have done, saying "Congresswoman Waters may have given you something on appeal
that may result in this whole trial being overturned."
Perhaps the Biden presidency is the first woke/cancel culture one in history. Not (
necessarily ) for the sexual part, but because wokism is emotional not rational. What
is happening in the deep recesses of the Blinken or Biden mind is based on absolute certainty
and emotionally ingested tripe.
The original Deep State and democratic manipulation was to give the population a binary
"choice" between Trump-bad and Putin-Bad. Any third possibility, that neither were as "
bad as all that " was not spoken of in the MSM. For four years, both "choices" were
hammered by the Democrats into the supine brains of the US masses. which has given rise to
"automatic" and forceful unthinking attitudes. ( All bad because I say so and I am right,
and I know I am right because I say so ). It is the basis of our censorship culture. Over
four years they have brainwashed themselves as much as the "plebs" .
Then the Democrats "won" the election with a bit of help from the deep state, and found
themselves in power.
When Blinken was anchoraged , he expected to tell the Chinese what to do, think and
he possibly even expected the Chinese to take a knee to honour the "self-evidence" of his
wisdom . He probably got into a hussy fit when they didn't agree with he knew
emotionallly or had been told by the CIA, Bowder or Bidens favourite sweet-smellin' lobbyist.
What Politicians now do is ; when in a stresssful position they revert to emotional dominated
reactions and do not follow orders from the deep state, oligarchs or lobbies.
Now we come to Ukraine and Taiwan. For the center of the democratic party, Biden Pelosi,
Blinken, what they "know" is all there is to know . So they don't listen to
anyone .
The lobbies, military profit-makers and the Deep State are equally sure they know but they
cannot change the brainwashing that they helped install in others.
Washington is emotional and the Intelligence/Military are the cold-killers. Whatever one says
the other will contradict it. So we have a forked tongue "Adminstration".
What has happened and one of the aims of both Putin and Xi, is to move a "woke"
adminstration out of it's comfort zone. Outside it's usual certitudes. The pressure will now
be coming from East Eurasia. In many fields -
ie. Even the Czechs are already walking back their expulsion of Russian Diplomats as they
hadn't expected a strong "retaliation". Tough for the five Czechs left in Moscow. All part of
the plan to drive home that actions will have repercussions.
******
Donbas? More shelling than ever before but the Russian red line is known. No Children or
other civilians to be killed. There is a tweet available, with sounds of shelling in the
background and children playing in the street ........ The Ukes have woken up to the fact
that a sea "invasion" is possible and now are sending (fast !) tank loaded trains back
towards Odessa.
"... The guy with the badge didn't kill Floyd, he committed suicide by ingesting an overdose of Fentanyl. The Autopsy showed he had a level of 11ng/ml and 3 ng/ml is a Lethal Level. I don't see how the Medical Examiner didn't rule cause of death was Fentanyl. ..."
Didn't the life of the 7 year old Chicago girl shot in the head while in line at a McDonalds
by a gang member "matter"?
Scott Manson CPA JD SUBSCRIBER 14 minutes ago
Unfortunately not
If she had been shot by a Caucasian cop than it would matter
Yes I am sure - is shot or Caucasian the offending word of the day
EDWARD HINES SUBSCRIBER 6 minutes ago
Exploitation value is all that "matters" to these people.
Chloe Kelley SUBSCRIBER 10 minutes ago
Will that gang member go to jail? Will hundreds of people try to justify the murder as just.
Was the little girl somewhere she shouldn't have been? Was she breaking the law? Was it past
curfew?
These are questions no one asks when a little girl gets shot. Its obvious that murder is
wrong. Her killer is caught and tried and goes to jail.
When I cop kills someone in cold blood in front of your eyes, you are still willing to and
actually search for reasons other than the obvious. It isn't the murder but the reaction to
it that people protest.
Scott Manson CPA JD SUBSCRIBER 5 minutes ago (Edited)
so its less new worthy and therefore better for a gang member to shoot a little girl than for
a felon to die while resisting arrest
Interesting way to view things
Andrew T SUBSCRIBER 16 minutes ago (Edited)
Get ready for more Democrat riots. Remember Maxine Waters' "get more confrontational" call to
protesters.
Jerome Ogden SUBSCRIBER 17 minutes ago
The daily threats and attacks on Chauvin defenders must be having a deep psychological impact
on the unsequestered jury.
A guilty verdict for even the least serious charge of manslaughter will surely trigger an
appeal of the decision not to allow a change of venue. And I believe it will have a good
chance of success. Here's why:
Jack Ruby's conviction by a Dallas jury in 1964 for killing Oswald was overturned on
appeal because Ruby's motion for a change of venue was denied. The appeals court judges
recognized that holding the trial in Dallas denied Ruby an impartial jury, because jurors
residing in that city would feel a unique duty to remove the stain that the Kennedy and
Oswald assassinations had left on their city. (google)
Jurors residing in Minneapolis are human. They cannot be impartial under constant mob
intimidation.
I'm betting the appeals court will grant Chauvin a new trial if found guity.
Anything less would mean our judicial system itself is bowing to mob rule.
RICHARD MARTIN SUBSCRIBER 21 minutes ago
"Beyond a reasonable doubt," is the legal bench mark, and it hasn't been met no matter how
frustrated you are about the restraint technique used the police in this instance. Mr.
Floyd's drug use was a contributing factor to his death whether Maxine Waters thinks so or
not.
A. James Tagg SUBSCRIBER 22 minutes ago
Watching politicians gas light minorities is so funny to watch, just wait to see the results
of the power vacuum created by the lack of a police presence in these communities. The
result..... one of the worst crime waves that is just gonna SHRED they're community for
years.
Scott Manson CPA JD SUBSCRIBER 16 minutes ago
crime in Minneapolis has been on the rise all year. At one point I remember an article in
which the MInneapolis police chief asked for assistance from other law enforcement agencies
because of all the retirements and lack of funding did not have enough cops to handle the
crime ridden city
Jerome Abernathy SUBSCRIBER 29 minutes ago
At the point Floyd lost consciousness, Chauvin's partner checked Floyd and said he couldn't
find a pulse, yet Chauvin stayed on his neck for over 3 minutes more. He knew Floyd was
unconscious, he knew he had no pulse, yet he stayed on his neck. He didn't administer aid, he
continued grind his neck into his neck. None of the other evidence matters for 2nd degree
murder.
Violet Liskey SUBSCRIBER 25 minutes ago
Sufficient in my mind for a second degree manslaughter conviction.
Mac Moore SUBSCRIBER 23 minutes ago
Abernathy writes, "At the point Floyd lost consciousness, Chauvin's partner checked Floyd and
said he couldn't find a pulse, yet Chauvin stayed on his neck for over 3 minutes more."
So, what? Are you looking for evidence to support your hate? How is that helpful? They
jury has all of the facts. The Prosecutors and Defense delivered excellent arguments and
supported them with facts. It seems all of your evidence is of only one perspective. The Jury
has both. I will await their decision, not yours.
Rick Krieger SUBSCRIBER 23 minutes ago
And the Floyd family will skip town with $27 million from the citizens of Minnesota.
Bruce Rado SUBSCRIBER 11 minutes ago
Thank Chauvin for that. The city settled because the bar for a civil award is only "the
preponderance of evidence," and anyone with two functioning eyes could see that Floyd's death
was "wrongful," and that Chauvin's actions were the proximate cause of Floyd's death.
Ellyn Oys SUBSCRIBER 2 minutes ago (Edited)
That is the fascinating part. I awaiting news as to how they spend it. Will they start with a
row of pink Cadillacs?
D REYNOLDS SUBSCRIBER 19 minutes ago
People who don't make a habit of getting high, committing crimes, then resisting arrest have
nothing to worry about.
John Bartlett SUBSCRIBER 9 minutes ago
Especially after ingesting a lethal dose of Fentanyl, Floyd's blood showed 11 ng/ml and
3ng/ml is considered a lethal level.
BRUCE MONTGOMERY SUBSCRIBER 32 minutes ago
Interesting final arguments by the prosecution which just wrapped up.
Next up, the Defense, then rebuttal by the State before the case concludes and jury begins
its deliberations.
The prosecution highlighted the pain suffered by Floyd under Chauvin's knee. Floyd
complained that he couldn't breath and about the pain in his stomach and neck.
According to the Mayo Clinic website, symptoms relating to an "enlarged heart," often
include shortness of breath and may also include chest pain, discomfort in other areas of the
upper body (one or both arms, neck, back, stomach and severe shortness of breath which may
indicate a heart attack), and fainting.
It is inexplicable, however, why Chauvin did not take his knee off Floyd when he had no
pulse. . .
EDWARD HINES SUBSCRIBER 44 minutes ago
National Guard in DC are playing video games on their phones.
As Minneapolis is largely unprotected, sacrificed for a political agenda.
Violet Liskey SUBSCRIBER 45 minutes ago
Bad closing prosecutor argument is going to justify a stronger reaction if the decision does
not go in the direction of the mob - we needed Steve to do a better job for all concerned
ted williams SUBSCRIBER 41 minutes ago
Which mob? The Jan 6 mob?? I'm confused
Kevin Burke SUBSCRIBER 37 minutes ago
The summer of love mob.
Richard Acuti SUBSCRIBER 52 minutes ago
The verdict and the sentence are irrelevant.
More rioting and violence will occur no matter the output of the trial.
This is a tragic tale of a lousy human being being killed by another lousy human being
with a badge. Neither of these guys are any good.
John Bartlett SUBSCRIBER 45 minutes ago
The guy with the badge didn't kill Floyd, he committed suicide by ingesting an overdose
of Fentanyl. The Autopsy showed he had a level of 11ng/ml and 3 ng/ml is a Lethal Level. I
don't see how the Medical Examiner didn't rule cause of death was Fentanyl.
John Bartlett SUBSCRIBER 9 minutes ago
The Medical Examiner is at fault for not listing Fentanyl as the cause of death, Floyd's
Autopsy showed he had 11 ng/ml and 3 is considered Lethal. An overdose of Fentanyl causes the
persons respiration to slow and even stop and that's what happened to Floyd.
Jerome Abernathy SUBSCRIBER 28 minutes ago
"This is a tragic tale of a lousy human being being killed by another lousy human being with
a badge."
Floyd was addicted to opioids like millions of other Americans. That didn't make him a
lousy human. But, I do question what type of person would accuse him of such.
Scott Manson CPA JD SUBSCRIBER 26 minutes ago
he was also a felon who was in the process of committing a crime -
does that qualify as a lousy human?
Maria Thompson SUBSCRIBER 20 minutes ago
... Conviction for first degree home-invasion robbery where he pointed a gun at a pregnant
woman's abdomen
the Media doesn't mention it much
EDWARD HINES SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
Looting And burning Footlocker basketball shoe stores will make everything better.
paul grunder SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
Maxine Waters was despicable in what she did by encouraging rioters. Then I also think Chris
Cuomo of CNN should be fired for basically saying, unless white children are shot there will
be no justice Why would anyone encourage the deaths of any children? We have a sicko nation.
p's wife
Albert Griffith SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
The prosecution's closing argument is way too long. He's playing to the cameras.
EDWARD HINES SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
He wants a CNN show when this is all over.
mitch wilkerson SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
how much pressure was the knee on his back? That's the 64 dollar question. I see not enough
to kill him but merely to restrain as he was high
Violet Liskey SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
I don't think there is any way to know - only the best guess of experts who may nor may not
be influenced by other factors
Keith Dowling SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
I wonder, did the defense point out that G. Floyd said he couldn't breath before he was put
on the ground? That seems to be proof that the restraining hold had nothing to do with his
breathing issues.
The other factor is, what impact did the crowd have on delaying the paramedics in
accessing and treating Mr. Floyd? They said they did a "load and scoot" due to the unruly
crowd.
Mac Moore SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
Dowling writes, "I wonder, did the defense point out that G. Floyd said he couldn't breath
before he was put on the ground?"
Yes. The Defense has been excellent. Both desks, Defense / Prosecutors, presented their
positions very well. The Jury has a good balance of facts and arguments to work with. I don't
know how they will find, but my guess is that at least one or more jurors will not be able to
conclude murder / manslaughter by the police.
EDWARD HINES SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
A 7 year girl in Chicagoland was shot in the head yesterday by a gang member and killed.
She was not fighting with police or under the influence of fentanyl.
Was in line at a McDonalds.
No media coverage.
D REYNOLDS SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
I read about it on Fox News. Didn't see it mentioned on CNN however.
karen graham SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
It's on CNN.
Scott Manson CPA JD SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
so where are the "peaceful protests"
Thomas Fowler SUBSCRIBER 46 minutes ago
There won't be any because if a black is killed by another black, there's no political gain
to be had. This just proves that black lives don't matter unless a white (or maybe Asian) is
involved.
Gregory Weinman SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
Based on the evidence I would acquit murder charges. Murder requires an intent the
prosecution has not proven. Involuntary manslaughter in Minnesota is called manslaughter in
the second degree. That seems the appropriate charge. Based on Officer Chauvin's negligence
in the death of Mr Floyd I would convict.
Representative Waters was filmed inciting riot if the jury acquits on murder. She did this in
Brooklyn Center MN, a city already in flames If Minneapolis erupts in riot will she face
sanction or dismissal? I wouldn't bet on it.
Jerome Feldman SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago (Edited)
Is anything going to be done to protect the anonymity of the jurors...as is done in mob
trials?
Not that anything can be done in this day and age. It is likely that the identity of each
juror is already public knowledge.
(Mrs. JF)
M Ruri SUBSCRIBER 47 minutes ago
That is a major issue as to an appeal of the verdict I believe.... because many selected
jurors did say they were worried about their safety in being selected.
John Harris SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
Q: Why were those "9 minutes" necessary?
A: Because he had been successful in forcibly resisting arrest (involving the entire police
force available) during the earlier 20 minutes ... just BEFORE!
...... Summary: It's that SIMPLE!
Violet Liskey SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago (Edited)
I think Floyd passed out at 20:24-5 and was not resisting for the last 3 mins of the 9 mins.
And that is the best prosecutors case for at least second degree manslaughter.
Violet Liskey SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
So far prosecutor's closing argument has been disappointing - playing the jury -- by
misleading claims 9:24, 9:24, 9: 24 or superhumans do not exist in real life or (I know, not
the defense, what Chauvin knows) he knew, he knew, he knew, mock, mock, mock -- guess Steve
figures the jury has the intelligence of 8 year-olds and he is willing to yank their strings
.. although not saying he is wrong
Joseph Areeda SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
I can't help but think the reaction of the mob will hang over jury deliberations.
Imagine the press reaction if Trump had used language similar to Maxine Water's on Jan
5
We've got to stay on the street and we've got to get more active, we've got to get more
confrontational. We've got to make sure that they know that we mean business.
I pray Mr. Chauvin gets a fair verdict than depends on his actions and the law
not on expected mob reactions, but I don't see how that's possible.
Girish Kotwal SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
Will police officer Derek Chauvin get proper justice from a jury that is being ferociously
intimidated to give a guilty verdict by an organized mob and filthy politicians like Maxine
Watters? It will be the responsibility of the judge and the justice department to assure that
the intimidation should have no influence on the verdict and the jury will be protected from
any repercussions of their verdict no matter what it is. Jury protection measures should be
in place until the mob calms down. I don't think that some of the organizations that were
rioting which are the poodles of the Dems are going to be rioting no matter what the decision
is because after the summer riots they got what they wanted which is the installation of
Biden in the white house. So now they have their puppy in the white house and he is doing
exactly what they want him to do.
The Dems have sowed the seeds of race wars and mass shootings that they cannot blame
Trump. Crime is a crime and deserves to be punished.
karen graham SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago (Edited)
Do you know who the jurors are? This is obviously a high profile case, but who do you think
is intimidating them?
And how did you get Trump into this?
D REYNOLDS SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
Perhaps the mob gathering outside the courthouse?
Randall Digby SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
and a US Representative from the state of California that the moderators will not allow to be
named.
Alan Pronesti SUBSCRIBER 2 hours ago (Edited)
A couple of years ago I watched a documentary on PBS on African American voters, and it said
that if Black participation rates in elections drops just a tiny % (don't remember the
number) Democrats would get killed in elections. If it wasn't for that we wouldn't know who
George Floyd is.
Once that changes the Democrats, Media, and Liberals will throw African Americans under
the bus.
This is not about race it's all about elections for Democrats.
Michael Dulaney SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
No. It was if the death of Floyd was caused only by the action of the police officer or if
there were other factors that, had they not existed, would not have resulted in death.
Floyd's body was full of drugs.
We will see if, in the United States today, Justice is Blind or Justice is now Mob
Rule.
Scott Manson CPA JD SUBSCRIBER 2 hours ago
Let the
"peaceful protests" begin
ALAN SEWELL SUBSCRIBER 2 hours ago
They already have. Somebody left a severed head of a porcine animal in the driveway of a
defense witness last night.
Scott Manson CPA JD SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
did it have an apple in its mouth?
Michael Dulaney SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
Our democratic cousins.
Jason Miller SUBSCRIBER 2 hours ago
Chauvin was already convicted in the media before stepping into court. The majority of the
public also convicted him before knowing all of the facts. So I hope the jury is doing their
job, not judging him from a biased media perspective that has plagued our nation for years.
Either way, there will be riots, whether he's found guilty or not guilty.
Michael Dulaney SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
Retail outlets need to board up before "shopping" begins when the verdict is read.
Michael Schmitt SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago (Edited)
Chicago stores (in all neighborhoods) started boarding up last week. Who wants to go shopping
in person any more? Between rioting, carjackings, personal attacks, homeless on every corner,
it's dangerous and not pleasant. Online shopping will take over. Retail, real estate and
insurance industries need to step up and call out this destruction.
K R HANINGTON SUBSCRIBER 2 hours ago
I would hope that everyone would be willing to accept the verdict of the jury, no
matter what the outcome.
This is foundational for our justice system and indeed for our country. People who have
not you been in the courtroom to hear all the testimony, to see all the evidence should
accept the Judgment of the jury. You don't have to be happy with it but you should accept it.
Outside agitators, such as Representative Maxine Waters, should be held in contempt.
Michael Dulaney SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
Maxine Waters is calling for protests against the government. Don't know about Minneapolis,
but in Washington DC she called this an "insurrection".
Maybe she should be tried for treason.
Rachel Glyn SUBSCRIBER 2 hours ago
I'm not sure whether anybody can be unbiased enough to judge to what extent Chauvin, as
opposed to George Floyd's drug use and heart condition, caused Mr Floyd's death. Radical
supporters of BLM are convinced that Chauvin murdered Floyd and it was racially motivated.
Some on the Right discount any involvement from Chauvin and blame it all on Mr Floyd. Even if
I were on the jury to hear all the scientific evidence, I might not feel qualified to
decide.
I also am unsure whether any jurors can really make an unbiased decision. Even in a worst
case scenario, if Chauvin is racist and evil and deliberately cause Mr Floyd's death, the
jury should decide based on evidence and not mob threats. I'd like to know if the jurors have
heard outside news and if they fear for their own safety.
karen graham SUBSCRIBER 2 hours ago
Jurors are instructed not to listen to outside news. Juries tend to take their
responsibilities very seriously.
AM Losee SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
I think a lot of people are convinced this was murder. People were screaming at Chauvin to
get his knee off his neck. How much more blatant can it get?
Because you and other right wingers hate Floyd, you are making excuses for a bad cop, a
really bad cop, who already had 17 marks against his record, some for excessive
punishment.
The guy should have been thrown off the force.
Mac Moore SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
Losee writes, "I think a lot of people are convinced this was murder."
That is the sad truth. When your lens is blinded by hate, one has difficulty seeing it any
other way.
Michael Dulaney SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
The broad generalization you make against "right wingers"...."hating Floyd" shows that racism
is indeed alive and well in your neck of the woods.
Bruce Anderson SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
AM - how do you know who hates Floyd?
you are a mind reader with a crystal ball?
what a dum statement.
no one heard of Floyd before and now they hate him ?
Charles McGill SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
yes AM and leftists are mind readers and not only that but are righteous, always correct, and
think all sheep should stand quietly and get fleeced.
Joseph Rosenberger SUBSCRIBER 2 hours ago
What a sad mess.
Mac Moore SUBSCRIBER 2 hours ago
The flame throwers, Obama, Sharpton, Jackson, James, BLM, and, their enablers in the MSM ....
have poisoned the waters of rational thought in America. They have far too many citizens
viewing this event through a racist lens that they created for political malfeasance to gain
power. It is sick.
Floyd was there as a culminations of hundreds, if not thousands, of bad choices of his own
making. The police were there as a request. If Floyd had chosen to comply with the police,
the outcome would have been completely different. How the police acted to gain submission is
in question, but it is political theatrics to call it murder.
For an acquittal, the defense must similarly convince all 12 jurors that the prosecution
failed to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. But it takes only one juror to "hang" the
jury. That means that if 11 jurors want to vote to convict on at least one of the charges
against Chauvin, but one juror doesn't believe the government has met its burden of proof,
there won't be a verdict. Instead, there will be a mistrial, and although the government can
retry the case down the road, a hung jury involves delay and the risk that as the evidence
ages, the prosecution's case may become weaker.
OMG. I just watched 2 strong young black men have a conversation
without screaming RACISM. All they talked about was our freedoms and
our rights. I love watching Lawrence, he is a breath of fresh air in
the media. We need more people like these 2 men to keep the
conversation going about protecting everyone's rights.
It's sad that money was used to help people not for her to buy four
houses I don't understand I work in Brooklyn a lot of people would
need those donations. Sad 🥺
The whole BLM/Metoo movement is "political" and primarily driven by
media/academia/think-tank elites. Yes, mostly white males and females along with the token
members of the "aggrieved" class. I don't get the psychology but denouncing their own
race/ethnicity/gender/identity through virtue signaling to achieve political ends is the game.
Cancellation and destruction of careers are all part and parcel of techniques to suppress
dissent and breed compliance to the overlords.
This trend has not occurred overnight. It is many decades in the making with creeping
fascism – the melding of Big Business and Big Authoritarian Government. This is not just
Democrats but Republicans too. The division and fracturing of society on the basis of identity
is deliberate. Gullibility is no excuse. The vast majority of Americans have fallen for
identity politics across many generations.
Reply
I am in full agreement with your comment, Sam; except perhaps for the last sentence.
Woke-ism is an *elite project*, serving primarily to get the little
people to fight each other, rather than the vastly-wealthy Very Few..
Walrus,
I don't know about all of that. As much as I despise "woke" culture, I think these concerns
are little overblown; or at least they are in *my* experience as a corporate manager for a
major US company. A caveat being the since the Covid panic/woke control of the world, we've
all been working virtually and all business trips are cancelled. So there is little to no
opportunity for situations to arise.
I have a couple of relevant rules from which I never deviate; 1. Never discuss politics
at work unless it is in a purely analytical way that is related to impact on our business.
2. Do not meet with female employees – whether they be higher-ups, peers or staff
– one on one, outside of the office (e.g. not at a happy hour). The former I
implemented from day 1 in my corporate career and the latter I developed based on early
experience, but not the experience you may think.
I entered the corporate world in my late 30s and well into my 40s I was a very fit
handsome devil (I'm getting fairly long in tooth now, in my late 50s). I have been told by
my superiors that I exude a quiet, calm confidence and it seems that people perceive me as
being intelligent and polite. Apparently women find that mix attractive. As recently as ten
years ago, I had all kinds of women, from work, coming onto me. I know the difference
between some harmless flirting and the real thing, though, IMO, as inevitable as it may be,
even the harmless flirting should stay out of the work place. An attractive female employee
is in a boring meeting with me, I catch her looking at me, she smile coyly, bats her eyes,
flips her hair back a little and looks at me again with a sultry smile. That's harmless
flirting. Used to happen all of the time. Debriefing over a cocktail on a business trip
with a female employee, in the hotel bar, and she starts running her foot up my leg, that's
crossing the line. That kind of scenario used to happen frequently too. Married women,
single, older, younger, peers, bosses, staff – and, especially, when they were
engaged to be married. Are they going to be ticked off and vengeful if I turn them down?
Would they destroy me later if I take them up on their offer? I didn't want to find out.
Best to avoid the situation.
Anyhow, it seems to me that hiring high quality people in the first place diminishes the
risk significantly. No one with talent and ambition wants to sacrifice a rewarding
corporate career by starting trouble over "me too" nonsense. That goes for both the alleged
perpetrator and the alleged victim in scenario. So far, I haven't become aware of any
accusations or legal issues at work.
As for the grandfather/woke grand daughter thing, I hadn't thought about that, but,
sadly, you have a good point there. Idiot school counselors and poorly raised scatter
brained friends can sway a forming young mind to say all kinds of damaging things.
Reply
Pray tell – what is wrong with single sex schools? I grew up in Germany when all
schools were either for male or female students, and I maintain I had a more respectful
attitude towards females because of that.
But I forget – sex does not mean anything, as anyone can freely choose Zir, Hir,
Eir, Vis, Tem, Eir preferred possessive pronoun for Zir, Hir, Eir, Vis, Tem, Eir preferred
gender..which makes establishing schools for about 63 genders ( http://www.hoschl.cz/files/6035_cz_Genders.pdf
) rather improbable .
Reply
Time to explore the prevailing wisdom that led to some of those "stuffy, old-fashioned
codes of conduct" that maybe were not to silly after all.
Perhaps they offered more freedom, than our modern version of freedom has afforded.
Freedom from STDs; freedom from false accusations; freedom of movement in public
settings; freedom from drunken harassment and freedom morning after remorse; freedom from
solo parent impoverishment -- though the story of the "plucky orphan" was long fodder for
coming of age literature classics .
Just re-watched the Shirley Temple "Heidi" – plucky orphan on steroids, matched
only by Anne of Green Gables as female empowerment role models who did thrive in a world of
code of conduct restrictions..
Reply
Walrus, unfortunately I have to agree with you. We are approaching the point where
husband and wife need to sign a consent agreement to have sex. Young adults' are simply
avoiding the subject due to social pressures.
Our experts are deflecting "Liberal" ideas with other factors:
Annotated freedom of association, set forth in statute.
But at one time, no did mean no so there was no need for this. But also over time,
fostered by the "free sex" social changes, saying no did not matter – and rape
laws already on the books were somehow deemed insufficient. He said, she said created
the impasse this statute attempted to correct. But did it?
Regarding "the demonisation of White heterosexual Males in all its forms",
I would like to add some evidence, and some historical background.
The two links below, of articles written by an anonymous American professor, give some
vivid evidence.
Each link is followed by a quote from the linked page.
"In the midst of all of this "inclusion," one can look in vain for anything positive for
Whites, Europeans, etc.
The only mention of Whites, as a group, is always in a purely negative sense."
"The curriculum of my institution is to be changed to prioritize "social justice" over
all else; indeed, we have been told that we need to de-emphasize actual scholarship, the
teaching of objective facts, and providing a truly enlightened liberal arts education in
favor of politicized far-left talking points. The entire curriculum is to be subordinated
to radical anti-White propaganda. Please note that this trend in American academia is not
restricted only to undergraduate education, but also extends into post-graduate education
of all sorts: graduate school, law school, medical school, etc. With respect to the latter,
the scientifically illiterate and hyper-politicized hysterics of the AMA are used to
justify curriculum changes at the level of medical education; one set of political hacks
justifies the lies and distortions of another group, and vice versa. All of these academic
and professional organizations are completely dominated by the Left."
I first encountered the demonization of my value system during my stint at Brandeis
Univ. from 1967 to 1973.
There, much to my amazement and shock,
the soldiers of the U.S. Army were called "babykillers".
Of course, there may have been isolated instances where Vietnamese children were wrongly
killed,
but it was commonplace to generalize this to the whole U.S. Army in VN.
Likewise, police were called, for no evident reason, "pigs".
It wasn't just the U.S. Army and the police that were trashed.
"Smash the establishment" (sometimes more specifically "Smash the WASP establishment")
was a commonly expressed demand.
Also, "the bourgeoisie", or "bourgeoisie values", were to be despised and scorned.
I am sure there were many at Brandeis who did not support such radical ideas, but they were
certainly more common there than in my previous environments.
As to hatred of whites and the then-mainstream white culture, there were three prominent
(non-Brandeis) examples;
1. Susan Sontag: "The white race is the cancer of human history"
2. (Somewhat later) Tim Wise
3. Weatherman John Jacobs, quoted in Mark Rudd's Underground : "We're against
everything that's good and decent in honky America. We will burn and loot and destroy. We
are the incubation of your mother's nightmare."
There's another possible outcome. That is one where the bottom 80% of men (the ones that
the average woman thinks are 'below average' in attractiveness) can't get a middle-class
job at all. They are limited to jobs which are dangerous (e.g. police officer, firefighter,
construction), dirty (refuse collector, sewage worker) or unglamorous (e.g. bicycle-based
delivery operative – jobs which the women don't want. The 'top jobs' are all held by
women and the small number of men they are interested in.
Reply
You left out race. Having had to fire a couple of protected class employees over the years
was only marginally better- in regards to the negative blowback on the manager – than the
problems you describe. In addition to the grandfathers you should realize father's have faced
such false allegations since at least the '80s. Try giving your 2 year old a bath today and see
what accusation you might have to defend yourself from in a decade. Thank feminists and the
lgbt+ movements for that. walrus says:
April 11, 2021 at 9:09 am
Fred, I've never fired a member of a minority. What works better is to declare them
"redundant' (ie: their job just disappeared) so its no fault and a tax free $30k – $50k
compensation payment on top of their legal entitlements to make it a little sweeter.
Fred says:
April 11, 2021 at 12:11 pm
Walrus,
These employees committed theft. The last one pre-commited company funds then provided false
documentation multiple times to the general auditors office. I didn't fire that one, I had to
do the retraining route. He decided to leave on his own accord .
Reply
Do these things happen by mass hysteria, or by intent ? The former tends to burn itself
out when the promised rewards do not arrive. It would be interesting to work up the chain
to the source of the money and intellectual force required to power all this and to co-opt
government acquiescence.
Walrus, may I add two more:
5. An attempted capture of the new power center, that being instant access to the minds
of the public, created by social media in the last fifteen years, in a way proven
successful by the lodgement of 'progressive' forces within education systems decades
earlier. Nature, and 'progressives' abhor a vacuum, and it's well underway now.
Nothing decisive would result, merely the capture of newly available ground. Note that
existing ground held by established powers are left untouched.
6. In the US, a division between 'woke' States and the deplorable States, characterized
by deliberate legislative differences and measured by the movement of people to States that
reflect their ideological preferences. Will the 'woke' States offer full employment
economies, and would that even matter to the woke refugees ?
The key word of point 6. is 'division', and the US cannot maintain it's place in the world
in that condition. All of this will not be reversed except by force and with the backing of
the majority, even a bare one, of the US population. That force will need to be headed by a
non-conforming leader with the credibility to muster it and to administer what comes after,
and that ain't Karmala.
Reply
A friend of mine's sister went to a therapist who convinced the sister her parents had
messed with her mind by performing satanic rituals on her when she was young and and had
suppressed the memories. Supposedly, the therapist had helped her recover these traumatic
events when, in fact, the therapist had implanted them. This took place in the 80s when
many innocent people were accused of performing satanist rituals, sometimes including human
sacrifice. There were some real devil worshiping killings but it turned into an out of
control witch hunt.
The sister eventually recovered her sanity after tormenting her family for a couple of
years and made up with her parents. Therapists track most of their patients problems back
to the parents, based on Freudian theory, even when the problem is drug and alcohol abuse,
as it was with this woman. The father was a Methodist minister.
Today sexism and racism are as over blown as satanism was in the 80s. I wonder what the
next media implanted Big Trauma will be?
Reply
I'm not sure how widespread therapeutic malpractice is but at times I wonder how
rigorous is the field of psychology? I think it is important to study human behavior
but I question if it can be generalized and whether it is capable of capturing nuance.
The one problem that I have with the practice is the incentive structure. It is
$/billable hour not $/outcome. The incentive is clearly to increase billable hours.
In any case I recall well the McMartin case and the surrounding media hysteria and
witch-hunts. Reminiscent of the current woke and cancel culture hysteria.
I don't know, but will try to find out and post here.
That witch-hunt felt *very fishy* even at the time..
almost like there was a subtext-in-the-making.
I wrote a post on the above-mentioned subject but I deleted it. I will not discuss the
demonisation of White heterosexual Males in all its forms for fear of cancellation. I will
instead leave you with my conclusions – which are consistent with The Walrus Law;
Governments achieve the reverse of their stated objectives.
Conclusion 1. No white male corporate manager is going to risk their career by engaging in
any of the following actions:
– Mentoring female subordinates.
– Taking one on one meetings with any female.
– Participating in any but the most innocuous social functions with female subordinates
and certainly not where alcohol is present.
– In fact avoiding any one on one situation with a female.
– It also stands to reason that women will not be employed or promoted if sufficient
excuse can be found. There wasn't a glass ceiling. There is now.
Why? Because a female subordinate can now permanently end a males career in a microsecond by
the act of alleging any impropriety thanks to #metoo. No proof is required.
Conclusion 2. The British/ European/ American class system is coming back with a vengeance.
Young men and their parents will confine their search for partners and social interactions, to
females of the same social strata, values, financial resources and background as their own.
This is not a guarantee of marital harmony, It does however decrease the likelihood of a male
being accused of relationship and career destroying improprieties twenty years after the
alleged event. You can forget marrying 'for love' outside your social class.
Conclusion 3. Male behaviour in the upper and middle classes is indeed going to change. We
will witness the return of the Chaperone for males. We will witness the end of many mixed sex
parties and entertainments because of the ever present threat of denouncement. Expect single
sex private schools to flourish. Co -education is an invitation for a young males career to be
finished before it even starts – all it takes these days is an allegation made perhaps
years and years after the alleged "event". The first a young male will know about it is when he
is arrested and handcuffed.
Conclusion 4. The nature of families is going to change. We are going to see the return of
stereotyped roles. Case in point? As a Grandfather I have decided I will have nothing more to
do with the informal upbringing of grand daughters – there is too much risk that if they
go off the rails in puberty or get involved in drugs, mental illness, etc. they will
conveniently blame sexual abuse by a relative as the cause. That means I will never allow
myself to be alone with them or be responsible for them ever and the rest of the family know
it. Period. The personal risk is just too great
I have examples to back up each conclusion but I will not share them with you.
I have not addressed the American race and firearm based issues but I would expect that
changes to firearm laws and characterisation of various behaviors as "extremist' will also have
the same opposite effect from what Government intended.
Indeed. I suspect that if I were of dating age (and single) today I would go on to die
celibate. A minority of women have made engaging with the entire gender entirely too
dangerous.
Reply
We are an adaptive bunch; witness how successful Prohibition was, or the alleged 'War on
Drugs'. Look at how Trumps border wall was rapidly shot to hell with a few acetylene
torches and some hinges – making really nice gates for the coyotes to run people
through.
It's interesting that there is no actual, physical way that the number of guns out here
'in the wild' is even known, much less can be seized. Guns can be seized by the
ATF/FBI/etc. making a huge raid on a single family and killing them all as examples –
but once that card is played, the ante will be upped and things will not be as easy for
them. The gun grabbers are literally about 200 years too late, as the gun cow is long out
of the barn.
The Covidian Cult is waning finally – in spite of the push by the globalist CDC,
WHO, Big Pharma, MSM and many others. It's hard to push fear of dying when there is nothing
to base it on any longer.
So now we are back to Ukraine, where Biden is both well known and well connected. Russia
will swat anything approaching her borders, and may swat hard. I would not be surprised to
see our puny couple of ships in their sea crippled electronically, again. But Russia
doesn't want what NATO and Biden are serving for dinner.
It's the same old SSDD of world ending disasters to keep everyone afraid of everyone
else while the big wheels in government are sending contracts out to their family members
and their various foundations using money leveraged against our grandkids.
57 genders; women cannot be approached without opening yourself to legal actions and yet
they are all in the military and government positions in far larger percentages than people
realize. Our local school principal was recently accused of "inappropriate conduct" with a
female teacher who is so obese she requires an electric scooter to move her bulk about.
Having actually seen this female, it was obvious to me, as a man with normal appetites,
that approaching her would have resulted in disgorgement of the previous meal and not
engorgement of anything.
It's human nature that when you forbid something unilaterally, it becomes more
attractive to many, just for the sake of flouting convention. Perhaps that is what the
morbidly obese teacher is striving for?
We are entering the Land of Unintended Consequences, and there is no way but
through.
The replace class conflict with race conflict. What can go wrong ?
Professional woke revolutionaries like
Chanequa Walker-Barnes
who is the
author is racial hate prayer (is not this a hate crime?) are similar to Russian Commissars. History repeats itself, first as
tragedy, second as farce.
A prayer book called "A Rhythm of Prayer: A Collection of Meditations for Renewal," is a number one bestseller on Amazon in the
category "meditation".
One prayer, called "Prayer of a Weary Black Woman," by Dr. Chanequa Walker-Barnes, a theology professor at Mercer University,
starts:
"Dear God, Please help me to hate White people. Or at
least to want to hate them I want to stop caring about their misguided, racist souls, to stop believing that they can be better,
that they can stop being racist."
The "prayer" then describes the type of White person they want to hate -- not the actual blatantly racist ones, but the "wolves in
sheep's clothing" who "don't see color", are friendly and accepting on the surface.
"
Lord, if it be your will, harden my heart. Stop me from striving to see the best in
people. Stop me from being hopeful that White people can do and be better.
Let me imagine them instead as white-hooded
robes standing in front of burning crosses. Let me see them as hopelessly unrepentant, reprobate bigots who have blasphemed the
Holy Spirit and who need to be handed over to the evil one."
"Grant me a Get Out of Judgment Free Card if I make White people the exception to your commandment to love our neighbors as we love
ourselves."
This is a sick, insane, religious cult of hateful people.
But institutions like
churches, schools, and corporations are pushing this blatant racism mainstream.
The book is also available at Target --
a
store which banned a book
that gave voice to transgender people who regretted their decisions to transition.
play_arrow
hmmmm
35 minutes ago
Maybe
include a prayer in your book... "Dear God, Please help me to hate black people. Or at least to want to hate
them I want to stop caring about their misguided, racist souls, to stop believing that they can be better,
that they can stop being racist."
Md4
57 minutes ago
""
Lord,
if it be your will, harden my heart. Stop me from striving to see the best in people. Stop me from being
hopeful that White people can do and be better."
Instead of whining...why not just leave?
America
isn't
the right place for a
lot
of
people anymore...
...so
just
go.
You'll
be happier.
And
we'll
be
happier.
You'll
see...
Meatier Shower
1 hour ago
"
It
was not part of their blood, it came to them very late, with long arrears to make good, when the Saxon began
to hate.
They were not easily moved, they were icy – willing
to wait til every count should be proved, ere the Saxon began to hate.
Their voices were even and low. Their eyes were
level and straight. There was neither sign nor show, when the Saxon began to hate.
It was not preached to the crowd. It was not
taught by the state. No man spoke it aloud when the Saxon began to hate.
It was not suddenly bred. It will not swiftly
abate. Through the chilled years ahead, when time shall count from the date that the Saxon began to hate."
-
Rudyard Kipling
Sol Invictvs
2 hours ago
(Edited)
They're worshiping the devil. There's no room for racial hate if you believe in God.
Kanzen Saimin
1 hour ago
remove
link
"If you or anyone in your
household identifies as Black, Indigenous, or a person of color (BIPOC), including anyone with Abenaki or
other First Nations heritage, all household members who are 16 years or older can sign up to get a
vaccine."
Health Vermont does not explain why there is a
racially segregated line for the Covid vaccine -- apparently it's just the woke thing to do these days
Health
Vermont does not admit eugenics is in play.
12Doberman
1 hour ago
They've become what they supposedly despise. They clearly have believed their own propaganda. Makes you
wonder what's coming next...white's to be deprived of their property?
homeskillet
1 hour ago
(Edited)
This is beyond the pale, the elites are pushing for a race ware - chaos and violence.
They are the
entities that should be destroyed.
jonesbeach
1 hour ago
Progressivism is not a religion of peace.
HonorSeeker
1 hour ago
(Edited)
It's more like a cult. Its members are recruited for their vulnerability, for their desperation, and for
their willingness to blame others for their failings. The members are groomed, brain-washed and then
released upon the nation they are to act like parasites against by sapping the nation's spirit and sowing
discord.
Liesel
1 hour ago
remove
link
I just
saw the book on Amazon. Interesting enough, there were "666" reviews. You just can't make this stuff up.
secretspaniel
1 hour ago
remove
link
Blacks
are not behind this, this whole issue is being weaponised to foment a race war to destroy us
JohnGaltsChild
1 hour ago
I refused to go
into a Target the moment they started blended gender toy departments.
They're sick.
A Girl In Flyover Country
1 hour ago
There
is no stopping the decline of the American empire. I wish I was wrong.
Macho Latte
1 hour ago
(Edited)
WOKE
HATE IS JUST GETTING STARTED
GET
YOUR CHILDREN AS FAR AWAY FROM PUBLIC SCHOOL AS YOU CAN
11.
The Public Schools - will ramp up their level of political indoctrination including severe anti-family,
anti-white rhetoric and Woke Hate. History will be re-written destroying every level of pride in America.
Prepubescent children will be made to question their gender. Heterosexual white boys will be emasculated and
demonized. Interracial sex for white girls will be encouraged. The destruction of childhood will be the most
horrible consequence of Woke Hate which will be administered mostly by hateful, indoctrinated, white women
with children (mothers). The incalculable psychological damage to our youth will last generations.
Demoralized, many will become addicted to prescription drugs. Many will commit suicide.
Neo2021
1 hour ago
I
guess that's not racist. I stopped reading after learning the author's name; Dr. Chaneqa Walker. I was
laughing too hard. Where is the outrage?
Ms No
PREMIUM
1 hour ago
remove
link
People
should buy a copy of that. It will be worth money as a Bolshevik relic. This won't last for ever but it's
most insane displays will have shock value forever.
NewMouldy
1 hour ago
remove
link
Like rap music. I remember saying in the 80's "this will only be a fad" (sigh)
secretspaniel
1 hour ago
The
elite are really pushing for a race war that they know will cause minorities to suffer most of all - they
are literal Nazis and the real racists. Let's not forget that the people pushing this only consider
themselves white when it suits their purposes. They hate black and white equally and are total extremists.
Xena fobe
1 hour ago
(Edited)
Chanequa has some kind of mental health disorder.
Paranoid or schizophrenic.
Hyper Entropy
2 hours ago
How
come no Targets got burned down during the riots?
Huckleberry Pie
1 hour ago
Because the looters were trying to get home with all their 'reparations'. Hard to start a fire, when your
arms are full of stolen $hit.
Miler52
1 hour ago
This
absurdity needs to stop. Keep stirring the pot with this divisional crap and all hell well erupt
eventually. Not all 12.6% of America which is the black population support this stupidity and those that do
are imbeciles and incapable of making a difference anyway. Some people are itching for a racial explosion
and a completely unsafe America. They will find it very regrettable supporting such a toxic ideology.
5G-Powered Nanobots
1 hour ago
I
would bet 90% of blacks in America don't support this nonsense.
mike6972
1 hour ago
It may
not be 90%. But it's probably at least 75%.
Miler52
1 hour ago
Whatever the percentage actually is, the majority of Americans of any ethnicity do not support this ongoing
assault on Americas ability to respect one another. And the majority of Americans are angry about the open
border, the massive, abusive spend, raising taxes, the misleading HR1, packing the Supreme Court, the arrack
on the 2nd Amendment, etc. This is all being done by a minority of people to collapse America.
Sol Invictvs
1 hour ago
All
race hustlers need rope or lead.
For
the sake of humanity.
Kanzen Saimin
1 hour ago
remove
link
If
you've never seen the movie 'Crash', I would highly recommend it. This "Chanequa" reminds me of the
character (wait for it...) Shaniqua.
That is a FAVE shock fake event. Write a racial slur on the wall somewhere (with a member of the victim
class doing the writing), then send a letter to all the alumni from the college president decrying the
episode whilst beating the drum for more indoctrination/re-education. When my college did this to me as
an alumnus, and I couldnt respond to the college president's email (bounceback), I called the alumni
office and cancelled all further contact with the school.
Ms No
PREMIUM
2 hours ago
It's a
favorite tactic lately.
"The
suspect who allegedly vandalized four synagogues in Brooklyn with anti-Semitic graffiti over the weekend has
been identified as 39-year-old Emil Benjamin, who is a Jewish man from Brooklyn."
"The
person arrested for a spate of anti-Semitic graffiti in New York is
apparently
just mad about a business dispute
and not on a hate campaign against ****; in fact, he's Jewish."
(Really, they accepted that excuse? That wouldn't work for us)
"An
alleged anti-Semitic attack on a kosher-style café in Winnipeg, Canada was staged by the owners of the
restaurant, police now say."
All the day's Opinion headlines.
PREVIEW
SUBSCRIBE
The talk shows and editorial pages are full of questions. What is the basis for acting so forcefully against Georgia? If Georgia
is racist, how can baseball talk of doing business with China? Mr. Manfred failed to spell out specific criticisms of Georgia's
voting law. Now he's put himself in the awkward position of having to defend Colorado's voting laws.
During my time as commissioner, I learned that the American people view baseball as a public trust. They want the game to stand
for the best and noblest of our national virtues. They see baseball as the repository of their dreams, even as they root for
their favorite teams. They don't want, and won't accept, anything that separates them from the game's history and leadership.
Major League Baseball can't become a weapon in the culture wars, a hostage for one political party or ideology. It can't be only
for the rich or the poor, nor can it only be for one race, as it was until 1947. Baseball must always stand above politics and
its dark elements of corruption, greed and sordid selfishness. It can't go wrong by standing for national greatness.
The situation calls to mind the 2006 Duke lacrosse case, when many erred -- like Mr. Manfred has here -- by leaping to a conclusion
based on assumptions rather than carefully considered facts. I've done the same thing, to my regret. Much rides on Mr. Manfred's
shoulders so he must be prudent. Perhaps he now sees how complicated these issues can become. I wish him well.
Mr. Vincent was commissioner of baseball, 1989-92.
Truth SQ 1 hour ago Here's a crazy idea - how about hire the best person for the job? Reply
4 JBer 46 minutes ago The interest might be there, the candidates probably aren't. Reply 2
Jones 44 minutes ago These statements are just game plays to project an image as being a good
company. At the end of the day the higher ups / managers have their own buddies / crownies /
clowns that they keep promoting. Reply 2 Yo 15 minutes ago Companies are making public
statements because they fear being canceled more than they fear losing money on bad decisions.
It is the old Pleasure Pain equation. When the pleasure derived from taking an specific action
exceeds the pain involved by taking the action, you are more likely to take the action. When
the pleasure derived from taking a specific action is exceeded by the pain of taking the
action, you are more likely to not take the action. Corporations are making these judgement
calls on everything from social justice, climate change, and the woke religion. Corporations
are interested in one thing... how to separate you from your hard earned money. When "wokism"
no longer pays, corporations will stop the insanity. Rational people need to start making
corporations pay for choosing wokism over rational thought.
Anthony 16 minutes ago The race card over and over. Hire qualified and be open minded and then
satisfaction will follow.
eric 1 hour ago Oh good, hiring based on race. What is the worst that could happen?
This is a classic "divide and conquer" strategy for corporation, which distract population from neoliberal abuses of Wall Street
banksters and financialization of the economy. It also helps to suppress the wave of populism, heat from which corporation felt very
well. Paradoxically the leaden of the most pro-corporations Party voiced his objections against such behaviour of major
corporatins.
Mr. McConnell accused Democrats of spreading misinformation about the Georgia legislation to justify their plans to ram throuth
Senate
For the People Act
,
which facilitated voting fraud. The bill passed the House, 220-210. No Republicans voted for it.
"This power grab is impossible to defend, so the left wants to deflect. Instead of winning the debate, they want to silence debate
by bullying citizens and entire states into submission," Mr. McConnell said.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) on Monday warned of "serious consequences" if corporations continue to use their
economic power to support 'far-left causes,' the latest being a lemming response to the new voting law in Georgia, according
to
Bloomberg
.
"From election law to environmentalism to radical social agendas to the Second Amendment, parts of the private sector keep
dabbling
in behaving like a woke parallel government,
" he said, adding
"Corporations will invite serious consequences if they become a vehicle for far-left mobs to hijack our country from outside
the constitutional order."
McConnell's rebuke comes as
a number of
corporations, including Delta Air Lines Inc. and the Coca-Cola Co., have criticized Georgia's new election law. Major
League Baseball moved its All-Star Game from Atlanta, a move endorsed by President Joe Biden
.
McConnell dismissed comparisons of Georgia's new voting laws, passed by Republicans, to
the Jim Crow voting restrictions for African-Americans. He said
many states run by
Democrats, including New York, have fewer days of early voting than Georgia's new law requires, and he cited polling
showing most Americans favor voter ID requirements
. -Bloomberg
"Nobody really thinks this current dispute comes anywhere near the horrific racist brutality of segregation," said McConnell -
mocking Democrats for their dramatic Jim Crow analogy.
"Our private sector must stop taking cues from the Outrage-Industrial Complex," McConnell added. "
Americans
do not need or want big business to amplify disinformation or react to every manufactured controversy with frantic left-wing
signaling
."
JimmyJones
2 hours ago
(Edited)
remove
link
Eat a Big
"icecream cone" McConnel, you POS. You knew that last election was a complete fraud and you did nothing even
worse actively worked against the uncovering and exposing of that fraud. As if we don't see through your fake
outrage. I hope you are primaried and replaced.
McConnel
you are a Traitor, we all know.
znilboy
2 hours ago
Guess
he thinks enough time has passed and we forgot already..
Ghost of Porky
1 hour ago
Nearly
50 years as a conservative in public office.
Hasn't
conserved a damn thing.
Buzz-Kill
19 minutes ago
(Edited)
remove
link
Mitch's public service, for the people, has made him very wealthy.
How
did that happen? Term Limits PLEASE!!!
Kayman
1 hour ago
remove
link
Despite McConnell doing nothing about clipping the wings of this Woke Corporatism, at least he is mouthing
the words,
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov says there is surging "aggression against white
people" in the United States and that it is harming efforts to fight racism.
Lavrov made the comments during an interview with political scientists that was broadcast on national television.
"We were pioneers of the movement promoting equal rights of people of any skin color," said
Lavrov, adding that
"everyone wants to get rid of racism."
However, he emphasized how it was
important "not to switch to the other extreme which we saw
during the 'BLM' (Black Lives Matter) events and the aggression against white people, white U.S. citizens."
Lavrov also insisted that
forces within the U.S. were trying to spread a "cultural
revolution" around the world by forcing "diversity" down everyone's throats.
"Hollywood is now also changing its rules so that everything reflects the diversity of modern society," he said, labeling it "a form
of censorship."
"I've seen Black people play in Shakespeare's comedies. Only I don't know when there will be a white Othello," Lavrov said.
"You see this is absurd. Political correctness taken to the point of absurdity will not end
well,"
he concluded.
As we
previously
highlighted
, after every mass shooting, journalists and leftists rush to blame white people even before the perpetrator has been
identified.
In the case of the Boulder supermarket shooting, this backfired massively after it was revealed that the gunman was an Islamist
immigrant from the Middle East.
After the Atlanta shooting attack which targeted massage parlors, the media once again whipped up hysteria over "white supremacy,"
despite the fact that authorities found absolutely zero evidence the assault was motivated by race.
This led New York Times contributor Damon Young to assert that
"whiteness is a pandemic" and
"the only way to stop it is to locate it, isolate it, extract it, and kill it."
"He was not fired from his job at The Root and the New York Times refused to condemn him -- such proclamations are what they pay him
for!"
writes
Chris Menahan
.
This narrative, in addition to Critical Race Theory, which teaches that all the United
States' problems are the fault of white people, has clearly created an atmosphere where race hate directed towards white people is
not only tolerated, it is openly encouraged.
Lordflin
6 hours ago
(Edited)
I feel as
though I have woken up on the other side of the looking glass...
We are the ones
on the 'other side of the iron curtain' my friends...
Something of a
surreal experience, wouldn't you say...?
r0mulus
5 hours ago
(Edited)
It's a
convenient scapegoat the hegemons are hoping to hide themselves in while the USA wanes and the USD/American
dream slowly melts into a supranational corporate, fascist dystopia. We're a good way on our journey, not
too much further to go now. Writing is and has been on the wall.
r0mulus
5 hours ago
I
honestly don't know enough about the upper reaches of the "deep state" power structure to be able to say for
sure, but I do know that they are interested in dominating everything forever in a self-perpetuating rentier
and seignorage friendly autocracy, and that as subjects to their power, we've no rights to fair markets, no
rights to fair legal systems, and even increasingly no rights to fair scientific/empirical systems
(definition of reality). How could one living with an honest understanding of that situation ever want to
support such a society?
Misesmissesme
6 hours ago
South
Africa part deux
DPLETTENBERG
6 hours ago
Similar but not quite like South Africa. Here a small minority (16%) of the population is somehow given
power and control over the majority.
Christian whites have been ingrained with the idea of forgiveness and turning the other cheek. This belief
may well cause our destruction. It's time to value truth over turning the other cheek.
r0mulus
5 hours ago
Well
said- I've been curious as to what the thoughts of non-"black" Afrikaaners have been about their society...
two hoots
6 hours ago
(Edited)
Life
is like the yellow brick road, as you approach the end you discover the many perceptions and beliefs that
provided your support along the way are mostly fallacies, manipulations and deceptions. Once there, don't
linger on it, accept it and find your peace. Life is.
eatthebanksters
5 hours ago
Except
the percentage of the population who are white and who agree the left is nuts is far larger than in South
Africa. South Africa didn't need to cheat to win an election.
HRH of Aquitaine 2.0
6 hours ago
As
someone who served in the former West Germany during the Cold War, yes, it is a very strange time.
Sir Edge
6 hours ago
Russia's Lavrov Warns
Of
Surging Anti-White Racism In US
Wow...
There goes Russia again meddling in USA affairs by
telling
the truth
...
chunga
6 hours ago
This
Lavrov is an impressive individual. I don't think we have anything like him in the US.
Ignatius
6 hours ago
(Edited)
My
concern is that Lavrov's statements -- which, in isolation, I agree with -- feeds
the
narrative
that if one is against CRT then one is obviously a Russian agent (aka, more "Russian
collusion" BS).
Our
current overlords are a clever, though evil lot. Don't underestimate them.
chunga
6 hours ago
The
fake news experts will say that. Who cares.
I
remember a few years ago there was a fake news conference of some sort and a bunch of the talkers were
shouting questions at Lavrov like maniacs and Lavrov just laughed at them, completely un-phased and said
"where are your manners?" The guy is clearly cut from a different cloth.
Biff M
6 hours ago
...white people and males. [there. I fixed it for ya]
enjoy
your S Africa experience.
SQRT 69
6 hours ago
remove
link
Big
difference in S. Africa where whites were an overwhelming minority to blacks. Here in the US whites are
still the majority while blacks are roughly 13%. The intelligent ones know that this is a setup by the
ruling class (Anglo Zionist Cabal) to create a polarized society that doesn't notice the show going on
right before their eyes, i.e. the Cabal looting the nation and leaving behind a hollowed out corpse.
harvester0fsorrow
6 hours ago
Russian leaders are far more intelligent and honest than ours. Sad that the once free-est nation in the
world is now turnimg quickly fascist. no...it cannot end well
WorkingClassMan
6 hours ago
Turning quickly maoist. This is almost the exact same playbook, complete with Red Guard mobs.
TBT or not TBT
6 hours ago
And
the Marxist struggle sessions. It's amazing to see my wife's zoom style meetings during the faux plague
spending time on trading confessions of guilt for all imaginable bias and insensitivity.
Portal
6 hours ago
remove
link
It's
not entirely about racism.
Democrats want to deconstruct America.
Destroy small businesses, the bastion of free market capitalism. Destroy traditions. Destroy cultural
sports. Destroy the military. Destroy the Constitution. Destroy elections. The list goes on...
cforeman44z
6 hours ago
remove
link
WHO
owns the media? If you know, then you will know WHO is behind this cultural revolution and WHO the TRUE
ENEMY is.
LeadPipeDreams
6 hours ago
...
forces
within the U.S. were trying to spread a "cultural revolution" around the world by forcing "diversity"
down everyone's throats.
Uh...these (((forces))) within the U.S. have been trying to spread a "cultural revolution" in every country
for millenia. The U.S. is simply (((their))) primary target at the moment.
Iron Noob
4 hours ago
remove
link
Russia
wants sanity to prevail so that it can avoid a nuclear exchange with the US. That is why it is trying to
make common cause with the sane people in the US.
So, "black bolshevism" is onthe upswing. "History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as
farce."
And those executives who signed the letter actually are trying to prolong the rule of
neoliberalism in the USA, the rule that hurts black population equally or more than white
population outside of top 10%.
ID
requirements are no more racist at the ballot box than they are on a Delta flight.
Corporate chieftains last year criticized Donald Trump for denying his re-election
defeat. So it's quite a spectacle to see them actively spreading the left's own big lie about
elections.
According to Delta
CEO Ed Bastian, there is only one reason Georgia passed a voting reform: to suppress the votes
of black Americans and other minorities. Georgia's Republican Legislature used the "excuse" of
voter fraud to "make it harder for many underrepresented voters" to "exercise their
constitutional right to elect their representatives," Mr. Bastian wrote this week in a memo to
employees.
Mr. Bastian has plenty of company in the C-suites. Some 72 black executives, including the
CEO of Merck and a former CEO of American Express, signed an open letter calling on corporate
colleagues to fight "undemocratic" and "un-American" GOP efforts across the states to "assault"
the "fundamental tenets of our democracy." Coca-Cola , Microsoft and Apple chimed in, and dozens more are readying
outraged press releases.
Nancy Pelosi
couldn't be more thrilled. Democrats and the activist left have long honed their techniques for
intimidating corporations. They successfully pressured companies into withdrawing contributions
from free-market groups, into embracing a climate-change agenda, into refraining from political
contributions, into adopting new "social" investment criteria.
Enlisting corporate America to help peddle a patently false narrative is their biggest
success by far. The left spent last year using litigation and political pressure to alter and
weaken election standards across the country. Democratic lawmakers and the Biden
administration moved swiftly to cement this effort with a federal takeover of state election
law, the bill known as H.R.1.
Its enactment is still no sure thing, so the left is trying to block election-reform efforts
at the state level. Central to this campaign is the dishonest claim that Republicans are
launching these efforts only because they lost the White House and because they want to cripple
the minority vote. Activists have spent weeks threatening companies that didn't join them with
boycotts, protests and the label of "Jim Crow racists," and companies have complied.
Thus the sight of the nation's top business leaders monotonously reciting a fact-free
narrative. As they know, state legislatures are moving to reaffirm longstanding rules and
restore confidence in electoral systems that were arbitrarily remade during Covid. ID
requirements are no more racist at the ballot box than on a Delta flight. Some 36 states have
them, and they've been upheld by the Supreme Court. It isn't Jim Crow to codify the use of
the ad hoc drop boxes that sprung up last year. It isn't voter suppression to reaffirm that
activists aren't allowed to approach voters in line, especially to solicit votes with gifts
(contrary to urban legend, the Georgia law allows poll workers to provide water). The Georgia
law expands voting, adding early voting on more weekends and providing additional equipment and
poll workers in larger precincts.
Mr. Bastian's moralizing memo fails to cite a single one of the supposedly "egregious
measures" in the bill that will suppress the vote, although he does stress he hears his
employees' "pain."
The letter from the 72 executives misstates the Georgia rules, suggesting the only way to
satisfy the ID requirement is with a driver's license, even though "200,000 Georgians lack a
license." In fact, voters can also use a free, state-issued nondriver ID, and those who lack
one can fulfill the requirement with a Social Security number or even a copy of a "current
utility bill, bank statement, government check, or paycheck." The letter suggests the Georgia
"playbook" -- enacting rules less onerous than those in many blue states, as Karl Rove has
noted
in these pages -- is of a piece with "police dogs, poll taxes, literacy taxes." One can only
hope Merck is more rigorous when conducting pharmaceutical trials.
Corporate CEOs may think this virtue signaling will spare them the left's boycotts or
Democrats' punitive legislative measures. That's a sucker's bet given this week's Democratic
plan to siphon $2.3 trillion from corporations to fund new spending. Meanwhile, longtime
Republican defenders of corporate activity are rapidly losing interest in aiding CEOs who
promote partisan conspiracy theories. Witness Sen. Marco Rubio's fuming tweet on Thursday
calling Delta a "woke corporate hypocrite," noting that the company is "business partners with
the Chinese Communist Party," raking in "billions of dollars in a country that doesn't even
have elections."
Smart executives have long understood the value of political neutrality. Corporate America
is now throwing its lot in with one of the most partisan, brass-knuckle, dishonest campaigns in
recent political history. It will be a long time mending fences with Republicans -- if that's
even possible.
The Great Commission to Uplift the American Negro is a long-running national project that
goes back at least to the 1850s. It's recurred in cycles that always eventually founder,
creating at best a "talented tenth"-type elite and leaving the great mass of the black
underclass where they are or worse.
It can only continue to the extent that it does because of willful ahistoriocity on the
part of its adherents, at least with respect to past cycles.
As our esteemed host has pointed out time and again, liberals are forbidden to know of any
history relevant to blacks prior to the 21st century other than slavery, Jim Crow, redlining,
and Emmett Till.
Why crime rises and falls is a devilishly complicated question.
In journalism, always a blaring alarm that a thumb-sucking pile of BS is about to follow.
In fact, insert anything you want in front of "is a complicated question." But crime in
particular is not complicated to explain. It's just unpleasant and embarrassing to face up
to.
The George Floyd incident is illustrative. Police were not being brutal or confrontational
when they approached Floyd. Floyd escalated the situation by refusing to comply with simple
instructions. This is at the root of almost all police/public confrontations.
Police are required to investigate a violation of the law. If you hinder that
investigation, physically resist or flee things go south. They can't just let you go if they
believe you did something illegal. Had Floyd cooperated he would have likely ended up with a
misdemeanor charge of passing a counterfeit bill,booked at the jail and bonded out in a
couple of hours.
Underclass negroes simply refuse to take the easy way out believing they can talk ( lie )
their way out of a situation of their own making or, failing that, flee and everybody will
just forget about it.
If you lived in an urban area through the 60s-90s urban crime wave, you could have
predicted this with more precision than Mr. Sharkey.
If you're looking for a sinister oligarch angle which explains people like Warren Buffett*
supporting BLM, perhaps the idea is to tank the values of gentrified urban property again in
order to make money by chopping up exurban/suburban farms into tract housing and selling it
to the urban refugees for the next 30-40 years. Then you scoop up the low value urban
property anticipating that the normies will actually demand policing again like they did in
1994 they can sell "redeveloped" real estate in cities to the kids who grew up in boring
suburbs again. Population churn yielding increased profits for eternity . . .
* a few years ago Buffett got into the realty brokerage business for some reason.
Americans are experiencing a crime wave unlike anything we've seen this century. After
decades of decline, shootings have surged in the past few years. In 2020, gun deaths reached
their highest point in U.S. history in the midst of a pandemic. In 2021, although researchers
can't yet say anything definite about overall crime, shooting incidents appear to be on the
rise in many places.
... Sharkey anticipated both the summer of anti-police protests and the possibility that
souring police-civilian relations would contribute to an increase in violent crime.
Thompson: The subtitle of your book Uneasy Peace is The Great Crime Decline, the
Renewal of City Life, and the Next War on Violence . Is it safe to say that the "great
crime decline" has come to an end?
Sharkey: I would say it is very clearly paused. What remains to be seen is just how
anomalous last year was. There's a possibility that this was just a year when social life was
completely destabilized in so many ways, and that resulted in a huge surge of violence that was
temporary. That's the hope.
Their public spaces have not been maintained. Their schools are underfunded.
"Underfunded" is a euphemism for "have students with low test scores." E.g., "Washington
D.C.'s underfunded schools." Presumably, it means "underfunded relative to some theoretical
amount of money, such as a gajillion dollars, that would be sufficient to raise these students'
test scores to average."
Unlike The Atlantic , I came up with 274 more murders in Chicago in 2020 and in 103
other cities back on January 6 in Taki's Magazine , which
has no paywall.
Since the Racial Reckoning was declared, blacks have been shooting people, mostly other
blacks, at a high rate.
Sharkey: My work looks most closely at where crime is happening, not at individual
victims. But there are some things we think we know. Intimate-partner violence increased in
2020. So did hate crimes against Asians. But the overall demographics of victims is
incredibly consistent over time. It's young people of color, particularly young men of color.
I don't see anything yet to indicate that's changed dramatically.
It's all those dark-skinned Tamil Brahmin young men of color shooting each other in suburban
New Jersey.
"the overall demographics of victims is incredibly consistent over time. It's young
people of color, particularly young men of color."
That's it for the victims all right. Tragic for sure. But let's focus on the perpetrators
for once, shall we? The perpetrators are bullets , and shots which ring out .
These things come from guns .
These things happen all by themselves, of course, so the solution is to make sure that
law-abiding people are never in control of these things, which happen. Have I got this right
now?
Sharkey is trying to take a victory lap. As a sociologist in his 30s, he "predicted" that
historically low crime rates would not stay historically low, confident he would be proven
prescient. He blamed it on not giving enough to blacks, which is catnip to sociologists, the
NPR crowd, and the media. His profession and clowns like Coates make him famous in his field
because he is available for soundbites suggesting that reparations are necessary. A few years
later, when the crime rate inevitably rises, he can say I told you so. He thought it might
take many years, but it was only about 6.
On a related note, I am beginning my book on how the introduction of critical race theory
into preschools, the banning of racist Dr. Seuss books, Netflix algorithms forcing people to
see previews of Beyonce's Black is King every time they touch their remote, and the new
privately-funded welfare programs for non-whites only have caused the crime rate to fall from
2020-2021 back to more typical levels. Watch for my interviews before 2030.
Yep, Sharkey made himself a major young academic star, and Steve explains how and why:
But crime rates mostly seem to go up and down depending up what Important People want.
E.g., from the early 1990s onward, Important People were sick of all the murders in New York
City, so New York eventually became the least homicidal big city in America.
The Elites wanted this rise in violent crime, so they could blame racists, the white
trash, the Deplorables, Middle America, whiteness, etc. That serves as cover for their
Satanic level of wealth accrued at the same time that they are murdering the middle class and
reducing the working class to beggary from Big Government.
This is not the only example of fake scholarship being employed to confirm the nonexistent
and implement damage on the Black community. In
Oregon , the Department of Education is urging teachers to register for training in what
they called "ethnomathematics." The reason being is that out of the blue they "feel (without
research or proof)" that White supremacy manifests itself in the focus on finding the right
answer in Math. This is based on their premise that amidst a pandemic, importance should be
placed on "dismantling racism in mathematics" rather than teaching skills that make black
students competent in Math.
More dumb shit for lack of a better descriptor. Now correct me if I am wrong, if math is so
racist, why do more half of Asians/Pacific
Islanders ( 52% ) scored at or above the
proficient level in math in the United States?
The results from the 2015 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), from 2015,
placed the U.S. an unimpressive 38th out of 71 countries in math and 24th in science.
According to the most recent data, the US is behind China, Singapore, Hong Kong, Japan, Korea
and ranks 37th
in proficiency in Math globally.
The progressive liberal academic is a heretic – an unprincipled person who as George
Orwell described in Animal Farm, thinks that some animals are more equal than others.
They know what is best for all and as such, all should think like them, be forced to think like
them or be censored if one thinks or dares to state otherwise. Thus, in their purview, even the
ridiculous becomes sane. Even if it means asserting that math, objectivity and science are
inherently racist. The
Seattle school district believes this, that math is a representation of white privilege and
structural racism. Why, for no other reason than the Oregon department of education does
– that showing your work and coming to the correct solution is something black students
can't do...
Woke Supremacy - Way Worse than White Privilege and Systemic RacismWhen you
promote Anti-racism, you get Anti-ArgumentTorrance
Stephens, PhD Mar 22 6 2
I am a relic. I am a child of segregation and remember the marches in Memphis during the
garbage strikes in 1968. I unlike many today claiming the experience of racism, was born in a
black only hospital in Memphis – John Gaston hospital .
Yesterday a friend of mine asked if I saw the Grammy's. I take it he already knew that my
answer was no, so he sent me two video clips. I gave up award shows decades ago for in my
purview they were merely a reflection of mindless celebrity twaddle. But being the person, I
am, I watched and saw something of a pornographic depiction during prime television. Couldn't
wrap my head around it, or how this was even considered to be TV friendly given the present
environment in which the Looney Tunes French skunk
Pepe Le Pew is suggested to propagate the toxic masculinity of rape culture and that
Dr.
Seuss books are racist. But what would one expect from a collective of folk who mandate
having a vagina or the color of one's skin is more important than competency for filling any
job or political appointment.
Then again, maybe two black women (questionable) shaking azz surrounded by other half naked
black women (questionable) twerking in cages, rubbing their puzzies together is the
representation of black female empowerment as defined most likely by white feminist. Strange
given that calling them women and the use of the word female reflects the patriarchy (see how
dumb these arguments or anti-arguments can be.) Things change so fast that it is difficult to
take any of this emotional dissonance serious. Just a year or two back, scientific papers were
published and even lauded that theorized about the " overt objectification and
dehumanization of Black people "and how " Black women
are sexually objectified at an interpersonal level ." Others lectured on " how
racist, sexist, and classist ideologies contributed to sexual objectification experiences
(SOEs) among African American women " and how "black women are more likely than white women
to be sexually objectified and perceived less than fully human."
There is so much going on in the age of woke supremacy that you cannot literally keep up.
Used to be that segregation was evil, now they segregate under the progressive guise of keeping
Black people safe from white people. Truth of the matter using FBI and Department of Justice
data, black folk would be way (more) safer around white folk than another Black folk. I am not
hating, just stating a fact, just like blacks are more likely to die from drowning , in particular kids
ages 5 to 14
, or a Stroke than by a white
cop. But my fault, I forgot that Math is racist. This is how the anti-argument of woke
supremacists functions.
All this idiocy started with the agenda of convincing US citizens that this country is the
worst and most racist ever has been going on since the 1960's. Each decade it's gotten worse. I
believe the goal is to condition people to accept extreme change. People will accept it because
they believe our present system is so hopeless and they're winning because it has substituted
the significance of narrative over fact and reason. The examples are too numerous to count
because the dialectic of woke supremacy is not rooted in science and ergo non-existent.
Take the recent shootings in Atlanta that targeted several message parlors. The quick take
for the purpose of narration was that this action was a hate crime and that it evidenced that
white supremacy was the cause of this given that the man charged killed eight people, six of
which were Asians and two whites. Thus, it was easy for an unsubstituted contention –
that this was confirmation of a rising tide of violence against Asian Americans (mostly Korean)
based on white supremacy and the words of Donald Trump regarding a virus originally from China
was why this happened. Although the record notes this man was a confirmed sex addict, who spent
time in rehabilitation for sex addiction and an eye witnesses report he always talked about
dealing with his
sex addiction by shooting up the message parlors that (lets be honest) take advantage of
illegal immigrants and turn them into prostitutes. Dude was on his way to Florida to do the
same. Also, data documents that Atlanta is one of the largest
hubs for adult and child trafficking. This was too reasonable and fact-based for the woke
anti-argument crew. All that mattered was the color of the folk he shot and that he was white,
not even to be considered was that one would think a white supremacist wouldn't shoot two white
people dead, pay to have sex with Asians in places he had visited or be motivated by a fear of
a virus called something by a former President.
There is also avoiding the fact that according to the
FBI and Urban Institute , Atlanta has an internal child/human sex trafficking
issue , in which minors , many recruited and
exploited for sex. It is estimated that around 100 adolescent girls are exploited each night in
Georgia via escort services, erotic/nude massage parlors, internet-based exploitation and other
avenues. The big cities presently reporting an increase in anti-Asian violence are place like
Oakland, San Francisco and New York (large democrat run places where most attackers are
non-white Blacks), not Atlanta. Thus, it is possible in the Atlanta shooting, race was not a
factor.
Yet this is too logical for the typical woke supremacist so they double down. Once upon a
time Kamala Harris was the first Asian American female senator, then became the first African
American Vice President and now she over night has changed into the first Asian American Vice
President to meet the narrative. The Anti-Argument woke supremacist do not and cannot
self-correct for it would support the notion that facts, math, science, reason and objectivity
are real, and that they could be wrong.
Sad truth is that this has been occurring since the
1980s in America. The Rev.
Al Sharpton had the gumption to suggest that former President Trump inspired this wave of
anti-Asian violence happening around the country. He forgets that in the 1990s he led a boycott
against Korean immigrants in Brooklyn which resulted in several Korean immigrant businesses
going out of business. The same was true during the 1992 Los Angeles Riots which resulted in
more than
2,000 Korean-owned businesses being looted or burned (45 percent of all damages caused by
the riot). As I recall, none of the police who beat Rodney King were Asian.
The woke know this, and that this is an endemic behavior exhibited by the wokiest Blacks in
America. In past tweets, San Francisco school board's Vice President
Alison Collins called Asian Americans as 'house n***ers' and has been asked to resign but
indicates she will not. This is how woke supremacy is – be racist to others while at the
same time claim to be fighting anti-Black racism and white supremacy. The lack of
self-awareness is thick. Same is true for
Alexi McCammond , the short-lived Teen Vogue editor. She also had to go after her tweets
presenting racist tropes of Asian-Americans while in college surfaced. Prior to this, she was
wokity woke-woke.
Woke supremacy is dangerous. The problem isn't that the woke want to destroy everything, the
problem is that they will take everybody down with them just to divide everyone by skin color
alone. Merit-based activities by their axiological nature are racist and equal white supremacy
although such has been practiced around the world for centuries prior to the establishment of
America. No country that punishes folk for intelligence and hard work can survive. Sad thing is
the people who are the main pushers of this behavioral Fentanyl are the wealthiest of the
wealthy and most privileged Blacks in America – Lebron James, Oprah Winfrey, almost every
dimwit in Hollywood, Joy "homophobic" Reid and Don Lemon among others (one reason most people
hate Hollywood and celebrities at this point). Nobody gives a hoot what they think. Only the
woke supremacist would consider a multi-millionaire white black hybrid royal duchess oppressed.
If you can't concede to this then it's off with your head.
Unfortunately, there will never be an honest media again if we do not stand and fight back.
We are too far gone for words and conversations. These people have no good intentions. They
want revenge. They have no problem lying to further their goals because they are disingenuous
actors to begin with. If Americans aren't ready to stand up and treat these people as tyrants,
then it's really going to get worse. Why? Because these people are so focused on grievances
they forget to live, and pull everyone down with them. Me, I only live when I sleep, then I
awake. Had no reason to become woke for I already was. The thing is with these cats is that
like in a clique of cannibals, one day, it's your azz on the plate. 6 2
It's nice to know that intelligent people are as fed up with woke insanity as I am. Hang in
there, doc, by the end of Biden's term (Harris, rather) enough dummies will be on our side to
enable the MAGA movement to return in triumph.
@Alfred ent to spend a weekend in Oslo she was shocked how we would go through some areas
where you wouldnt see any white people.
If no one told you that was Oslo, you wouldnt had figure it out by yourself.
When i registered to take Norwegian classes, that i was paying, a few days before the
course started i was informed that i have lost my position to someone because they had
refugee status WTF?? I am paying and still i dont have priority? Their reply but you are
European, others need more than you.
Every other ad has a mixed couple, every company makes sure their image, etc is associated
with "diversity".
Seriously, is no different from Netherlands, France, etc
There is absolutely no reason at all for any American, especially white ones, to fight and
die for the Zionist-Washington empire. Even America's "decline" is misleading. It is the
American EMPIRE in decline, not the continental heartland of the USA itself. Don't join the
military.
" .whites have no reason to fight for a government that discriminates against them,
replaces them through immigration, and scorns their heritage."
This is perhaps more true and more dangerous than the author realizes.
In the US Army the combat arms-infantry, armor, artillery, combat engineers-are staffed at
the enlisted level mostly with patriotic middle class whites from rural backgrounds. Support
jobs like cook, field wireman, supply clerk, etc. are populated with folks having a different
socio economic profile.
If the very people the USG-and especially the current Administration-are doing their
utmost to alienate stop enlisting and reenlisting, well, who is going to pull the
trigger?
@anonymousperson unauthorized Capitol tour upped the ante even more. The US government is
demonizing the very backbone of the US military – right-leaning white [men] – to
an absolutely astounding extent. It's like they are trying to collapse the empire. Maybe they
are.
Anyway I brought all this up with this guy and he just said "I don't really follow all
that." And for every uninformed and apathetic vet like this guy, there are probably a few
uninformed and apathetic 18 year olds who want to enlist. Perhaps the saving grace is that
these boys (and girls) will not reenlist like they used to, thus starving the military of
NCOs, or at least white ones.
In the US Army the combat arms-infantry, armor, artillery, combat engineers-are staffed
at the enlisted level mostly with patriotic middle class whites from rural backgrounds.
Support jobs like cook, field wireman, supply clerk, etc. are populated with folks having a
different socio economic profile.
If the very people the USG-and especially the current Administration-are doing their
utmost to alienate stop enlisting and reenlisting, well, who is going to pull the
trigger?
Hopefully, it will be Re'derrik, Enrique, Mohammed, Aahan, Chao, Stevie ( formerly Sally )
and Juan.
@AndrewR Concept of the operation is to turn the US into a South Africa or Zimbabwe
analog: not influential internationally, but with a regime protection force and no law to
speak of. To do this, the US military must be turned from a combat force into a regime
protection force. The US Army has largely given up direct combat employing conventional
infantry, has realized that special operations don't have a strategic effect (it's
essentially a force multiplier, an analog to the "forlorn hopes" of medieval warfare). That
is, the US Army is no longer a combat force. It is not, however, a regime protection force
and cannot be with current personnel. It would have to be re-populated (as was academia)
before it can be fully converted into a regime protection force.
Whites who don't hate themselves should welcome America's geopolitical decline and
eventual displacement. Anything that weakens this anti-white satrapy leading to its total
collapse is a good thing.
"Woke" racism is a form of financial oligarchy control of population. Specifically the
attempt to rule by classic "divide and conquer" strategy and hide the problems connected with the
collapse of neoliberalism in the USA under the smoke screen of racial injustice. So yes this is
replication of Bolshevik's practices.
Notable quotes:
"... I am appalled at what is currently occurring in schools in the U.S. Sadly, under the guise of progress, history is repeating itself in the country I chose to escape the nightmares of my early childhood. ..."
Mr. Bartning's account of his children's grade school's new "curriculum" hit a nerve in me.
I grew up in Poland, born shortly after World War II, so my early childhood experiences
included attending school in Stalinist and communist times.
We, too, were encouraged to report on each other and our parents: their habits, what radio
stations they listened to, etc. Since kindergarten we were spoon fed stories of heroic young
pioneers who, as activists, valued their country's leaders and its agenda above their own
families. We were taught two versions of the history of our country: one, official and
propagandized in school, the other, real and truthful at home. My parents later told me they
were afraid I would say something in school which would result in them being arrested.
I am appalled at what is currently occurring in schools in the U.S. Sadly, under the
guise of progress, history is repeating itself in the country I chose to escape the nightmares
of my early childhood.
Is not this a new variant of Soviet promotion of sons and daughters of "workers and peasants"
in university education on the new level.
Notable quotes:
"... But what colleges love more than anything are untalented, hard-working individuals that will stick around for years to get that degree. The tuition money just keeps rolling in and it doesn't matter whether it is mom and dad's money or the governments. ..."
"... Why do you think colleges have separate categories for military members using the GI Bill? Because even if they're dull the college knows they will pay their bill. ..."
Has an era of American mediocrity begun? In January the College Board announced it would
eliminate the essay portion of the SAT, as well as all of the separate SAT subject tests. Their
stated purpose was "reducing and simplifying demands on students." Such a burden.
One high school near me just dropped freshman advanced-standing (honors) English "to combat
the effects of academic 'tracking" because it "ultimately separates students of different
socioeconomic and racial backgrounds." It turns out that middle schools from lower-income areas
aren't adequately preparing their students for high school. So rather than fix that problem,
they dumbed down high school.
... ... ...
Virtually all universities and now many companies have D&I departments, for diversity
and inclusion. Sounds worthy. But as far as I can tell, the No. 1 job of a D&I department
is to hire more people into the D&I department. No one ever mentions
excellence.
T
Terrence M Ryan SUBSCRIBER 4 weeks ago Regression towards the mean is now more than a
statistical phenomenon, it is a policy. 5 Share link Report flag
B Barbara Shamah SUBSCRIBER 4 weeks ago This has been going on for a long time. By dumbing
down admissions for everyone, it's just now more open. China doesn't have to lift a finger.
Self destruction is here 19 Share link Report flag
B Blanche O'Brien SUBSCRIBER 1 month ago It's true that colleges are making it "easier" to
get in or more "holistic" as he says but that's because enrollments are down. The open
admissions policies like some have are making it harder for other colleges to "compete" in the
capitalist framework that they are all now using. So let's face it, it all comes down to money.
So what the author is really saying although it's probably not his intention ha ha, is that
capitalism is driving mediocrity! Don't get me wrong, the Boomer generation really did everyone
a disfavor by raising an entire generation of millennials to think that everyone is a "winner"
and to not be able to handle criticism. However, I think his argument is a bit off here as to
who (or what) is to blame.
J joseph barbato SUBSCRIBER 1 month ago The article mentions Hampshire College. Both the
author and the readers might appreciate this additional information about the school.
Enrollment between 2018 and 2019 was down 94%.
In other words, conservatives and Christians need not apply. 3 Share link Report
flag
W William McIntire SUBSCRIBER 1 month ago Mediocrity isn't new. This trend has been in
place a long time. When I was in college in the early 80's it was already in place. After
recently being downsized in the engineering industry, where I worked for over 30 years, I would
note that college grads generally have no idea what the heck they are doing, as a rule. I got
to the point that more than 20 years ago I would not hire a new college grad from an
engineering school to work in my department. Few of them can think and even fewer can
articulate a basic sentence much less develop a study report. The last 10-15 years have been
the worst with functional illiterates being sent to my office for interviews that knew nothing
about the company they were interviewing for and could not demonstrate basic engineering
skills, much less communication skills. Their entire lives are centered around social media and
without cell coverage they are lost. I think about this every time I cross a bridge or overpass
these days. Doug Eaton SUBSCRIBER 1 month ago
Mediocrity isn't new.
What is new is the institutionalization of it.
C Charles Clemmons SUBSCRIBER 1 month ago Thank goodness for Equity! College professors
will no longer have to fend off those bright students who ask pesky, penetrating questions.
Their classes will be filled with nescient victims giggling over their tired Bon mots. One can
hardly wait for a stampede of stupefication to hit grad school and the employment market. This
re-defined Know-Nothing movement should last at least as long as it takes an equity-selected
crew to crash a space vehicle. Like thumb_up 6 Share link Report flag
D Deirdre Hood SUBSCRIBER 1 month ago If you haven't watched the movie "Idiocracy", please
so so. We are there now...
Like thumb_up 6 Share link Report flag
P Paul Runge SUBSCRIBER 1 month ago Vonnegut nailed it with his short story "Harrison
Bergeron". Welcome to the monkey house. 9 Share link Report flag
R Ross Johnston SUBSCRIBER 1 month ago I believe this was all indirectly predicted 25 years
ago in the Bell Curve. Ever since I read that book (which you can't unread) I wondered how it
would play out in a diversifying world - and now I see . Outperformance is now called "unfair
advantage" and merit is looked upon like Pol Pott's soldiers in the "Killings Fields" who asked
for the "academics" to step forward for "reeducation" - which landed them dead in a field with
a plastic bag tied around their head.
It really is the dumbing down of America, but I'm sure it's a global phenomenon. The SAT
Board has already had to dumb down the test twice over the past 15 years to keep scores moving
up as the cohort taking the test scored lower and lower on average. The elimination of the
modules is a logical next step if want to dumb it down further.
I doubt you want your Medicare/Medicaid covered heart surgeon to be from the Bahama's School
of Medicine - hired for reasons of diversity quota - with no class ranking - do you?
C Christopher Petersen SUBSCRIBER 1 month ago You don't get it, do you?
Colleges created diversity programs to create a larger clientele. Colleges still want the
smartest kids because having alumni become Nobel Laureates creates bragging rights. Colleges
also want really smart kids that are going to drop out and create amazing things because their
name will be attached to them forever. But what colleges love more than anything are
untalented, hard-working individuals that will stick around for years to get that degree. The
tuition money just keeps rolling in and it doesn't matter whether it is mom and dad's money or
the governments.
Why do you think colleges have separate categories for military members using the GI
Bill? Because even if they're dull the college knows they will pay their bill.
As for government...If you're mad about mediocrity and you got a stimulus check, either
donate it or put it in the shredder. If not, you're complicit in this.
P
Parul Dutt SUBSCRIBER 1 month ago This article feel like a rant that colleges have done away
with SAT and there is an undesired focus on Diversity and Inclusion. While I agree that America
must strive for exceptionalism , the author seems to be blind to the challenges that exist for
underprivileged students and minorities. Challenges are real and the playing field is not
leveled.
There has to be conversation on equitable education so that an underprivileged child has an
equal chance of success. Also, don't forget American colleges are not producing engineers and
technologists but relying on foreign students to fill the STEM void (I don't have statistics
but Silicon valley is built on the labors of engineers who come to the U.S. for higher
education or better future). Just doing away with the SAT may not be the ideal solution but
maybe the beginning of a conversation.
R Ronald Ganim SUBSCRIBER 1 month ago Maybe a wealth tax isn't such a bad idea. We could
confiscate the wealth of the tech oligarchs and thereby eliminate their power to censor us on
social media. How about a law that no one can have wealth greater than $20 million (I'm under
that figure)? John Kerry would have to give up his private plane (thus helping the environment)
and Jack Dorsey wouldn't dare shut down anyone else on Twitter. As conservatives, maybe we
should start thinking outside the box!
B bruce miller SUBSCRIBER 1 month ago I have elsewhere advanced the same notion.
Why does progressivity in the IRC stop at $500K? Is an accountant, electrician or other small
business owner, earning $500K on the same footing as a tech plutocrat earning $50 million? Of
course not. Why are we defending these people who do not have our best interests at heart? Tax
the earnings above $1 million per year at escalating progressive rates. Heck, Buffet wanted
that. Oblige him! 1 Share link Report flag
J Jean Samuel SUBSCRIBER 1 month ago I am a "woman of color" married to a White man who's a
pediatrician. I am an electrical engineer with an MSc in mathematical sciences. I earned my
degrees and my well paying job through hard work and sweat equity same for my husband. We both
find racial preferences and the dumbing down of college level courses simply revolting. Of
course if you choose to major in modern dance you have earned your job at Starbucks. Mediocrity
only wins out if you allow it.
G George Rebovich SUBSCRIBER 1 month ago Kudos to you and your husband.
My parents were the first generation to be born in America. My father worked in an oil
refinery most of his life as an hourly wage earner. We lived modestly and within the family
budget. My father worked many overtime shifts so his children could go to college, the first
generation of our family to do so. We learned the value of education, hard work and postponing
gratification for long-term happiness.
My daughter is an MD ... the story line of how that happened is similar to my brothers and I
being the first to go to college.
America is a great country that offers opportunities to citizens that are only dreams
elsewhere. But those opportunities don't arise from mediocrity.
J Jason S SUBSCRIBER 1 month ago I'm not sure the author really understands why colleges
and universities are dropping standardized tests. It's not that they're unfair. That's just the
cover story.
The real reason is the trouble Harvard got into from excluding Asian Americans. Those kids
had the grades and the test scores and used them to prove (in court) that Harvard wasn't using
those metrics to determine which kids to admit. Could (or still might) cost Harvard a lot of
money. :-s
But here's the thing, if you don't use standardized test scores as part of your admission
process, well, guess what, you can't be sued as easily for recruiting/admitting whoever you
want.
This opens up the door to going after students from richer families who can actually pay
full price. Who really cares about test scores anyway when your budget is on the line?
L LEONARDO ROSENFELD SUBSCRIBER 1 month ago Mr. Kessler touches on a dozen examples of what
he sees as liberals disincentiving merit in favor of mediocrity. What he seems to ignore is the
fact that most people who have been successful in life have had some help along the way,
whether through the privilege of their parents, a high-quality education (afforded to those who
can pay for it through private school or living in expensive suburbs), or another form of
support (connections, etc.). If you want to see more children grow up to be successful and get
to fulfill their own version of the American dream, then recognize that our society is not
equal and that the American experience is not the same for everyone.
The initiatives Kessler cited are far from perfect, but at least they're acknowledging that
there is a problem that continues to grow with each decade as income inequality becomes more
extreme. Maybe this isn't a problem for you, Mr. Kessler, but it is for many others who work
hard and still cannot get ahead.
G Greg Barry SUBSCRIBER 1 month ago I will agree with those challenging "American
exceptionalism" in as much as I believe that we will enjoy no special protection from our bad
decisions. Take a look at historical examples of what embracing class warfare and mediocrity
yeild on a societal scale, and you have a window into our possible future. Like thumb_up
3 Share link Report flag
J Juan Vega SUBSCRIBER 1 month ago Mediocrity and the pursuit of what is trivial and
irrelevant. Never in the history of the world has a great nation chosen to commit self
immolation by become deaf, dumb, and blind.
However, to those that think that they have won the recent events are not unlike when
Churchill was confronting the reality of Nazi Germany after Dunkirk when members of his own
party were trying to convince him to surrender and negotiate. Those of us that look beyond the
horizon of the next few years realize that now is definitely the time to stand.
I thought that as smart as the left was in orchestrating the electoral coup they need to see
that it did wake a sleeping giant of 75 million that went out and voted. We do not need Trump
to keep the dream of a free, fair, and proud America. Freedom is in this nation's blood and
soul.
Many of the 80plus million already see the mistake and how they we lied to. Hunter Biden's
thievery is true. Catholics that voted for Biden will see him as a hypocrite.
"... It turns out that Floyd had a long criminal record, including an armed robbery in which held a gun to the stomach of a pregnant woman. In short, George Floyd was a real piece of shit. ..."
"... I don't think it is likely Chauvin will get any justice. Presumably the upgraded murder charge works in his favor as he's more likely to get off, but considering the media attention, the state of thinking in America, and the corruption of the justice system, it seems likely that he's going to get railroaded. ..."
"... Actually, he might not have been lying. Covid19 patients are known to have difficulty breathing. Add to that Fentanyl, which also causes sudden death. I wonder if the autopsy included a review for blood clots around his heart, which is not an uncommon cause of death for Covid19 patients. ..."
"... The author of this piece is every bit as much a cry baby as BLM pricks painting up the streets. ..."
"... Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison said that he did not want to release the videos because it might hurt his attempt to prosecute the officers. Get that, he's not interested in justice but to get the pre-determined result: WHITE MAN guilty of racist murder. ..."
"... Agreed that George Floyd got justice, but please remember that it's not the role of police to hand out justice. Agreed that he was not killed by the police, but just what does the author mean by saying that Floyd got what he deserved, ..."
"... Fentanyl is a respiratory suppressor in itself. Some of its analogues are particularly so. Floyd had multiple fentalogues in his system I believe there were also some variety of benzodiazapines as well. These combined are more than lethal at surprisingly low doses for a normal adult male. That doesn't even start to consider all the meth, and metabolites of it, coursing thru his veins. Metabolites will have an effect in this mix, in terms of toxicity. ..."
"... Of course it's a lie. The Mockingbird Media has been lying for decades running about damned near everything. Why is anyone surprised? It's like the old joke in the USSR about Pravda (Truth) and Isvestia (News): There's no truth in the news and no news in the truth . ..."
"... Yes this is very true. Breanna Taylor of Louisville was an actual case of such reckless abuse of power (no knock warrant where the cops killed an innocent black woman). Haven't seen the usual suspects complaining very much about that one. Yes there have been a few scattered BLM riots – but only after the tragic ascension of St. George the Breathless. She didn't get tens of millions via Go-Fund-Me and a state funeral with a gold-plated casket like St. George. Guess St. George serves a higher purpose than Breanna – apparently a mere paramedic rather than the Kang of Wokeundumb Kangz. ..."
"... Honestly, to most Europeans, neither George Floyd nor the cop who knelt on his neck can inspire sympathy. Both are loathsome. Most of us don't like American police methods, they're brutal and dishonourable for a country that pretends to be free, and most of us don't like criminals who are fake victims of racism either because most of the racism we see is against us and our civilisation nowadays. ..."
The cries for justice over the deaths of Trayvon Martin and
Michael Brown were
hoaxes. Both men were criminals who died because they were dumb enough to assault men with
guns. The same is true of Ahmaud Arbery
.
There are more than forty million black people in America. Can't Black Lives Matter find at
least one actual victim of racism?
Now, with the leak of the police body-camera footage of the arrest of George Floyd, we have
confirmation of what sensible people suspected all along: George Floyd was not a victim of
police brutality or injustice.
The story we had been sold was that, for no good reason, Floyd was thrown to the ground by a
brutal cop, Derek Chauvin, who then put his knee on Floyd's neck for nearly nine minutes while
Floyd pled that he could not breathe, choking him to death.
Based on this story, Derek Chauvin was fired and indicted for murder, and the three other
cops who assisted him were fired and indicted for aiding and abetting murder.
Also based on this story, America has been convulsed by more than two months of race riots,
which have killed dozens, injured countless others, and destroyed billions of dollars in
property and countless livelihoods.
There were many facts that did not fit this story, however.
George Floyd's autopsy revealed that he wasn't suffocated. Instead, he died of heart
failure. He was suffering from heart disease and COVID-19. He also had the opioid fentanyl in
his system as well as methamphetamine. The medical examiner said these drugs contributed to
this death. (He also had traces of cannabis.)
Beyond that, Floyd was apprehended before he could drive off, clearly intoxicated, after
trying to pass a counterfeit bill. Should the police have allowed him to just drive away?
Obviously not. They had to do something to get Floyd out of his car and away from the public so
he could not endanger himself or others.
The person who called the police reported that Floyd was acting strangely, which in all
likelihood meant that he was intoxicated or mentally ill, thus not to be trifled with.
It turns out that Floyd had a long criminal record, including an armed robbery in which
held a gun to the stomach of a pregnant woman. In short, George Floyd was a real piece of
shit.
Moreover, putting a knee on an uncooperative suspect's neck is an approved police control
technique, so how could Chauvin be indicted for murder?
Finally, there was never any evidence that race played any role in Floyd's death. He
was not arrested because he was black, but because he committed a crime. He was not forcibly
restrained because he was black, but because he was uncooperative. Two of the four officers
were non-white. The claim that race had anything to do with Floyd's death at all was simply
a baseless assertion amplified and endlessly repeated by the media and BLM
agitators.
But now we know that it was all a fraud. What does the police body camera footage
reveal?
First of all, it reveals that George Floyd was dishonest, uncooperative, and acted deranged
and scary.
Floyd claimed that he had just lost his mother (he hadn't). He claimed to be too
claustrophobic to get in the police car, which was a lie because he was not too claustrophobic
to sit in his own car. He claimed twice that he was not on drugs, falsely. He refused
repeatedly to allow the police to cuff him. He refused repeatedly to get in the police car. He
claimed multiple times that he could not breathe before he ended up on the ground with
Chauvin's knee on his neck. Obviously he was lying before that, so it made sense for Chauvin to
disbelieve him when Floyd was on the ground. And, in any case, remember that the medical
examiner said Floyd did not die of asphyxiation.
Second, the video reveals that the police dealt with Floyd with a level of patience and
professionalism that I certainly could not have mustered. One cannot say that Chauvin lost his
patience or lashed out at Floyd.
Ask yourself, dear reader, would you have been able to maintain your cool in the same
situation? I know I would have snapped. I was thinking "Couldn't we just arm police with
tranquilizer darts to bring these beasts down?" This video gives me nothing but respect for the
police who have to deal day in and day out with deranged criminals like George Floyd.
Was George Floyd a victim of injustice? No, he died because (1) he committed a crime, (2)
refused to comply with the police, and (3) was so high on drugs that he was not up to the
rigors of being forcibly arrested. If he hadn't done any of those things, he -- and a lot of
other people -- would still be alive today. George Floyd's death was entirely his fault.
It wasn't murder. It was the predictable result of Floyd's own bad character and bad choices.
It was his just desserts.
George Floyd got justice.
Now we have to secure justice for Derek Chauvin and his fellow officers, as well as for the
millions of Americans whose lives have been turned upside down by this massive hoax perpetrated
by the government of Minneapolis, the State of Minnesota, Black Lives Matter, the mainstream
media, and the far Left -- aided and abetted by the craven eunuchs of the mainstream Right.
If I were Donald Trump, I would invoke the Insurrection Act, then spend the next few weeks
arresting the leaders of BLM and antifa, as well as their collaborators in state and municipal
governments, for the crimes they have already committed. Once the Leftist beast is decapitated,
I would pardon Derek Chauvin and his fellow officers. Then I'd grab some popcorn.
"But we could never do that! Blacks would burn the country down!"
If that is your initial reaction, I want you to reflect on it. Derek Chauvin, his fellow
officers, and the whole planet have been victimized by a blatant hoax. If we can't do the right
thing and call a stop to it, then aren't we admitting that we have to choose between having
justice and having black people in America ? Well I choose justice. Which is reason number
one-hundred-million-and-one why I believe that blacks and whites in America need to go our
separate ways. We need
a racial divorce .
"I was thinking 'Couldn't we just arm police with tranquilizer darts to bring these
beasts down?'"
That would've killed him flat out, what with a lethal/near-lethal dose of fentanyl in him
already. It seems they'd decided to let EMS deal with him, which was absolutely the correct
decision. Strap the maniac down on a gurney.
I can't find any fault with this assessment. After watching the eight minutes of Floyd
lying about claustrophobia and struggling against the attempt to simply get him safely into
the police vehicle, it makes me sick that I bought into part of the narrative being sold at
the time.
There's not much doubt left that a combination of drug abuse and poor health killed the
man. Chauvin and the others should be released with a clean record.
Which is not to say that no policing reforms are needed. Too many innocent people are
killed by cops. Floyd just wasn't one of them.
I don't think it is likely Chauvin will get any justice. Presumably the upgraded
murder charge works in his favor as he's more likely to get off, but considering the media
attention, the state of thinking in America, and the corruption of the justice system, it
seems likely that he's going to get railroaded.
If he does that will be the saddest part of this whole affair – a cop just doing his
job to police the community gets (presumably life, at least his life ruined) because he was
sent to deal with a deranged, intoxicated negro.
This video shows a silverback coming to the realization that he is going to jail, yet
again, and acting like a typical low I.Q. Negro. He was a career criminal P.O.S. that got
just what he deserved. It's a travesty of justice to charge the cops with anything.
It ought to be a wake up call for any cop that the powers that be need you collectively
but will throw you individually under the bus if it's politically expedient.
He claimed multiple times that he could not breathe before he ended up on the ground
with Chauvin's knee on his neck. Obviously he was lying before that, so it made sense for
Chauvin to disbelieve him when Floyd was on the ground.
Actually, he might not have been lying. Covid19 patients are known to have difficulty
breathing. Add to that Fentanyl, which also causes sudden death. I wonder if the autopsy
included a review for blood clots around his heart, which is not an uncommon cause of death
for Covid19 patients.
I agree with you Greg, yet ANOTHER hoax. Whew. Like you said, they can't even find ONE
legit victim of oppression. I blame Keith Ellison, but most of all I blame the jewish media
for inciting the whole bullshit scam. With the covid scam, two big scams going at once, the
creepy jews have our citizens on their fucking knees.
I've had it. I'm at the not gonna take any more stage, and I suspect that many people feel
the same way I do.
This is what you get when jews run your country incessant lies and hoaxes and gaslighting
and nonsense and chaos and crime and murder.
And one day, for no reason, the entire German populace decided, "Gee ..I don't think I
like the jews anymore ."
Unfortunately the police are proving impossible to love. They bow down to the people who
hate them and want to strip them of their jobs (if not their lives), but then arrest people
who defend themselves against a violent mob. In big cities they have no qualms against
assaulting people for not wearing a mask, nor to enforcing illegal "red flag" laws. They are
the definition of anti heroes:
Violent and oppressive toward peaceful and productive whites, but meek and subservient toward
violent and destructive blacks and communists.
I'm aware that there are exceptions, such as a few rural sheriffs refusing to enforce this
crap. But they're getting tarred by association, simply because you can never tell whether
your district will be run by a patriot or a petty tyrant.
If I were Donald Trump, I would invoke the Insurrection Act, spend the next few weeks
arresting the leaders of BLM and antifa, as well as their collaborators in state and
municipal governments, for the crimes they have already committed. Once the Leftist beast
is decapitated, I would pardon Derek Chauvin and his fellow officers.
This is brilliant. If Trump did this, he would win big -- if they don't alter the results.
If Trump did this, he would become a historical icon akin to Daniel Boone or George
Washington.
If Trump did this, and ground the Government's boot on the throat of every race agitator,
including celebrities like Winfrey and Cannon, as well as NBA/NFL ingrates, he would forever
change the hustle of blacks to game the system. He would alter America on a cellular level,
and exponentially for the best.
Alas,Trump will never do this. He cares too much (perhaps in a prurient manner) what his
daughter Ivanka thinks and her cunning conniving husband, Jared.
Note: Ron Unz has MAXIMUM backbone to run this fabulous, truth telling piece.
So the marchers are completely correct. There will be no justice. There will be no peace.
They will make sure of both no matter what. At least they tell us of their plan. Veteran
coppers smell what's up. Many have gone fetal. Others are retiring earlier than expected. All
are disgusted by the bullshit they see with this case
George Floyd was dishonest, uncooperative, and acted deranged and scary
.
Stop the presses! Acting scary is too much! Especially if it's a scary nigger! Kill the
scary nigger! Aaaaahhhhhh!!
The world has become soft, and everyone is just one big victim of every action and
inaction. The author of this piece is every bit as much a cry baby as BLM pricks painting
up the streets. Take your "I suck blue dick" cause on down the road – you're bound
to find followers.
We have to thank the leaker of the body cams video. Minnesota Attorney General Keith
Ellison said that he did not want to release the videos because it might hurt his attempt to
prosecute the officers. Get that, he's not interested in justice but to get the
pre-determined result: WHITE MAN guilty of racist murder.
Ellison was humiliated when he lost the election to the chair of the Democratic National
Committee to Tom Perez because of his affiliation to the Nation of Islam. As a consolation
prize Perez made him Deputy Chair, a meaningless title for a worthless person. I am sure that
if he can deliver a murder conviction of a white police officer the black caucus will demand
a cabinet post for this house muslim.
Yes! Yes! Yes! But you do not understand. The largest crime was not committed by Floyd.
The largest crime was committed by totally criminal media. Particularly CNN.
Agreed that George Floyd got justice, but please remember that it's not the role of
police to hand out justice. Agreed that he was not killed by the police, but just what does
the author mean by saying that Floyd got what he deserved, "his just desserts"? Was
death the form of justice he deserved? Could there have been another path made available to
"salvage" him and turn him into a benefit rather than a detriment to society?
What forces, internal and external, acted on Floyd from the time of his birth to his death
to make him become what he was, behave as he did? Can we build a society in which someone
like Floyd never exists and never needs to be put out of his and our misery?
In Floyd's life and death should we see racism or societal failure? In the reaction to his
death what should we see?
The video will of course be used by BLM and other leftists to enhance their whiny shit.
They'll say that trying to stuff him into the back of the cop car after he told them he was
claustrophobic was cruel, and just exacerbated the situation. They'll also say the cops
should have just let him sit on the ground till the amberlamps arrived.
They'll bitch about the cop pulling his gun on an "unarmed black man," and "they wouldn't
do that to a White guy." Then they'll say something really intelligent like "trying to pass a
fake 20 doesn't deserve the death sentence."
It would have been so simple to pop Floyd in the head while he was sitting in the car,
like they do in Brazil or Mexico. Or what fellow negroes do to each other every weekend. At
least then he would have died once, and the cops certainly would have been justifiably
crucified. But this case will go on and on, and we will have to endure from multiple angles
his dying. And of course the kangaroo court theatrics that will go with it all. Add to that
the scapegoats,( sacrificial pigs).
@AnonymousFentanyl is a respiratory suppressor in itself. Some of its analogues are particularly
so. Floyd had multiple fentalogues in his system I believe there were also some variety of
benzodiazapines as well. These combined are more than lethal at surprisingly low doses for a
normal adult male. That doesn't even start to consider all the meth, and metabolites of it,
coursing thru his veins. Metabolites will have an effect in this mix, in terms of
toxicity.
IMHO dude was a goner, they just showed up too early. And all hell has broken loose over
another opioid overdose not much different than hundreds of others that week but for a video
that looks bad to the unknowing
Weimar Amerika has a problem, it is called the Jewish run media that spreads lies and
causes harm to the nation. We the people have the right and moral duty to remove all Jews
from the press, the tv, from newspapers, etc.
The damage done by the George Floyd hoax is nothing compared to this stupid Covid
insanity, they are actually shutting down schools over nothing. Governments are being run by
insane lunatics, there are no adults in the room making any rational decisions.
This comment gets 5 stars
This is what you get when jews run your country incessant lies and hoaxes and
gaslighting and nonsense and chaos and crime and murder.
And one day, for no reason, the entire German populace decided, "Gee ..I don't think I
like the jews anymore ."
The trial of Chauvin will be interesting. If they do the right thing and acquit him we
might be in for some stormy times. However, sending an innocent man to prison to appease all
the extremists out there isn't something we should be forced to swallow. Buckle up your seat
belts, round two coming up.
It won't matter. This entire issue is based on complete nonsense and fantasy. All of
modern woke identity politics is intentionally fantastic and mystifying and completely
divorced from reality. As many have pointed out, the entire notion of objective truth is
considered simply a form of white supremacy (this is an actual quote from a woman with a PhD
discussing racism in math: "the idea of 2+2 equaling 4 is cultural and because of western
imperialism and colonization, we think of it as the only way of knowing"). Just as the news
will not say a suspect is black or show his face, any discussion AT ALL of actual crimes
committed by "POC" have become verboten on the woke left, and they control the narrative. If
issues were presented and discussed openly and honestly, none of this would have ever
happened anyway. So this video will simply be memory holed or, better yet, edited to somehow
portray Floyd as a victim, just as people still think of Michael Brown as a victim and all
the rest. It just won't matter.
That kind of job cannot be done by a president : there was never such thing as a honest US
president. A honest US president is a president who resigns to avoid his country the shame of
impeachment. Such a job can only be done by a Lucky Luke or so who identifies with the
president and whom the president has no choice but to support.
Of course it's a lie. The Mockingbird Media has been lying for decades running about
damned near everything. Why is anyone surprised? It's like the old joke in the USSR about
Pravda (Truth) and Isvestia (News): There's no truth in the news and no news in the truth
.
The Pulitzer Prize committee has never rescinded Walter Duranty's prize for his lies from
the 1930s about the great abundance of milk, honey and happiness in the Ukrainian SSR under
the tender care of Stalin's good boy (((Lazar Kaganovich))). Oh what's that? Never heard of
those 8-10 million being starved to death under the machine guns of those nice (((NKVD
men)))? Just another damned conspiracy theory ! (Mentioning this will get you jail
time in the "free country" once known as France – for minimizing the holycost!)
This truthful article is about the big lie regarding the ascension of St. George the
Breathless but that lie is far from the only one told. Along with the holy man's long
criminal record there's the lie about those 4 White cops when only Chauvin was
actually White. One was Black, one was Asian and a third was of mixed ancestry. Almost as big
a lie as the whopper printed about the notorious white soopremaciss involved in the
tragic ascension of St. Trayvon of Skittles and Arizona Iced Watermelon Juice – a
Peruvian octaroon named George Zimmerman. The Germans had the perfect term for our lovely
comrades at the Ministry of Truth: Lügenpresse
Which is not to say that no policing reforms are needed. Too many innocent people are
killed by cops. Floyd just wasn't one of them.
Yes this is very true. Breanna Taylor of Louisville was an actual case of such
reckless abuse of power (no knock warrant where the cops killed an innocent black woman).
Haven't seen the usual suspects complaining very much about that one. Yes there have been a
few scattered BLM riots – but only after the tragic ascension of St. George the
Breathless. She didn't get tens of millions via Go-Fund-Me and a state funeral with a
gold-plated casket like St. George. Guess St. George serves a higher purpose than Breanna
– apparently a mere paramedic rather than the Kang of Wokeundumb Kangz.
If he hadn't been pulled over, he probably still be alive today. I guess blaming the
nigger is a satisfying way for white Americans to cope with the obvious, ongoing decline of
their civilization.
Everyone I know flashes their high beams to warn other drivers of speed traps. The same
hypocrites in this thread massaging cop balls are certainly greateful for it. They only love
the cops when their abusing blacks or their political opponents, not when they're burning
down Waco.
Hmmm well, I'm not seeing the same idiots that came here before to embarrass themselves
with comments insisting that the cop murdered Floyd. Hang your heads in shame, wherever you
are.
You stupid cunt ..Floyd ingested a huge amount of fentanyl AND meth AND cannabis.
The cops were insanely patient with that crazy negro, and then the jew media LIED about
the incident for months creating an entirely false narrative that resulted in horrible loss
of life and property.
It's not "crying" to speak the truth about what happened and to lament the fact that we
were hoaxed yet again.
They DIDN'T kill the crazy buckwheat; he killed himself.
EXCLUSIVE: Police bodycam footage shows moment-by-moment arrest of George Floyd for
the first time – from terror on his face when officer points gun at his head, sobbing
before he's shoved into squad car and begging to breathe as his life drains away .
Worth a look. I think Gould must moonlight on violin.
@Tusk of thinking
in America, and the corruption of the justice system, it seems likely that he's going to get
railroaded.
He will most likely get railroaded by a jury that is afraid of another riot.
The prosecution won't be able to argue that he died by asphyxiation. They will have to
argue that he might have OD'd but the knee on the neck was a factor. Well that's manslaughter
at the most.
They'll probably give him 6-10 and let him out early. I think he should just be fired.
I really don't know why anyone would take a police position under a left-wing mayor.
If I were Donald Trump, I would invoke the Insurrection Act, spend the next few weeks
arresting
The media conglomerates, as others have said, and the education conglomerates.
Scrap higher education and go back to the tech schools we had before. It's too late to
save the old system; PC infestation and weird sex rot have ossified them all. When the
country even pretends to be civilized again, we can give it another shot.
All of the media and most of the Antifa's paleface contingent are graduates of our
overweening Institutions of Higher Indoctrination. Defund them all.
@Avianthro d the
meth and fentanyl up his rectum. That's the fastest way to get any drug, legal or not into
the vascular system.
After his last prison term in Texas, he moved to Minneapolis for drug dealing and
counterfeit money passing.
People like you, endlessly posturing and weeping about dangerous thugs like Floyd are more
responsible for " societal failure" than the useless, dangerous thugs you want to cuddle and
care for as if they were babies abandoned in a snowstorm.
Get a rescue dog or cat to lavish your love and care on, instead of defending the likes of
Floyd
Liberals blacks and Jews claim 2 of the officers got into the back seat with him and beat
him up. Yeah right, 3 men, including the giant Floyd in the back seat.
Remember White Justine Dimond also of Minneapolis. An affirmative action black officer
shot her dead as soon as he saw her, the woman who called the police about a possible
disturbance. Took more than a year to even charge and arrest him.
Lets get this straight. The police did not go over to Floyd and ask him a few questions
about his transaction in the store and then tell him he had to come with them or be arrested
for passing fake money. They just went up to his car GUNS IN HAND, and started demanding he
showed his hands. The people from the store had already been over to the car and talked to
him before this happened, they did not seem to think he was dangerous.
He refused repeatedly to allow the police to cuff him.
The police did not tell him what it was about.They swore at him and pointed a gun at him
and then started pulling him out the car, It was several minutes after he was pulled out and
handcuffed they tell him that this was an arrest on a charge about the counterfeit bill.
He refused repeatedly to get in the police car
Yes he did that.
He claimed multiple times that he could not breathe
Yes he was trying a variation on the old I'm having a heart attack ploy. Maybe the COVID
19 epidemic and the froth at the corners of his mouth ought to have made Chavin think twice
about what he was going to do.
He claimed multiple times that he could not breathe before he ended up on the ground
with Chauvin's knee on his neck. Obviously he was lying before that, so it made sense for
Chauvin to disbelieve him when Floyd was on the ground.
Excuse me? Floyd had three cops on top of him and three knees on his back when he was
prone on the pavement. Chauvin was scoffing that "It takes a lot of oxygen to talk" and told
Floyd to stop yelling about how he could not breath.
One cannot say that Chauvin lost his patience or lashed out at Floyd.
I can and am going to, because in my opinion the most likely thing is Chavin decided to
give Floyd good reason to complain about his breathing and that is why Floyd and his hapless
stooges put him down and knelt on him. They only got off 9 minutes later when they were
told he was not breathing . What was Chauvin trying to achieve, and how long did he plan
on keeping Floyd like that?
Moreover, putting a knee on an uncooperative suspect's neck is an approved police
control technique
The use of knees technique is authorised to a purpose that is not what Chavin was using
the technique for. Chavin got his and his two colleagues' knees on Floyd and kept them there
for 9 minutes 30 seconds while resting his hands on top of his own legs.
how could Chauvin be indicted for murder?
He is charged with felony murder meaning the prosecution merely have to show that he used
the "approved police control technique" in a way that crossed the line into assault. It is
not necessary to show intent for anything but the felony for a felony murder conviction,
George Floyd's death was entirely his fault. It wasn't murder. It was the predictable
result of Floyd's own bad character and bad choices.
One could say the same of many murder victims.
It was his just desserts
He messed with the wrong guy in Chauvin. But Chauvin also messed with the wrong guy. If
Chauvin had done his job properly none of this would have happened.
"In Floyd's life and death should we see racism or societal failure?"
We should see neither, for neither had any demonstrable bearing on his life or death. As
the sage is reported to have said to the seeker: "Some have good fates; some bad. Yours was a
bad one."
The author did not actually suggest that tranquilizing Floyd with darts was the best way
to deal with him. He merely stated the thought would go through his head if he had to deal
with individuals like Floyd, as he would not be able to muster the saintly patience and
forbearance of Derek Chauvin and the other officers.
It's another one of those cases where the narrative is important, not the actual story. In
a real world, with a real press with intelligent reporters, we would have discussed how
horrible the death was. How it was an accidental event but was hard to avoid. They wouldn't
use his death to inflame passions, race bait, try to forement racial hatred, strife, and race
war. Floyd's death wouldn't be an event used by the Beast to get Orange man, because
ultimately, everything the media has done the last 4 years has been one version or another of
"Orange Man Bad". We might be talking about real issues like asset forfeiture or police
immunity from crimes. How police unions weld too much political power and abuse their sacred
position of trust in society. In other words, in a real world, we wouldn't have a
manipulative propaganda organ to make Orwell's head spin like a top. We'd have intelligent
and thoughtful readers that really take a part in debate and help steer the course of
society.
No that would be asking too much I suppose. Eat your gruel, prol.
I agree with that statement but it seems that sometimes the Universe blindly hands out
justice to people. Floyd seem to be one of those. When you consider the toxicology report and
the type and amount of drugs in his system it seems likely that if he had never had any
interaction with the police at all he would have still died that day. By his own hand. But of
course not one black in a million can see it because blacks are not a people that let logic
and truth stand in the way of them venting their constant rage against the White man.
@Biff nd BLM are
producing far worse consequences than merely a deceptive message or a wrong-headed
article.
The BLM circus is not only excusing, but giving credence to, and animating violent,
low-life negro culture which often kills innocents, ruins lives, destroys businesses, debases
entire neighborhoods, and undermines the rule of law. This is worrisome trend.
The spiraling costs associated with the unintended death of one stupid criminal is already
in the billions. And BLM is still on the warpath. It's time to vigorously resist this mob,
not appease them.
People will believe what people want to believe. Curiosity killed the cat, I did a search
to find out what George Floyd's autopsy said.
After all, the whole BLM thing spread over the ocean and came to Europe for no reason
whatsoever. Americans have a shtick to export every piece of shit they crap. Some time ago
they produced some useful stuff, now they manufacture gay prides, surrogate child bearing,
gay marriage, "humanitarian" military interventions, and their latest product, "anti-racism".
Coming from a country that has abolished segregation only half a century ago, it's rich.
Honestly, to most Europeans, neither George Floyd nor the cop who knelt on his neck
can inspire sympathy. Both are loathsome. Most of us don't like American police methods,
they're brutal and dishonourable for a country that pretends to be free, and most of us don't
like criminals who are fake victims of racism either because most of the racism we see is
against us and our civilisation nowadays.
Though George Floyd's autopsy did say that "he died of heart failure" and that he "was
suffering from heart disease", it didn't say that he suffered of COVID-19, it said the
opposite, that he was tested positive to the coronavirus causing it two months before but
that he remained asymptomatic and likely was still so at the time of his death.
To top it, George Floyd's autopsy didn't reveal "that he wasn't suffocated", it said that
there were "no injuries of anterior muscles of neck or laryngeal structures", in other words
that there were no signs of trauma associated with forcible asphyxiation which doesn't mean
that his heart failure wasn't eventually caused by lack of oxygen, even if drugs in his
organism contributed to it.
As I see it, this video proves nothing either way and will only enhance each side's views
because each side will pick from it just what suits it.
Why can't the racist boot-licking authoritarians here just admit that they love seeing a
black man humiliated and murdered? Step up, you crybaby cunts, embrace your depravity. You
don't care about justice or the rule of law or anything else. The cops easily got the cuffs
on him and easily got him in the car but we can hear the author trembling behind his keyboard
at the big scary black man. The worldview of you idiots guarantees that the US will
periodically burn.
Could there have been another path made available to "salvage" him and turn him into a
benefit rather than a detriment to society?
No, career criminals have no interest in reforming or becoming productive members of
society.
All they care about is getting that easy gimmi dat from the welfare center while getting a
llit of extra cash on the side by selling drugs and robbing other people.
@aandrews after
the police leaders denied that Chauvin was acting to procedure, posted the department police
training manual and noted Chauvin was a trainer and the other officers his trainees that day.
This was all from the police department website! Brilliant.
The media ignored this, of course. Even UNZ missed it.
The Libertarian Institute also pointed out no one is investigating his Floyd's real
murderer, namely whoever sold him the defective drugs. What was being covered up?
Since then, we have world riots to shut down the police department. Why are the
Libertarian fans the only ones noting this looks like a massive cover-up, perhaps the
far-left again getting in bed with far-right and now Islamic organized crime across
borders?
No country for white men,first there were those Indian savages, attacking peaceful
settlers, then there were Africans, refusing to take a place, assigned to them by God,then
came Chinese, pretending, they were invited to build Transatlantic railroad,then came
Latinos,claiming that this is their country,since they came first!And there were also those
Russian commies, pretending, they are as white as they could be!
@Biff Race has
been merely one part of a wider Elite effort (ie Nixon's "Southern Strategy" was a new
phase).
Indeed, the US is itself entering a new phase: massive unemployment, massive drops in
productivity, mass evictions, mass poverty, massive (dangerous) belligerence towards
international competitors, mass business failure .and so on. And again, only one group seems
to be profiting from this nightmare.
Articles like this one, plus the lunatic & vicious shenanigans of BLM etc are merely
speeding the country towards a precipice beyond which no one knows the depth of the eventual
drop.
You've got at least 45% of the voting population who will never see things your way, and
all the organs of media working overtime to influence as many of those on the fence as
possible to buy into the narrative despite any narrative collapse.
As much as it would be justified in a sane world, Trump using the Insurrection Act and
rounding up the leaders of yet another coup in America would play into the narrative and
would lead to a landslide defeat. Unfortunately for Trump, acquiescing isn't doing anything
to make a case for his re-election, but at least it isn't fanning the flames to burn him out
of office for being a dictator. The mayors and governors of these hell holes are all on the
D-team, and the D-team knows the best way to beat Trump is to make him look like a monster
(buffoon just hasn't been working), and so they keep whipping up those flames the best ways
they can.
The rounding up of people should have started with the Russiagate coup conspirators in
2017, but Orange Man was no doubt told by his handlers that that would look like political
revenge and that he should just let it go. That is where everything went off the rails. 2020
would not have gone to hell if 2017 had been handled correctly, forcefully, and
aggressively.
You're reading too much into this. I think it's futile to keep finding reasons why
diversity doesn't work and to try new solutions. It all ends up just being welfare programs
for blacks. Separation is the only sensible solution.
Yet another piece of trash being trotted out of UR, that is increasingly assuming the face
of White supremacy. Yet UR's merciless – and justifiable – criticism of Zionist
Israel as an apartheid, racist entity seems to fly in the face of this blatant diatribe
against minorities in general and Blacks in particular. The purist White "analyses" being
touted here speak of a reality that has never existed in this country and never will. Live
with that.
@Gleimhart
Mantooso eyes of the masses of conservatives who went along with the story because of the
bad optics in the first video. It will allow them to second guess their judgement and for a
new opinion.
You can almost never change closed minds of the zealot liberal left, nothing will do that,
and this should not be the goal. This is more of a confirmation that thinking people are on
the right path and that their detest of the never ending pandering is right on point.
So it is still good that it came out. The cops are vindicated as well as the disbelievers
in the sensationalist coverage.
Having wasted two generations since the Civil Rights Acts were passed and the negro was
invited to fully participate in American life, the negro today senses time and money have run
out. Worse still, while he bitched and moaned about 'racism' he now realizes he has been
replaced by hispanics for low skill labor. With neither the education or talent necessary for
high paying jobs he, no doubt, realizes he has become superfluous to the American economy.
The covid virus has shut down the only lucrative gigs his race had- professional sports and
entertainment. His only option is to take up the inane slogan of BLM even as he realizes they
don"t.
Note to Tarantino. "Django 2020, Buying Cigarettes in Crackertown". Script half compete.
Artistic license required for completion. Studies show wide acceptance with young white
female demographic.
@Anonymous
Cigarette smoking involves sucking in nasty smelling smoke into your lungs, which from my
naive way of thinking, sure as heck is not going to do anything except add to whatever
breathing problems he had due to the Fentanyl he had in his system.
Unless, of course, he was buying those cigarettes for the other guy who was in the SUV
with him.
I am still wondering where he got that counterfeit $20 dollar bill in the first place.
Last time I mentioned this, my comment disappeared down the memory hole – for the first
time ever on this website. Why might that be, I wonder?
Racial divorce is not the issue. The white Leftist are white. They are freaks and
monsters. Their race does not alter that a teeny bit.
Along those lines you must face the fact that the Negro was made Numinous by Yankee WASP
Elites. The very crowd that idiots like the VDARE bunch would have you serve and emulate
created the Negro Problem in order to use the Negro as weapons and tools to wage culture war
against the non-WASP whites the WASP Elites hate most.
Jussie Smollet and Bubba Wallace were hoaxers painting themselves as victims of hate
crimes. But fake hate crimes are real hate crimes against whites. Both men's careers should
be canceled, and they should end up in jail for their crimes.
That is correct but that is not what will happen.
Now, with the leak of the police body-camera footage of the arrest of George Floyd, we
have confirmation of what sensible people suspected all along: George Floyd was not a
victim of police brutality or injustice.
Exactly. Now where is that asshole, Mercer's retraction?
No sympathy for the cops. They have been using excessive force on ALL kinds of people for
decades. They haven't done a thing to "protect and serve" any of the victims of these
riots.
Doesn't matter that the democrat mayors told them to stand down. They know what the right
thing to do is. They could have gone to their unions and bitched that they weren't allowed to
do their jobs, their precinct houses were being attacked etc. Could have went to the media
etc.
They did nothing to apply any pressure on these mayors or police chiefs.
They want to cruise around the suburbs, go after soft targets and collect their fat pensions
nothing more!
Cops are well known to take a routine traffic stop and poke and prod at the driver to
escalate a situation until it becomes a physical altercation, and the cops then have an
excuse to arrest and charge the driver with assault.
They like to taze grandmother's in Texas
Karma's a bitch as they say
"Papers please" has been going on in the U.S. for a long time, cops pulling people over just
to ask "where you going, where'd you come from?"
Cops are petty tyrants, the kind of guys who got their jock straps Ben Gay'd, in high school
or their heads swirly'd in the toilet, and now that they have a little power, their going to
exert it maximally using anything as pretense to exert it.
That said, the dirt bag Floyd got justice, Antifa and BLM need to be put down by the
military.
If you can use the military to force whites to have to put up with black degenerates in their
schools, you can use the fucking military to put down riots. There is already plenty of
precedent for the use of military troops to put down riots and insurrection. What BLM and
Antifa are doing is the very definition of insurrection.
Don't dare get together to actually peacefully protest the unjustified, and unconstitutional
Covid lockdowns and other assorted bullshit if your white however That's treason!
The U.S. government as far as I'm concerned has rendered itself "null and void."
Firstly, there is absolutely no reason for his arrest. They did not ask him for ID. They
did not ask him his name. They did not ask him about the $20.00 bill.
You do not get arrested for passing a $20.00 bill. You get arrested for "knowingly" and
with "intent to defraud" pass a counterfeit bills. .
Where is there an iota of evidence that he did it with intent to defaud. The evidence they
had was insufficient to make an arrest.
They did not even ask him any questions about passing the bill before taking out a gun and
arresting him.
But he also knows that the Elites love him and will always use him to terrify the white
middle class and to batter the white working class.
The Numinous Negro knows that that he is, and had ben since roughly the late 1830s, the
beloved pet of the Elites of the Anglo-Zionist Empire, who despise the vast majority of the
whites they rule.
The police asked him and his friends (more than once) 'what he was on'? It appears that
both G.F. and his friends declined to say. He (or perhaps his friends) maybe could have saved
G.F.'s life if he (or they) just would have told the police he was on opiates. They probably
could have given him naloxone. In many jurisdictions the police have that on hand (but I'm
not sure if that is police policy in Minneapolis). But probably it is, according to this
link:
Maybe the more accurate angle on this whole thing is that the friends should be
investigated, as to what they knew about his drug use that day. If it could be determined
they knew, perhaps the correct angle is manslaughter (it being the friends as the guilty
ones).
@mark green
teacher's unions and welfare bureaucrats who in the latter case take for themselves 70% of
every dollar supposedly going to help inner-city negroes, so you can take it to the bank both
groups have accounted for the largest number of demonstrators of any color. The white
parasite machinery was out in numbers as well with all the obvious dykes with a hatred of
male-dominated society despite their continued existence relying on white male sympathy
toward such effed up and sexaully disgusting women. But, the worst of it all is that it all
could have been shut down on day one if urban police hadn't proved themselves uniformed
bureaucrats who serve the Democratic political machinery and none other.
But it will open the eyes of the masses of conservatives who went along with the story
because of the bad optics in the first video. It will allow them to second guess their
judgement and for a new opinion.
Tucker Carlson still thinks Derek Chauvin should be charged with something. Carlson is the
best Whites have in the MSM but he is still lacking immensely.
We need to make some distinctions. The police should act differently than bandits. It's
not the competence of the police to decide permanently what is justice or not and also not to
impose and execute death penalties.
In a Rechtsstaat the police only uses violences according to what is allowed by the
law and not more than necessary in a certain moment to restore order.
I don't see any need to use violence of any kind in this case. It's not very probable that
the police arrived there a few seconds or minutes after being called. I think that the
article in the Daily Mail says that Floyd wasn't trying to run away during the time that it
took for the police to come. He was sitting in his car. Second, I don't understand that the
police arrests somebody only because someone accused him of something. How can the police
arrive in some place and know immediately who is guilty of what? It was a petty offense
anyway. The police should speak with him, confront him with an accusation and he could answer
or not answer. After that the police should ask his identification card, write his name down
and go away. Later a prosecutor would see if there is a reason to write him to call him for
an interview, or not.
If the rules allow the knee on the neck, then there will be more people who should answer
for murder besides Chauvin. Could the author of the article explain what Chauvin was doing?
And what for? Why stay with his knee for almost 9 minutes on the neck of someone on the
floor? How can it be that 4 policemen aren't able to arrest one man who has shackles on his
hand? If this was the case, why didn't they call for more policemen to come?
Floyd was free and apparently the police wasn't looking for him. But even if he was a
criminal, criminals have rights. Many Americans seem to think that citizens don't have
rights. Chauvin is now accused of a murder and there is a lot of evidence against him. If I
remember correctly and if what I read was right, then Chauvin had a history of abuse of
authority. To say that Floyd got what he deserved is cynical.
@Tucker I believe
Fentanyl is used medically in obstetrical anesthesia.
Fentanyl may be the choice on the street now because of its potency.
Regardless, if you are getting it and doing it on the street, "recreationally," you are no
stranger to drugs and most likely a junkie. Who in Floyd's case is also doing meth. Going the
full John Belushi.
There is a saying that nothing goes better with cocaine than more cocaine and another
cigarette. This in general holds true across the board in this crowd.
He probably wasn't following his doctor's advice. Any of it.
American justice is a joke–Ofc. Chauvin will only be its latest victim, just like
the Tsarnaev brothers blamed for the Boston marathon bombing, justice like the victims of
America's response to 9/11. But list is a long one
Obviously, those in power in this deeply democrat state had all the tapes and all the
information about how St George died pretty quickly. They parsed it and twisted for a
specific reason, they think angering up the Negro will get them out to vote. The whole bs blm
nonsense, is idiot dems willing to destroy the country so they get elected. They did the same
thing with the Ferguson nonsense in 2014 as the mid-term election was coming up. And Negroes
fall for it every time. If I was sitting in a spaceship, watching this on alien television,
I'd say it was cliche and played out. But it never ends. Low IQ or not, stay off drugs, don't
have kids without being married, obey the law and go to work every day, you'll do fine in the
USA. Why doesn't some Negro preacher say that?
Yes, even if Chauvin et al are acquitted, they will be considered forever guilty by the
same mobs who consider Michael Brown and Trayvon Martin to be murder victims.
St George had 19 nanogram/ml of fentanyl and metabolites in his system. That works out to
19 ug/l. The volume of distribution of fentanyl is 6 liters/kg. Assuming he weighed in at
over 100 kg the amount of fentanyl in his system would be a minimum of 12 thousand micrograms
or 12 mg. The retail street value would be thousands of dollars. The wholesale value would be
less. This suggested he may have been dealing and consumed his stash to avoid prison
time?
*You can always count on Negroes to mouth-off.
*Black Live Matter–except to their bros in the hood.
*Pelosi, Schumer, the Black Caucus and the woke folk will press to have the Lincoln Memorial
replaced by the George Floyd Memorial.
" turns out that Floyd had a long criminal record, including an armed robbery in which
held a gun to the stomach of a pregnant woman. In short, George Floyd was a real piece of
shit"
Apparently St G of da 6 Felonies would beat his hoes as badly as Meg would the etard if he
didn't grovel hard enuf whilst takin da knee to a swarthy Hollywooder.
@anastasia You do
not get arrested for passing a $20.00 bill. You get arrested for "knowingly" and with "intent
to defraud" pass a counterfeit bills. .
Where is there an iota of evidence that he did it with intent to defaud. The evidence they
had was insufficient to make an arrest.
They did not even ask him any questions about passing the bill before taking out a gun and
arresting him.
This is BS. This was completely staged.
He was behind the wheel of a car in a highly intoxicated state. Of course there was reason
to arrest him.
@UncommonGround
wasn't trying to run away during the time that it took for the police to come. He was sitting
in his car. Second, I don't understand that the police arrests somebody only because someone
accused him of something. How can the police arrive in some place and know immediately who is
guilty of what? It was a petty offense anyway.
The call to the police indicated that Floyd was either nuts on or drugs. He was either nuts
or on drugs (in facts, minutes from dying from an overdose) behind the wheel of a car, a weapon
weighing how many pounds? Of course there was good reason to restrain
him.
If he hadn't been pulled over, he probably still be alive today.
Well, the excitement of the arrest didn't help his survivability prospects but I'm not
even sure what you're proposing here. Your argument is so stupid that I'm unsure if it's
coming from a human being. It's like watching an ant twitching his antennae. I know it's
trying to say something but it all translates into gibberish.
Are we supposed to ban arrests because one in a 100K perps might be too sick and/or
drugged-up to survive the ordeal?
To put it simply, blacks were being self-destructive, and elite whites decided not to stop
them because that would be "racist." And now our elites are going further down that path by
glorifying a criminal, George Floyd.
Had our elites fifty years ago used tough love instead of pampering, few blacks would turn
to criminal activities. George Floyd likely would have sold insurance or become a pharmacist
or something else harmless and even productive. Too bad it didn't turn out that way, but it's
impossible to get through to our elites that they are the problem.
@Priss Factor And
CNN, all of them, are pure opinion and propaganda. Made up concern. Not news. No actual
people actually care about this stuff.
Who will give a shit about George Floyd in 2021? There will be another school shooting by
then. Or better, a fucked up election to talk about.
No charges for the officer who shot Michael Brown. No reaction from anybody. No "riots."
Nobody even burned down a Wendy's. Because nobody knows who Michael Brown is. They found all
the statues and Confederate flags. They forgot the thing with Michael Brown. You can't take
them seriously.
@TKK g incidents
like this for crass political purposes.
What's different this time, besides cabin fever from the lockdown, is Trump.
A word to the wise, be a little less credulous about the "Oh, it's just the blacks again"
narrative when purportedly peaceful protests over "systemic racism" quickly become a violent
assault on the White House, with Democrats, Allied Media, and resistance scum like Mitt
Romney and Mattis egging them on.
Apparently, all it took was painting 'BLM' in front of the White House and Trump Tower for
many here to take the bait.
@Robert Dolan
those white nationalists that was over on Unz's The Political Bankruptcy of American White
Nationalism thread, pissing and moaning how he got it wrong too.
Another thing that white nationalists seem to piss and moan about is how wrong the State
is. Constantly deriding big bad government. Yet when big scary black man comes along, it's
straight to the jackboot to wimpier behind. I recognized the same thing when the twin towers
were coming down – save us from those scary Araabs no matter what it takes! or what
you take from us. – Suckers then and Suckers now.
@Alden He didn't
shoot her immediately AFAIK. She, unarmed and in her pyjamas, was taking to the other officer
when this Somali Muslim killed her from inside his car, across his partner.
The biggest red flag for me was the fact that his layers refused to release a statement
after interviewing him. What he did was indefensible so everyone expected some variation of
"I thought I saw something" excuse but his story was, apparently, so bad that they decided to
say nothing.
Needless to say, that case disappeared from the MSM like Jimmy Hoffa. I've heard somewhere
that the killer was convicted but that's all. I still don't know what the Somali Muslim told
his defenders.
There was certainly no reason to restrain him the way it was done. Did the police tell him
why he was being arrested? Did the police know for sure that he was on drugs? How? Or is it
enough that someone tells something about someone and you are arrested? In any case, I
thought he had been arrested because of the 20 dollar bill. Was there a talk between the
police and Floyd or they just came to arrest someone and decided that they would arrest him?
Don't Americans have rights? Can the police jump on your necks and tell the reason later in
case you haven't died?
@Realist Also
take in consideration that in America the justice system by no stretch of the imagination
lives outside of politics. They HAVE TO charge him with something, and it's probably good
that the charges were upped to 2nd degree murder because it will be far harder to prove. Now
the problem is that the courts might end up finding him guilty with an mostly black picked
jury. If that happens white Americans should no longer oppose riots in big cities, or even
care for preserving the police, all of it should go down the drain the sooner the better
because the system will clearly be a openly SJW one against whites.
@Rich he
Cloward-Piven Plan that we see unfolding before our eyes obviously has nothing to do with
justice and everything to do with a hatred and vengeance so great the leftists will burn the
country down around themselves to destroy everything whites have created. This is a point
Nietzsche made long ago, that vengeance and resentment are always the actual motives of those
marching under banners calling for social justice. I'd take the prophesy by a Russian monk
during the height of the Christian massacres in Russia a century ago to heart; namely, that
what the Jews were doing to Christians in Russia was a mere prelude to what they will attempt
to do to Christians in America a century hence.
This idea comes from a view of history that telescopes slave ships, pre-civil war plantation
stories, KKK, Watts Riots and MLK to the year 2010. I think there might once have been white
people who feared to allow large black men to be peacefully questioned about a crime. There
have been almost 80 years of integration, whites voting for blacks and close contact between
the races at work, school and in the military. We know each other well. We're not afraid of
black people.
Where has everybody been since 1940? Not in the country I know well.
was Ellison & Co not releasing the bodycam vids they should be charged as inciting a
population to riot under the PATRIOT ACTS I & II, and the willful obstruction of
justice.
Bravo!! You have, with your article, tremendously helped the public good. What the
incompetent press do is to cherry-pick "items" to support their agenda. Recently, the
Herald-Tribune of Sarasota, Florida published a similar hatchet job. Fortunately, on page 6,
they published six real cases, and I concluded what you have in your excellent article. I
sent a comment to the newspaper that the Sarasota police department used appropriate force in
sub-doing the six who were resisting arrest. I had the same question that you express in the
article: What would I do if I was the arresting article?
Even the Jesuit mouthpiece, America Media, joined the cacophony of ridiculous
"reporting"
If a double dose of fentanyl did not bring him down, they would have needed an elephant
tranquilizer.
But your point is one worth exploring. The key is a drug with fast kinetics. Something
that paralyzes one almost instantly yet last only five minutes. Wouldn't that worth a govt
grant somewhere.
The divorce attorneys for the other side are Jewbaum, Jewberg and Jewfeld, LLP and the
presiding judge will be none other than Dishonorable Jewstein do you see a favorable ruling
for the plaintiffs? I don't think so
Alternative ending: The police never showed up, and Floyd slowly died behind the wheel of
his vehicle as his companions tried to shake him awake.
Cause of death: Meth, fentanyl, Covid, and a bad heart. The fentanyl alone would have
slowed his breathing down to the point of death. As his circulatory system shut down, he
would have fell unconscious and unresponsive. His friends would have panicked, but they also
would have been reluctant to call 911 for obvious reasons.
Of course there are those who believe Floyd was a superman who could have laughed off a
lethal dose of fentanyl that day, "if only the cops hadn't held him down ".
No. He was destined to die of an overdose and he did. The cops holding him for the
paramedics were trying to save his life and should be commended for their
professionalism.
@Moi Ever since
Keith Ellison first ran for Congress in 2006, he has characterized his relationship with
Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam as a sincere but misguided youthful dalliance. Though
Ellison said he was proud of his 18-month association with the Nation of Islam in preparation
for 1995's Million Man March, he wrote to concerned Jewish leaders in May 2006, saying, "I
have long since distanced myself from and rejected the Nation of Islam due to its propagation
of bigoted and anti-Semitic statements and actions of the Nation of Islam, Louis Farrakhan,
and [Farrakhan aide] Khalid Muhammed."
Strawman argument. Everyone here knows that blacks, gays, cat ladies, etc. are simply
tools wielded by the Jewish program that has been going forward for 120 years.
I don't see any need to use violence of any kind in this case.
That's because you're living in some weird, out of touch bubble. A guy like that –
text-book example of someone who'll explode into violence at any second – must be
restrained for everyone's sake and the cops did it professionally.
If the rules allow the knee on the neck, then there will be more people who should answer
for murder besides Chauvin.
What? You don't see a problem with throwing a guy in jail for following the rules? Do you
have any idea how a justice system should work in a normal country?
@Realist d. It
would have been easier to just ignore it.
Do you think that Tucker should be judge and jury and proclaim Chauvin innocent? If he did
that, he would deserve to be fired, and I would be all for it. Would Tucker off the airwaves
be fine with you?
Most of Tucker's more discerning fans understand that he must be careful in his language
if he wants to keep his job. The Cancel Culture Left is out for his scalp every day, and will
use any phony excuse to get him removed. If you think that Tucker's a sell-out and is
"lacking immensely," I have an obvious answer. QUIT WATCHING!
I haven't seen that Tucker made any sort of reply to this newest video. It would
surprise me if he didn't respond with asking whether the rioting had a just cause, or
something along that line.
Upon doing a search on Tuckers recent programs I can find no comment that I attributed to
him. It appears I confused comments made by Hannity with Carlson.
Don't forget to blame white Minnesotans who thought it was a good idea to elect a black
Muslim leftist with credible accusations of domestic abuse against him.
Those white racist supremacists, I'll tell you what.
He had some more bills that he (they) shoved in the seat cracks after being stopped. I do
not know, but it is possible the stashing operation kept his hands busy and why there was a
delay showing his hands and was the cause for guns to come out.
We've got an election coming up, or don't you read the papers.
These events were no surprise, Trump was on track to garner a game-over 20% or more of the
black vote.
Heck, the Democrats and their Allied Media even rolled out their old favorite David Duke,
once again shouting that he so wants Trump to win he's available any time for CNN and MSDNC
to tell everybody so.
People like you, endlessly posturing and weeping about dangerous thugs like Floyd are
more responsible for " societal failure" than the useless, dangerous thugs you want to
cuddle and care for as if they were babies abandoned in a snowstorm.
They do this Every. Single. Time.
When the hoax blows up, they tell us how the point still stands that Blacks are victims of
evil racist White society because reasons.
Get ready for round two
Injustice or insurrection.
It will define the USA for decades to come.
Justice, if it clearly prevails – will immediately unleash bloodletting, arson,
robbery, rape, murder and unprecedented mass civil revolution.
If it doesn't prevail it will unleash bloodletting, arson, robbery, rape, murder and
unprecedented mass civil revolution as a chronic ongoing and increasingly vile, corrupt
society.
Either way- the old America is gone to just a hatefilled, brainwashed cesspit of violence and
crime and to civil war – if white people there have the guts to hold their ground and I
wouldn't bet on that.
The USA has become George Floyd – the nation.
Criminal, brutal. drug ridden, and the gun he holds to a pregnant woman's belly symbolises
the gun held to much of the defenseless planet as the USA plunders and murders across the
globe.
Floyd is the USA.
Let us hope it meets the same fate.
@TimeTraveller If
he hadn't been pulled over, he probably still be alive today
That's an assumption. Could very well have smashed into a car full of kids and all we would
have heard was the "tragedy" bracketed by more reports on Kim Kardashians fat ass.
I've had the cops abuse me in my own house in front of my wife and kids over what was
essentially a phoned in SWATing by some anonymous bastard. So I have no love for cops and their
abuse of power. And as far as people flashing their lights its a sign by people who are
systemically abused for non crimes to be on the lookout for the badged
thieves.
Media is by and large nothing more than an echo chamber of propaganda and disinformation.
I've observed for nearly five decades the consistently increasing volume of BS uttered out of
their pie holes. Its gotten to the point that they no longer even pretend.
Because the purpose of these riots is not to actually address issues with cops, it's to
expand the power of the Police State by getting rid of local cops who might be familiar with
their community and have federal police from elsewhere to act like an occupying army. That
is, of course, the antithesis of what libertarians are all about.
May 27, 2020 New video shows Minneapolis police arrest of George Floyd before death
Four white officers involved in the death of George Floyd have been fired from the
Minneapolis Police Department, but Mayor Jacob Frey is saying that one of the officers should
be arrested for pressing his knee on Floyd's neck.
July 6, 2020 End Qualified Immunity from the Bottom Up
While states can't end a federally-imposed legal fiction on their own, a new state law to
reform the practice can serve as a model for getting something done.
A staff member rushes up to the two officers waving the banknote. 'Before they drive
off, he's parked right here, it's a fake bill from the gentleman,' he tells the cops
Well so glad the cops were able to serve up swift justice for poor Hadji there wouldn't
want this fine looking American to have to go to Friday Prayers with a fake twenty in his
pantaloons, now would we ?
Was reading obit of Herman Cain. His mother taught Cain that what matters is what you
start off with spiritually, not materially. His dad managed to buy a house and did all right.
I've met blacks like Cain's parents. They are solid people. There used to be a lot more of
that type of black.
I think some level of civil war may well be inevitable at this point. However, if Trump
did try that there would be 100% chance of civil war right now. The situation is not dire
enough to declare a state of emergency and may well encourage a coup d'etat by the CIA (who
has ultimate political power and is profoundly hostile to Trump and populism) and allied
elements in the military. Trump today has little room to do much of anything even if he wins
the next election.
They had already run the nogs plate and what do you know An armed violent offender red
flag is burning bright on his his arrest sheet right there on their computer screen. What do
suppose they should have done?. Walk over to the vehicle with a bundle bundle of balloons and
a lollipop.
The worthless nog had children in Texas that he never paid a penny of child support to yet
he's doping it up, making porn and driving around in a fucking Mercedes. He lived the life
and he died like a filthy mutt.
Alternative ending: The police never showed up, and Floyd slowly died behind the wheel
of his vehicle as his companions tried to shake him awake.
Alternative alternative ending: Floyd drove off in his car, had a heart attack or passed
out from drugs, and plowed into another car or a pedestrian or two before coming to a
stop.
We have laws against driving drunk for this reason.
@Anonymous e
story makes it clear that the police had reason to believe he was lying. The police
wouldn't know if he had Covid 19, when he was infected, and whether or not he was
symptomatic.
If Floyd knew he was infected and knew he was symptomatic, why was he not self quarantining?
As studies from around the world have shown, "having Covid 19" means little, as 50% of those
tested and found to have been infected, have no symptoms, and majority of those infected have
mild to moderate symptoms. If Chauvin and the other cops not done their job, Floyd would have
been counted as a Covid death.
Floyd says 'I'm dying man..'. I don't agree here – the cops were not compassionate
in his arrest. They had guns, he had muscle. Sure, one could have ended up with a broken rib
if they surrounded him and told him to calm the fuck down, but none of them, were really ever
at risk of death – like he was.
He was an imperfect citizen, even an imperfect human being, if you like, but the state
should aim to improve the lives of, and even the individuals themselves.
This is not what the cops did here. The issue is not racism, or even police brutality. It
is US society. Guns, no guns, genetics, culture – something must make US society so
violent that citizens kill cops, and cops kill citizens.
There are enough nations (China, Russia) where there is a melting pot of ethnicities and
cultures, where this kinda shit is much rarer. Why, violence is so exponentially prevalent in
US society (and not say UK society, where 3% of the population is Black), is a question.
In my personal opinion guns without education about guns – an aggressive state
policy, breeds aggressive citizens, white or black – they behave as they are led.
Three cops with guns on one druggy with muscles – either they are pussies or they
are psychopaths. In both cases, they need to either retrain, quit, or be arrested for
intentional harm.
There exists in males what I call a "delayed compliance" reaction. The football coach says
"everyone line-up for wind sprints" and no one, of any color, immediately moves. A brief
delay; a few seconds. It satisfies the ego; creates a false sense of voluntariness: Well,
okay, I will comply, but it is only because I choose to. Authority figures -- coach, the
teacher, parents. A harmless delay game. But whites seem to sense that a policeman is not the
football coach; when a policeman gives an instruction, you comply instantly. Instantly. For
some reason, Blacks think that the policeman is the football coach. Poor, uneducated,
intoxicated Whites, in their stupor, nonetheless seem to know this is not the football
coach.
You are being too kind.
The "societal failure" has been, and is, the negrification of virtually every aspect of life,
and claiming it is normal. That ranges from unintelligible ebonics to dressing like pimps, with
drug usage, lax sexual morals, etc along the way. It's all courtesy of the tribe. https://www.jpost.com/Jewish-World/Jewish-News/Sacks-Multiculturalism-threatens-democracy
Some people don't understand that.
@neprof e
allergies and prior conditions police know nothing about so using any sort of tranquilizer
carries a high risk as does using 'less than lethal' weaponry as you don't know how a person
will fall.
I am reminded of the Dylan song about the prizefighter Davey Moore. Moore was knocked down
but his fall was 'broken' when the base of his skull caught the bottom rope of the boxing
ring. He got back on his feet and finished the round. He even gave a post fight interview but
then lapsed into a coma in his dressing room and soon died. Apparently that lower rope
injured his brain stem
@anonymous ents
don't matter. Science doesn't matter. Only The Narrative™ matters.
So put Chauvin on trial, convict him, and sentence him to thirty years in prison. Then
pull a Witness Protection gambit: give him a new identity, a million bucks for his trouble,
and release him into South Dakota.
Nobody ever follows up on anything anymore, and if Cuomo can get away with murdering
thousands of vulnerable Covid patients in nursing homes, I'm sure the Minneapolis penal
system can carry a phony name on the books for a few years.
Voila, justice. Or at least what passes for it in The Day of Cthulhu.
New elites were emerging with new ideas, and one of them was to pamper blacks instead of
using tough love. Anything blacks did was ok with them, even if it did them no good.
It's called multiculturalism, and it's been the death of every European based country and
society.
@Trevor Lynch .
It doesn't mean they arrest you. They just do it so you don't try to run off or fight back.
So in this case putting cuffs on Floyd was justified as they had evidence of wrongdoing, and
just wanted him neutralized until they figured out what happened. Floyd freaked out, went
crazy, when they even tried to talk to him. It was a tragic event, but I don't see how the
cops really did anything wrong. They followed procedure. Floyd should have remained calm, but
he was too high, mentally unstable, afraid because he knew he messed up, had a panic attack
and a heart attack. Floyd killed Floyd.
He claimed to be too claustrophobic to get in the police car, which was a lie because he
was not too claustrophobic to sit in his own car.
There is a huge difference between sitting in a vehicle that you can freely leave, such as
one's own car, and sitting handcuffed in the backseat of a police car with a grate across the
front–which Floyd could not leave.
I would imagine that there are many people who can handle a car that they are free to
leave–and that can also take them many places , thus easing any sense of confinement,
and being *locked* in the back of a police car.
Other than that, I find myself sympathetic to much in the article. In particular, I have
sympathy for the other police officers who tried to get Chauvin to stop kneeling on Floyd's
neck and who are now facing serious crimina charges.
However, since Floyd did not pose a threat to the safety of the police officers–none
reported being injured–he should not have been killed. And I don't believe he died of
*entirely* natural causes, as there are conflicting autopsies. I think we should wait and
see.
Even by the account given in this article, Floyd was being difficult, not dangerous, and
being difficult does not deserve being knelt on while begging for breath and calling for
mother.
@Emily k of gas
are going to find themselves frostbitten and being shot at with no food and nowhere to lay
their head.
You are a woman. We've seen what happens once or twice when some blubbery black teen
female got caught shoplifting in a Korean store and assaulted the Korean woman and she simply
hauled off and shot the girl dead.
When screeching BLM come into suburbs and some black girl throws a rock through the wrong
window some non-white woman is going to simply blast her.
The AG has already he is withholding evidence in order to get a conviction. This is
against everything the prosecution is supposed to be about. He should be disbarred after this
at a minimum but this puts the whole prosecution into jeopardy at the appeals level.
Don't forget to blame white Minnesotans who thought it was a good idea to elect a black
Muslim leftist with credible accusations of domestic abuse against him.
Minnesota is about 85% white, and yet they elect a black supremacist Muslim uber-liberal
who doesn't pay his own taxes.
If they put it to a state-wide referendum, that all white males in Minnesota must be
castrated at birth, I wonder by what margin it would pass. 85%?
If he hadn't been pulled over, he probably still be alive today.
No, more like if he hadn't been pulled over he would probably be dead from the fentanyl
overdose the stupid bastard took. Blaming stupid niggers for their stupid nigger behavior is
quite rational and the fact that you seem to think it inappropriate indicates you have an ax
to grind.
He was high on drugs. He was passing a fake 20 and he had a rap sheet as long as a porn
stars schlong. What part of that did you fail to understand?
That's nine too many right off the bat. And although it's not in your face in media, cops
kill people other than blacks. Many more whites than blacks die during encounters with cops.
I'm not saying it is our biggest problem but there is room for improvement.
@jsinton or "put
cuffs" on anyone they want. It's enough that someone tells something about you (maybe not
even this is necessary). The police may also say that you might get uncoperative at some
point in the future because you are a "text-book example of someone who'll explode into
violence at any second" even if your hands have been tied before and the police has not read
any textbook or got any special education. Did the police make any test, make any question to
know if Floyd had taken drugs, was drunk? No. Did they tell him why they were arresting him?
Not necessary because people don't need rights.
@Ilya G
Poimandres voidance. That's why the cop has his gun out right away.
Police departments develop rigid, inflexible procedures to minimize risk, that leaves less
room for judgement and humanity.
For instance, police have not rescued drowning people on several occasions, because it was
against procedure.
I don't know about Russia, but police in China are notoriously brutal and rights are few
and unenforceable – worse than America, and there is a general callousness towards
human life.
Its hypercapitalism – anywhere hustling and the profit motive is king, human life is
cheap.
@bruce county
rofessional law enforcement officers kneeling on his torso and another on his legs. As for
the cervical spine, Joe Rogan says anyone putting their shin across a training partner's neck
like that in a Jiu Jitsu class would be instantly told get it the fuck off. Did Chauvin
maintain his position only for the few minutes until Floyd had became weak as a kitten and
begged to be allowed to stand up, or until Chauvin noticed Floyd had suddenly expired?
Neither, Chauvin stayed on top of Floyd for two minutes after medics had found Floyd
had no pulse. A medic had to tell Chauvin to dismount the dead man.
Some commenters mention Jewish support of BLM, and this interests me as someone who has
read Philip Roth. A Roth list of Jewish traits would be something like this: Contentiousness,
dissension, oppositional, hyper-touchiness, hyper-criticalness. Displaying these traits, says
Roth, "Puts a spring in their heel." (is it any wonder that Jewish people do not do very well
in the military?). It seems to me that BLM embraces the very same traits. So maybe Jews see
BLM as colleagues, sharing the same sensibility.
@Jefferson Temple
e needed. Too many innocent people are killed by cops. Floyd just wasn't one of them.
But Duncan Lemp was. And all of these fuck whitey riots have refused to acknowledge his
murder. We STILL don't have bodycam footage. The "defend the police" crowd have no problem with
police or even police brutality. They are upset that blacks get arrested at all. They cheer on
police when they murder white dissidents and seize the guns of law abiding citizens. The crowd
of rioters don't give a damn about police reform, other than to turn the police into a
commisariat to persecute whites
It is about BOPE an elite police squad in Brazil.
One commentator writes
"saw the movie, surely the best movie i've seen in a long time. impressive story. my country
needs BOPE definitely. saudações da Sérvia. respeito!"
Movies of super macho Cops who bash up criminals black and blue are super popular here in
India.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/mp-XqCrCi6I?feature=oembed
Super Hit super cop movie Singham.
After his last prison term in Texas, he moved to Minneapolis for drug dealing and
counterfeit money passing.
Criminals out on parole often move to another state since they won't be known to the
police. That is why George Floyd moved from Texas to Minnesota and not because he was just a
good guy who made some mistakes and seeking a "fresh start" as the jewsmedia tried to frame
things.
As I wrote in a previous commentary, the attorney general of Minnesota has no case against
these 4 police offiicers. They were merely acting in that incident in accordance with the use
of force protocols of the Minneapolis Police Department. That is simply the best defense they
have. Further, although I am not an attorney. I don't see how any judge could even allow this
to go to trial. There is no legal case. And if it does go to trial, they will surely be
acquitted.
Beyond that, these 4 officers should sue the hell out of the city of Minneapolis, the
state of Minnesota, the mainstream media, both verbal and print, as well as these black
organizations like Antifa, Black Lives Matter, these fake civil rights attorneys like
Benjamin Crump and others of his ilk. And any other entity or entities that were responsible
for this charade and outrageous defamation of character. They should take a leaf out of the
Nick Sandman playbook. Each of these officers could easily wind up with tens of millions of
dollars and be independently wealthy for the rest of their lives.
You're a spineless, virtue signaling nigger loving lunatic. These fucking filthy
primitives do not care about you. When SHTF will you genuflect to you Black invaders. They
will slaughter you and your nigger loving family mercilessly. Your wife and family must be so
proud of you.
@AaronB Caught On
Camera: Cops from Utter Pradesh State mercilessly Beat Up Boy With Cricket Bat
This is so normal, something like this probably happens everyday in the country.
Also applying electric shocks to genetilia etc is common practice here. Before you jump in
say how evul Indian police are, Indian police themselves are brutally beaten up the public
often.
This is how it is and this is how it will always be here.
As the US population becomes more brown and more multiracial and mixed, this will be
future that will await the West. It is inevitable.
@JessicaR not
deserve being knelt on while begging for breath and calling for mother.
He was bullshitting. He lied about his mother. He lied about doing drugs. He was lying about
being unable to breathe. But you want to construct an elaborate rationalization for him not
lying about claustrophobia. And who cares?
Should we disband the police because blacks start claiming they have "jailophobia."
You strike me as a nice person. We have police to protect nice people from horrible people
and ugly realities. Just thank them for their service and go back to thinking happy
thoughts.
His breathing difficulty was most certainly due to the lethal levels of fentanyl in his
bloodstream, which, including both fentanyl and it's active metabolite, norfentanyl, was
about 16.6 ng/mL. The average lethal concentration found in one recent study of opioid
related ODs was 9.8 ng/mL. We're not even sure Floyd was accustomed to opioids, because a
naive user can succumb even at much lower levels. Per the autopsy he had signs of advanced
atherosclerosis, which means he was a ticking time bomb considering his use of illicit
substances.
The merchant victim of the bogus bill asked Floyd to void the transaction by returning the
cigarettes and the change for the bill he passed. Floyd refused and that's why the merchant
called the cops on his black ass.
@NobodyKnowsImADog
ayments that let them stay in the city and not vote while the political professionals vote
"Democrat" that claim to represent the inert mass / mob, but don't.
Time to end this farce, and it's time because the money has run out to even support the
present system. Supposedly Trump and the Democrats are negotiating a COVID-19 welfare package
that will amount to 2.5 trillion dollars, if the negotiations don't fail. 2.5 trillion
dollars, all borrowed when the Democrat run States and cities (supposedly the richest in the
country) are effectively all bankrupt. The phrase "Dead, but too stupid to fall down" comes
to mind.
It's not the usual beast with a brain to remove. Like ISIS, it's a starfish with arms that
will grow back.
George Floyd was not a victim of police brutality or injustice.
Like the rest of us, he was a victim of the Covid lockdown. He was passing a bad bill
after losing his job. That wasn't his fault, but the DFL governor and mayor's.
@Malla stranger
wanted to start a fight with me in a bar. None of that would ever happen in America, despite
its supposed culture of violence.
America only doesn't look so great when compared with Western Europe (and Eastern?) and
Japan, but police brutality is obviously much less severe in America than in China and
India.
But America should be compared to the most developed places, not India or China or
Thailand or Poland, and it is more brutal than places in that comparison.
Sweden and Norway seem to have worked out a good approach to policing.
Which is reason number one-hundred-million-and-one why I believe that blacks and whites
in America need to go our separate ways. We need a racial divorce.
There needs to be separation because there's certainly no shortage of stupid dysfunctional
blacks like Saint George Floyd or indoctrinated/cucked whites who will take up for them.
Once the former are gone, we can focus entirely on the latter.
@animalogic t of
the divide and conquer strategy. Seems to me Trump has done his job (for his handlers) better
than even Obama; he's the most divisive President by far. I know, the media creates the
controversies, but Trump gets to play his part. He's an actor, taking direction, just like
every Pres. since Kennedy. I've noticed a steady progression beginning with Billy boy, and
reaching new heights of division with Trump.
People who still think "we" elect our President, or that it makes any difference at all
who gets elected,
gotta be deluded or distracted or just not paying attention.
The situation in the United States that this entire George Floyd event crystallizes into a
microcosm of our society even has such people as Dr. Gary Null, a noted researcher on the
Left side of the political spectrum up, in arms.
What is he angry about? That such organizations as BLM and many others of the Left,
concentrate on their own victimhood instead of concentrating on those issues that concern all
of us, together as one nation.
In this afternoon's radio broadcast, Dr. Null leveled a broadside against the Left that
would have had everyone on the Right standing up and cheering
The merchant victim of the bogus bill asked Floyd to void the transaction by returning
the cigarettes and the change for the bill he passed. Floyd refused and that's why the
merchant called the cops on his black ass.
LOL
Typical Nigger Behavior.
Unrestrained arrogance + Unmatched ignorance.
Look how many of them will gun each other down over the slightest notion of
"disrespect"
Some people will chose death over incarceration, but the duties of police and correctional
officers as properly discharged are to make the aforementioned option a very difficult one in
practice. The guards in the Epstein case are being prosecuted and so are the cops in the
Floyd case. They were paid to do a job.
@AaronB , cops in
America are far more rude than cops in Britain or the rest of Europe or Japan on average. For
some reason, I have never had any problems with police anywhere, for some strange reason cops
and airport officials are nicer to me than others (I have noticed). For example being let off
without fines for bringing in forbidden food products (the food products were confiscated
ofcourse) at airports while all my Indian friends having to pay fines.
But even I found American cops a bit rude compared to Western Euro/ Japanese cops. British
cops are extremely friendly and nice.
While the entire narrative concocted by the Lügenpresse is of course a massive lie,
there are nevertheless real questions to be asked about the tragic ascension of St. George
the Breathless.
*Big-city cops aren't usually very concerned with things like some drugged up hoodlum
passing a fake 20-dollah bill. They usually have better things to do and leave this nonsense
to the feds. (Yes we know they are supposed to enforce all laws – federal included
– except immigration violations which they routinely are ordered not to enforce by the
criminals who issue their orders.)
What was so important about this particular drugged up negro felon when there are so many
out there? Why was this fake 20 so important?? (They're all really fake 20s of course but
we're only referring here t0 those who are not legally entitled to counterfeit versus those
who are.)
*Officer Chauvin and St. George might very well have known each other as they both worked
security for an establishment called El Nuevo Rodeo, which seems to have some interesting
owners connected to the famous representative in our Clown Congress – one Ms. Ilhan
Omar, a paper Murikan from Somalia. Chauvin supposedly worked as outside muscle while St.
George served as inside muscle for this fine, upstanding pillar in a top-notch Minneapolis
neighborhood.
*Did St. George ingest all that Fentanyl, etc. himself or did someone help him?? Given his
saintly lifestyle self-medication seems most likely but still if a loose end needs to be tied
up it needs to be tied up.
*Chauvin's record of excessive-force complaints (18) in über-leftist Minneapolis
seems unusual for someone still allowed to work at the pleasure of the Politburo there. Is
this unusual or are they so desperate to keep foot soldiers they'll overlook the number of
complaints (many of which could be nonsense in that environment) despite his being a
crackah?
*I've read some reports of a massive counterfeiting operation centered in Minneapolis. Did
St. George, Derek Chauvin and the owners of El Nuevo Rodeo have anything to do with this? Is
there any possibility Chauvin was merely making certain that St. George's OD was permanent in
nature??
@Sulu worth an
article on Unz because the drug manufacturers are white (so the Chinese or Blacks can't be
blamed). The victims are also white.
It seems obvious that what these people need is medical attention and mentorship. In
Europe, that's what they would have gotten. It probably won't happen, however, because
blaming the victims is easier and more satisfying.
Seeing this shithole country finally crumble makes this a great time to be alive. Hit that
shard pipe, wrap yourselves in the flag, and find other losers to commiserate with you.
At least Hadji was working to build a business instead of Saint Floyd who was working hard
at hardly working. But tbeiving and being an ignorant dope fiend was "job 1" for the
beneficent giant.
" Four white officers " SNIP! And that my friends is where all of this crap falls apart.
When these clowns reporting this nonsense can't even get that right then everything else, all
of the subsequent lies, follow.
@FB dn't want
this fine looking American to have to go to Friday Prayers with a fake twenty in his
pantaloons, now would we ?
Arabs are the ones keeping the lights on in a lot of these areas.
A lot of those mini mart owners are actually refugee Coptics. This is especially true for
Detroit where a Coptic community runs half the businesses. Ironically the Blacks chased out
the Jews in the Detroit riots and the Gov replaced them with Coptics (Not a conspiracy, it's
done through green card requirements).
Muslims don't like handling pork or alcohol unless they have to.
@Anon This is why
I suspect that the smaller prefrontal cortex is really the main issue. We are supposed to
believe it's just a coincidence that this is the area of the brain that is responsible for
self-control. Harsh to talk about but I don't see blaming Whitey as a long term solution.
The obsession alt-right has with IQ tests is corrosive and leaves too many questions
unanswered. I used to live near a group home for severely mentally limited adults and they
were harmless. They were happy to help with anything but weren't able to care for themselves
since they were mentally around 6 or 7.
The Germans and Hitler were right. I wish Germany would have won the second WW. Jews do
not want to join the peoples of the world. Their hog wash ( gods chosen people) keep them
from becoming citizens on the level playing field of world peoples .that leaves one defense
for us non jews get rid of them ..had the Germans won the second WW, there would be no small
state of Israel .and look what a murderous monster state of terrorism it is today
The jews take over of the us Fed Reserve is not acceptable .they run the US congress .through
their lobbys .they steal billions from the US taxpayer .this way .and there you have it .they
are thieves ..period. Get Rid Of Them
Prefrontal cortex executive function would be overthinking it in emergencies. That is why
it gets disconnected under conditions of extreme stress. If you are brought up around chronic
stress, you become programmed to react very instinctively to any threats, even ones to social
status.
That's the flip side of the same "logic" that says that anybody who champions their rights
actually hates themselves and/or wants to have sex with them.
@John Johnson
decline as long as this continues.
Here, biker gangs make and distribute this drug. I guarantee that none of the "pro-white"
commenters here are going to be calling for cops to manhandle them, or even to take any
action at all, since seeing a white guy on a Hayim Davidstein motorcycle that he wouldn't
otherwise be able to afford is fine no matter how many white kids' lives he ruined.
Whites here would rather cry over a Jewess that was killed by a Somali cop, and my thesis is
that no race or community can survive with the problems that white Americans continue to
have.
@anon is what
this "article" is designed to do, to set one group against the other. "Let's you and him
fight." That is how we make color revolutions by the training manual. Look! A plane hit the
building! You didn't see it? Something wrong with your eyes. Look at the video. BLM and
Antifa should think twice when they are sent out because their own trainers may shoot them in
the back for special effects. Of course, it's not just about the Trump Biden election. It's
about who rules the world. The World Trade Center is now "One World Plaza." And to think this
is our own government doing this to us.
@AaronB
prostitutes where some police accused me of soliciting and actually drew their guns on me.
But I was polite and kept my hands away from my pockets (Which makes cops nervous) and in
five minutes they said I was free to go.
Its a kind of utter buffoonery. An oafishness.
On the female side its a grotesque public spectacle. As anyone who has seen a 300 pound
hooker knows. Sure, there are Jewish sex workers. Lots of Gentiles beat off to Joanna Angel
or Nina Hartley films.
But Joanna is not screaming on the sidewalk "The streetlight makes my p((ssy hair glow in
the dark"
I met Joanna Angel once at an electronic trade convention. She was polite and nice.
@anastasia ss a
single counterfeit bill is arrested. The matter is immediately referred to the federal
agency, Secret Service which investigates.
If the arrestee is deemed an innocent person who's innocently acquired the bill. He's not
charged. If the investigation finds the person has acquired the bill from either the
counterfeiters or another passer of counterfeit bills he is charged with knowingly passing a
counterfeit bill.
Floyd was a career criminal. There's a major counterfeiting operation In Minneapolis. As
evidenced by the seizure of 900,000 counterfeit bills recently.
In 1993 on a trip to Spain I saw four cops (one female) club the living shit out of some
Moroccan in Puerto del Sol Madrid. They beat him until two bricks of "mugre" dropped out of
his pants on the sidewalk, slung him in the back of a patrol car and sped off. From first
verbal contact to everybody gone was less than two minutes.
Another hoax perpetrated by the dishonest f media going unpunished for inciting subsequent
hate crimes and destruction against white weaklings and founding fathers images. Racist Lemon
and his colleagues from the CNN together with MSNBC are leading this police onslaught.
The use of police body cams that the Obama administration pushed for and which were
supposed to prove the narrative that police, and especially white police, are
stopping/targeting and killing blacks for no other reason than they are
driving/walking/jaywalking while black, is actually debunking the narrative and showing that
blacks invited and deserved the force that was used against them based on their erratic and
violent behavior.
Not sure who made the prediction but years ago they said that the widespread use of body
cams would do precisely this (debunk the far left narrative), so there would be a new push to
eliminate the use of body cams since it would show blacks acting like animals on the set of
the wild kingdom.
This is a great article but Greggy went soft on the Jewish owned drive by media and if not
for their slanted and propagandistic coverage and false claims the nation wouldn't have been
set on fire for months now. An honest media (Jew free) would have put events in their proper
context and waited for more facts to emerge instead of screaming "racist killer cops"
24/7.
@Sean they puled
him out because he'd give them the virus in the closed space. Then they called the paramedics
to take care of him. While waiting, one of the cops held him down with a knee on the BACK OF
Floyd's neck, preventing him from turning around and spraying the cop with viruses.
Cops aren't personal maids or nurses, asking them to take care of infectious drug addicts
would require a lot more cops and they wouldn't be cops anymore – that would be a
horrendous way of wasting taxpayer's money. Why didn't you go and take care of the drugged
criminal? At your own expense? His death is your fault
You'll notice that the media, even FOX, hasn't breathed a word about the Hennepin County
Medical Examiner's report. That's because the report contradicts the media's claims that
George Floyd died of asphyxia due to Chauvin's knee on his neck. The medical examiner's
report makes clear that Floyd had no internal or external injuries to his neck. If the
medical examiner's report had claimed Floyd died as a result of Chauvin's actions the leftist
media would be quoting from it every night.
Instead it has been memory holed and the media myrmidons hope everyone will just forget
about it so they don't go looking for it to read it and learn they've been lied to for
months. This way they can convict the four officers in the media with damnable lies.
@anonymous le,
who had murder on their mind. All the Alt-Right and White Nationalists did was complain. No
competent defense attorney volunteered to defend him. Fields wound up with an incompetent
Public Defender who did nothing to try to get him off.
If Chauvin is found guilty, which I'd bet a thousand dollars he will be, again his White
supporters will do nothing but complain on the pages of Unz and like websites. IMO, there is
a much better case to convict Chauvin than there was for sad sack James Fields. Chauvin needs
a top notch Black defense attorney. Unfortunately Johnny Cochran is dead.
" the police dealt with Floyd with a level of patience and professionalism that I
certainly could not have mustered. would you have been able to maintain your cool in the same
situation? This video gives me nothing but respect for the police who have to deal day in and
day out with deranged criminals like George Floyd."
Yup. Browse among the literally thousands of hours of cam footage online showing how
blacks typically react to police in routine stops. Blacks love lying and shouting and
violently resisting. They genuinely believe they have a right to resist lawful arrest, and
have for at least the last ten years.
No way I could be a cop. I would never find the patience to put up with even five minutes
of it. God bless law enforcement.
@Sean It used to
be accepted that Black boys needed harsher punishments. This was accepted by both Blacks and
Whites.
Now modern egalitarians have decided that all children are the same. Well how is that
working out? Have you read the essay on what it is like to teach black children? For all
indications Black kids were better off in the 40s when Whites had lower expectations. In
today's classroom White liberal teacher lets a few of them run wild and then ruin the class
for the sake of liberal feelings. The Black kids with potential get to college and find out
they are well behind. This happens everywhere.
James Fields plowed his car into a group of protesters, killing one. Your point of view is
the result of the cognitive dissonance between your imagined reality and your observable one.
Taking such indefensible positions has to be understood in the context of your mind
protecting your ego.
Being on drugs did not make Floyd deserving of death. Neither did having a criminal past,
or resisting arrest. This entire situation, where police could apply arbitrary force against
Floyd, resulted from Floyd passing a fake $20 bill. I dont know if you've noticed, but the
FED has been passing trillions in fake twenties these last few months. How can you
counterfeit something that is worth nothing, backed by nothing, signifying nothing, endlessly
created out of nothing? If anything, by injecting his own worthless currency into the
economy, George Floyd was saving the FED some work. He was providing a valuable service,
which is keeping this dead economy afloat.
The author writes that knee on neck is an approved restraint technique, and thus cannot be
illegal, without seeming to realize that this is the CORE of the issue and why many people
are upset and protesting in the first place. George Floyd was not cooperating but he was also
not being violent. Whereas Chauvin used violence to subdue Floyd. It doesnt matter if Floyd
died of heart failure. Do you think his heart would have failed if he didnt have an armed man
kneeling on his neck?
Justice happens in a courtroom buddy, and it's the cop's job to make sure a perpetrator
makes it to a courtroom.
Of course its probably all psychological warfare from top to bottom. The cop's name is
practically Chauvinist for crying out loud. The end result is how we may judge the motive of
the incident. And the end result appears to be the defunding of police departments. Just as
COVID is defunding the rest of the economy.
Whoever is left holding the fake cash loses everything.
If the Feds abused their power in Waco and Ruby Ridge, then they also abused their power
in Portland.
As far as people flahing their high beams, I think it's a pretty clear sign that the people
who do it want the rest of us to avoid a bad encounter with the police.
Sadly, it continues to be fashionable to take whichever side of an issue makes you feel
better about your country and your identity. Here is where nationalism reveals itself as a
bankrupt ideology good for manipulating feelings rather than arriving at any useful
results.
Blacks love lying and shouting and violently resisting. They genuinely believe they have
a right to resist lawful arrest, and have for at least the last ten years.
Golly, I wonder (((who))) put those kinds of RADICAL ideas in their heads?
@Robert Dolan
unable to see through liberalism. If anything they used their intelligence to delude
themselves. This is mocked in the joke about how only someone born really smart can write a
book about how intelligence isn't genetic.
I would trust my local Mexican gardener to craft racial policy over any White liberal with
a Harvard degree. I don't think we are dealing with a lack of intelligence in liberals. I
think the theory of liberals having religious and egalitarian genes make the most sense. This
then overrules their rationality. So in that context I'm really not impressed with
intelligence tests.
Lol if George Floyd really threw the entire "Free World" into spasms of K*ll-the-Boerism
because he pulled a Juice WRLD and ate his stash (which happened to be, I assume, laced with
a lethal amount of fent) to hide it from the porkers welll, that's pretty darn funny. Besides
all the k*ll wypipo stuff, of course.
The truth is that the Leftists don't care what caused Floyd's death. The truth is
irrelevant. A negro died while a white cop was restraining him. The damage that Floydgroids
do to society is stuff we deserve, don't you see? There shouldn't be any cops, unless it's
gentile whites defending themselves, then there needs to be a police state to keep them
defenseless.
@John Johnson
have good jobs and live with wives and kids aren't good parents as a whole judging by the
criminal records drug habits etc the children of so many affirmative action blacks have.
But black fathers are strong, violent rageaholics
So they can keep the little ones in line. But once boy is 5'8 140, beatings I doubt more
beatings will import him. In the old days he could leave home and do farm labor or other
work.
Nowadays the 14 year old thug lives with mamma because of the welfare money. And if the
critters don't go to school, the welfare department cuts off the money.
@TimeTraveller e
an English class. Your I.Q. must be very low to not recognize the use of a simile.
Just the fact that you want this country to burn tells me that you are a looser from an
economic as well as an intellectual standpoint. You're on the bottom and you think if there
is revolution that some how things will get better for you. I can assure you, especially if
you are black, that things are never going to get better for you. As a matter of fact, if you
do happen to be black, things will probably get a lot worse for you before it ever gets
better.
Yes. I didn't comment much on this because, like pretty much EVERY OTHER "racist" incident
the last several years, I figured, if we waited long enough, the truth would come out. Of
course, waaaay after the narrative was set, and the damage was done. I'm curious. Are the
powers that be pushing this b.s. because they genuinely feel blacks face injustice or are
they using the blacks to aid in their attempt to destroy our culture? Either way, the blacks
will ultimately suffer. They're so put upon they have to manufacture countless "crimes"
against them. As if there eventually won't be a backlash bringing on the prejudice they
supposedly wish to stamp out. Lol. Popcorn indeed.
So, George Floyd is 'The Boy Who Cried Wolf'. That make sense because he kept saying
(lying) that he could not breath seems the beginning then those police will not trust him
anymore, and when he truly begin to unable to breath by the kneeing on neck with ton of human
meat on his back and butt, so those police think he lied and didn't trust him and they didn't
even think to double check.
(Note: There is other version with the conclusion is that the boy is eaten by wolf, not
sheep)
Sorry, the leak video:
1.George Floyd is an Temper Tantrum and his mind is really sane to me, he is not even in
the state of 'drug addict'.
2.It does not prove that George Floyd is killed by the Fentanyl. The leak video, in fact,
proves that Derek Chauvin had accidentally killed George Floyd due to the 'The Boy Who Cried
Wolf' effect, and ignorant on how dangerous kneeing on neck is. I think George Floyd is
killed by the combination of Fentanyl and Kneeing On Neck.
Question:
1.Why the police does not release the leak video from the beginning? The video, in fact,
can give Derek Chauvin more excuses to save him from being jail or just get him fire only or
he even able to keep his job due to the police qualified immunity and it can prevent
riot.
My own answer for this is that this is literally divide and conquer tactics, make those
anti-police, with many right reasons, like a bunch of idiot and the leak video also cover the
true problem, police abusing power. The police abusing power is usually unable to discussed
and the MSM always turn it into 'police beat black people'.
2.Why the redacted video, which is recorded at the same places, has the date '05/26/2020'
meanwhile the leak video has the date '05/25/2020′? Can anybody explain to me? I truly
curious about this.
That fat (360 pounds) tub of crap Eric Garner had the cops trying to get him to comply
with his arrest for 45 minutes before they laid a hand on him. He had been arrested more than
30 times by the NYPD on charges such as assault, resisting arrest, and grand larceny. Less
than a year before he died, in August 2013, he was charged with aggravated unlicensed
operation of a vehicle, false impersonation and marijuana possession. He was out on parole
for that.
He already had three more pending charges for illegally selling cigarettes–and then
was caught again the day that he died. He was (correctly) afraid that this time he'd be
busted on a parole violation.
He would not just sell the loose cigs–he positioned himself by the store's entrance
and threaten people who would go in and buy legal cigarettes inside.
He had no job due to his obesity and health issues-plus his own wife said on TV that he
was "lazy" (her word). Not totally–he did have 6 kids-with 4 different women.
He was being arrested for counterfeiting. The cops routinely cuff you even when they want
to interrogate you for a possible crime. I see it all the time. Then later they uncuff you
and let you go. What is so hard about that?
Too many cops have been shot going up to a car where they can't see the guys hands. That
is why there is always a cop in the back with his gun drawn in case you try to spin around
and take a shot. Sorry, but that is the way is is because of the people being stopped.
I also have no doubt that liberals would much rather divide children by IQ than
acknowledge that race exists. They would put well behaved White kids with unruly Black kids
for not scoring high enough.
It makes more sense to argue that Whites simply have a right to exist as a people and that
includes all Whites regardless of intellect. There are numerous European gene differences
that are related to cultural preferences and they should not be forced to subject themselves
to some egalitarian dystopia that hates them, especially when said Whites built the empire in
the first place.
@frontier y are
you speaking for cops? David Layman the ex cop and former supermax guard YouTuber, who
deliberately broke fingers until convicts submitted, and once was struck by a colleague to
get him to stop baton choking a rampaging convict to death said the duration of what Chauvin
did to Floyd was nothing like what would be done in the line of duty, clearly unnecessary,
and Chavin knew it because he was resting his hands on his thighs. Relative to the education
and amount of training required to qualify, cops are far better paid than nurses. But that is
going to change because even one Chauvin is too much.
Having a gun out shows they were self-dramatising cops in a fantasy world.
No, you see this all the time when there are two cops on a traffic stop. One approaches
the window and the other hangs back in the guys blind spot with either his gun already drawn
or with his hand on it.
@Sulu se
granddaughter killed herself because of meth isn't even able to grieve properly for his
granddaughter because conservatives declared her the enemy and declared a war on her for the
sake of law and order. His political ideology estranged him from his own seed, and any nation
that makes this the norm is doomed to failure. Its flags deserve to be burned and its
monuments deserve to be defaced.
I guarantee that the old man sympathizes more with Wall Street and Israeli Jews than his
own daughter, and sides with property against life and injury. Such a nation has an
appointment with famine and has no future.
He wasn't really trying to kill anyone if the only person he managed to kill was a
4′ 11″, 330 lb. chain smoker. If he had been black, a mestizo illegal alien or a
major D Party donor his sentence would have been no more than 10 years. The 419 year sentence
was the tell that this had been a political show trial.
Floyd was not "murdered" by the police. How simple to watch and conclude that.
Expose and expose and expose the restraint they show they used on a crazed, resistant and
potentially violent person.
If reason does not prevail here, if the crazed, resistant and potentially violent
person(s) still want to use this as an excuse for violence and destruction, then time to
arrest every one of them, by defending the police, not stupidly "defunding" the police.
To watch the wormy and pompous Jeffrey Nadler utter, "Shame on you," to AG Barr shows what
Nadler would do to efforts to maintain order: encourage rioting, violence and
destruction.
Go to Israel, Mr. Nadler. That's where you belong! And take Antifa with you.
@Alden ers are
just as bad as the media. They know full well it is a lie and hate that we don't go along
with it. That hate us more than anything. They would happily send us to camps and shut off
the internet in the name of equality.
So they can keep the little ones in line. But once boy is 5'8 140, beatings I doubt
more beatings will import him. In the old days he could leave home and do farm labor or other
work.
Well that is also when 8th grade was the goal and not high school graduation.
From what I have read Blacks really start having problems around junior high.
@TimeTraveller I
agree that America has major problems and a hell of a lot of it can be laid at the feet of
the Jews. But if things go to hell in this country(Civil War) your benefits won't be worth
the paper it's printed on. I don't think this country needs to burn so much as certain groups
within it need to burn.
But I suspect all this civil unrest is little more than poor Kabuki theater designed to
assist in getting Trump out of office. If Biden wins I bet Covid-19 and riots just magically
go away. If Trump is re-elected it's anyone's guess what will happen.
Almost a year ago exactly, yet another drunk-driving illegal alien killed another
American citizen. This time, it was Sarasota, Fla., and the vehicular killer will spend 13
years behind bars.
He pled guilty to the federal charges, not to the sate charges. Presumably he pled guilty
to the federal charges because he didn't want to face the death penalty.
And no, these people don't give a damn about justice. The idea of the great reset is to
continue to push the US into a collectivist state of mind and a China like economic set up
with a fully authoritarian government and no political freedom. Scamdemic lock down and media
manufactured race war are two ways to push us in that direction.
If it looks like a conspiracy and smells like a conspiracy .
I would invoke the Insurrection Act, then spend the next few weeks arresting the leaders
of BLM and antifa, as well as their collaborators in state and municipal governments,
You forgot to arrest the media owners. The one's who have for 4 years, made our
president's life miserable, through lies and innuendos. And, while you're at it grab False
Fauci and his master, Billy boy Gates, thereby putting to an end the entire charade.
There's enough video, and print evidence, available of powerful jews clamoring for the
eradication of white Christians. It's time for those who speak of our genocide, be it a
rabbi, a professor, politician, newscaster, or whomever, to be charged under the hate speech
laws that they themselves rammed through congress.
@John Johnson
inistrators big black mammas, black preachers, and NAACP ADL AJC ACLU lawsuits hovering
about, it's basically illegal to impose discipline on black kids. Just as it's impossible to
fire incompetent troublesome blacks in the workplace.
The White women are stuck in the classroom with the monsters . The black women sit in the
school district office as consultants, coordinators and counselors at high salaries. And
behind them are the Jewish legal foundations and administrators at the state level aiding and
abetting the savages who destroy the schools and make them unsafe for Whites.
Immigrants are fortunate. Most of them come from nations that are free of blacks.
Irrespective of their economic shortcomings, nations such as this offer a peace, security and
tranquility that once they arrive in the US they will never know again. And since so many
immigrants are destined to operate small businesses in the United States, their interactions
with this conflict and crime driven group will be a central part of their lives in the US.
But that's only if they decide to call the years they'll spend interacting with black America
as living.
I didn't have to use DuckDuckGo to find this vid. It was first, right at the top, using
the Carlson episode title as a search phrase. Enjoy:)
Once again, the cop didn't "point a gun" at George Floyd, which is clearly evident in the
video. The pistol is pointed slightly down and to the side. If the trigger had've been pulled
during that segment of the video, the bullet would've struck the hinge area of the opened
door. Look at the trigger guard to get a good idea of the pistol's long-axis alignment.
Tucker's Unreal George Floyd Comments The Young Turks
Aug 5, 2020
These teachers are no different than the scumbags in media in that they believe
egalitarian lies are better than admitting that those other Whites are probably
correct. They can't stomach that outcome so the unspoken plan is to lie and suppress while
hoping that miscegenation somehow evens it all out someday. The unspoken plan is to hope they
just breed out the curve.
Public teachers are part of the problem and they know it. All it would take is a dozen of
them to setup hidden cameras and the system would crash.
Chauvin will no more get justice than has James Fields (he of Charlottesville, Va.), whose
victim wasn't even black (and she wasn't his victim, either).
The mob is in full control, now.
Presumably, he pled guilty because he knew the evidence against him was insurmountable
(i.e., he knew he was guilty) . That would be the simplest presumption to make.
Along those lines you must face the fact that the Negro was made Numinous by Yankee
WASP Elites.
The Unz Jew haters can't handle that reality.
There must have been a Jew in the cupboard or something when Lincoln decided to go to
war.
The same Jew in the cupboard must have forced him to only give lip service to the Liberia
plan.
At Unz the Jews are able to magically transverse time and space, filling the innocent
minds of Anglo leaders with egalitarian delusions even where Jews didn't exist or didn't have
influence.
The guy is flippin' out and the officers have a handful, to say the least. I also have to
admit that according to this footage, they are being as accommodating as possible considering
the situation.
Like the author, I have to question the claim of claustrophobia, in particular. They are
not putting him in a prowler, but an SUV, as far as I can tell.
And for LAW God fearing common people that believe in karma divine justice and their
simpleton infantile mind that in the battle of good vrs evil and lies vrs TRUTH good shall
prevail over evil and only the TRUTH shall makes us all FREE that divine binary covenant has
been broken. LIES and evil reign supreme and their godless troops in the MSMedia,
politicians, and other lords of darkness not only claim victimhood but make profits in the
process..WE simple deplorables find it incredible that our sacred News media affirms lies,
glorifies lies, certified lies , and if you dont believe lies then you are racist, bigot,
conspiracy lunatic BUT then if LIES win then the truth is irrelevant then it follows that GOD
is a fraud Why is the Black god fearing communities so silenced? all moral religious
INSTITUTIONS whose main source of sustenance is their defense of PEACE, morality, ethics,
GOODNESS, etc.condened BLMANTIFA From Jesus Christ, to Thoreau, MLKING, Mandela, the JUSTICE
and TRUTH ha been the crux of their MORAL force Today the political, religious, civil, MEDIA,
allied themselves with the LIES .its shameful, repugnant While terrorists are financed with
millions$$$ and celebrated in MSM Hollywood WashDC, an honorable man probably alone
devastated with a lifetime career in ruins Derek Chauvin he probably made the same mistake
that most simple humans made ,he believe in GOD that was his demise..IF you believe and hope
in god .you shall perished waiting
@fnn out, and
turned into the wrong street. His car was mobbed, his back window broken out, and he
accelerated into, as it turned out, another mob. That's what happened, I studied the
video.
The acceleration was a panic response. The people responsible for the resulting death were
the people who induced panic in James Fields, not James Fields. Had he not been mobbed and in
justifiable fear of his life, there would have been no death.
Field's trial and conviction were simply not legal. They weren't even a lynching. they
were simply a demonstration of life and death power by the Charlottesville Left. We've seen
quite a few of those demonstrations since then.
One in the chest and one in the head. Sorts all kind of problems out.
Ok where I live, Sweden, the police would have beaten the shit out of him for resisting
arrest. Police don't easily draw their firearm here, but they are quick to draw their baton
and use it. But on the other hand, people arrested here do as the police say, making scenes
as in the video only worsens your case.
Policemen here are respected, and you can always ask a policeman if you are lost for your
way.
Most people here understand they do a hard and health wise taxing job.
I had a girlfriend a long time ago, who was a police officer ( 3,5 years education, minimum
college to entry) she got in a fracas, and was so much she had to quit. And she was not
petite 1,80 cm, really well built, athletic and of course a blonde.
She is now 30 years later a cripple, because of a bad arrest.
They should have shot the motherfucker! I would.
@UncommonGround
heir pods) encounter here on a regular basis, largely due to a black population unleashed by
liberal and media permissiveness. (You will soon though, when the levels of foreigners with a
migration background but no integration interest rise.)
There are some sadistic cops and they cause trouble (lots of white victims too) and
policing attitudes are bad, but blaming these cops on the death of a hopeless, disgusting
figure like St. George of the Gutter is unfair. Chauvin did ok, even if he did have priors. I
hope he doesn't get fucked over completely and I pray for him and the rest of us here.
Negroes are criminals. they may not have committed a crime yet, but they will soon.
"You can take a man out of the bush, but you can't take the bush out of a man"
Rhodesian proverb.
Niggars was a failed offshoot in making of the white man. It was a dead end, really. Just
like Gorillas and Chimps, will mostly not evolve further.
Once they they movi into your neigboorhood its time to move, same goes for bloody arabs,
sandniggars, bad people.
He didn't plead guilty for the state trial and was sentenced to 419 years by the
State/Commonwealth of Virginia. He risked the death penalty if found guilty in the federal
trial. I know it sounds crazy, but some guys would rather rot in prison than be put to
death.
@John Johnson
maybe they're more honest with me? They are also continually bullied by the black teachers
who just love to hear how the blacks curse defy and hit the White teachers.
A montage of videos showing black behavior in the public schools would be great great
great. If it were not taken down from the internet the first day.
I've seen plenty of internet posts and comments from White teachers describing the
horrendous behavior of blacks from K-12.
Once you've worked with blacks, whether kindergartners or attorneys, you realize the truth
about them.
@John Johnson
were bribed / financed by oil companies. No joke, no conspiracy theories, not "mystic
powers", just businessmen with oil/gas concessions that would go broke under nuclear
competition but managed to bribe the environmentalists to destroy nuclear. Granted, the word
"jewish" is never mentioned, and should have been if only as minor participants, but the
principals were not jewish.
Simple reality is horrifying beyond reason -- we are in a competitive society, like it or
not, and everybody competes ruthlessly. Far more comforting to believe that somebody
somewhere will prevent anything too bad from happening. The puppet masters need puppets, the
people complaining thus have a steady job.
Most ridiculous post I've seen in months. It's the black preachers who are the biggest
problem. They're not really clergymen. They're black racist activists using their churches as
a base from which to operate their political activities.
Mandela was a communist terrorist. MLK was trained at a communist activist school and was
a complete charlatan, grifter con artist and wife and sex partner beater.
The FBI had recordings in his home and there are many tapes of him pounding on his wife.
Source; retired FBI man a relative knows.
Fed Criminals commit crimes against countries, but it's the George Floyds us petty
assholes have to deal with on a daily basis and yes, he was being violent.
I guess replying to a "gay troll" makes me stupid too, but it won't happen again.
It's more likely that during interrogation they told him that the murder conviction was
cinched, that everyone at every level in the country, when they discussed the incident, they
prefaced it with "when the cops killed George Floyd" or some variation. They told him (like
they do people) that he needs to take the "smart" option that is least destructive and
"safer". To me, a plea-bargained acceptance of a penalty has little relation to the truth of
the matter let alone guilt.
It probably very safe say that those cops are under bizarre pressure and it's
semi-ridiculous to pontificate about what they should do, but they need to keep their traps
shut and go to trial. The video that's been released shows the majority of what actually
happened. They did nothing wrong. The only quibble is Chauvin using his knee to keep that
whigged-out nut in position, and it's a permitted technique according to the formal police
guidelines, used against people who are resisting arrest, as Floyd was.
But they all could be sacrificed, especially if the Democrats win (the trial is set for
next spring). Actually, that's probably what he was told. "They're going to kill you
[essentially] and you'd better agree to this before they have a chance."
"Presumably, he pled guilty because he knew the evidence against him was insurmountable
(i.e., he knew he was guilty) . That would be the simplest presumption to make."
@Ilya G
Poimandres ed use their fire arms under the law in that case and if they had the shooting
wouldn't have been a blip on the radar screen given King's actions. Instead, to save King,
they used batons as they were trained and brought a man stated to be under PCP, wildly strong
and deranged under control without killing him or inflicting permanent debilitating injury.
(The two other men with him complied and there was no problem). Officer Koon thought the
whole thing, being taped, would be used as a text book case of how to handle such a
situation. So basically they did what you suggest. How'd that turn out?
What scares me is the insouciance and apathy to the loss of a human life shown by the
white people here. BLM have a point.
Only psychopaths would dwell on the technicalities of how he died and the events that led
to it. Does it matter now? he is dead.
These are two fundamental questions for me.
Would George Floyd has died if he didn't had the encounter with Dave chauvin? Would he
have just died anyway?
Did he deserved to die?
Most reasonable people would say no. People here try to justify his death when there is
nothing to justify here. Watching white people justify his death with cold rationality and a
total lack of empathy gives me the shivers.
The Chinaman is probably just as racist as whites against blacks but George Floyd didn't
do anything to deserve this fate.
Think about how it felt like to die from suffocation under that knee for 9 minutes? What
if it were you ? Would you want someone to help you if you said " I can't breathe"?
She's the one who had a meltdown and had to leave the set and go smoke a big fat hooter
when Trump won the count on election night. And she's the one that bandies about the epithet,
"trash". It's on Youtube, somewhere. It's hilarious.
A montage of videos showing black behavior in the public schools would be great great
great. If it were not taken down from the internet the first day.
Vrettos: 1. We're waiting to see how the rhetoric of the new Biden administration will play
out in actual policies.
Hudson: Biden's long political career has been right-wing. He's the senator from Delaware,
the country's most pro-corporate state – which is why most U.S. corporations are
incorporated there. As such, he represents the banking and credit-card industry. He sponsored
the regressive bankruptcy "reform" written and put into his hands by the credit-card companies.
As a budget hawk, he's rejected MMT, and also "Medicare for all" as if it is too expensive for
the government to afford – thereby making the private sector afford to pay 18% of US GDP
for health-insurance monopolies.
Hardly by surprise, Biden has chosen cabinet members as corporate lobbyists, including the
new Secretary of Defense. And on February 9 he invited Jamie Dimon and other business leaders
to the White House and asked them what they recommended. These billionaires said that they
didn't need $1.400, so why should anyone else? They pretended that spending money might cause
inflation – yet we are in the midst of debt deflation and falling disposable income for
most families.
Biden's prejudices are why the Democratic National Committee pushed him as their candidate
over Sanders, and why Rep. Jim Clyburn made his pharmaceutical industry backers happy by
pushing Biden over the top in South Carolina, delivering the black vote in that state's big
primary.
What amazes me is the ability to attract this vote despite the degree to which Biden has
sponsored legislation that hurts blacks and other minorities: his cutbacks in welfare spending,
his anti-crime laws falling mainly on the black community, his bankruptcy laws, and of course
his denial of universal public medical care to that part of the population with the highest
death rates, shortest lifespans and worst medical care.
He has tried to cover up this history by appointing Neera Tanden as head of the budget,
claiming that she's a progressive presumably simply because she's non-white. Yet she's a
leading opponent of Bernie Sanders' Medicare for All proposals.
V: In our polarized economy, wages have stagnated since 1971 – home ownership rates
have fallen as foreclosures, evictions and homelessness have jumped dramatically during the
2020-2021 Covid pandemic.
The big decline in home ownership was the result of Obama's double-crossing his campaign
promises by bailing out the banks and leaving all the junk-mortgage debts and other fraudulent
loans on the books. This led to foreclosures and evictions of about 9 million American
families, most of them Hispanic and black. Home ownership rates plunged from 68 to 61 percent
of the population (an enormous and rapid 10% drop).
The covid epidemic is leading to enormous arrears mounting up – for renters and for
mortgage debtors. Evictions have been suspended by moratoriums that expire in March or April,
and unpaid mortgages have been added onto later due dates (with appropriate penalties making
this remunerative for the banks).
So the question is whether Biden can outdo Obama in reducing U.S. home ownership rates by
another 10% -- say, to just 56% of the population.
Let's look at what could be done – today and a decade ago. Obama and Biden COULD have
written down the junk mortgages to realistic market prices (and thrown the mortgage brokers and
bankers in jail for fraud). Instead, they supported the fraudsters against the voters who had
been promised "hope and change." Most of the millions of foreclosed homes were bought by
absentee owners and turned into rental property. Companies such as Blackstone were major
players. The evicted families entered the rent market – and U.S. rent charges have
soared. So consumer income has been spent much more on real estate, finance and insurance than
for goods and services.
V: It's most severe and unstable at the bottom of the housing market where tenants who have
lost jobs have amassed $11 billion in rental arrears -- a broader measure which includes all
delinquent renters puts the number at $53 billion.
There are two kinds of results. The first will be an enormous accrual of back-rent debts and
mortgage arrears to be paid off. For commercial businesses such as restaurants, these arrears
are so large that they probably will choose to go out of business rather than paying all the
profits for the next few years to their landlords.
Unless these debts are written down, most of the population is too debt-strapped to buy
goods and services. So corporate profits can come only from rising prices, or getting
government subsidy,
A second result is going to be a rise in homelessness in many cities. Entire camps of
evictees will be forming in tents, perhaps in the major parks – or on the subways as in
the past.
Many properties will be sold – yet housing prices are still rising.
V: What are some of the specific racial effects of this housing and job crisis, what's been
the Bidden administration's response so far and how does this relate to your own work on racial
reparations measures?
The low rates of black home ownership reflect a vicious history of red-lining. Limiting the
areas where non-whites can buy has gone together with charging much higher interest rates than
white buyers receive.
Housing is the basic criterion for joining the middle class. And for a century, blacks were
excluded, not only by banks but from the government mortgage-insurance programs dating from
FDR's reforms in the 1930s. That's what made black buyers "more risky" and hence charged higher
interest rates.
I grew up in Hyde Park, in Chicago. The University of Chicago and its property management
companies were among the worst abusers. For them, a "free market" meant a market free of
blacks. But in the late 1950s they saw that they could do "block busting," that is, selling a
home in a white neighborhood to a black buyer. This panicked the neighboring owners, who sold
their homes. The buyers were largely the speculators, who flipped them to black buyers at
marked-up prices.
That happened on my block, on 48th and Dorchester, a block from where Obama has bought his
home. Once a few houses had changed hands, Mayor Daley condemned the block. My house was torn
down, as were others, and the land is not gentrified.
To put the issue in perspective, think of the situation in 1945. That is when the great
increase in middle-class wealth – today's middle-class net worth – took off. It was
limited to white people, because they were the only people who qualified for the great increase
in net worth created by the house-price boom over the past 75 years.
The norm was that banks limited their mortgages to a level that would absorb up to 25% of a
buyer's salary. The buyer would get a self-amortizing mortgage, to be paid off in 30 years free
and clear. This limit on debt leveraging kept housing affordable.
You and I have spoken about the issue of black reparations before. It's very hard to pay
reparations for slavery, because the enslaved families have died long ago. The reparations need
to be paid to the living – and after all, it's the living blacks who remain injured.
There is one way to make the black population economically as resilient as the white
population has been. That is to give it the same deal that created most white middle-class
wealth. The government should buy or build homes – private homes, just like white
neighborhoods, not public housing. They should offer buyers the same deal that was given in
1945. Any black family would be given a home, with a mortgage of 25% of the household head's
income, to be amortized over 30 years.
Suppose the black buyer earns the minimum wage, or about $25,000 a year. Then 25% of this
would be $6,250 – just about $500 a month. Over 30 years, the buyer would pay $187,500
– much of it in interest, guaranteed by the FHA.
As a practical political matter, of course, such a windfall would have to be offered to all
Americans across the board. Hispanics and white poor would qualify.
That is the only way to create economic resilience of a class that has been excluded on
racial lines, and which remains excluded today.
Without special subsidy of this sort, there cannot be any serious talk of equality. Minority
buyers were the great victims of the junk-mortgage run-up and the Obama evictions.
V: In a recent N.Y. Times piece, David Leonhardt raises the question of why the U.S. economy
has fared so much better under Democratic presidents than Republicans?
In fact, he argues the gap is "startlingly large" when one measures annual growth rate, Gross
Domestic Product growth rate, jobs, incomes, productivity -- even stock prices.
Well, the New York Times has been the leader in "fake news," not least for its support of
real estate and financial interests, and of the Democratic Party.
The focus on growth rates as measured by GDP is a travesty of reality. Since 2008, GDP for
95% of Americans has actually declined. We are still in the Obama Depression – that was
the state of affairs when the covid-19 crisis hit. Pavlina Tcherneva at the Levy Institute at
Bard College has produced the statistics.
When debtors fall behind and have to pay penalty interest rates to banks and credit card
companies, this is counted as an "increase in GDP," classified as "financial services." As if
the banks are providing a service by charging higher fees to indigent debtors who are unable to
keep current on their living costs.
About 7% of GDP is hypothetical "homeowners rental value" – what homeowners would have
to pay themselves if they rented out their homes to themselves as tenants. As rents have risen
(largely by absentee owners who bought homes that were foreclosed), this increases GDP. It
leaves out minority owners, whose home ownership rate is much lower than that of whites.
What The New York Times and others looking at GDP leave out of account is how unequal the
distribution of wealth and income have become since 2008, and indeed since the 1980s.
Economists are now talking about a K-shaped recovery: up for owners of stocks and bonds (about
One Percent of the population owns something like 80 percent of these securities), and real
estate. But wage earners are being squeezed. The "recovery" is not a recovery for them. It's a
boom for the wealthy, for the rentier class, mainly in the Finance, Insurance and Real Estate
(FIRE) sector.
That sector is the main audience for The New York Times. And most of the Democratic Party's
donor class comes from the FIRE sector. Despite this, the Democratic success at identity
politics has created a political situation in which only the Democrats can enact anti-labor and
anti-black policies, because their politicians are able to deliver the labor and black
votes.
I don't see how there can be real progress unless the Democratic Party is replaced, at least
with the DNC leadership that has turned its politics into demagogy. Its identity politics is
based on every identity except being a wage-earner.
V: Central to Biden and America's neoliberal vision of world order is an economic philosophy
of privatization and financialization. How do you think this will play itself out in the Biden
administration's foreign and economic policy of military spending and arms sales and use of
military threats and force if necessary, to enforce U. S. international dominance and
technological hegemony?
Biden has spent his career defending the financial sector, and its leading policy is to
privatize basic infrastructure. That means blocking governments from providing basic services
at cost or on a subsidized basis – education, health care, roads and communications. Yet
that is how America became the leading industrial economy from the late 19th century onward.
Financialization and privatization have left it a high-cost economy, uncompetitive in world
markets. that is why the economy is de-industrialized.
Privatized and financialized economies are high-cost. America spends 18% of its GDP on
health care – far more than any other country. And then there is the military budget. A
year ago January, Biden wrote an article in Foreign Affairs in January 2020 promising that his
incoming "foreign policy agenda will place the United States at the head of the table."
So what is he going to lead? He's already said that he's not going to negotiate with Iran,
but to keep the Trump administration policies in place. He's appointed neocon hawks to
leadership positions, especially Victoria Nuland and other anti-Russians. Biden seems to want
to use sanctions to isolate countries he sees as rivals or enemies – which is turning out
to be a rising share of the world's population, from Russia and China to Venezuela and
Iran.
The reality is that the United States is isolating itself! It is trying to block Europe from
importing Russian gas, and insisting on U.S. IT monopolies directed against China. And Biden
has as little respect for treaties as Trump had – that's why he's retaining Trump's
withdrawal from the Iran deal.
Even if Biden makes a new treaty, Congress would have to approve it. But Congress has
remained firm that no foreign countries can set policy for the United States. It therefore
insists on not subjecting itself to any international rule of law not drawn up by its own
political donors.
The looming global fracture is becoming a fight against the most basic organizing principles
of economies throughout history. All successful economies have been mixed. And to promote
survival and prosperity, it is necessary to subordinate private gain-seeking to public
objectives benefitting the 99 Percent, not just the One Percent.
That isn't Biden's policy or any other Democratic or Republican policy.
V: You see a basic conflict between financialized rentier economies and democratic-socialist
ones that seek to promote public objectives benefiting the 99 percent, not just the one
percent.
Privatized economies are high-cost economies. This is mainly because basic infrastructure is
a natural monopoly: roads and other transport, communications, the post office. When they are
privatized, they are run for a profit – consisting mainly of monopoly rent, over and
above normal profits, plus capital gains as these rentier claims are capitalized into stocks
and bonds at rising prices.
The policy of American industrial capitalism in the 19th century is the same as that of
socialism: to minimize the cost of living and doing business. Privatization is largely
responsible for de-industrializing the U.S. economy. While leaving 95 or 99 percent of the
population to stagnate, it has been a bonanza for the 5 to 1 percent.
V: Could you expand on what you mean by that conflict and where you see the Biden
administration heading on it?
The conflict often is put by juxtaposing Wall Street to Main Street – that is, the
FIRE sector to the industrial goods-and-services economy. Wall Street's objective is to
increase wealth. This is done largely by capital gains, not by hiring workers to produce more
goods and services – such investment is done mainly abroad by today's multinational
firms.
V: How does the $1.9 trillion stimulus aid package fit into this debate?
I don't think you should call it a "stimulus." It's disaster relief. The idea is to catch
up. The aim should be to at least put the economy back where it was before – that is,
still in the Obama Depression.
What WAS a "stimulus" was the $6 to $8 trillion created by the Federal Reserve to buy stocks
and bond, including junk bonds, to fuel the Wall Street boom. That is the essence of the
K-shaped recovery. Rising prices for wealth, falling wages and net disposable income for living
labor, after deducting the payments to the FIRE sector that families have to pay off the top
– rent and debts, medical insurance contributions, FICA paycheck withholding (the most
regressive tax), and monthly payments to privatized utility monopolies.
The $1.9 trillion checks of $1,400 or $2,00 actually should be sent out monthly, not part
time. Europe pays its laid-off work force 80 percent of their normal wages, so that they will
not be plowed under by the covid shutdowns.
V: There's profound disagreement about how to handle increased bankruptcies here and in
Europe.
Biden himself is largely responsible for the bankruptcy problem. He was the politician who
steered the regressive bankruptcy reform through Congress, making it harder for low-income
families to wipe out their debts – and making it impossible to wipe out student debt
through bankruptcy.
In that sense, he "owes" it to the economy to make up for his opportunistic water-carrying
for his campaign backers in corporate-run Delaware.
Will he do it? Can he do it? He's a deficit hawk, and has appointed deficit hawks such as
Neera Tanden to his cabinet. He also promised that "nothing will change." This is just how the
Obama administration was run (demagogically running on a slogan of "hope and change"). So will
Biden be Trump 2.0 or Obama 3.0? It really doesn't matter much. Because both Obama and Biden
were basically Republicans running with a different ethnic profile for the voters that they
delivered to their campaign contributors.
V: Chapter 11 bankruptcy filings in the U.S. rose in the third quarter to the highest level
since the 2010 financial crisis. In the last week 900,000 Americans have filed new unemployment
claims.
John Williams' Shadow Statistics puts the real unemployment rate at 20 percent. Many people
have dropped out of the work force, as no jobs are available, at least, no jobs for them.
The rent moratorium has enabled many unemployed or low-income workers to remain in their
homes. If they're evicted and become homeless, how can they work? The real crisis is scheduled
to fall in March and April. Small businesses such as restaurants and stores will give up and
close.
V: Europe has been more receptive in extending national programs to keep troubled businesses
afloat, but there too a sharp debate exists as to whether a strategy of protecting businesses
and workers "at all costs" will cement a recovery or whether it will leave economies less
competitive and more dependent on government aid when the pandemic recedes.
Europe and other countries are trying to avoid disaster. U.S. policy is to see disaster as
an opportunity. It's easier to make fortunes in a disaster than in normal times, at least if
you are wealthy, liquid and have access to bank credit to buy up distressed businesses and
properties.
The aim of Europe – and of economies through the ages – has been to provide
resilience. That is what is missing here. The doctrine of "individual responsibility" is a
euphemism for letting the financial classes take control of economic and social planning. And
their objective is their own self-enrichment, not that of economies as a whole.
What is it that can be "recovered"? To most politicians, it means that creditors – the
economy's top One Percent – can "recover" the money that is owed to them by the indebted
99 Percent.
In Europe's system of parliamentary politics, third parties can arise to promote a social
policy of economic resilience. That isn't possible in the United States, because of the
two-party duopoly. Duopolies resolve themselves into monopolies, which is what we really have
today: pro-Wall Street and anti-labor, pro-creditor and anti-debtor.
Thanks for alerting me to the
new Hudson item : "The Democrats Role in Distracting with Identity Politics," which is
far more about economics that ID politics. An outtake:
"The looming global fracture is becoming a fight against the most basic organizing
principles of economies throughout history. All successful economies have been mixed. And to
promote survival and prosperity, it is necessary to subordinate private gain-seeking to
public objectives benefitting the 99 Percent, not just the One Percent....
"The policy of American industrial capitalism in the 19th century is the same as that of
socialism: to minimize the cost of living and doing business. Privatization is largely
responsible for de-industrializing the U.S. economy. While leaving 95 or 99 percent of the
population to stagnate, it has been a bonanza for the 5 to 1 percent....
"I don't think you should call it [the $1.9 Trillion] a 'stimulus.' It's disaster
relief . The idea is to catch up. The aim should be to at least put the economy back
where it was before – that is, still in the Obama Depression.
"What WAS a 'stimulus' was the $6 to $8 trillion created by the Federal Reserve to buy
stocks and bond, including junk bonds, to fuel the Wall Street boom. That is the essence of
the K-shaped recovery. Rising prices for wealth, falling wages and net disposable income for
living labor, after deducting the payments to the FIRE sector that families have to pay off
the top – rent and debts, medical insurance contributions, FICA paycheck withholding
(the most regressive tax), and monthly payments to privatized utility monopolies.
"The $1.9 trillion checks of $1,400 or $2,00 actually should be sent out monthly, not part
time. Europe pays its laid-off work force 80 percent of their normal wages, so that they will
not be plowed under by the covid shutdowns." [My Emphasis]
And there's much more. Hudson sees the real crisis as yet to come, and warns not to expect
any help from Biden as many of the bad policies now in place were his doing. One thing is
clear: Europeans won't suffer much at all compared with the Outlaw US Empire's citizens. The
Obama/COVID-Trump Great Depression will only involve one nation, although it will certainly
try to blame others for its failed policies; and given its great immaturity, might even end
humanity in a fit of pique.
What the hell is 'inclusivity' and how is that a principle?
I know what ethics is. And I know what fairness is. It means in meritocratic competition,
let the best person win. Don't favor someone based on family, color, or some such.
But what is this baby talk of 'inclusivity'? Doesn't fairness cover the rules of
acceptance or inclusion on the basis of qualification? The principle of fairness dictates
that one's admission into an industry or institution is incumbent on one's qualification and
ability.
By adding 'inclusivity' to the equation, it suggests that some people should be 'included'
despite lack of ability because what? They happen to be black, and that's qualification
enough?
Fairness means entry by qualification. 'Inclusivity' implies entry by something other than
qualification. Thus, it is not fair and undermines the very foundation of principles.
Btw, 'inclusivity' seems to apply mostly to blacks. I mean, NO ONE talks about how the NYT
should include a Palestinian American columnist or how the White House should hire some Arabs
sympathetic to Palestinians. And it's perfectly fine to suppress BDS, and it's never a
problem when there are TOO MANY JEWS. Or TOO MANY BLACKS. NBA is hardly diverse. It's mostly
black and lack diversity, but no one complains about how it should 'include' more non-blacks.
No one gripes about TOO MANY JEWS in Biden's administration.
Jews talk about Diversity, but they don't want diversity of opinions in NYT columns. How
many Palestinian-American columnists did NYT feature?
Well, hello there. I don't know if you've noticed, but we live in a vastly different worl d
than the last
time I posted here . The social landscape, political, and, it seems, everyday life is
trending vastly different since 2020, Covid, and the national elections.
A huge part of survival, prepping, and Nomad Strategies is getting done what needs to be
done with minimal interference or notice from those around us . The more eyes on your project,
the more people that can foul up our plans, throw a wrench in the works, or, nowadays, ruin
your life.
Have a secret identity.
So, we turn to lesson number one from the great bastion of literature: comic books.
What does almost every comic character have? A secret identity. And why? So they are not
having to fight, protect their family, and hide from the public all the time. That is a mighty
wise course of action. Life is not a movie. There are rarely times to take a bold, public stand
that will put you or your people in danger.
It is a blessing to live in the time and place we do that enables us to engage in such
vociferous debate levels with no real consequences. That is not the norm throughout history,
and, as we can see, it is changing in front of our eyes. All one needs to do is look at the
world outside of the U.S. for current or very recent historical examples. Take a look at
where Selco comes from
or Belfast just a couple of decades ago. Look at many areas of the Middle East, Syria , or Asia for current
displays of enforcement.
You don't have to share your opinions with everyone.
Keeping a low profile as long as possible is a crucial OpSec practice .
Note: I am not saying you are not allowed to have opinions. But, I am a firm believer in
only discussing them with known associates in private. It is also easier to keep seeing the
other party as still human if you do it in person. *Othering is a nasty thing to do and nastier
to be on the receiving end of. Remembering that the other side is not the devil incarnate helps
to identify actual enemies easier. Instead of jumping at every boogyman brought to your
attention, save your energy for real, in your face threats.
*The term Othering describes the reductive action
of labeling and defining a person as a subaltern native, as someone who belongs to the socially
subordinate category of the Other.
Choose your battles wisely, or don't battle at all
Another reason for concentrating on the mission: it's a waste of your time. Leave the
arguing and name-calling to others. Arguing lessens your productivity and may alienate
potential allies that could assist you. (Except for those pesky Facebook posts you made,
calling their kind evil and stupid.) Choosing not to participate in arguments and debates shows
that you have mental toughness, compassion, discernment, and, most importantly,
self-control.
In case you aren't aware, those and your integrity are essential things to keep intact. Both
for our own well being and for cultivating good, successful relationships. Keep your ego
intact, and if you can exercise the self-control required to not argue points with others that
don't matter in the day-to-day.
You will be more peaceful.
Fewer distractions = more time to work on numero uno
We want to give ourselves as much time as possible to work on various aspects of ourselves
that need the work.
Distractions from this can be costly. It can be costly in terms of time wasted on a needless
post, and at its worst, it can literally cost you everything you have worked for and built
up.
Stop throwing chum to the internet sharks.
An important but often overlooked aspect of any successful underground work is the ability
to escape notice. Therefore escaping issues that will negatively impact your ability to move
forward will help you complete whatever the mission at hand is.
Rather than willingly compromising your future, stop engaging with the sharks. Instead of
spending time engaged in activities that are not beneficial, use your time wisely. Allocate the
majority of your time to doing the work. Use your downtime to recharge, find the good, relax,
and keep your eyes on the prize.
There may be a time in the near future where we must elevate to a more offensive posture.
But now is not that time. What we do now is an important step in keeping us more even-keeled
and ready. Don't volunteer yourself for the enemies list. There are already plenty of people
that will gladly put some of us there.
1 hour ago (Edited) remove link
"Political correctness is fascism pretending to be manners."
-- George Carlin play_arrow
Patmos 17 minutes ago
Ahhhh... George Carlin.... Back when liberals were liberals, and not "woke" regressive
morons.
Banker415 PRO 1 hour ago (Edited) remove link
1. Get off Facebook
2. Delete your Instagram
3. Stop using douche apps like Snap and TikTok
4. Don't use WhatsApp--switch to Signal and Wickr
5. Migrate off of Google apps and Apple-related apps
6. Kill your Twitter
knopperz 1 hour ago remove link
Jack Dorsey is in cahoots with Signal.
He celebrated on Twitter when it went #1 after the Parler Ban.
Rather use Telegram.
Banker415 PRO 1 hour ago
I agree with you on Signal... but it's a short-term solution until better apps are
available. Telegram is ok but its subject to the same MITM attacks as the others.
Foe Jaws 1 hour ago
I have been using DuckDuckGo for a few years it is a fine replacement for Google.
AnonymousCitizen 58 minutes ago
You might want to look into the management team of DuckDuckGo. It may not be the search
engine you're looking for.
Onthebeach6 1 hour ago remove link
Sounds like the author is preparing to be a very quiet mouse and accept the coup d'etat
and the new illegitimate regime.
The new regime will consolidate quickly to eliminate any chance of organized resistance -
they may also try to make it impossible for states to secede.
Ted K. 6 minutes ago (Edited) remove link
So, is this where we're at? Now that we know 'political correctness' has grown up into
'cancel culture' with this takeover of the USA and Western society (because that's what it
is), we're simply reduced to understanding 'how to survive' in it?
For real? Really? REALLY?!?!
No fight at all? We're all just gonna lie down and show our bellies and accept this?
Some of New York's most prominent female Republicans derided and mocked Speaker Nancy
Pelosi's proposal to
eliminate gendered language from the official House rules.
"Instead of reviving the economy, restoring our Constitutional freedoms and delivering
results for the American people, Speaker Pelosi has chosen her debut legislation -- which would
ban words like mother, sister and daughter," upstate Rep. Elise Stefanik told The Post.
"Obviously she is triggered by the historic number of GOP women elected to Congress who will
fire Nancy Pelosi once and for all in 2022."
Staten Island's Congresswoman-elect Nicole Malliotakis also had words for the new rules.
"There are millions of Americans suffering, our economy is hurting, vaccine distribution is
lagging and Nancy Pelosi and the House Democrats are worried about this nonsense," she said.
"Here's a gender neutral word to describe this legislation: ridiculous."
Proposed changes to the rules of the House of Representatives would "honor all gender
identities" by eliminating such specific terms as mother and father, son and daughter, and aunt
and uncle.
Instead, only gender-neutral terms such as "parent," "child," "sibling" and "parent's
sibling" would be allowed in the text of the House rules.
Outrage even made its way to the all-important Georgia Senate runoff, where Republican
Kelly
Loeffer warned it was reason enough to vote for her.
"The far-left's priorities, everyone. If you'd like to still be able to call yourself a
father, daughter, mother or son, vote for me and @Perduesenate on Tuesday," she tweeted
Saturday, adding, "Sincerely, A Proud Daughter."
Meanwhile, top Dems in Congress took credit for the new regulations.
"I'm proud to start the 117th Congress by drafting these historic rules changes," Rep. Jim
McGovern said in a tweet.
However both Pelosi and McGovern continue to use gendered terms to describe themselves on
their respective Twitter pages Saturday.
The new rules are expected to be voted on when the house reconvenes Sunday.
The rules also got a big boost from progressive Queens/Bronx Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez,
who said she
was "grateful for@RepMcGovern's leadership" during the process.
One Capitol Hill insider told The Post the idea for nixing gender from the new rules package
likely originated in the House's Office of Diversity and Inclusion. The same rules also
enshrined the office as a permanent new addition to the Capitol.
The agency was created by Democrats in one of their first acts at the start of the previous
Congress.
"This office is charged with submitting to Congress a diversity plan to direct and guide
House employing offices to recruit, hire, train, develop, advance, promote, and retain a
diverse workforce," reads its official about page .
Is this site really starting down this path? Isn't identity politics precisely the red
herring that will divert debate from real questions like the division of labour,
financialisation, consequences of economic and military imperialism and the question of the
future of the late capitalist West? Let's leave this one in the way-too-hard-basket as the
distraction it is.
Who are these people on opposite sides of the barricades?. Would the analogs
from past conflicts supposed to be the same as the root , recognize one another in
the modern context. Marxism was a pseudo religion, with blessings from the self declared
intellectuals of the day, and that is what gave then a degree of cohesion. yes many were Jews
which added another element of clan to the glue. Today, the WOKE religion and it's blessing
by those who would put this academic vanguard in charge, provide the unit cohesion for the
left. The poor and economic class warfare nonsense is kicked to the curb in the new left side
of the barricade. They fight for their "side", their clan, and the spiritual core of it is of
little consequence practically, but listen to their "I hate Ignorant Trump wall mart
deplorables" talk coming from those who embrace corporate and even foreign interests, without
a twinge of irony. The root enemy from a theoretical level, are the university lefties who
are hungry for the rest of us to recognize their wisdom and put them in charge where they
belong. There we have it. Same as 1917 in Russia and Germany in the street. Their graduates
seek to wear the mantle of learned and wise as their teachers. Go to the streets of Madison
and Ann Arbor and observe BLM and Antifa, see their afinity to WOKism and their teachers.
"It's the height of hypocrisy for people who claim to be the champions of rights for women
to deny the very biological existence of women," former Democratic presidential candidate
Tulsi Gabbard, who just might be the last Democrat in DC with a functioning brain, told
Tucker Carlson. "Instead of doing something that could actually help save people's lives,
they are choosing instead to say 'You can't say mother or father.'"
I would ask for an 'Amen!' at this point, but, thanks to the clown work of lawmaker
Emanuel Cleaver, who ended his congressional prayer opening of the very unsexy 117th
Congress with the words "amen and awoman," even that simple gender-free term (which simply
means 'so be it') is now tainted with foul political intrigue.
With these sort of unforgivable stunts under the belt, the Democrats should be very
grateful they have perfected the art of 'winning' elections, otherwise they would probably
vanish from the political landscape simply out of lack of doing anything positive for the
nation. Indeed, the term 'Democrat' may be on the way out faster than that of 'male' and
'female.'
A lot of talk here but no really effective strategy or tactics. Here is something that
might well work.
Larry Fink, do know him? You should,, you REALLY should.
Larry Fink heads Blackrock Investments. This firm has a massive $7.6 trillions of dollars
in investments. Fink is also the one person who was most responsible for successfully pushing
"wokeness" onto our present day American corporations.
Fink is the absolute czar of "wokeness". He is probably the biggest reason for American
corporations caving into this new trend.
He did this by first threatening to remove these corporations' heads using his massive
influence, (based his firm's stock ownership in these firms) on the companies' boards of
directors. If this threat failed to work he then threatened to dump Blackrock's massive
holding of these companies' stocks, thereby potentially crashing their stock prices.
Fink's tactics proved to be VERY effective. Virtually every US corporation folded under
such an onslaught. Then, these craven cowards were pressured to prove their newborn fealty
to"wokeness" by, among other things, financially supporting "woke" groups like Black Lives
Matter and The Antidefamation League and contributing additional funds to Democrat
politicians while also lightening up in their support to "unwoke" Republican candidates.
Blackrock has mutual funds and ETFs (exchange trade funds) that many UNZ readers might
own. "Ishares" are probably the best known ones. No patriot should hold any security
controlled by Blackrock. Boycott Blackrock. Fight back by hitting them in the pocketbook.
Here is a list of Blackrock investment funds. Go through it carefully. Do you own any of
these? If so, dump them and tell your friends to do likewise.
Agree, here is what Nathan Rothschild infamously said, I care not what puppet is placed on
the throne of England to rule the empire, for the man who controls the money supply controls
the British Empire and I control the British money supply.It is the same here in America.
The zionists who own the FED control America and until the FED is abolished nothing will
change, wars and debt all coming from the zionist owned FED.
Recommend the book The Controversy of Zion by Douglas Reed, it can be had on amazon, and
also recommend reading The Protocols of Zion.
That's the essence of identify politics. The key idea is put various groups at each other
throat so that neoliberal oligarchs are safe. If you do not understand this you understand
nothing...
Journalist Matt Taibbi joined Hill.TV's "Rising" on Thursday and suggested that partisan
media circles resulted in echo chambers that have left many Americans without factual, reliable
sources of information.
Taibbi told hosts Krystal Ball and Saagar Enjeti that those who stormed the U.S. Capitol
grounds on Wednesday were victims of misinformation and conspiracy theories resulting from
these echo chambers.
"We have two basically conflicting media ecosystems...and what ends up happening when people
get an uninterrupted stream of information of this type for long enough, is they just
completely lose their ability to assess situations rationally, and they will eventually lash
out," Taibbi said.
Partisan media sources, Taibbi added, are driving "different groups to hate each other."
British comedy icon Rowan Atkinson has said online mob justice makes him "fear for the
future" and lashed out at the algorithmically generated outrage perpetuated by social media
platforms.
In a recent interview with the Radio Times magazine, Atkinson, 65, described online cancel
culture as the "digital equivalent of the medieval mob roaming the streets looking for
someone to burn," while detailing what he perceives as the increasing polarization of the
world and how it's exacerbated by online discourse.
Atkinson previously fell foul of the 'woke crowd' when he manned the battlements in the
culture war to champion the cause of free speech, and the right to offend and to criticise even
the most sacred cultural institutions.
"The problem we have online is that an algorithm decides what we want to see, which ends
up creating a simplistic, binary view of society," Atkinson said, adding that it's
important to be exposed to a "wide spectrum of opinion" in the modern world.
"It becomes a case of either you're with us or against us, and if you're against us, you
deserve to be 'canceled,'" he opined.
Atkinson's latest comments received plenty of support online, including from Australian MP
Tim Wilson, who described the remarks as a "hole in one!"
Others felt Atkinson's self-imposed exile from online life might preclude him from
commenting on it.
"I love Mr. Bean, but I feel he might've missed a few things. Or, more than a few,"wrote
one Twitter user.
The Mr. Bean and Johnny English actor described online life as "a sideshow in my
world," while also discussing in the interview his lengthy career in British comedy,
including playing his most widely acclaimed character.
Atkinson said he finds playing Mr. Bean "stressful and exhausting," given he alone
must generate the majority of laughs from the audience using a character who rarely speaks.
He also alluded to a possible return in the role of the only character he created that he
enjoyed playing: the iconic Blackadder. Atkinson wrote the show with Ben Elton and Richard
Curtis, and it featured such British comedy luminaries as Stephen Fry and Hugh Laurie.
However, possibly in reference to his views on contemporary culture, he added that it would
be hard to recreate "the creative energy we all had in the 80s."
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
Slezzkolen 7 hours ago 5 Jan, 2021 07:42 AM
Imagine Mel Brooks creating his brilliant films in today's snowf1ake world.
TheFishh Slezzkolen 3 hours ago 5 Jan, 2021 11:17 AM
If Brooks tried to make movies today, we would never hear of him at all, ever. He'd be shut
down by the woke police squad before he even started.
Ice_Man Slezzkolen 6 hours ago 5 Jan, 2021 08:03 AM
imagine the torrents of offended people . lol think i want to watch blazing saddles now.
mongo like candy!
Leaders in the House of Representatives announced on Friday a rules package for the 117th
Congress that includes a proposal to use " gender -inclusive language" and eliminate gendered
terms such as "'father, mother, son, daughter," and more.
James McGovern (D-Mass.) speaks during a meeting at the Capitol in Washington, on Dec. 21,
2017. (Alex Wong/Getty Images)
Terms to be struck from clause 8(c)(3) of
rule XXIII , the House's Code of Official Conduct, as outlined in the proposed rules (
pdf
), include "father, mother, son, daughter, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, first cousin, nephew,
niece, husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law,
brother-in-law, sister-in-law, stepfather, stepmother, stepson, stepdaughter, stepbrother,
stepsister, half brother, half sister, grandson, [and] granddaughter."
Such terms would be replaced with "parent, child, sibling, parent's sibling, first cousin,
sibling's child, spouse, parent-in-law, child-in-law, sibling-in-law, stepparent, stepchild,
stepsibling, half-sibling, [and] grandchild."
According to the proposed rules, "seamen" would be replaced with "seafarers," and "Chairman"
would be replaced with "Chair" in Rule X of the House.
... ... ...
The rules package will be introduced and voted on once the new Congress convenes.
bloostar 1 hour ago remove link
What gender was the pig's head? Is it correct to refer to it as a pig?
researchfix 1 hour ago
Well, my father and mother are dead already. So they will never know, that they are not my
father and mother.
Al Gophilia 1 hour ago
These idiots should no longer be honorably idenified with the noun Represtenative.
judgement put 29 minutes ago
Actually, 'repressed-tentative' isn't so bad.
Ms No PREMIUM 1 hour ago
I think it was Lenin that said "The last enemy of Marxism is the family"
Et Tu Brute 1 hour ago (Edited)
When politicians cannot deliver a $2K stimulus that affects 30%+ of the population but
have time to promote laws representing the interest of less than 0.6%* but still affecting
the over 95% who do or will have a family, you know it's not just a matter of ineffective
governance and culture wars, it is deliberate Psychological Warfare, coordinated through
Mainstream Media, aimed at dividing and demoralising the population.
"*******" is an appropriate non-gendered term referring to all the Democrats in
Congress.
St. TwinkleToes 1 hour ago
So now we're supposed to appease 1% of the population who are gender confused freaks by
removing thousands of years of family relationships?
RocketPride PREMIUM 1 hour ago remove link
Democratic Congress continues to endear themselves to true American values. F-ing idiots,
I hope they are all voted out in 2022
sgt_doom 1 hour ago remove link
On Dominion voting machines?????
sgt_doom 2 hours ago (Edited) remove link
Exactly why there should be laws against geriatric dementia-suffering twits who once were
financially connected to Saddam Hussein in congress.
The twitch Pelosi wants to destroy the family unit: Job #1 of the Maoist agenda!
Itinerant 1 hour ago (Edited) remove link
Just look at how much they are improving the world, fueling inclusive economic growth
!!!
In France they've already moved to force you to fill in parent1 and parent2 instead of
mother and father.
Medical Experts are now saying that boy/girl should be removed from birth certificates as
clinically irrelevant.
Right, no need to check for descended testicles or abdominal hernia in little boys, or
anything else.
What you circumcise, may as well be your thumb, right?
I just had an operation on my testicle, of course it is clinically irrelevant to find the
right doctor for anything to do with your prostrate or testicles, or any gynecological
issues, for that matter.
We are going insane ... we are already in the lemmings rushing to the cliff stage.
Seeing those geriatric demonrats on their knees with their kente cloths, paying homage to
a dead drug addict was one of the more hysterical moments of 2020.
Ducks 8 hours ago
Its a disgusting image. and my Black American peers agree.
Is-Be 9 hours ago
The word missing is "chutzpah".
bobroonie 9 hours ago
Watching scummy democrats in pro slavery garb bend the knee for a POS that OD'd is comedy
gold.
u25dtp1 8 hours ago
Is that what they were doing, I thought they were looking for Nancy's Ben and Jerrys.
Sorry, My irrationality
radical-extremist 8 hours ago
They do it because it works. Democrats love the theater. They don't mind being lied to if
it benefits them. Many of them actually believe it's not theater and that their political
heroes are being authentic and sincere....with crocodile tears, feigned outrage and other
drama techniques. I would have to give Adam Schiff an Oscar, but Chuck Schumer definitely
gets second place.
There was a very specific plan in development since at least the mid-1970s by the Ivy
League fraternity secret society set (their right hand in action is the CIA so I usually just
refer to that organization for rhetorical shorthand). This plan was to finally bury the
threat of communism in the imperial heartlands by redefining to the population that conflict
in society is an identity issue rather than one of conflicting interests of socioeconomic
classes. This plan was going to be a massive multi-channel, multi-media affair involving
every aspect of contemporary culture. Sports, literature, music, movies and TV shows,
classroom content, workplace cultures, and of course political discourse all would be guided
to lead to this capitalist Utopia of a population fixated on their personal perceived
socially constructed non-class identities.
Of course, this project has been in development for some time now and those developing it
knew it would take decades to implement. That implementation process started its roll out at
the turn of the Millennium with accelerated changes in mass media products intended to soften
up the population. The changes were intended to transition from a largely media push to
tangible impacts on the broader population with the 2008 elections, accompanied by
over-the-top fanfare surrounding America electing its first woman president. This was to be
followed by a drumbeat of elections (and accompanying mass media priming of the population)
in which successive under-represented populations get represented. After Clinton's victory in
2008 gave cultural "representation" to women then in 2016 Black Americans would get
their "representation" by Obama, followed in 2024 with LGBTQXYZ identifying people
achieving "representation" with Butt-gig in the White House. With that America would
have finally arrived at the "End of History" and achieved the perfection of capitalist
culture.
Of course these plans went to shit because they are based upon the retarded nonsense
notion that capitalist culture can be perfected, which is patently absurd to anyone who
actually understands how capitalism works (Marxists, for instance). Obama was just supposed
to be getting his debut to national audiences like a political debutante at a kind of
national debutante ball in order to prepare for being installed in the presidency in 2016, in
exactly the same way that Butt-gig was debuted in 2016 for his/its installation in 2024.
Obama was scripted to sound rash and radical in 2008, which his image managers in the CIA
felt would sink in his chances for victory in 2008. Obama would then spend the intervening
years until his scheduled turn as President in 2016 "maturing" and being cloaked by
the mass media in artificial "gravitas" . In a surprise to the plotters, though, the
voters eagerly embraced the imaginary "radicalism" of Obama and took a pass on
Clinton's bland "maturity" .
The elites firmly believe in the moronic "identity" narrative that they are pushing
and think that they just have to educate and civilize the "deplorables" to bring them
on board with it. As a result these elites who are far less intelligent than they give
themselves credit for totally misinterpreted Obama's success with the voters. They were sure
the voters were demonstrating greater respect for Black people versus women rather than the
voters responding to Obama's more aggressive political rhetoric and promise of Single
Payer.
Well, the CIA's cultural engineering plan had some flexibility so they swapped Obama for
Clinton and moved Clinton's presidential installation date up to 2016. In the meantime,
though, Clinton had to be kept in the public eye so she could run again in 2016. Even more
important was that Clinton had already been brought up to speed on the empire's covert
"ratline" and "ratfucking" operations around the world and they needed someone
who already knew the script to handle the public relations side of those ops (Obama was still
too green at the time). Since the US State Department is nowadays nothing more than an
appendage to the CIA but with a high-profile public face, the Secretary of State was the
obvious place to plant Clinton.
Of course, Clinton losing in 2008 was a bit unsettling for the plotters. They thought they
had it set up just right. They were not willing to take any chances in 2016. To make
absolutely certain that Clinton won this time they frauded the DNC primaries to clear the
field on the left and cleared the right by making sure the most ludicrous buffoon running (in
their own perception) got that side's nomination.
Here is where their failure to comprehend Clinton's loss in 2008 came back to bite them.
Completely counter to all the bad analyses by the miseducated morons in their stink tanks and
newsrooms and boardrooms, the voters actually voted on issues rather than identity :
End war and create jobs.
[Aside: The Post Trump Stress Disorder victims will shriek in their typical
hysterical way and with ALL CAPS "But... but Trump never intended to do those things! I
know that because I am psychotic... uh, I mean psychic!" . It doesn't matter what Trump
intended to do. He was simply the only candidate in the general election to even pay lip
service to real issues and so he was the only one for the "deplorables" to vote
for.]
"Deplorables" are too stupid to vote on issues, aren't they? It is all just emotion
and knee-jerk behavior for them, in the elites perspective. The establishment had those sides
of things sewn up, so what could possibly have gone wrong? It must have been the
Russians!
In any case, that is why Clinton had to be installed at the top of the US State Department
in 2008. It might sound complicated but it is really quite straight forward.
There was a very specific plan in development since at least the mid-1970s by the Ivy
League fraternity secret society set (their right hand in action is the CIA so I usually just
refer to that organization for rhetorical shorthand). This plan was to finally bury the
threat of communism in the imperial heartlands by redefining to the population that conflict
in society is an identity issue rather than one of conflicting interests of socioeconomic
classes. This plan was going to be a massive multi-channel, multi-media affair involving
every aspect of contemporary culture. Sports, literature, music, movies and TV shows,
classroom content, workplace cultures, and of course political discourse all would be guided
to lead to this capitalist Utopia of a population fixated on their personal perceived
socially constructed non-class identities.
Of course, this project has been in development for some time now and those developing it
knew it would take decades to implement. That implementation process started its roll out at
the turn of the Millennium with accelerated changes in mass media products intended to soften
up the population. The changes were intended to transition from a largely media push to
tangible impacts on the broader population with the 2008 elections, accompanied by
over-the-top fanfare surrounding America electing its first woman president. This was to be
followed by a drumbeat of elections (and accompanying mass media priming of the population)
in which successive under-represented populations get represented. After Clinton's victory in
2008 gave cultural "representation" to women then in 2016 Black Americans would get
their "representation" by Obama, followed in 2024 with LGBTQXYZ identifying people
achieving "representation" with Butt-gig in the White House. With that America would
have finally arrived at the "End of History" and achieved the perfection of capitalist
culture.
Of course these plans went to shit because they are based upon the retarded nonsense
notion that capitalist culture can be perfected, which is patently absurd to anyone who
actually understands how capitalism works (Marxists, for instance). Obama was just supposed
to be getting his debut to national audiences like a political debutante at a kind of
national debutante ball in order to prepare for being installed in the presidency in 2016, in
exactly the same way that Butt-gig was debuted in 2016 for his/its installation in 2024.
Obama was scripted to sound rash and radical in 2008, which his image managers in the CIA
felt would sink his chances for victory in 2008. Obama would then spend the intervening years
until his scheduled turn as President in 2016 "maturing" and being cloaked by the mass
media in artificial "gravitas" . In a surprise to the plotters, though, the voters
eagerly embraced the imaginary "radicalism" of Obama and took a pass on Clinton's
bland "maturity" .
The elites firmly believe in the moronic "identity" narrative that they are pushing
and think that they just have to educate and civilize the "deplorables" to bring them
on board with it. As a result these elites who are far less intelligent than they give
themselves credit for totally misinterpreted Obama's success with the voters. They were sure
the voters were demonstrating greater respect for Black people versus women rather than the
voters responding to Obama's more aggressive political rhetoric and promise of Single
Payer.
Well, the CIA's cultural engineering plan had some flexibility so they swapped Obama for
Clinton and moved Clinton's presidential installation date up to 2016. In the meantime,
though, Clinton had to be kept in the public eye so she could run again in 2016. Even more
important was that Clinton had already been brought up to speed on the empire's covert
"ratline" and "ratfucking" operations around the world and they needed someone
who already knew the script to handle the public relations side of those ops (Obama was still
too green at the time). Since the US State Department is nowadays nothing more than an
appendage to the CIA but with a high-profile public face, the Secretary of State was the
obvious place to plant Clinton.
Of course, Clinton losing in 2008 was a bit unsettling for the plotters. They thought they
had it set up just right. They were not willing to take any chances in 2016. To make
absolutely certain that Clinton won this time they frauded the DNC primaries to clear the
field on the left and cleared the right by making sure the most ludicrous buffoon running (in
their own perception) got that side's nomination.
Here is where their failure to comprehend Clinton's loss in 2008 came back to bite them.
Completely counter to all the bad analyses by the miseducated morons in their stink tanks and
newsrooms and boardrooms, the voters actually voted on issues rather than identity :
End war and create jobs.
[Aside: The Post Trump Stress Disorder victims will shriek in their typical
hysterical way and with ALL CAPS "But... but Trump never intended to do those things! I
know that because I am psychotic... uh, I mean psychic!" . It doesn't matter what Trump
intended to do. He was simply the only candidate in the general election to even pay lip
service to real issues and so he was the only one for the "deplorables" to vote
for.]
"Deplorables" are too stupid to vote on issues, aren't they? It is all just emotion
and knee-jerk behavior for them, in the elites perspective. The establishment had those sides
of things sewn up, so what could possibly have gone wrong? It must have been the
Russians!
In any case, that is why Clinton had to be installed at the top of the US State Department
in 2008. It might sound complicated but it is really quite straight forward.
Even with direct and damning evidence, it is too late to expect the directors of major
media to give up their activist role. They have been thoroughly indoctrinated by the academic
collective. If I were King, academia would be the focus, the place to begin eliciting change
to the very radical and biased directions promoted at these institutions. For decades Che
Guevara, and others of that same ilk, have been heroes to the elitists in higher education.
It is the liberal educators who have embraced the revolutionary agenda, in their minds
finding a warped sense of purpose promoting today's mania of cultural revolution. Notice the
openly Marxist leaders of BLM, and the white, progressive followers. This group is not the
downtrodden seeking to redress wrongs. Many are spoiled rich kids looking for a life, a cause
to believe in, because they have been told they are special. But in the end, they are just
one of many with too much student loan, and a degree in art history which doesn't pay very
well.
BinAnunnaki 4 hours ago
As a Professor at a Tier 1 university. It dawned on me the damage of Critical Race Theory
indoctrination being taught by my colleagues when during a podcast two gender muddled 20 year
olds discussed banning Dr. Seuss from bookstores bc he didn't have people of color in his
stories.
I wanted to grab these two twerps by their necks and scream. Theodore Seuss devoted his
entire life to childhood development. What the foq have you little bastards done to improve
society?
Cancel Culture is their first arrow out of the quiver. By all means blame Academia for
this mess. 40 years of gender, race, and ethnic studies programs.
WorkingClassMan 6 hours ago
I dunno, I for one TOTALLY trust the corporate junkenpresse. They would never lie to me.
When they call Whites racists simply for being White...I believe them! When they tout
"systemic racism," as the cause of all the worlds' ills...I believe them! When they ignore
the astronomical black-on-White murder sprees from year to year and instead focus on the rare
White-on-black killings...I believe them! When they say Trump is the worst thing since
cancer...I believe them!
For the last four years, Americans have become increasingly polarised -- divided between
Democrat crusaders who are determined to save America from becoming a racist, sexist Nazi
dictatorship under Donald Trump, versus Republican crusaders who are determined to save America
from becoming a liberal Marxist state under a Democratic reign.
This fervour has become so extreme that families can no longer meet for the holidays without
a conversational blow-up. No longer are people "entitled to their opinions." This has become a
crusade between Good and Evil. ("I'm good. You're evil.")
The absurd nature of this dichotomy has reached the point that even Dr. Phil is increasing
his viewership by featuring disputes between siblings who are on opposite sides of the
political divide and are no longer speaking to each other.
At this point, all that remains to be done by the networks would be to air a Red versus Blue
television game show in which contestants compete with their own family members to "Win the
White House."
Until November, the great majority of Americans appear to have been hoping that the November
election would end this strife one way or the other.
My take on this has been that the opposite would happen after 3rd November. The fireworks
would increase exponentially after the election. The election would be hotly contested by
whomever was the apparent loser.
This should easily have been foreseen, as the media on the right have insisted for months
that the Democrat encouragement for mail-in ballots was a precursor to election fraud.
Similarly, the media on the left have insisted for months that Donald Trump's suggestion
that he may not accept the election results meant that he was planning a coup after he
(presumably inevitably) lost the election.
It's been estimated that 93% of all Fox watchers are Republicans and 95% of MSNBC watchers
are Democrats. Since neither side watches the other's news programme, each side is cognizant of
only its own team's heavily slanted rhetoric.
The conservative media is awash with details of voter fraud by Democrats, whilst the liberal
media states with equal conviction that Mister Trump and his lawyers have provided no details
whatever.
Therefore, those who voted Republican will conclude by watching their own "unbiased" news
channel that Democrats have tried to steal the election and thereby steal control of the
country.
And those who voted Democrat will conclude by watching their own "unbiased" news channel
that Republicans have tried to steal the election and thereby steal control of the country.
But how did this get to be so bad? Americans have not been so wound up -- nor so polarised
-- since 1861, at the beginning of the Civil War.
Indeed, the post-election fervour is as strong as though Fort Sumter had just been fired
upon.
More importantly, what will be the outcome?
Will the courts rule against the claims of Mister Trump?
If so, that decision will enrage an already angry right-wing crowd, refusing to vacate the
White House and defending it against the pinko mob.
Or will the courts rule in favour of Mister Trump?
If so, that decision will unleash nationwide riots, intent on bringing down the evil
dictator.
Either way, we can anticipate that the US will be in flames. If for any reason the level of
strife is insufficient, those with deep pockets will hire squads of shills as mercenary
soldiers.
The populace will be in terror. Republican voters will beg the federal government to bring
in the troops to contain Antifa and the BLM mob.
Democratic voters will beg the federal government to bring in the troops to quell the
Republican militias.
In such an upheaval, the one thing both sides will have in common is that they will both beg
for the creation of a police state.
And the federal government will answer that call. Martial law would be declared, possibly as
a "temporary measure," until normalcy has returned.
But what if normalcy does not return? What if pockets of violence continue to pop up all
over the map with regularity?
If that occurs, martial law would need to continue for as long as it was deemed necessary,
which would be likely to translate into a permanent police state.
At one time, the media was for the most part impartial and benign, but in recent decades it
has been bought out by four large corporations. And some of those corporations own and direct
both liberal and conservative networks, which would seem to be at odds with each other.
However, they are not. Today, the objective of the media is not to offer news. It is to
create strife -- to pit one half of the electorate against the other. In doing so, the ruling
elite have the justification to lock down the entire USA under martial law.
NEVER MISS THE
NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
Once that has been accomplished, the elite may do as they please. As in all countries where
a police state has been achieved -- such as Nazi Germany, Mao's China or Stalin's Russia --
once military control has been put into place nationwide, meaningful protest ends.
In each of the above cases, the populace was whipped up into a frenzy of hate and violence
against the Jews or the aristocracy or whatever other demon had been invented. But the real
objective and the result were the subjugation of the populace.
At this point, it's not too late for people to stand back, take a deep breath and ask
themselves if they're not being conned into their own subjugation. But it would appear that
they've been wound up so tightly that such objectivity is unlikely to occur.
However, if they do not, they risk losing what remains of their once-proud democracy.
* * *
Economically, politically, and socially, the United States seems to be headed down a path
that's not only inconsistent with the founding principles of the country, but accelerating
quickly toward boundless decay. In the years ahead, there will likely be much less stability of
any kind. That's exactly why New York Times bestselling author Doug Casey and his team just
released an urgent new report titled Doug Casey's Top 7
Predictions for the Raging 2020s .
he fallen Christopher Columbus statue outside the Minnesota State Capitol after a group led
by American Indian Movement members tore it down in St. Paul, Minnesota, on June 10, 2020.
(By Tony
Webster/Flickr)
In the general chaos of the summer of 2020, it was a typical moment. At the Minnesota State
Capitol in St. Paul, a band of activists -- primarily from indigenous-rights groups -- had
slung ropes around the neck of a statue of Christopher Columbus and pulled it down by
force.
The moment meant different things to different people. For the woke left, it was another
culture war victory in the age of 1619 and BLM -- a small and long-delayed comeuppance for the
colonial oppressors. For the right, it was the latest advance in the onslaught of the cultural
arsonists -- as cities were burning and statues falling down, it seemed that little would
survive the spontaneous rage inspired by the death of George Floyd in that same city just two
weeks before.
But it was hardly spontaneous, and it had little (if anything) to do with the death of Mr.
Floyd. The destruction of the Columbus statue on the Capitol grounds -- installed by Italian
immigrants in 1931 as a pushback against discrimination -- had long been an explicit goal of
the region's American Indian activists. The eruption of riots in the early summer simply
provided an excuse. As destruction reigned, Twin Cities native activists decided to join in,
taking the opportunity to follow through on something they had wanted to do for decades.
It's actually fairly representative of what happened in major cities across the country this
summer: local activists had an axe to grind, and the superimposition of a national narrative
gave them all the cover they could ever need. (Any outburst of disorder that happens to have
occurred after late May is qualified in the media as a "protest following the death of
George Floyd" -- a carefully crafted non-descriptor.) It's representative, too, of the
interplay among the unholy trinity of the modern activist left: grassroots radicals, big-money
donors, and the big money itself -- concentrated in funds where the donor foundations invest
their dollars.
The St. Paul statue-toppling was organized by a man named Mike Forcia, a member of the Bad
River Band of the Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians. Forcia is also the chairman of the
Twin Cities branch of the American Indian Movement (AIM), and of AIM Patrol.
AIM -- the most prominent network of indigenous activists in the country -- is commonly
billed as a grassroots organization. In some ways this is true. AIM was founded in Minneapolis
more than half a century ago, as the Indian Relocation Act of 1956 and other federal policies
geared toward assimilation created sizable urban communities of Indians drawn away from
reservations. Over the years, much of AIM's public profile has been shaped by scattered bands
of activists engaging in highly visible stunts, such as the occupation of Alcatraz from 1969 to
1971.
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.426.0_en.html#goog_1649891056 00:00 / 01:00
Loading Ad
Even today, the national network remains fairly decentralized -- sometimes ostentatiously
so. After Forcia's arrest, AIM's national president Frank Paro "was adamant that the rally was
not sanctioned by A.I.M. or associated with the organization," according to court documents
. Paro even went so far as to assert "that Mr. Forcia is not affiliated with the National AIM
organization" -- an interesting claim, given Forcia's identification as chairman of AIM of the
Twin Cities.
It's certainly possible, though -- AIM's decentralization leaves a door open for false
claimants, and even the recognized national organization underwent a schism in 1993. Whether or
not Forcia is associated with Paro's national AIM organization -- and regardless of who has the
strongest claim to the trigram -- it is certain that he is extensively connected in the
activist movement of the Twin Cities. The Facebook page he runs for the region under the AIM
banner has over 12,000 followers. As of 2010 he was vice chair of the Minneapolis American
Indian Center, one of the city's most important hubs of native activity (political and
otherwise). He revived and sustains AIM Patrol -- a sort of neighborhood watch on steroids,
founded to limit police presence in the urban Indian community -- which had been dormant for
decades. And at the very least, he commanded enough influence in the community to organize and
execute a protest which drew no small crowd and successfully destroyed a public monument that
had been standing for nearly a century. Mike Forcia is no mere unlovable rogue; he is a key
player in a network that remains as lively and robust as it was when Minnesota's first Indian
radicals began to organize three generations past.
But it would be a mistake to think that the Twin Cities' indigenous activism remains
"grassroots" in any meaningful sense. In fact, the cause is supported by some of the region's
biggest philanthropic organizations, which in turn support themselves by extensive activities
in finance capitalism.
The most notable of these is the Bush Foundation, founded in 1953 by Archibald Bush, a
childless executive at 3M. At his death in 1966, Archibald Bush left his fortune to be put
toward good works, with no political caveats. Over the intervening decades, the Bush Foundation
has shifted ever leftward in tandem with the philanthropic establishment at large; under
current president Jennifer Ford Reedy, the foundation has gone fully woke .
Institutional connections have been made with the flagship establishments of far-left big
money, such as Borealis Philanthropy and the mother
of all wokeries, the Tides Foundation. But the Bush Foundation is
especially known for its contributions to indigenous causes -- totaling just under $100 million
from 1982-2019, with most of that total concentrated in the last few years as the foundation
amped up its
focus on the cause. This includes over $1 million to the
Minneapolis American Indian Center, where Mike Forcia was vice chair.
Another of Bush's biggest beneficiaries is the Minneapolis Foundation, a sizable
organization whose scope is limited to the local community, and the recipient of over 40 Bush
Foundation grants. Interestingly, the Minneapolis Foundation's Director of Impact Strategy,
Economic Vitality -- as well as director of grant-making and special projects, according to her
LinkedIn -- is a woman by the name of Jo-Anne Stately who is active in indigenous affairs
herself, including a six-year stint as vice president of development at the Indian Land Tenure
Foundation. (The ILTF is another recipient of over $1 million
in Bush Foundation funds.) In 2013, the Bush Foundation provided a grant of $100,000 to the
Minneapolis Foundation to support the Northside Funders Group, a third impact investment
organization where Stately happens to serve as co-chair. (Whether Ms. Stately is any relation
either to the late Elaine Stately, co-founder of AIM and namesake of its Peacemaker Center in
Minneapolis, or Angel Stately,
associate of Mike Forcia and prominent witness
to the death of George Floyd, remains unclear.) What is clear is that the indigenous
activist network of the Twin Cities (and likely elsewhere) has moved far beyond the ragtag band
of urban Indian change-makers in the first decades after relocation.
Of course, like big philanthropy in general, these organizations aren't drawing their funds
from static coffers. Archibald Bush left the foundation endowed with just about $300 million, a
number dwarfed by current assets of more than three times as much. The Bush Foundation, and the
Minneapolis Foundation, and Tides and countless others, all rely on investment to sustain and
grow their resources. The Bush Foundation's 990 disclosures
show just how extensive that reliance is, including substantial investments in Sequoia, one
of the nation's leading venture capital firms. Such relationships are sure to raise questions
about the dependence not just of progressive groups on capital, but of capital on progressive
groups. How long could firms like Sequoia survive without groups like the Bush Foundation
underwriting them? That's a question that must be asked, and the exact same question should be
directed at the radical groups that this relationship enables, like those who took down
Columbus in St. Paul.
The lesson here is not that there's some massive, shady conspiracy behind the people who
destroy our cities. It's that no conspiracy is necessary. All that's required is a seemingly
innocent, and entirely unguided, process. Money falls into the wrong hands: the hands of the
woke, or even the merely progressive. Sustained by the kind of mega-scale investment that now
defines our economy, that money allows so-called community organizations to function without
any real dependence on the community, and thus without accountability to it. The connection to
such national networks also seems to muddy the mission of such organizations, folding them into
a broad and ever accelerating progressive agenda.
And when the cultural green light goes live -- this time George Floyd flipped the switch --
the combined power of big money
"Splitting the public up into two oppositional factions who barely interact and can't even
communicate with each other because they don't share a common reality keeps the populace
impotent, ignorant, and powerless to stop the unfolding of the agendas of the powerful."
Surely so. But I'm not sure whether this was deliberately planned by the plutocrats as a
political strategy, or whether this bifurcation spontaneously emerged from tech company
algorithms designed only to increase their profits.
Clearly, the plutocrats have seized upon this bifurcation to keep the populace divided and
engaged in a kind of civil war, but it's sort of like the pandemic – was it a plot
hatched or an opportunity exploited?
This might not seem to matter at this point, but IMHO the answer helps to determine not
only what we're up against but also the best ways to fight the bastards.
SHOCKER / NOVEMBER 24, 2020
https://www.wakingtimes.com/tyranny-standing-rock-govt-divide-conquer-strategy-work/
`
"Divide and conquer.
`
"It's one of the oldest military strategies in the books, and it's proven to be the police
state's most effective weapon for maintaining the status quo.
`
"How do you conquer a nation?
`
"Distract them with football games, political circuses and Black Friday sales. Keep them
focused on their differences -- economic, religious, environmental, political, racial
[gender- pandemic] -- so they can never agree on anything. And then, when they're so divided
that they are incapable of joining forces against a common threat, start picking them off one
by one."
JWK / NOVEMBER 24, 2020
"We live in different information universes, chosen for us by algorithms whose only
criterion is how to maximise our attention for advertisers' products to generate greater
profits for the internet giants,"
Which precisely explains how we got the recent POTUS candidates, displayed as the "best and
brightest". Really? That's the best they have? You can look across the board at ALL of the
two party's leadership and get the same picture. These are far from the "best and brightest".
They may be bright, since psychopaths are often quite intelligent, but they certainly have
zero qualification for best.
KHATIKA / NOVEMBER 24, 2020
Regardless. The democrats ignored people like Tulsi Gabbard and Sanders to flock to Biden.
This is just a sign of how brainwashed the people have become. The propaganda is working
quite well.
ANARCISSIE / NOVEMBER 24, 2020
This raises the question of why these people were selected. I think Trump sabotaged the
Republican fix for 2016 by exploiting weaknesses in its pseudodemocratic primary structure,
but the choice of Biden is hard to figure from any angle. Someone should investigate. About a
year ago I was conversing with some deplorables about Biden and a perfectly intelligent young
Black woman hotly defended him against all criticism. Anita Hill, the crime bill, the
invasion of Iraq, his creepiness, just bounced off her shell. How do people get this way?
JULIUS SKOOLAFISH / NOVEMBER 24, 2020
in passing
. WESTERN VALUES™ . The country that judges other countries' elections just
had an election. Somebody won. One day a court will tell us who. Apparently counting votes is
a tremendously difficult task, requiring enormous amounts of time.
. http://russiahouse.org/current_news.php?language=eng&id_current=3183
.
See also (via Fort Russ – Matthew Ehret)
Ah, Ms Johnstone, my fellow United States citizens love their " echo chamber comas "
because it allows them to completely suppress any and all logic, justice, empathy, and shame
for the blood-thirsty Evil Empire that they cherish and support. The Evil Empire has no soul
at all; and it requires its subjects to be soul-less as well. Resistance is futile!
Damn, Krystal dropping one of her classic heaters today: "Affirmative action is the type of program that poses little
threat and only benefits to affluent white liberals. It's the college admissions version of identity politics: more
about getting brown faces in high places to make WHITE people feel good than it is about actually addressing the very
real problems it seeks to ameliorate." - Krystal Ball
As a black person I hate to admit that I've bought into the BS all of this time but she is absolutely right. All of her
data is correct. AA is just a tool for bourgeoisie blacks to get into better schools. Period. Nothing else. Stop trying
to sell it as some saving grace that it is not. The point about student loans is exactly right. If you want to help a
ton of black people with college then do something about this BS student loan situation.
"White Saviors" is a way to say what we've been saying all along. Affirmative Action IS racist. You are saying that
someone needs help because of their skin color, as if that makes them inferior. Racist.
When Affirmative Action Was White: An Untold History of Racial Inequality in Twentieth-Century America, by Ira
Katznelson (W.W. Norton & Company, New York, 2005), preface, appendix, index, 238 pp.
Elizabeth Bartholet correctly point out blatant disregard of law and witch hunt atmosphere on MeToo movement. This aspect
is easily exploitable by female sociopaths who want to remove a men who did not reciprocate their "favors" or just represent
obstacle on their career path. Teachers are especially vulnerable to such a blackmail.
Notable quotes:
"... However, I am concerned that in the recent rush to judgment, principles of basic fairness, differences between proven and merely alleged instances of misconduct, and important distinctions between different kinds of sexually charged conduct have too often been ignored. Similar problems plagued the imposition of new sexual harassment guidelines for colleges and universities by the administration of former President Barack Obama. I was involved in attempts to push back against those guidelines and to develop at Harvard Law School our own policies, better designed to balance the important values at stake. ..."
"... My fairness concerns with the #MeToo phenomenon include the ready acceptance in many cases of anonymous complaints, and of claims made by women over conflicting claims by men, to terminate careers without any investigation of the facts. ..."
"... Sometimes the alleged conduct is so egregious, or alleged patterns so suspicious, that suspension is warranted while facts are determined. Sometimes allegations are demonstrably credible by virtue of independent evidence. But where facts are in doubt or conduct is subject to different interpretations, efforts must be made to investigate what actually happened and how the different parties understood the events. ..."
"... I am also deeply troubled by over-expansive definitions of wrongful conduct. In the current climate, men are called out for actions ranging from requests for dates and hugs on the one hand to rape and other forced sexual contact on the other, as if all are the same and all warrant termination. ..."
"... The legal definition of sexual harassment in employment and education is a helpful guide to what sexual conduct should be the focus. It is illegal to engage in quid pro quo harassment, namely conditioning an employment or educational benefit on sexual favors. It is illegal also to create a "hostile environment" through unwelcome sexual advances that are severe or pervasive and that limit the victim's ability to enjoy employment or educational opportunity. ..."
"... Finally, I am concerned with the cynical exploitation of sexual harassment cases and related scapegoating of individuals. ..."
"... Corporate and political leaders, who must have been at least generally aware of these problems, did little to address them until this moment of public shaming. Now they dismiss alleged perpetrators overnight, often with no regard for the facts but clearly with significant regard for their corporate reputations and electoral strategies. ..."
"... All this puts real reform at risk. It undermines the legitimacy of action against serious sexual misconduct and abuse of power. It creates the potential for backfire. ..."
Like many others, I am outraged by the
egregious incidents of sexual misconduct made public recently through carefully documented journalism. I applaud the removal
of many alleged perpetrators who have clearly abused their positions of power, often through force and even violence. I celebrate
those who have stepped forward to call out sexual misconduct and demand changes in the degrading culture that has characterized working
conditions for women in too many settings for too long.
However, I am concerned that in the recent rush to judgment, principles of basic fairness, differences between proven and
merely alleged instances of misconduct, and important distinctions between different kinds of sexually charged conduct have too often
been ignored. Similar problems plagued the imposition of
new sexual harassment guidelines
for colleges and universities by the administration of former President Barack Obama. I was involved in attempts to push back against
those guidelines and to develop at Harvard Law School our own policies, better designed to balance the important values at stake.
My fairness concerns with the #MeToo phenomenon include the ready acceptance in many cases of anonymous complaints, and of
claims made by women over conflicting claims by men, to terminate careers without any investigation of the facts. Some argue
that women who speak out should simply always be believed. Others argue that if some innocent men must be sacrificed to the cause
of larger justice, so be it. I find this deeply troubling. I do not contend that mini-trials should always be required before action
can be taken. Sometimes the alleged conduct is so egregious, or alleged patterns so suspicious, that suspension is warranted
while facts are determined. Sometimes allegations are demonstrably credible by virtue of independent evidence. But where facts are
in doubt or conduct is subject to different interpretations, efforts must be made to investigate what actually happened and how the
different parties understood the events.
I am also deeply troubled by
over-expansive definitions of wrongful conduct. In the current climate, men are called out for actions ranging from requests
for dates and hugs on the one hand to rape and other forced sexual contact on the other, as if all are the same and all warrant termination.
I do not believe that all touching by a man in power is the same as touching that is clearly unwanted or the deliberate abuse
of power to obtain sexual favors. I do not believe that all romantic and sexual overtures should be banned from the workplace, even
between people on different hierarchical levels. Some recent cases involve
peremptory dismissal for behavior
that may involve nothing more than that. Women are not so weak as to need this kind of protection. Banning all such activity from
the workplace would reduce the quality of life for everyone, including women.
The legal definition
of sexual harassment in employment and education is a helpful guide to what sexual conduct should be the focus. It is illegal to
engage in quid pro quo harassment, namely conditioning an employment or educational benefit on sexual favors. It is illegal also
to create a "hostile environment" through unwelcome sexual advances that are severe or pervasive and that limit the victim's ability
to enjoy employment or educational opportunity.
Objective standards apply, so the question is whether a reasonable person in the position of the alleged perpetrator or alleged
victim would have thought the conduct was sexual harassment, not simply what the alleged victim subjectively felt.
Finally, I am concerned with the cynical exploitation of sexual harassment cases and related scapegoating of individuals.
The #MeToo movement has helped demonstrate to the world the toxic level of sex discrimination and sexual misconduct that have characterized
work life for too many women in business, entertainment, media, and government. Corporate and political leaders, who must have
been at least generally aware of these problems, did little to address them until this moment of public shaming. Now they dismiss
alleged perpetrators overnight, often with no regard for the facts but clearly with significant regard for their corporate reputations
and electoral strategies.
All this puts real reform at risk. It undermines the legitimacy of action against serious sexual misconduct and abuse of power.
It creates the potential for backfire.
Elizabeth Bartholet '62 is the Morris Wasserstein Public Interest Professor of Law at Harvard Law School.
The left's latest ideological obsession isn't limited to BLM protests -- it's all the rage
in top law schools, and it's breaking into Congress.
There's a lesson I've learned: if it's a fad, be wary. The tulip craze in Holland in the
1500s led to one of the first economic bubbles. The internet replicated the problem in 2000, as
did cryptocurrency in 2019. At one time, the hula hoop was all the rage.
Today, there's a social philosophy that's building up a bubble of
its own: critical race theory (CRT). CRT has been around since the 1970s, but has blown up in
the past few years as terms like microaggression, white guilt, white privilege, and white
supremacy have come to dominate the popular lexicon. All of it is rooted in CRT.
CRT -- though it's known to most as a potent political force, and the ideological
underpinning of the Black Lives Matter organization -- has always been, first and foremost, a
legal philosophy. It starts with the premise that the United States is rooted in white
supremacy and that this white supremacy is written into the law. This inherent racism is
presented as the explanation for any disparity in outcome, such as that drug convictions and
death penalty sentences are more likely to be rendered on minorities.
Mari Matsuda, a CRT luminary, described it as "the work of progressive legal scholars of
color who are attempting to develop a jurisprudence that accounts for the role of racism in
American law and that works toward the elimination of racism as part of a larger goal of
eliminating all forms of subordination."
Far from being a grassroots philosophy formulated by radicals on the streets, it can be
traced back to the faculties of some of our nation's most elite law schools. From Critical
Race Theory: An Introduction :
Critical race theory sprang up in the mid-1970s, as a number of lawyers, activists, and
legal scholars across the country realized, more or less simultaneously, that the heady
advances of the civil rights era of the 1960s had stalled and, in many respects, were being
rolled back. Realizing that new theories and strategies were needed to combat the subtler
forms of racism that were gaining ground, early writers such as Derrick Bell, Alan Freeman,
and Richard Delgado (coauthor of this primer) put their minds to the task. They were soon
joined by others, and the group held its first conference at a convent outside Madison,
Wisconsin, in the summer of 1989.
All three -- Bell, Delgado, and Freeman -- were law school professors. Derrick Bell was
teaching at Harvard Law School when he published the seminal CRT treatise Race, Racism, and
American Law . Freeman taught at the University of Minnesota, the University of Buffalo,
and others. Delgado is currently teaching at the University of Alabama, and has previously
taught at UCLA, the University of Colorado, and elsewhere.
"The Law as Microaggression," another pioneering work on CRT, was written by NYU Law
professor Peggy Davis and published in the Yale Law Journal in 1989. One especially successful
CRT practitioner is Patricia Williams, who currently holds the title of Director of Law,
Technology, and Ethics at Northeastern University. From 2000-2005, she was the recipient of a
$500,000 MacArthur Grant. Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw, another CRT heavyweight, is the
Isidor and Seville Sulzbacher Professor of Law at Columbia Law School.
Crenshaw, in addition to her professorial duties at Columbia, heads up the university's
Center for Intersectionality and Interpolicy Studies. That center advertises:
The Center for
Intersectionality and Social Policy Studies was established to examine how social
structures and related identity categories such as gender, race, and class interact on
multiple levels to create social inequality. The first such center of its kind, the Center's
research projects and initiatives will bring together scholars and practitioners from law,
sociology, feminist and gender studies, human rights, social justice, and other fields to
explore the relationship of intersectionality to their work, to shape more effective
remedies, and to promote greater collaboration between and across social movements.
It's a good gig, if you can get it. But it's far from her only one. Crenshaw is also the
founder of a 501(c)(3), the African American Policy Forum, which promotes CRT to both popular
and academic audiences. The forum's mission statement :
Founded in 1996, The African American Policy Forum (AAPF) is an innovative think tank that
connects academics, activists and policy-makers to promote efforts to dismantle structural
inequality. We utilize new ideas and innovative perspectives to transform public discourse
and policy. We promote frameworks and strategies that address a vision of racial justice that
embraces the intersections of race, gender, class, and the array of barriers that disempower
those who are marginalized in society. AAPF is dedicated to advancing and expanding racial
justice, gender equality, and the indivisibility of all human rights, both in the U.S. and
internationally.
Among other AAPF activities, Professor Crenshaw hosts a regular webinar, Intersectionality
Matters. One recent webinar, released shortly before the election, was entitled, "Black Men for
Trump? The Overdue Conversation on Patriarchy and Misogynoir in Black Politics." This
election's result, with the greatest share of black voters breaking for a Republican since
1960, is clearly seen by CRT advocates as a problem to rectify, rooted in internalized racism
or misogyny.
Another webinar which AAPF put on
recently -- "Under the Blacklight: Politics, Power, & the Struggle Against Black Precarity"
-- gives a good idea of the influence CRT is gaining. It's not so much the topic that's
interesting here as the guests.
Perhaps the most recognizable speaker was Ayanna Pressley, a Massachusetts congresswoman and
member of "The Squad." Pressley, as so many CRT advocates do, presented the legal movement and
the activist movement as inextricably linked: "If you believe that Black Lives Matter, then you
believe that Black healing matters and Black justice matters."
Joining Pressley were Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) and Kim Foxx, the Cook County State's Attorney
who let off Jussie Smollett. During the webinar, Foxx made it clear that she drew no lines
between her racial identity and her legal duties, professing, "I'm unapologetic that I come to
this role as a black woman."
Heather MacDonald looked closer at Foxx's identity prosecuting in City Journal :
Foxx is a leading figure in the recent national wave of progressive local prosecutors who came
to power by playing race politics. She campaigned on the Critical Race Theory credo that the
criminal-justice system is endemically biased. She inveighed against the so-called
school-to-prison pipeline and promised to reduce racial disparities in prosecutions. Last
month, she dismissed aggravated battery charges against a 16-year-old student who had
attacked two Chicago police officers; the Chicago police union argued that her dismissal of
the charges fit a pattern of favoring offenders over police officers. Foxx operates in a
cultural
milieu that holds that the fact that a hate crime is a hoax is less important than the
fact that it could have been true.
Two congresswomen and a district attorney is no mean collection of power and influence. Even
still, the devotees of CRT are far from attaining any kind of governing consensus in Congress
or in the criminal justice system. But radical progressive prosecutors like Foxx are sweeping
into offices across the country, and all four members of the Squad won reelection -- these
ideas, and their radical proponents, are on the rise.
The only question is, how much bigger will the bubble get before it bursts? BillDaytona
• 21 minutes ago Critical Theory has become entrenched in the universities. It's not a
bubble. It's a takeover.
Chris Pratt made a name for himself getting chased by dinosaurs in the Jurassic World
franchise films, but the woke are now out to get him for allegedly having what they deem to be
the political and cultural beliefs of a caveman.
Pratt originally shot to fame as the lovable lug Andy Dwyer on the NBC sitcom Parks and
Recreation , and went on to movie stardom as the leading man in the Jurassic World ,
Guardians of the Galaxy and The Lego Movie franchises. Unfortunately, he is now
squarely in the cancel culture crosshairs of the woke Twitter mob for potentially being a
secret, homophobic, Trump supporter.
This Pratt incident began when TV writer Amy Berg posted pictures of the four famous Chrises
– Chris Evans, Chris Pine, Chris Hemsworth, and Chris Pratt, on Twitter and said " one
has to go ."
In response, the Guardian readers of the Galaxy
attacked Pratt – claiming the star's Instagram bio ' radiated homophobic White
Christian supremacist energy '.
Pratt's bio that sparked that comment reads, " I Love Jesus, My wife and family! Seahawks
fanatic, MMA junky! " The horror. The horror.
This Pratt episode is amusing because while he is known for dinosaur movies, it is the woke
who are acting out of their lizard brains, as the evidence of Pratt being homophobic and a
white Christian supremacist is well entirely non-existent.
Last year, after actress Ellen Page attacked Pratt on Twitter for being a member of an "
infamously " anti-LGBTQ church, Pratt
responded , " It has recently been suggested that I belong to a church which 'hates a
certain group of people' and is 'infamously anti –LGBTQ.' Nothing could be further from
the truth. I go to a church that opens their doors to absolutely everyone ."
Of course, just because an emotionalist buffoon like Page says something doesn't make it so,
as she famously once gave a hysterical
speech on the Late Show with Stephen Colbert decrying the homophobia
and racism in America that led to the " attack " on Jussie Smollett. A claim that has
not held up particularly
well .
The lack of evidence regarding Pratt's homophobia hasn't deterred the Twitter mob from
marking Pratt for termination though, which is ironic since Pratt's father-in-law is former
Republican Governor of California
Arnold Schwarzenegger .
The other thing that seems to have galled the tiny Torquemadases of Twitter are Pratt's
ambiguous political beliefs.
Even though Pratt has never declared his support for Trump, the maniacal mob assumes he does
because he also hasn't said if he supports Biden. Although Pratt's wife, Katherine
Schwarzenegger, has publicly stated she will be voting for Biden.
The cancel culture clan point to Pratt's not attending an upcoming Avengers fundraiser for
Biden, and that he was also once photographed by a paparazzo wearing a
Gadsden Flag t-shirt that said 'Don't Tread on Me', as iron-clad proof of the star's evil
political intentions, but this seems like a short cut to thinking.
He was also
blasted by woke activists for joking about voting, with humorless morons branding him
insensitive and tone deaf. All Pratt had done was make a light-hearted quip about voting for
his kids' movie Onward at the People's Choice Awards. According to the fun police on Twitter,
this election is "too important" for such frivolity.
Pratt's lone, unambiguous statement on politics, besides his contribution of $1,000 to
Obama's campaign in 2012, was in 2017 in Men's Journal where he
said , " I really feel there's common ground out there that's missed because we focus on
the things that separate us I don't feel represented by either side. " What a monster!
The biggest issue with all of this nonsense is that people are furious not because of
anything Pratt has said or done, but because he hasn't said or done anything. Pratt isn't going
to a Biden fundraiser or a Trump fundraiser or a Groot fundraiser or a Thanos fundraiser he
isn't going to any fundraisers at all!
The idea that the mental midget McCarthy-ites on woke Twitter want to cancel Pratt because
he said and did nothing is absurd to the point of madness.
Chris Pratt has graciously kept his politics private, unlike a host of other
approval-addicted actors who flaunt their " fashionable " beliefs for 15 more minutes of
fame. Pratt shouldn't be excoriated for imagined beliefs that people project onto him, he
should only be judged by what he does and what he says in life.
For example, judge Pratt on his further
response to Ellen Page's baseless anti-LGBTQ claim,
" My faith is important to me but no church defines me or my life, and I am not a
spokesman for any church or group of people. My values define who I am. We need less hate in
this world, not more. I am a man who believes that everyone is entitled to love who they want
free from the judgement of their fellow man ."
He then wrote, " Jesus said, 'I give you a new command, love one another.' This is what
guides me in my life. He is a God of Love, Acceptance and Forgiveness. Hate has no place in my
or this world. "
That statement speaks glorious volumes about the quality and worth of Chris Pratt as a human
being.
The recent unwarranted vilification of Pratt speaks volumes too, not about him, but about
the vapid, vacuous and venal villains partaking in it.
I've never been much of a fan of Pratt's acting but this whole Twitter Pratt attack has left
me admiring the man for his groundedness and humility.
The bottom line is Chris Pratt seems like a genuine and decent guy and his detractors seem
like vile and repugnant Twitter tyrants.
Like this story? Share it with a friend!
Peter Chamberlin 21 October, 2020 21 Oct, 2020 11:29 AM
Trump was brought to power in the last election to disrupt the politically correct culture,
advocated by the Democrats as "Democracy", when it is in actuality, a hidden form of
authoritarianism, where the people are subjected and controlled through applied peer pressure
on a national level. Neoliberal mainstream media has been at war with American culture since
the birth of the monster called "political correctness." The rage reaction against Trump has
been orchestrated from his first day in office, building in intensity until today, when we are
all called to be witness to the "crescendo" of the culture war. Democracy used to be when
everybody was entitled to their own opinions, as long as they did not force others to change
theirs. The arrival of so much partisan violence on both sides testifies to the abnormality of
our current situation and to the dangerous position we have allowed ourselves to be maneuvered
into. Whoever wins in two weeks, wins. Accept it and move forward.
intolerantslob 21 October, 2020 21 Oct, 2020 04:25 AM
Trump has tried to make peace - Biden is a war monger Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Libya, etc. He
is a self-centered old man - why anyone thinks he would make a good president is beyond me. It
is time for the minor US parties, such as the Libertarians and Greens, to break the 2 party
domination of US politics
Flyingscotsman 20 October, 2020 20 Oct, 2020 11:56 AM
These woke keyboard warriors , should be held to account for slander or incitement to violence/
harassment. The fact they believe they can attack from the shadows and never be held to
account, is the problem .
T. Agee Kaye 21 October, 2020 21 Oct, 2020 06:25 AM
Why hedge with 'seems'? His attackers don't use 'seems'. Say it. Chris Pratt is decent guy and
his detractors are vile and repugnant Twitter tyrants.
Jenny Morrill writes the UK nostalgia blog World of Crap . Follow her here @ theworldofcrap Win or lose, the woke outrage mob are still
on the warpath. Everyone, everywhere, is in danger of being canceled for the injustice of the
week. In my opinion, the media are to blame for their childish good-versus-evil narrative.
Last week, I committed the ultimate unforgivable sin – I expressed mild support for
Donald Trump on Twitter. This was in the context of suggesting that the election, which even
the US Congress has admitted contains " the presence of extensive voter
fraud , " might have had some voting irregularities. This, obviously, translated into
me being a 'Nazi' and a 'far-right Trump enabler', whatever that's even supposed to mean.
It's a story we've heard many times before – someone fails to toe the far left's
ideological line, and they are immediately 'canceled'. It's happened to people far more
important than me, and as a result most 'normal' people just keep their mouths shut and stay
out of it. We're used to seeing the pitchforks coming after celebrities for their imagined
crimes (often the same celebrities who not five minutes ago were doing the exact same thing),
but be under no illusion that they save their venom for the rich and famous. I'm a nobody, and
still they were outraged enough to come after me.
For what it's worth, I don't consider myself right wing or left wing. For the most part, I
support things that benefit the average voter. Making sure elections aren't rigged is pretty
high on my list of 'things that benefit the average voter'.
Unfortunately, the generation who were rewarded with fake internet points for tweeting about
avocados and gender studies have decided that they are the new 'voice of the people', and the
rest of us can go to hell for not already agreeing with their deeply held beliefs they've had
since Tuesday. These people cry over the plight of the 'working class', but as soon as one of
them has an opinion they don't like, they are told to shut up and know their place. And god
forbid one of them should ever meet a working-class person in the wild – they will
wrinkle their nose and tell them off for 'liking football and sausage rolls'. These are the
people who refuse to acknowledge that most voters are not in favor of banning speech and
defunding the police, because they are stupid ideas.
You can spot these people immediately if you know the signs. Their Twitter username includes
a barked virtue signal, all in caps (John 'WEAR A MASK!' Jackson). They are the men who wear
T-shirts that say " The future is female ," and make sure the world sees them wearing
it. They have an open-mouthed selfie of themselves holding a Funko. It's always Funkos.
The problem with these people is that they get the moral prism through which they view the
world from Harry Potter, the Marvel movies, and other franchises aimed at children, rather than
the nuances of real life. They are infantilized by the corporate blanketing of the 'good v
evil, and by the way we're the good guys, buy our stuff' narrative. Being surrounded on all
sides by this simplistic world view inevitably reduces a person's ability to think critically,
especially when the punishment for doing so is being ostracized by your peers. It must be
difficult being a revolutionary when you're surrounded by every corporation on the planet
patting you on the back and charging you for the privilege.
And yet I can't really blame these people. The finger should be pointed at the media for
encouraging this one-sided view of the world to the point where all opposing views are banned,
no matter how harmless. The people who over-consume this media have lost whatever ability they
had to fairly judge a situation which might include various shades of grey. That's why they
react so furiously to someone disagreeing with them, to the point that they will make personal
threats.
Which brings me back to my deplorable crime of suggesting Trump might not be literally evil
incarnate. I don't mind losing some Twitter followers for what I said, but I do mind people
threatening to 'find out where I live and pay me a visit', people trying to get my (completely unrelated) blog shut down, and
generally trying to make my life a misery in all my online spaces. Perhaps most shockingly,
they threatened to get my Redbubble page shut down. I hope they don't do that, because I'd lose
a whole 30p a month.
I fully expect to get canceled even further after writing this. But quite frankly I'm past
caring. I just wanted to write about old TV. I just wanted to laugh at kids' shows from the
'80s, and talk about nostalgia. But the woke mob has a way of dragging you into its demented
world. Well, I don't want to be part of that world, and at some point they're going to have to
grow up and stop trying to be king of the playground. It's time to take social media back from
these oversized children.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
Franc shadow1369 2 hours ago 16 Nov, 2020 12:25 PM
It's even worse than intolerance and bigotry, it's intolerance and bigotry under the guise of
acceptance and goodwill. They've been indoctrinated, and if they were more organized we could
call them a legit religious cult.
volch 1 hour ago 16 Nov, 2020 01:49 PM
One of the best op-eds written. In my view people need to pay more attention to the social
biologists. Humans will accept their own irationality delusion and hysteria if they feel
their social standing is nevertheless enhanced . It's a fundamental problem that will plague
society forever. The woke mobs won't begin to question themselves while their dopamine levels
are elevated.
Sapphire1 1 hour ago 16 Nov, 2020 01:50 PM
My son lives in the States and he said that Woke culture has taken over. People were afraid
to say that they voted for Trump. The media has been taken over by the left and will not
report anything that goes against leftist propoganda. It is the end of free speech.
Lacus_Magnus DoubleKnot 2 hours ago 16 Nov, 2020 12:42 PM
(((They))) control what we hear, see and now (((they))) try to manage what we may say.
Remember the Koni experiment about 15 years ago? Within a week of social media campaigning
they had the kids up in arms over some obscure warlord in Africa. That was an excercise in
mob creation and manipulation.
benalls 58 minutes ago 16 Nov, 2020 02:04 PM
All living things are skeptical of that which is different from yourself. Government forced
tolerance, and mandatory race ratios has made the parents of this generation,angry, bitter,
and feeling unable to change things. This generation has by a majority been raised by a
single parent, at the border of poverty. The families wondering if there is enough left on
the maxed visa card to get enough gas to go to work and back today. They also find that after
they graduate high-school the choices are limited, lowering the bar to prevent accusations of
racism, their 4th grade reading and comprehension level disqualifies them for most of the few
jobs available
allan Kaplan 2 hours ago 16 Nov, 2020 12:47 PM
"Emperor's has new clothes" is so befitting to the real peeled off layer of an onion
Democrats and the fraudulent liberals that there's no more pretense, charades, and pretexts
left to dwell upon in their long run of fakeries of democracy, equal rights, and the rest of
the garbage! Kamala Harris is the living devil in disguise with all the subtle nuances, and
an unashamed sanctimonious holier-than-thou devil who would surpass any female leader of any
country in the past in her devilish turpitudes and depravity that the world has seen!
This is the really scary part. There used to be an unspoken rule that defense attorneys were
not supposed to be judged for their clients, even if they represent a despicable person. Serial
killers, terrorists, pederasts, etc. should not be cut off from the ability to have
representation in court.
A good law firm would be suing the Lincoln Project for harassment and defamation instead of
rolling over and showing their bellies to a bully. So it would seem that the loss of Porter
Wright as a member of the Trump team is probably for the best.
A law firm representing the Trump campaign's efforts to challenge the Pennsylvania election
results gave notice late Thursday that they are withdrawing from one of the cases.
While no reason was given for the decision by Porter Wright Morris & Arthur LLP,
Bloomberg notes that it was one of two law firms targeted by the Lincoln Project - a group
of 'never-Trump' Republicans devoted to removing Trump from office.
On Tuesday, the group encouraged people to join LinkedIn and target individual employees of
Porter Wright and another law firm, Jones Day, and "Ask them how they can work for an
organization trying to overturn the will of the American people."
" Leftist mobs descended upon some of the lawyers representing the President's campaign and
they buckled ," said campaign communications director, Tim Murtaugh. "If the target were anyone
but Donald Trump, the media would be screaming about injustice and the fundamental right to
legal representation. The President's team is undeterred and will move forward with rock-solid
attorneys to ensure free and fair elections for all Americans."
Here's another 'cancel' crusader bragging about the left's latest scalp:
Another attorney who is not affiliated with Porter Wright will remain on the case in
Williamsport, Pennsylvania. A hearing on the state's motion to dismiss the suit in federal
court is scheduled for Tuesday.
The suit claims the state's election results are suspect because the campaign wasn't given
adequate access to observe the vote-counting in Democratic-leaning counties. A hearing in
that case has been scheduled for Nov. 17.
Porter Wright has also been representing the campaign in a case heading to the
Pennsylvania Supreme Court similarly challenging vote tallies based on poll observers' access
to the counting process. It additionally filed several county-level challenges seeking to
disqualify ballots it claimed were defective. It's unclear if Porter Wright also intends to
withdraw from those representations. -
Bloomberg
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
The firm's work for the Trump campaign was led by Pittsburgh office partner Ronald Hicks,
co-chair of their election law practice.
takeaction , 1 day ago
This is Soros/Clinton money and strong arming that is doing this.
We are in a full MAFIA exposure.
This is going to get real interesting.
I have said it before, this is the FIGHT OF THE REPUBLIC....if Trump ends up losing, all
hopes of exposure are gone.
Obama spying on Trump, No big deal...
Hunter corruption buried...
Clinton crime family, off the hook...
Seal Team 6...forgotten...
Biden family enrichment, no repercussions...
SETH RICH, a hero, wiped from memory...
There is a lot more at play here than just the "Election" and our taxes going up.
NAV , 1 day ago
Good riddance to Jones Day: this is just an excuse to further delay and hurt Trump's case.
Already that firm has leaked private case information to the New York Times. Both these firms
have sabotaged President Trump.
Jones Day, the most prominent firm representing President Trump and the Republican Party
in its legal battle challenging the results of the election, earlier backstabbed Trump in the
back by leaking case information to the New York Times.
The activist rag, the Times, says those inside the firm are concerned about the propriety
and wisdom of working for Trump.
Trump needed to fire these unethical lawyers and one wonders why he didn't. Maybe he's
being sabatoged on so many fronts he doesn't know where to start. And just maybe information
is being kept from him by his "advisers."
The Times says these Jones Day subversives fear "Mr. Trump and his allies undermine the
integrity of American elections, according to interviews with nine partners and associates,
who spoke on the condition of anonymity to protect their jobs."
(Notice that Trump always is Mr.Trump, not President Trump, while Biden is President-elect
Biden.)
"At another large firm, Porter Wright Morris & Arthur, based in Columbus, Ohio,
lawyers have held internal meetings to voice similar concerns about their firm's
election-related work for Mr. Trump and the Republican Party, according to people at the firm
. At least one lawyer quit in protest."
Trump has had 4 years to take action. I used to think like you but gave up about ...
hmmm... 4 years ago. He is just as zionist as ziohedge and the dems. Elections are
irrelevant. The CHAOS was always the plan.
takeaction is absolutely right in both comments. Great info in the first comment and a
great point in the second. We have one life, if you're not enjoying it, what's the point?
TheReplacement's Replacement , 1 day ago
Ah, a fundamental point of propaganda from the progressives that has successfully been
anchored in the psyche of the west. You need to have fun...
Life is a struggle that everyone will eventually lose. How rewarding the struggle is
depends of the effort you expend.
There are protests all across the country today. You can put down your childish things for
a few hours and go out to physically show support for Trump and the rule of law. You can meet
like minded people, network with them, and perhaps even begin preparing for struggles
ahead.
Or
Just keep doing what you have been doing. It has worked out sofa king great that the
communists are in their final push to take over not just this country but the entire
world.
It's up to you. No big deal. Have fun....
U_Wish_U_Were_This_Cool , 1 day ago
I suppose you have one?
Mine was to pass a constitutional amendment to forbid members of Congress from having any
income producing assets or source of income other that salary of office. Simply owning one
would by law immediately end their current term and disqualify them from any public office
from that point forward. No more corporate grift or self serving representatives in
office.
Of course it is difficult to convince a troll to support anything other than being a
troll.
Soylent Green tastes the same no matter which side of the fence you are on.
konputa , 1 day ago
If I may add an item to your excellent proposal:
Immediately ban anyone from public office that holds a foreign citizenship. I know this
will "unfairly" impact a number of people with dual citizenship in a certain ME country but I
feel it's for the better and allows us to focus on more pressing domestic issues.
kharrast , 1 day ago
The Troskyists are supported by the banking cartel. You can't get rid of the tyrants while
still using their monetary system.
wizteknet , 1 day ago
The committee was announced on December 17, 2019, in a New York Times op-ed by George
Conway, Steve Schmidt, John Weaver, and Rick Wilson.[5] Other co-founders include Jennifer
Horn, Ron Steslow, Reed Galen, and Mike Madrid.[6]. Sounds like a bunch McStains from what I
read.
MoreFreedom , 1 day ago
Big Democrat and RINO money is going up against Trump, and threatening the law firm
they'll lose their business with the traitors who bring in lots of revenue. That's what's
happening, and you are right; they are strong arming threats of force as well. It shows how
bad their case is they have to resort to thuggery and economic boycotts.
Cognitive Dissonance , 1 day ago
The Deep State/CIA's color revolution/coup proceeding as planned.
Hey Assholes , 1 day ago
Methinks that the obviousness of the fraud was intentional. Media crowns bidet, Trump
calling out the fraud. Whoever wins, the country is split and irreconcilable .
If Trump prevals, riots ensue and marshal law follows. We lose. If bidet steal succeeds,
70+ million become ungovernable, and civil war ensues.
I am a Tump supporter, but I am also an individualist and despise tyranny. The controllers
are trying to overturn the chess board and the setup is heads they win, tails we lose.
skizex , 1 day ago
Chairman of the Federal Election Commission says 'I Do Believe There Is
Voter Fraud Taking Place'...'Making This An Illegitimate Election' https://rense.com/general96/voter-fraud.mp4
Tirion , 1 day ago
All sorts of criminality has been obvious since the last election, but what has been done
about it? Nothing! So what makes you think they will lose? The rule of law is a pretense
only.
palmereldritch , 1 day ago
The CIA, at the highest level, is a Bankster infiltration and enforcement agency.
Goldblatz' Monster , 1 day ago
The bigger question is who in Hell wants more Trump (Kushner and Bibi)? Doesn't matter.
Bibi and Gates won. Harris stands before AIPAC spreading her love to Israel. The goy ain't
never gonna get it.
skizex , 1 day ago
Academy Award-winning actor Jon Voight has come out in support of Donald Trump's claim
that Joe Biden is falsely declaring victory in last week's presidential election.
"My fellow Americans, I stand here with all the feel as I do disgusted with this lie that
Biden has been chosen." Voight began. "As if we all don't know the truth. And when one tries
to deceive we know that one can't get away with it, there will be a price to pay."
Voight warned Americans that they are now facing their "greatest fight since the civil
war" as the left are Satanists:
The ones who are jumping for joy now are jumping towards the horror they will be in for.
Because I know that the promises being made from the left to the American people will never
come to be. My friends of all colors, races, and religions, this is now our greatest fight
since the Civil War. The battle of righteousness versus Satan. Yes, Satan. Because these
leftists are evil, corrupt, and they want to tear down this nation.
This is the really scary part. There used to be an unspoken rule that defense attorneys
were not supposed to be judged for their clients, even if they represent a despicable person.
Serial killers, terrorists, pederasts, etc. should not be cut off from the ability to have
representation in court.
But in this new Lord of the Flies zeitgeist, if you get designated as an enemy of the
state, they can bring you up on whatever charges they want and no defense attorney will risk
being associated with you. So you'll stand alone against the full weight of the
government.
StuffyourVAXX , 1 day ago
So wait, this was done on Twitter and LinkedIn?
Organizing coordinated harassment and threats aren't against their TOS? Huh.
Zorch , 1 day ago
Not against TOS because these are patriotic Americans fighting a fascist dictator.
/sarc
InTheLandOfTheBlind , 1 day ago
Conservatives, most Republicans, and most importantly, Christians, are considered subhuman
by Twitter. They have no rights
TechnoCaveman , 1 day ago
I feel for the law firm and its employees.
This happened for two reasons - lack of morals from those who harassed the firm and a lack of
push back from US
Not only should the police get involved, but can we know the names and companies of who did
the harassing so we can abandon them?
No violence - do not stoop to their level. Instead tell them they are on the wrong side of
justice and the wrong side of history.
Seek the truth.
Stand with Trump
Stand with Trump supporters.
Stand against evil.
rlouis , 1 day ago
A lot of the people on the Lincoln Project have links to John McCain...
Silentwistle , 1 day ago
Everyone is missing the big tell here. You don't send your mob out to harass if there is
nothing to hide. All they are doing is circling their wagons around this corruption
Quia Possum , 1 day ago
And it looks like they're succeeding in that effort. From the old John Harrington
verse:
Do not harass or bully: We don't allow bullying or harassment. This includes abusive
language, revealing others' personal or sensitive information (aka "doxing"), or inciting
or engaging others to do any of the same.
So everyone involved in the Lincoln Project should be banned from LinkedIn.
I'm sure Microsoft will get right on that.
Original_Intent , 1 day ago
and they call us Fascists - straight out of Saul Alinsky's book...
tunEphsh , 1 day ago
If the election had been run honestly, the Democrats and their Lincoln Project "friends"
would not be pushing so hard to end an investigation. Honest people would say "Go ahead and
investigate all you want to, you are not going to find anything."
Whoa Dammit , 1 day ago
A good law firm would be suing the Lincoln Project for harassment and defamation instead
of rolling over and showing their bellies to a bully. So it would seem that the loss of
Porter Wright as a member of the Trump team is probably for the best.
Totally_Disillusioned , 1 day ago
Unfortunately the corporatists have a tremendous amount of power.
Whoa Dammit , 1 day ago
Only if the power is given to them by not standing up for one's self and for the law. The
British had a lot of power here 244 years ago.
el_buffer , 1 day ago
Using intimidation and violence to foment political change is terrorism by definition.
I know you guys hate Facebook, so feel free to let your freak flag fly on that note.
Anyway, I commented on a Sun Times article on FB stating that the only qualifications for
Kamala were ticking the boxes of gender and race. She won zero delegates in the primaries,
and I don't know anyone who can even stand to hear her voice, let alone the words she is
forming with it. So a guy took a screenshot of my comment, proceeded to visit my personal
page, and messaged my employer saying that I am a racist, have no business representing the
company, and need to be fired immediately. As the page administrator I laughed at how
pathetic the guy was and deleted it. These people are out there in full force.
Countrybunkererd , 1 day ago
Every action you do will be under the cover of darkness and secrecy. Every day. Every
hour. Every minute. Every word carefully weighed as to ensure you don't say anything with
emotion or conviction. You don't speak to anyone about your thoughts or feelings because they
may use you to get out of some trouble where they were simply misunderstood by the given
power hungry individual for the current day. You never know what day you will be in trouble
for some misunderstood statement or worse.
You will give to the government everything they want and keep what they deem is enough to
sustain your meager lifestyle.
You can't afford to make a SINGLE mistake. Ever. So you cease talking with others except
for a very very select few.
EVERY SINGLE DAY. The lockdowns were a walk on the beach if and when we go this path.
Enjoy the Bolshevism, If you don't stand now on constitutional law, you deserve it. You
leftists have been played and are soon going to be deemed a useful idiot and executed by your
masters. It happens every single time, don't you read?
"... "There's no denying," Columbia professor Mark Lilla wrote in 2017's The Once and Future Liberal, "that the movement's decision to use this mistreatment to build a general indictment of American society and its law-enforcement institutions and to use Mau Mau tactics to put down dissent and demand a confession of sins and public penitence played into the hands of the Republican right." ..."
Early in the Trump years, moderate columnists and strategists held that the mechanisms for
accomplishing what Biden evidently has would be an aggressive critique of progressive identity
politics. It was agreed specifically that Black Lives Matter and progressive activism on
policing and criminal justice could be crippling.
"There's no denying," Columbia professor Mark Lilla wrote in 2017's The Once and Future Liberal, "that the movement's decision to use
this mistreatment to build a general indictment of American society and its law-enforcement
institutions and to use Mau Mau tactics to put down dissent and demand a confession of sins and
public penitence played into the hands of the Republican right."
Despite Democratic victories in 2018's midterms, the argument lived on long enough to worry
moderates who criticized Biden this year in the wake of the demonstrations and riots over the
killing of George Floyd and the shooting of Jacob Blake. "In the crude terms of a presidential
campaign, voters know that the Democrat means it when he denounces police brutality, but less
so when he denounces riots," The Atlantic 's George Packer wrote in a
piece about the unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin.
"To reach the public and convince it otherwise,
Biden has to go beyond boilerplate and make it personal, memorable."
A little over two months
later, it's actually quite difficult to remember what exactly Biden said that week. And he
never delivered grand denunciations of cancel culture, White Fragility, the 1619
Project, or any of the other culture war material moderates and conservatives suggested he
needed to address to make large gains among whites and white men in particular. Those gains
were clearly made anyway.
JOHN: "Human nature does not change" ( 10:00 ) is not a conservative
insight. It is a 'religious' insight, which conservatism recognises. But no 'religion'
analyses human nature, and recognises it for what it is, better than the teachings of a young
Galilean around two thousand years ago. Unfortunately his teachings on our 'human-ness' were
important for the first two hundred years after his death and resurrection; but have, since,
been absorbed, and subsumed, into the image of the 'Christos', in order that the 'leaders' of
the Church might achieve POWER. We see these pathetic 'career-clergy' men and women clinging
to their 'clerical power' to this very day: but covid has found their empty gospel
wanting.
Very good interview and excellent questions. Dan is very intelligent and has a common
sense, down to earth, moral attitude to life and as a congressman. Do not agree with all of
his judgements politically but respect his thorough investigation and research into the
matter. Really respect his mature attitude and personal comport. Do not agree with his
disdain for the Pres even when agreeing with the Pres actions. There is a personal problem
due to an encounter or some other personal conflict on a deeper level. Credit due to
separating it from the office he holds.
"SYSTEMIC RACISM" EXISTS! 11:58 It's called "Affirmative
Action" -- allowing the skin color of an applicant to weigh in on whether or not to accept
the applicant.
As far as BLM and CHAD and racism is concerned look at South Africa today and what's
happened in South Africa since Mandela and the AMC took power in South Africa after
Apartheid!
It took to nearly the end of the interview to state what is truly missing from public
discourse, and that is the understanding that a person's moral compass, a party's moral
compass, a nation's moral compass, depends upon something higher than themselves, for some it
is God, for others it is themselves, in the form of the State. Therein lies the conflict -
between absolute truth and relative truth, between eternal morals and situation ethics,
between thankfulness and entitlement, between forgiveness and condemnation, between love of
country and betrayal. And right now that conflict in the USA is reflected on the political
battlefield between Republicans and Democrats.
The one thing you never hear from the left today, is the idea of personal responsibility
for your own actions and behaviors, which is the cornerstone of freedom. I recently saw a
video of a drug store, where two men came into the store and shoplifted from the store, the
store manager called the Police. The Police had the shoplifters give back what they'd stolen
and were not arrested for their actions. Afterwords a woman got out her phone to record and
began to badger the store manager for his actions. She said to him that he was endangering
the lives of black men because they could have died at the hands of the Police that day.
Never once did she acknowledge that they shouldn't have shop lifted and it was their actions
that should be in question, not the store manager. She got downright nasty with the manager
and later people protested in front of the drug store for the injustice of calling the Police
on shoplifters. Think about that for a second, we've swung completely upside down as a
society with this type of thinking. Recently a Policeman shot and killed a crazed man as he
came charging out a front door wielding a knife over his head running at the officer to kill
him with the knife, the officer ran away but eventually had no choice but to turn and shoot
this man, and people came out in large numbers and protested the officers actions. I guess he
was supposed to sacrifice his life to the black lives matter movement. So in the vocal black
community there is absolutely no need for personal responsibility anymore, no matter what
someone does it's always everyone else's fault, or our racist societies fault, but never
their own due to their own behavior. Now that's some scary shit.
13 minutes "Systemic Racism" Let me start by saying I'm self educated, my observations my
own, I follow no one, and I have no followers :) People are misunderstanding the reasons for
their economic problems (meaning poverty), and inability to ever improve conditions, and
describing it as Systemic Racism. Truth is we all have limited horizons. Parochial, whether
by geography or class, or both. Where I live I see a mix of all race/ethnic- mostly caucasian
(white) Americans, impoverished , homeless, miserable, who tried and failed so much they have
given up. Black people see the same thing but it's mostly black people where they chose to
live. Same with Asians, South Americans, Somalians (Ilhan Omar :( and so forth. Whats stuck
everyone in the mud is called NAIRU (natural anti inflation rate of unemployment), a rule
adopted by all the central banks around the world including the USA and Australia in the last
half of the 1970"s. Search & find dozens of varying descriptions of what NAIRU is about.
That was when or first homeless appeared (generally "overpaid" union American farm workers at
first) It means permanent high unemployment, adjusted by the central banks, leaving workers
in surplus, in order to keep wages flat or slightly declining. In the USA add to that mass
runaway immigration of low skilled workers accustomed to minimal wage. Think of it as a game
of musical chairs. The number of chairs (jobs) is slowly increasing, but the number of people
looking for chairs increases faster. Thus our large and seemingly permanent population living
in alleys and street sidewalks, never able to find employment, and given in to despair. Trump
has turned off NAIRU at our central bank, and greatly slowed the excessive and illegal
immigration, and until the Pandemic shutdowns, turning everything around. A tighter labor
market had employers rehabilitating older homeless workers and employing them, plus raising
wages to attract workers
16:48 Fascism- characterized by
dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and strong regimentation of society and
of the economy. Anarchism - is a political philosophy and movement which is skeptical of
authority and rejects all involuntary, coercive forms of hierarchy. Communism - a
socioeconomic order structured upon the ideas of common ownership of the means of production
and the absence of social classes, money and the state. It looks like the congressman is
putting negative words together without understanding they are opposites of each other. He's
become a politician.
Yes! FINALLY someone is contradicting the false claim of "both sides are doing it" with
censorship and cancel culture. Now, if only people would talk specifically about how CRT
fuels the insanity, we would have a chance to pull our country out of this spiral of
destruction. A sane person in Portland needs a little help here!
For 40 years I paid a large chunk of my Paycheck into Social Security. How can Dan call
this an Entitlement. I guess the paycheck that I worked for is an Entitlement too. When did
the labor that I provide become an entitlement. Entitlements are when something of value is
given to those that did nothing to earn it, like welfare checks.
Interesting analysis! Systemic racism is everywhere,🙄 is in the institutions?,
**but it's in you 😳and you don't know it?** So you have to change the institutions
and make the UNEQUAL👹? in order to create
equality🥴😂🤣😂😆😂😂 Isn't Radical Left =
Socialism?
The defunding of the police is to set the way for a national police as proposed by
President Obama in 2009 governed by DC. In its place temporarily, the strong arm of this
movement are Antifa and BLM. I equate these groups to the Brown Shirts of the Nazi party in
the 1930s. Once the German police were pacified and converted to the ideals of the party an
SS was created along with a Ghestappo which made the Brown Shirts an irrelevant and dangerous
group. It was destroyed in The Night of the Long Knives. Now you truly have the recipe for
central control and the tendency towards repression of those that will not conform.
Crenshaw spoke disingenuously about "the debt crisis, " blaming it on seniors. Surely he
realizes we have a fiat money system -- the bankers and other mega-corporate interests seized
TRILLIONS recently in two massive "Covid" heists." Bankers got trillions in October in a REPO
rescue, which was barely reported. Add their 2008 bailout, costing $21 trillion. And don't
forget defense industry payouts PLUS an even larger stealth siphoning revealed in the
delinquent Pentagon audit -- it exposed more TRILLIONS missing! And #Unappropriated by
Congress ! Their excuse: oops, "clerical" Why doesn't Rep Crenshaw complain about trillions
disappeared by the military? Or going to rich bankers? Yeah. Blame it on Boomers living on
Social Security... and who had FICA taxes removed from their paychecks for decades.
Social security is not an entitlement but money that the working class had taken out of
their paychecks for the time they worked for me 35 plus years but maybe your too young to
know about that...do your home work
The globalist technological revolution that we are in the midst of has pulled the economic
and cultural rug out from under the vast majority of citizens of western capitalist
democracies. Many people feel as though they no longer have anything of value to provide
others in a society based on the free and voluntary exchange of goods and services, or if
they do, that someone in China will provide it for far less. This reality has set the stage
for the attractiveness of Marxist ideology. We have made the average person in the West
obsolete or superfluous.
John Anderson
101K subscribers
SUBSCRIBE
Victor Davis Hanson is an American classicist, military historian, columnist, and farmer. He has been a commentator on
contemporary politics for the National Review and The Washington Times and is currently the Martin and Illie Anderson
Senior Fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution. He and John analyse the current culture war and the effect it is
having on our geopolitical strategy especially in relation to China, in light of the current pandemic. If you value this
discussion and want to see more like it, make sure you subscribe to the channel by clicking this link:
https://www.youtube.com/c/JohnAnderso...
As someone who wasted his youth on a worthless law degree, I can tell you that the US has way too many lawyers, and way too
many law schools. The job market for lawyer collapsed about 10 years ago, and law schools responded by pushing social justice
activism as a recruitment tool. They're training movie lawyers, instead of real ones, and jacking up tuition to ridiculous
levels. The graduates come out financially ruined, propagandized, and barely employable. I repaid my loans by leaving the
field and working construction, and I wish I'd never wasted my time on it. They send me alumni donation request forms,
trumpeting their new social justice initiatives.
Interesting conversation. Regarding "racism" it is an empty charge against America today from those of African descent. Like
America has always been racist and AS IF their ancestors came from a place that was not. I have visited several countries in
Africa and read much of history. What is called "racism" hardly compares to the brutal "tribalism" that is in Africa. Often
one tribe wiping out other tribes. Of course, we are aware many tribes sold "other tribes" into slavery. Now this follows all
of history and other places in the world. There is no nation and no tribe on earth that hasn't been guilty of
racism/tribalism/nationalism, etc. Why do we let organizations like BLM distort history? What history is taught in the USA
schools? Seesm we horrible suffer much from superficial schooling regarding the history of racism/tribalism/nationalism/religionism/slavery/abolitionism
and so on. Seems it will never change until we realize there is none righteous, not one. So - let us all confess past sins and
be determine to improve from where we are now as much as humanly possible. Equality and fairness is a forever quest worth
pursuing.
Marxists will stimulate and inflame and exaggerate any potential group resentment or conflict or difference within society -
race, gender, sexuality - in order to bring about as much confusion and chaos as possible in the hopes that "capitalist"
societies - and families and individuals - will fall apart from within so that they can then step up and "save the day" with
their brilliant Marxist framework - the same Marxist framework that has worked so brilliantly in the past in the Soviet Union,
East Europe, Mao's China, Pol Pot's Cambodia, Ho's Vietnam, etc., - gulags, walls, repression, stagnation and well over 100
million dead through starvation, worked to death in labour camps and mass executions, but, hey, don't let that stop you.
The
individual counts for nothing and the collective within the brilliant framework counts for everything. Human life counts for
nothing and the ideology counts for everything. Evidence counts for nothing because, hey, you know, if anything ever went
wrong, it was "not real Marxism". "So let us try again and next time we'll get the gulags and walls and executions right."
Behind all this is the spirit of resentment and vengeance, a spiritual war that will not allow for anything that transcends
their limitations, anything that transcends materialism and bureaucracy, like creativity, innovation or free enterprise. Free
spirits must be shot down. Individual responsibility must not be allowed.
Everything must be collectivised. You are not an individual, you are a soulless member of a collective according to your race,
gender, sexuality and nothing more. You are a locked-in member of a bureaucratic category and nothing more! There is no "you"
apart from the category we place you in. So give up all hope, all striving and all spiritual and aesthetic and intellectual
growth, and just accept your impotent, inevitable, irrefutable future as a zombi worker slave to the Central Committee that
will make all decisions for you. History has a plot and you are just a meaningless iota in the grand sweep of history.
And
if you don't go along with this narrative, we will work on your guilt feelings, your sense of fairness, your fear of losing
your livelihood, by calling you a "racist", "sexist", "fascist", "something-phobe", "anti-something" and bureaucratically
moving you out of your position. The soulless, heartless, godless bureaucracy is everything and you are nothing. Until there -
literally - is nothing.
Their end goal is not something like power, prestige, money; their end goal is nihilism, nothingness, the lights go out, the
pain stops, the "unfairness" stops. "If I can't have it, then you can't have it either." And their vengeance against life,
spirit, God, glory, joy, beauty, is complete Th- th- th- That's all folks!
All really interesting. The linking of what is happening in the States with the French Revolution is astounding. One thing
that stands out is the godlessness of the French during the Revolution, they publicly, through the National Assembly declared
themselves atheist and set up the Cult of Reason using a dancing girl as their object of worship and worshipped her in Notre
Dame. The anarchy in the States from the left is just as godless and is seeking the same. Problem is is that it led to the
Reign of Terror. If anyone is interested, read the chapter on the French Revolution in the book 'The Great Controversy' by
E.G. White. Then read the the 24th chapter of the Book of Matthew. We are in for extremely interesting and worrying times.
1:15
"Decolonization of post war British Empire"? People! What is the predominant accent you hear in our media today? It is
British. We are still their colony. We're like children being patted on the head by our guardians. Our enemies: Our
government at all levels; Britain; Israel. We are being attacked from within. When that happens we must divide or be
conquered. Emigration is today's Trojan horse. The antidote to globalization is secession. The solution: Iterative
secession. We are not homogeneous and shouldn't desire to be. The solution to neighbors who don't get along is not to force
them to live in the same house. We need many more spaces. Just look around. Who do you want to be equal to? Who do you
think is your equal?
This country was being destroyed from within by losing the skills of the people in the manufacturing sector. Go into stores an
find nothing produced in USA. Even simple things like clothes hangers. My dry cleaners asked me if I could bring any I had to
them because of supply disruption from China. Thank God we have a strong agricultural sector. That is our strength. China's
weakness. A billion more mouths to feed. China has to look outside there country to feed there people. Our weakness was energy
Independence. Trump changed that along with new technology like fracking. He allowed the horses to run by removing excess
regulation. Now we have new LNG plants an pipelines an opening new areas to drilling. We need to work with Taiwan an Japan to
help neutralize China in the East. An Germany needs to stay on board with USA to check Russia expansion. Putin wants to
restore the old Soviet Union. We need to support countries like Ukraine an Poland. We have many strengths. USA is not racist.
That was proven when we elected an African American candidate with blacks representing less than 15% of population. Americans
need to stand up for there country an not be labeled by a radical group like BLM or Antifa. Stop the destruction of our
culture an monuments. Enjoy VDH talks.
Actually s/he complained about the 'misuse' of the phrase 'white supremacy', a phrase
which can be very easily defined by the apparently bizarre and abnormal activity of
'looking up the phrase in a dictionary'. It literally has no 'hidden' or 'non-standard'
definition.
The motte definition of "white supremacy" is Mirriam-Webster: "the belief that the white
race is inherently superior to other races and that white people should have control over
people of other races".
The observation that white supremacy, under this definition, has been influential in
American history, is not controversial. (Controversial: claiming that the American revolution
was fought to protect slavery, as claimed by the 1619 Project, before the, ah,
clarification was issued.)
This outlook is influential; it, or something much like it, is part of the training of all
New York school employees, as
George Packer notes:
De Blasio's schools chancellor, Richard Carranza, has answered critics of the diversity
initiative by calling them out for racism and refusing to let them "silence" him. As part
of the initiative, Carranza has mandated anti-bias training for every employee of the
school system, at a cost of $23 million. One training slide was titled "White Supremacy
Culture." It included "Perfectionism," "Individualism," "Objectivity," and "Worship of the
Written Word" among the white-supremacist values that need to be disrupted. In the name of
exposing racial bias, the training created its own kind.
The meaning of the words has expanded, too. Ten years ago, white supremacy frequently
described the likes of the Ku Klux Klan and David Duke, the neo-Nazi politician from
Louisiana. Now it cuts a swath through the culture, describing an array of subjects: the
mortgage lending policies of banks; a university's reliance on SAT scores as a factor for
admissions decisions; programs that teach poor people better nutrition; and a police
department's enforcement policies.
So Mirriam-Webster is behind the times on the evolving and ever-expanding meaning of
"white supremacy"; an update is anticipated.
If we start with perception management, we can propose something patently absurd: the
Artificial Creamer Party.
Recognize any familiar tactics in the following campaign strategy?
1) We shall insist on the separation of milk and state, and bar any organization affiliated
with milk from being eligible for public subsidies.
2) The rights of dairy farmers to marry, adopt children, and openly serve in the military
shall be considered morally objectionable and debated at every opportunity.
3) In the event of an election, the multiple evils of milk shall be used to distract the
public from questioning the candidates on anything.
4) Think tanks, foundations, and the political correctness police shall enforce the world's
perception of Artificial Creamer as a "bridge to the future," "the salvation of the global
village," "the right of the human family," "the key to sustainable development," and "the path
to lasting peace."
5) Artificial Creamer will win a Nobel Prize, in light of everything it might do to fill the
world with sparkle ponies.
See? Something for everyone. But that's just perception management. Here's the net
effect.
The only ones to benefit will be the 0. 13% who are lactose intolerant and the 7% who make
megabucks. It won't create U. S. jobs because it will be made in Botswana at the emancipating
wage of twenty- three cents a day so 40% of Americans can afford to buy it at Walmart. For the
50% who are destitute, the FDA will declare Artificial Creamer a food group so it can be
purchased with WIC and Food Stamps, lest there be a riot against unfairness or Artificial
Creamer should fail to cash in on its share of national social programs.
Aren't we ingenious? We might demand that great- grandpa bag groceries on an oxygen tank,
thirty years into retirement, to afford his hypertension medicine, and reduce his Social
Security if someone gives him a five dollar tip that puts him over the income limit.
But, by God, he can have Creamer -- in any flavor he wants it. This is a land of choice and
opportunity, damn it.
Which is all fine and good, but when Artificial Creamer doesn't prove to be everything it
said it was, we'll go back to milk (again). And milk will get carried away in an orgy of self-
indulgence until we return to Artificial Creamer (once more). Either way, we'll have the
satisfaction and euphoria of empowerment.
Or something, anyway.
If you're confused about U. S. principles and who's supposed to benefit, you may not be to
blame. We've responded to boom and bust cycles inherent to our development choices and other
countries' criticisms with different programs and palliatives over decades of continuity.
But it doesn't take a genius to see that the tyranny of science is fighting to replace the
tyranny of royalty- teamed- with- religion we rejected in the eighteenth century. Science is
the power that buttresses democracy and capitalism, also in the name of "progress." Not that we
won't play the God card when corruption is so glaring that it requires another support system
which is conveniently available in the form of religious sanction.
It's a function of self- esteem to seek affirmation of our beliefs and share safety in
numbers, but the existence of like- minded people who hold the same fears, hopes, values and
disappointments is what makes them predictable targets and therefore most vulnerable to
strategic manipulation. It's like handing over the remote control to your decision- making
power or wearing a badge on your sleeve
"... It is the great con game. The super rich use the blacks especially, but also most of the browns, as excuses, weapons, and tools to batter the white middle class and white working class into utter submission. Tyranny of the worst sort seems to be end game. ..."
There is no agenda to "work together" with people who are trying to steal our freedom by
replacing our heritage as the world's first secular republic with a Christian theocracy. When
Christians took over the demoralized remnant of the Roman Empire they ushered in a thousand
years of repression and intellectual stagnation. We will not allow them to repeat this crime
in our land.
While we are selectively quoting the mendacious propaganda of the Federalist articles, let
us recall that in Federalist No. 10, Virginia aristocrat James Madison argued that
democracies were "spectacles of turbulence incompatible with the rights of property
[owners]." He was especially frightened of the mass of landless Americans, who, not unlike
his own slaves, "labour under all the hardships of life, and secretly sigh for a more equal
distribution of its blessings."
In Federalist No. 35, the future first US secretary of the treasury, Alexander Hamilton,
wrote, "The idea of an actual representation of all classes of people by persons of each
class is altogether visionary." Anticipating the infamous line in Orwell's "Animal Farm", he
continued, the "weight and superior acquirements of the merchants render them more equal"
than men of ordinary means.
The usual account of anti-federalism tells of the activism of wealthy men who feared a
strong central government would encroach on their local power and privilege. All but
forgotten is the opposition of rank-and-file Continental Army veterans who gathered in
protest at a number of locations nationwide to burn copies of the new constitution. They
declared it was a betrayal of what they thought they had fought for. Captain Daniel Shays, a
leader of the western Massachusetts militiamen's abortive uprising the previous year, spoke
for all American patriots when he said "we did not overthrow a wise king to be ruled by
shopkeepers" but their voices have long been silenced in conventional histories of those
turbulent times.
Recall also that in the first election of 1788-9, only 43,782 men were able to cast votes
for Presidential electors, out of a total American population of nearly four million.
And Hamilton is now lionized as being the great hero for blacks and browns.
It is the great con game. The super rich use the blacks especially, but also most of
the browns, as excuses, weapons, and tools to batter the white middle class and white working
class into utter submission. Tyranny of the worst sort seems to be end game.
You're like some Guelph who flopped out of a time machine yelling about the bucket and
everybody's like, What the fuck is he talking about?
Do you really want to piss away the rapidly dwindling rest of your life fixating on some
bullshit stereotyped melodrama? It's three words of one article of one clause of one of the
nine core human rights instruments. (You don't know what I'm talking about but bear with me.)
Both parties are in perfect agreement about screwing you out of every other human right you
got.
Nobody gives a rat's ass about Jay. Your founding fathers are Allen Dulles and Frank
Wisner. The conflicts you're trained to emote about are wholly synthetic. Apparatchiks of
both parties concur on impunity. That's all your country is. The United States of
Impunity.
Trump and his backers have been accused of mass murder.
And during the summer of 2020, the Black Lives Matter- and antifa-fueled riots, looting,
arson and assaults on cops went on for weeks, destroying billions of dollars in property
and ending with demands to "defund the police."
Scores of statues have been toppled and destroyed -- statues of explorers, missionaries,
Founding Fathers of the republic and presidents on Mount Rushmore.
Now, not only are we fractured over ideology, religion, race, culture and morality, but
also our country's history has become a cause of irreconcilable conflict.
Leftism, no matter what you call it, has always been dysgenic and always will be. It is a
"philosophy" embraced by those unable to surrender their dream for an impossible to achieve
perfect world for an imperfect and achievable good one.
Recall also that in the first election of 1788-9, only 43,782 men were able to cast
votes for Presidential electors, out of a total American population of nearly four
million.
Fewer than that. Almost all the states had their legislatures choose the electors back
then.
Regarding your last observation, Observator, the fact that the right to vote has become
nearly universal for all adults, has made the country's dire situation and short and
long-term outlook much worse. Too bad we can't go back to the days when only well-educated
male property owners could vote and hold office. Too much democracy contains within it the
seeds of its own destruction, which we are witnessing in spades today.
@The
Alarmist extreme left have been a disaster for Europe, at least since 1990. They have
destroyed the high standard of living Europe built up after the war and they have destroyed
Europe's competitiveness. Same for the USA. And the left has done much more warmongering than
the right the last 30 years. Neo-Cons (Republicans) are former leftists, mostly Jewish, that
promote war for Israel's security and strength. When Europe's right wing parties gain power
then Europe can begin its turnaround and perhaps become competitive again. They also want
good relations with Russia. That will benefit everyone. Hopefully this happens before the
left makes Europe a shithole no one wants to live in.
We have, for instance, Lieven focusing on the current top two, great interlocking
challenges: climate change and the fact that "350 years of Western and 250 years of
Anglo-American predominance are coming to an end."
I was under the impression this was about serious topics, not liberal claptrap. My
mistake.
Every problem [neo]liberal cockroaches claim is a calamity -- discrimination against
"transgender women of color", police brutality, systemic racism, COVID-19, the Chinese
crackdown on Uyghur militants and the Hong Kong chapter of Antifa, and, of course, "climate
change" -- is imaginary, inconsequential, or an actual positive.
Everything liberals claim to be a positive or dismiss as inconsequential -- "diversity",
mass Third World immigration, Moslem barbarity, BLM and Antifa riots, rigged elections, the
normalization of sodomy, feminism, sexual liberation -- is a calamity.
Judging from comment ZH audience does not like Critical Race theory one bit :-). Does this
mean Trump 2020-2024?
It is also clear that the tide of white public opinion that's to BLM and Critical Race Theory
turned against the blacks and turned drastically. In a way founders of BLM did a very bad service
to community. It proved to be extremely divisive for the country.
Schools that teach " white privilege " as fact are breaking
the law , the equalities
minister has told MPs.
MP Kemi Badenoch said the underpinning ideology of critical race theory "sees my blackness
as victimhood and their whiteness as oppression."
"This government stands unequivocally against critical race theory," she
told MPs during a debate on Oct. 20 in which Labour MP Dawn Butler had called for the
curriculum to be "decolonised."
https://www.youtube.com/embed/KtXshJDqJOw
Badenoch, MP for Saffron Waldon and also minister for equalities, said the rise of
critical race theory was a "dangerous trend in race relations."
"We do not want to see teachers teaching their white pupils about white privilege and
inherited racial guilt," she said.
"Any school which teaches these elements of critical race theory or which promotes
partisan political views such as defunding the police, without offering a balanced
treatment of opposing views, is breaking the law."
The defunding of police has been a demand of many key members and supporters of Black
Lives Matter.
"Some schools have
decided to openly support the anti-capitalist Black Lives Matter group, often fully aware
that they have a statutory duty to be politically impartial," said Badenoch. "Black lives
do matter -- of course they do. But we know that the Black Lives Matter movement, capital
B, L, M, is political."
Some Black Lives Matter leaders and groups, including the UKBLM group, are explicitly anti-capitalist.
"What we are against is the teaching of contested political ideas as if they are
accepted facts," said Badendoch.
"We don't do this with communism. We don't do this with socialism. We don't do it with
capitalism."
'Not America'
Badendoch also warned against importing the rhetoric on race from America.
" Our history of race is not America's history of race. Most black British people who
have come to our shores were not brought here in chains, but came voluntarily due to their
connections to the UK and in search of a better life. I should know. I am one of them.
"We have our own joys and stories to tell. From the Windrush generation to the Somali
diaspora, it is a story that is uniquely ours."
During the debate on education and race, MP Dawn Butler had earlier called for the
curriculum to be "decolonised," saying that "history is taught to make one group of people
feel inferior and another group of people feel superior."
Former Windrush passengers and members of the RAF Donald Clarke, George Mason, Sam King
MBE, and Allan Wilmot in the Imperial War Museum in London on June 12, 2008. (Cate
Gillon/Getty Images)
But Badenoch said the curriculum did not need decolonising for "the simple reason that it
is not colonised," adding, "We should not apologise for the fact that British children
primarily study the history of these islands."
In the United States, the Trump administration recently
banned agencies or contractors from "conducting training that promotes race stereotyping,
for example, by portraying certain races as oppressors by virtue of their birth."
"This ideology is rooted in the pernicious and false belief that America is an
irredeemably racist and sexist country; that some people, simply on account of their race
or sex, are oppressors; and that racial and sexual identities are more important than our
common status as human beings and Americans," Trump wrote, later calling the ideology
"divisive."
The UK government last month issued guidance
which says schools should not use resources "produced by organisations that take extreme
political stances on matters."
Examples of unacceptable stances include "a publicly stated desire to abolish or overthrow
democracy, capitalism, or to end free and fair elections," as well as opposition to free
speech or the use of racist or anti-Semitic language. Materials "promoting divisive or victim
narratives that are harmful to British society," were also included as an example.
Lt. Frank Drebin , 1 hour ago
A rare example in these surreal times. I salute you ma'am.
Nothing , 36 minutes ago
Not that rare. Ive heard numbers of blacks and latinos speak out like this. But these
voices are systematically suppressed by Google, by Facebook, and also by the blocking of
peaceable assemblages and by simple conversation with strangers without being muzzled with
the excuse given of coronaphobia.....
Dickweed Wang , 1 hour ago
If all races are so equal why is it that when Europeans first went to the African
continent the people there were not using the wheel?
Yippie21 , 1 hour ago
Now do American Indians; same
CriswellSpeaks , 1 hour ago
If whites are superior to blacks then why didn't the white race completely supplant the
black race in Africa? Short answer, same reason the black race never built any great cities
in Africa, tropical diseases. Geography is destiny and being located at the equator,
tropical diseases have prevented black Africans from creating any great civilizations until
the present era. When the whites of S. Africa attempted to migrate north much past Rhodesia
they were stopped dead in their tracks(literally) by tropical diseases. Imagine what a
society would look like if it got hammered by the Black Death every century and you have
black Africa.
DeathMerchant , 1 hour ago
********! There was no enviromental incentive to progress in equatorial regions. No need
for warmth, food or advanced tools to progress beyond ability to provide basic necessities
which were available to them year round. Compare that to the northern climes which had
minimal seasonal opportunities to provide those things and the development of capability to
cope with such.
CriswellSpeaks , 1 hour ago
Critical Race Theory is a form of back handed racism directed at minorities. According
to CRT, as a white person I possess this magical power to oppress all black people that I
was born with. No matter what black people do, they are powerless is the face of my absence
of skin pigmentation. Seriously, if you do a little digging into the founders of CRT you
will probably find the law firms/lawyers/political lobbyists who were responsible in the
1960's for opposing the abolition of Jim Crow laws. After they lost to color blindness and
integration, they infiltrated the Communists, claimed racial harmony was preventing a
Marxist revolution and had to be reversed for it to happen. CRT would drag race relations
back to the post civil war era.
PCShibai , 32 minutes ago
Ask yourself this, " if ' white privilege ' is the real reason
why blacks cannot get ahead in the US, then why aren't blacks successful in all the other
black-lead nations on the planet?" I mean...... there's ZERO history of ' white privilege '
keeping down Uganda, or the Congo, or ANY other black-lead nation...... and yet they are
all failing their people miserably and have ALWAYS failed their people miserably!
WHAT DO ALL THOSE BLACK NATIONS BLAME " THEIR " CONTINUOUS FAILURE ON? The
Samoans???
" White
privilege " is the CRUTCH that is used by the black race for their own failures.
Failure to maintain a family that raises children properly, failure to insist that their
children are properly educated, failure to integrate into the successes of the surrounding
culture, failure to accept the fundamentals that make people economically successful.
Until they eliminate the CRUTCH and accept their responsibility for their own success
& their own failures, they will continue to be the one failed culture throughout the
entire world!
cvp , 9 minutes ago
I do not disagree with the point your making; I would like to add, the people who
migrate from the African continent to the United States are some of the happiest people
I've met and worked with in my life. They are not interested in what BLM is selling! Jus
say'n...
5onIt , 40 minutes ago
None of the black people in this country were brought here in chains either. They are
free to leave whenever they damn well please.
greatdisconformity , 30 minutes ago
The institution of slavery gave black lives a value they did not otherwise have in
Africa.
Africans simply sold the losers of tribal wars, or their own slaves, to the coastal
markets.
It was either the auction block, or the killing fields.
I do not feel any guilt at all.
Without slavery, these people would not exist in any form; here or with descendants in
Africa.
They owe their existence in its most fundamental form to slavery.
They should be glad.
Whitey is being played. Big time.
Spetzco , 19 minutes ago
Especially as most of the major slave traders in Africa were BLACK themselves.
greatdisconformity , 35 minutes ago
The language of Critical Race Theory is the language of Genocide.
Historically, when an ethnic group is singled out for a savage take-down like Critical
Race Theory, it has been a prelude and pretext for mass killings.
Of course, this time things will be different.
Shifter_X , 14 minutes ago
It's the same playbook the Boshies Nazis and Maoists used. Yes, genocide and wiping out
history, that's their specialty.
St. TwinkleToes , 1 hour ago
When you're a race hustler filled with the dripping hatred of Whitey, and all you have
going in life are endless victim grievance bs regurgitated to get a head in life, it all
makes sense. It's not enough that Blacks have their own BET, endless Black This & Black
That Awards, staring roles in most all feature films, Two term POTUS, no, they want it all.
They want Whitey to live in imaginary Black World Wakanda as indentured Servants as
reparations for slavery 150 years ago. They want to drag us in chains down roads of endless
Persecution until we are no more.
Phuc Critical Race Theory, and Phuc Black Lives Matter.
SunsteintheSodomite , 58 minutes ago
Rhodesia, Zimbabwe, and South Africa showed the world that you can build a complete
NATION with infrastructure, economic supply routes, trade deals, agriculture, technology,
EVERYTHING...
...then drop off the keys and an instruction manual...
...and within 5-10 years it will be beyond repair.
Throughout their history, blacks have had only one route to civilization:
Follow WHITEY.
Rest Easy , 23 minutes ago
And van jones has the nerve to say white people have a virus. Maybe so van. We are too
nice.
Is there a US city and unfortunate surrounding suburbs that has a large percentage of
black persons not causing havoc? Ruin. Just generally weird stupid bs. Morning noon and
night. Tip toeing through the daisies trying to keep the young black kids fun down to a
dull roar. If you are "lucky". Get a little uppity and the klan with a tan comes a
knocking. Sometimes just being white around black Nazis is more than sufficient.
At least teach students about what happened in Rwanda.
play_arrow
Misean , 4 minutes ago
Or Rhodesia, the bread basket of Africa.
After changing it's name to Zimbabwe, the black rulers have reduced the nation to abject
poverty. From feeding much of sub Saharan Africa, the nation now depends on massive food
imports, most of which is given by western nations at great expense.
The population of productive whites and blacks have either left or been killed by roving
bands of bandits. The bandits "reclaimed" commercial farms at gun point, took girls as
slaves killed all makes, and raped then murdered the women.
Having no clue how commercial farming works, but assured by their leaders that
traditional African farming was superior, they sold the farm equipment to smarter thugs,
for dimes on the dollar (the buyers exported the equipment to better run countries, for
sizable profits, this depleting the country of the farm capital necessary to turn things
around).
The farm bandits, with stone age farming techniques, destroyed the soil quickly. Most of
the fertile top soil has washed away, what's left is exhausted.
nsurf9 , 1 hour ago
The only "privileged" our country is suffering under - is not already ending the
Affirmative Action Act of 1986. It had it place 25 years ago. Now, it is nothing more than
a prima facie Government sanctioned systematic discrimination against Caucasians - that's
now well past being justified by any stretch of a "compelling state interest" argument.
If you are being wrongfully discriminated, you have the Equal Protection Clause of the
14th Amendment and State law to pursue your claim - like the rest of us.
SmokingArgus , 25 minutes ago
If you have a "Minister of Equalities" you've already lost.
Shifter_X , 1 hour ago
"" Our history of race is not America's history of race. Most black British people who
have come to our shores were not brought here in chains, but came voluntarily due to their
connections to the UK and in search of a better life. I should know. I am one of them"
What a steaming pile of ********.
The settlers who came to America in 1560 (not 1619 as the fictitious farcical revised
"history" claims) and thereafter brought their slaves WITH THEM FROM THE UK
The UK was happy to pass the slave trade on to the colonies.
But make no mistake, the UK was up to its *** in slavery well before the colonies were
even formed.
DieSocialJusticeWankers , 1 hour ago
A Biden win and there will be affirmative action and CRTheory on steroids. The USA will
die for young white people. Vote Trump white people, or you're fkkkkked!
1. As recently as June of 2019, Biden praised the "civility" of the segregationist
senators he worked with in Congress to pass anti-busing legislation.
2. Biden praised the notorious segregationist politician George Wallace, boasted about
how Wallace once honored him with an award in 1973, and told a Southern audience in 1987
that "we [Delawareans] were on the South's side in the Civil War."
3. Biden opposed busing in the 1970s and expressed fears that it would lead to a "racial
jungle."
4. Biden voted to protect the tax-exempt status of private segregated schools.
5. Biden told black radio host Charlamagne tha God, "If you have a problem figuring out
whether you're for me or Trump, then you ain't black."
6. Biden told the Asian and Latino Coalition of Des Moines that "poor kids are just as
bright and just as talented as white kids."
7. While delivering remarks before a black audience in Delaware, Biden launched into a
meandering story about a gang leader named Corn Pop and claimed that he "learned about
roaches" while working at a community pool in a black neighborhood.
8. In 2008, Biden referred to then presidential candidate Barack Obama as "the first
sort of mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean."
9. In 2006, Biden told C-SPAN, "You cannot go to a 7-Eleven or a Dunkin' Donuts unless
you have a slight Indian accent."
10. Biden falsely claimed to have "marched" in the civil rights movement.
Still waiting on Trump's racist comments, been like 6 years.
Brits had slave's just as almost every other country in the world has, in the past even
white slaves (Irish). Brits have no higher ground to stand on than anyone else looking at
their indiscretions in India and China and elsewhere. Such as the opium wars in China.
Silly British. They should realize it has NOTHING to do with race. It's all about
COMMUNISM, they are just as in danger from the cancer of communism as anyone else.
rmogabe , 27 minutes ago
She said it is a political movement.
artytom , 1 hour ago
Thank Goodness. Very surprised to see this coming out of the UK government - but...
Is the tide turning.
Have the World Bank run out of bribes?
Have we passed the tipping point and they have taken off the pressure because they know
there is no going back?
Are they satisfied that the economies are in free fall and won't bounce back?
Are they simply covering their asses (the most likely of all).
DeathMerchant , 1 hour ago
In 1959, AAMD set the IQ threshold for mental retardation at < 85. The civil rights
movement of the next decade forced psychologists to rethink this boundary, because half the
African American population fell below it. In 1973, responding to this concern, AAMD (by
then AAMR) changed the threshold for retardation from IQ < 85 to IQ < 70. The
boundary moved south by one standard deviation! The proportion of blacks below the
threshold instantly dropped from about 50 percent to 12 percent. Subsequent refinements
made it still more difficult to meet the criteria for retardation.
When Binet in 1905 produced the first IQ test, it promised to revolutionize the diagnosis
and treatment of mental retardation. A half century later it came under attack for reasons
Binet could not have imagined. Could any of the pioneer psychometricians have foreseen
Larry P. v. Riles (1979), a California class-action suit that focused on IQ testing of
young black children? The court held that IQ tests were not valid for African Americans. It
banned California from using the tests for placing black students in classes for the
"educable mentally retarded" or equivalent categories on the grounds that the tests were
biased. After a series of appeals, the district court ruled that no special education
related purposes exist for which IQ tests could be administered to black pupils. Though
only a California ruling, the case began a political assault on standardized testing that
has spread beyond the IQ test to college entrance exams, promotional exams and more.
A Case History of Government Intervention
In 1996, The Office for Civil Rights placed 16 school districts nationwide under review for
potential discrimination. The districts were charged with violating the civil rights of
minorities, especially African Americans, because blacks were found to be overrepresented
in special education programs, especially those for the mentally retarded. Five of the 16
districts were in Maryland. Ironically, Maryland is a very liberal state very much in tune
with the goals of the Civil Rights Office. Maryland is also almost 30 percent black. The
offending districts included Baltimore, Howard, Harford, Montgomery and Prince Georges
counties. OCR detectives uncovered "discrimination" by looking at school records. The
offending data appear in Table 1. The irritant is in the last column. Black children were
classified as retarded at 1.5 to 2.2 times the rate of whites. OCR ordered the counties to
find a "remedy."
Fortunately teaching Critical Race Theory or any other invented marxist propaganda is
going to get a lot of people killed.
They'll find they deployed the subversion before gaining a sufficient majority, or
sufficient technological control among a highly educated peasantry.
And by the end of all that killing, there will be a brighter future for European
descendants, darkness relegated to its corner of the Earth.
By that time, all the people who would otherwise wish they'd never uttered a word of
critical race theory will simply be no longer.
Fight back.
You have the moral law on your side and you will win.
GreatUncle , 18 minutes ago
UK Government ... ROFL.
The UK government last month issued guidance
which says schools should not use resources "produced by organisations that take extreme
political stances on matters."
Because see we the UK government do that ... ain't you noticed? So as we do it then it
is all legal like mass immigration to destroy the indigenous population...
MadameDeficit , 1 hour ago
Oh boy, can't wait for the hypocrites to tell her why she's wrong.
Maghreb2 , 1 hour ago
She's right but she should shut her mouth either ways because she's a tory sell out
bitch and we know that because we know the Tories and the
Freud-Murdoch run P.R firms they get their polices from . Real racial theory would have
David Lammy lynched by everyone but the Chinese. Starting teaching the little white boys
about
Jimmy Savile in Leeds infirmary and we'll have them ready to suicide bomb Buckingham
Palace and go after the nearest member of "the people who will n
ot be blamed for nothing " minority .
Tell them that is what Mi5 are for.
To protect White Privileges and the weaker ones will kill themselves when they see what
they have planned for them in the future. By the Divine right of the Windsors suicide isn't
even legal and just remember that is why he was in the infirmaries. She should remember how
similar the white monkeys are to the black monkeys in their natural habitat .
The west is past imported racial talking points. Blood for the money will be new mantra
after the war starts but we wouldn't expect the people in parliament to have ever
understood that in way because they can't see the real world. Rivers of Blood Libel these
days. Play them this song and we'll see which music turns them into hardened killers over
night. Tell them Guy Burgesses and Rothschild used to go to the
Gargoyle club and the stories about Dolphin Square .
Victim ideology as broadcast by media, politicians and schools is the true divider and
oppressor that reinforces the odious legacy of slavery. The only way people move beyond
what was unacceptable in the past is to release and bury it. Those who are vested in
maintaining the old ugly status quo are the ones who won't let it go. that's the cabal and
all their minions. Enough.
GeezerGeek , 1 hour ago
How many black slaves were needed on Britain's cotton plantations? Duh...
How many black slaves were brought to Britain's colonies in America (not just on the
continent) before it became an independent (at least that's the story) nation? Duh...
As an aside, isn't one particular candidate for VP this year the descendant of a slave
owner in a former British colony?
Compare slaves brought to British colonies against slaves brought into the USA after
independence. Which number is greater and which process lasted longer?
For fun, we can then consider black slaves brought to other places in the Americas, both
North and South, plus the nearby islands.
At least she had the courage to attack CRT, which strikes me as another example of the
soft bigotry of low expectations. How long do you think it will be before she finds herself
looking for a new job?
What is never mentioned is that poor whites suffered from slavery. Depressed wages.
Being forced to man "slave patrols" or risk jail time. That system robbed everyone
Faustus B. , 2 hours ago
The left got so worked up about intelligent design being taught in the classroom, but
apparently it was just political. We must never forget that they'll ram racial
pseudo-science down kid's throats the minute they get the chance.
Christina Jordan is a Malaysian-born British politician. She served as a Brexit Party
Member of the European Parliament (MEP) for South West England from 2019 to 2020.
A Lib Dem parliamentarian's bill to legalise race-based candidate lists is undemocratic,
patronising & will undo the decades of progress Britain has made.
I was so irked by an elected public servant's recent declaration, that paraphrasing a great
man's quotation was the only response I felt could touch my exasperation.
My comments will not attract much attention in the crowded Twitterverse, but I felt that if
there was even half a chance that a few might notice, then I should use the opportunity to do
so.
In 1954, while trying to explain what it was to be a parliamentarian, Winston Churchill
defined it as, "The first duty of a Member of Parliament is to do what he or she thinks in
his or her faithful and disinterested judgement is right and necessary for the honour and
safety of Great Britain. Their second duty is to their constituents, of whom they are the
representative but not the delegate."
Instead of understanding the primal importance for representative democracy exemplified by
those words, on October 14, an elected Member, the Lib Dem Wera Hobhouse, proudly affirmed that
she would present a bill that went against that very goal. She wants to make it legal to select
politicians based solely on the colour of their skin. Ludicrously, she claims that the bill is
necessary to beat racial injustice.
Her attempt to allow non-white only shortlists will do the exact opposite. Bringing forward
a bill which makes it legal to discriminate against candidates just because they are white is
undemocratic and downright patronising. It implies that non-whites are incapable of being
selected on merit unless Caucasians are sidelined. It is 'one insignificant step for national
unity, one giant leap for racial division and disharmony'. Any candidate selected on this basis
will be open to justified ridicule.
It is extraordinary that in our democratic country, in the mother of parliaments, a place
less happy parts of the world can only eye enviously, we have elected politicians seeking to
legalise racial discrimination.
Quotas do not work. Short lists that favour colour over merit do not work. Parliamentarians
who push these divisive agendas should not work for us. Far from eradicating or helping racial
injustice, this bill would only serve to stoke the flames of resentment. Our country should,
and must, demand that only the best are sent to Westminster. We want candidates to prove to the
electorate that they deserve their place and have been chosen on merit, not on a nod and a
wink. The message must be that discrimination is always wrong, whatever the skin colour.
I fear that some politicians are taking our country on a destructive path in their crusade
to right historical wrongs. In trying to put their new world order into practice, they risk
tearing the very fabric of our peaceful and cohesive society. They are saying to our citizens
that they are not to be trusted when it comes to fairness and justice for all. Diversity,
equality and anti-racism does not mean we divide people of different races, beliefs,
backgrounds, religions and ancestry into two groups, i.e. white and non-white.
I write as a person of colour, an immigrant, a democrat and a believer in fair play. I am a
staunch and loyal citizen of this great country. One who believes that the majority wants to
see us move forward together. But how can we when we have politicians telling us that we cannot
be relied on to look out for, and after, each other? It is bad enough that some, through
all-women shortlists believe that we should be politically divided by sex. Now they claim only
non-whites can better represent non-whites. What message does that send to our friends, peers,
children and visitors to our shores?
When I stood for election in 2019 for the European Parliament, I naively believed that I had
faced optimal vitriol and abuse. Nothing would ever match the overflowing vat of bilious hate
my colleagues and I faced. I had not appreciated however, that in pushing back against our
country's navel-gazing, knee-bending, finger-pointing, supine acceptance that white people are
privileged racists and black/brown/mixed/Asian/none of the above-skinned people are victims in
dire need of saving, I have leapt into a den of hate and scorn.
I do not parade the following messages to elicit sympathy. I just want to expose the fact
that, as a woman of colour who rejects victimhood labels, I receive pretty vile abuse from both
the white and non-white contingent of the virtue brigade. In the last few days alone, some of
these have included:
You've sold your soul because you're so desperate to be accepted by the Right yet no matter
what you say your skin colour will always be the major factor.
So desperate to be liked by the flag waving mob that she'll happily throw her self-respect
and morals out the window.
Christina is just a hypocrite and a sell out to get the flag waving bigots on her side.
How can such a dark face have such a white name?
This "christina" seems to be of Asian descent and claims to be an immigrant, not sure how
she ended up with an English name
Pulling up the ladder after her to prevent immigrants from entering the country.
Impressing her bully boy, flag shagging fash mates.
Off you pop good immigrant, probably have some bootlicking that's overdue to show how
grateful you are to be here.
These, and other comments, only make me more determined to stand up for our country against
the monotonous, wearisome and never-ending bashing she undeservedly receives. Creating division
is not the answer. Most of us live outside the political, institutional and media bubble and we
get along just fine, thank you.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
In Greek mythology, men used to fear the stony gaze of the snake-haired Gorgon. Today, men
once again feel such fear – but, ironically, no campaign has done more to impair women's
opportunities either.
A seven-foot statue of Medusa holding a man's severed head was
unveiled in New York this week. For six months, this sculpture, made by the
Argentinian-Italian artist Luciano Garbati, will be situated facing the Manhattan Supreme
Court, where Harvey Weinstein was prosecuted and
convicted of sex crimes against actresses and female film-production staff.
The statue is being used in this position as a symbol of justice enacted against male
rapists. However, it more accurately – and unintentionally – symbolises the
difference between the public triumphalism of the #MeToo movement and its negative
repercussions for women in the United States.
The most famous painting of Medusa – a female character from Greek mythology who had a
hair of snakes and could turn men to stone if they met her gaze directly – was painted by
Caravaggio in
1596. He was inspired by Vasari's account of a lost painting by Leonardo da Vinci. It has been
a common subject for artists since. Garbati's statue was made in 2008 and adopted by the #MeToo
movement subsequently. From moral outrage to financial advantage
The #MeToo movement hit prominence in 2017 and was initially primarily concerned with
incidents, and allegations, of sexual abuse in Hollywood. It quickly grew to include cases of
sexual impropriety in many fields, mainly in the US. However, as it expanded, it encompassed
rape, sexual abuse, inappropriate sexual contact, unwanted advances, and transactional sex.
By refusing to draw distinctions between actual crimes, ethical/professional infractions,
and consensual (but regretted) sex, the movement became diffusely broad. Allegations of sexual
abuse led to the accused losing contracts, jobs, and marriages; in some cases, it contributed
to suicide. In the ensuing storm of moral panic, actual rape was conflated with Ben Affleck's
groping of an actress
in a video interview , a woman complaining
about a date with Aziz Ansari and Louis CK
exposing himself to colleagues (with their consent).
By failing to distinguish between levels of seriousness, the movement lost what moral
credibility it had and became a means of gaining revenge and exacting extortion. If crimes have
been committed, then they should be reported to the police, not aired in a public forum. The
accused need anonymity just as the victims do, until justice can be served.
Sexual accusations have long been weaponized in American pop culture. It has already
been proven that a whisper network of female comic-book professionals has targeted male
colleagues with – alongside actual crimes – unfounded accusations, in order to
provide more opportunities for female creators. This is not a male/female problem; using deceit
and exaggeration to advance oneself is as old as language itself.
In American television and film production, #MeToo gained control of productions via Time's
Up, enforcing quotas of women and extracting payments. It became a grab to secure lucrative
work for women, relying on goodwill from the public and the fear of executives. The Time's Up
movement is co-led by Katie McGrath, who runs production company Bad Robot Productions with her
husband J.J. Abrams. Bad Robot has a history of presenting itself as a pro-social-justice
company. This summer, at a time when rioters were burning shops and destroying historic
monuments, Bad Robot made an
infamous announcement that there had been " Enough polite conversation. Enough white
comfort. "
By presenting a company as an ethical, socially conscious body, that company is an ideal
position to benefit from major firms being pressured into making decisions not based on
competence but politics. Individuals and companies have seen how they can manipulate public
sympathy about sexual abuse to their own advantage. But firms are now realizing this
danger.
No event has done more to impair women's opportunities in the workplace than the
#MeToo/Time's Up movement. Production companies – even those led by women – now see
female colleagues as a source of potential extortion and compensation claims. As a result, they
now
avoid hiring women in order to avert the possibility of costly legal claims and
reputation-impairing social-media campaigns. Following decades-long attempts to persuade
male-dominated industries that hiring women brought advantages and an expansion of the talent
pool, the moral panic of #MeToo has served only to reveal the disadvantages of employing
women.
When male executives see women today, they fear them, just as heroes in Greek mythology
feared the gaze of Medusa. Ironically, rather than celebrating female power, Garbati's statue
is instead a fitting symbol of the way a campaign that began well has, once again, made men
mistrust women.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
Alexander Adams
is an artist, art critic and author. His book 'Iconoclasm, Identity Politics
and the Erasure of History' is published by Societas. Follow him on Twitter @AdamsArtist
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
I'll join the chorus calling New York Times columnist Bret Stephens "brave" for last week's
takedown of his
newspaper's "1619 Project." But I'd also like to ask him: What took you so long?
The 100-page collection of 18 articles that infamously claimed America's "true founding"
date is not 1776, but 1619 – the year enslaved Africans were first brought to these
shores – has received withering criticism since it was published
in August 2019 .
Ten months ago some of the nation's leading historians – including Pulitzer
Prize winners Gordon Wood and James McPherson –
wrote the Times to challenge a wide array of its claims, which the newspaper and its
partner, The Pulitzer Center, were disseminating free of charge
in the nation's classrooms . The historians were especially troubled by its assertion that
the Revolutionary War was fought to preserve slavery and the project's near total erasure of
the contributions of whites to dismantling slavery and working for freedom. Their letter
described these failings as "a displacement of historical understanding by ideology."
Their criticisms were
echoed and extended by others including
Leslie M. Harris, an African American professor of history at Northwestern University, who said
she "vigorously disputed" some central claims of the project when she helped fact-check it
before publication. "Despite my advice," she
wrote in Politico seven months ago , "the Times published the incorrect statement about the
American Revolution anyway."
Stephens' sharply written broadside breaks no new ground. What it does provide is a skillful
synthesis and endorsement of these voluminous critiques in the Times – by a Timesman.
That is significant. But his decision to write the essay so long after the project's mistruths
have been laid bare – and months after it was honored with a George Polk Award and a
Pulitzer Prize – suggests more rot at the Gray Lady and in American journalism.
As Stephens (pictured) himself suggests, the precipitating event was Phillip W. Magness'
Sept. 19 article in
Quillette , which revealed that the Times has "taken to quietly altering the published text
of the project itself after one of its claims came under intense criticism." Most significant,
the paper had scrubbed the claim that 1619 was "our true founding" from the online text without
acknowledgment.
This is not mere editing, but stealthy expurgation intended to cover up the paper's
journalistic malpractice.
This sketchy conduct, presumably approved by New York Times Magazine Editor Jake Silverstein
and others, warrants far more than a column. It demands a published response from the paper's
executive editor, Dean Baquet, that acknowledges the misdeed and states whether Baquet knew of
and/or approved the secret changes. Baquet must also detail the paper's response and explain
why the Times still stands by the project, given the need for such major corrections.
In this context, a column by someone with no authority at the Times beyond his opinion seems
part of a strategy to acknowledge a problem without fixing it. For all his bravery in writing
this piece, Stephens is the perfect foil for the Times, one that creates an escape hatch for
1619 acolytes.
It is relevant that Stephens – a conservative who came to the Times after a Pulitzer
Prize-winning stint at the Wall Street Journal – is the columnist whom so many liberal
Times subscribers love to hate. One of the few scribes at the paper who does not incessantly
preach to its woke choir, he has generated strong pushback from colleagues and readers for his
opinions on
climate change and the
Middle East . This may explain why the
New York Times Guild initially felt comfortable sending a now deleted Tweet criticizing the
editors for running Stephens' 1619 piece, which, it said, "reeks."
Stephens' standing makes it easier for many Times readers to dismiss or ignore his
devastating critique. Imagine the impact a similar piece might have had if it been written by
David Brooks or Nicholas Kristof.
Times publisher A.G. Sulzberger appears to be unconcerned by the allegations. The man who
forced editorial page editor James Bennet to resign because he ran a
controversial op-ed by Sen. Tom Cotton , issued a brief statement
Sunday that ignored the journalistic and factual issues raised by Stephens and others, and
instead insisted that the 1619 Project was "a journalistic triumph" whose publication is "the
proudest accomplishment of my tenure as publisher."
[ Baquet echoed Sulzberger's
comments in a note to his staff on Oct. 13, when this column was posted. Without directly
addressing the ethical and factual issues raised, he asserted that "the project fell fully
within our standards as a news organization" and that it "fill(s) me with pride."]
The deeper issue raised by Stephens' column is that the 1619 Project is just one example of
the degree to which the Times and other mainstream news outlets have displaced traditional
journalistic practice with ideology. Informed by the tenets of social justice and
critical race theory that have long dominated the humanities departments at leading
universities, journalists have abandoned a commitment to the elusive ideal of objectivity for a
naked embrace of results-oriented activism masquerading as reportage. In this regard,
journalism is a symptom, rather than cause, of the deep-seated cultural relativism that
pervades American culture.
The essence of the 1619 Project is the idea that America is a permanently racist nation
whose founding ideals were lies. This is the capital T truth it seeks to advance. It dismisses
facts that undermine that narrative, distorting the historical record because they are seen as
roadblocks in the arc that bends toward justice. This approach relies on one of the most
dangerous engines of dishonesty in human history: the notion that the means justify the
ends.
That the Pulitzer board would bestow its prize for commentary to the lead writer of the 1619
Project, Nikole Hannah-Jones, despite damning scholarly critiques, suggests how deeply this
activist approach has infected journalism.
This impulse now drives much of the coverage in the Times, the Washington Post, the New
Yorker, NPR, and other prestigious news organizations. The clearest example is reporting on
Donald Trump, whom the left sees as an existential threat. This is the capital T truth they
advance through stories that insistently eschew nuance to portray the president as a
monster.
From climate change to identity politics, examples of their tendentious coverage are legion.
But none is more thoroughgoing and dishonest than the years-long coverage claiming Trump
colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 election.
My RealClearInvestigations colleagues are among those
who followed the leads and dug up the facts mainstream outlets refused to and, so, got the
story right. Tom Kuntz, a former Times editor who leads RCI,
detailed how the Times and the Post relied on untrustworthy anonymous sources, unfair
innuendo and cherry-picked facts to advance this narrative in a series of stories that won both
papers a Pulitzer Prize in 2018.
This effort to distort the truth continues unbowed and unabated. Last week,
New Yorker writer Dexter Filkins wrote that Christopher Steele's dossier – opposition
research paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign that claimed the Russians had been
cultivating Trump as an asset for decades – "has been neither proved nor
disproved."
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
In fact, much of it has been debunked and the key parts of it that haven't been probably
never will because you can't prove a negative – one can't ever prove that there is no
videotape showing Trump paid Russian prostitutes to pee on a Moscow hotel bed the Obamas had
slept in.
Shane Harris of the Washington Post encapsulated the ongoing dishonesty in an article last
week acknowledging, after a fashion, damning new intelligence tying the Clinton campaign to
Russiagate. In a single paragraph he both denied overwhelming evidence that the Clinton
campaign helped generate that now debunked scandal while also insisting that the conspiracy
theory was legitimate. Harris wrote:
"Trump allies have seized on the intelligence as evidence that Clinton was in some way
involved in ginning up an investigation of Trump to tie his campaign to Russia. The president
has consistently denied the charge as a 'hoax,' even though multiple investigations have
documented numerous instances in which his campaign sought Russian assistance in damaging
Clinton."
There is hardly any evidence that the Trump campaign "sought" such assistance. The most that
can be said is that it was receptive to offers of dirt on Clinton at the infamous
June 2016 Trump Tower meeting . Her campaign, by contrast, used people like Steele to
actively seek compromising material on Trump, which appears to have included Russian
disinformation.
Such reporting is so brazen that it suggests a far deeper problem than any one story.
Indeed, the deeply misleading Trump/Russia coverage and the 1619 Project are not deviations
from the norm. They are the new standard at prestigious outlets that are committed to pursuing
their notion of the capital T truth – inconvenient facts be damned.
The problem with the venture capital industry, a sub-sector of private equity in which
deep-pocketed investors bankroll cash-hungry startups, is the lack of black representation
– or
so says venture capitalist Frederik Groce, who co-founded BLCK VC in 2018 to increase black
representation in the sector.
Surfing the wave of 2020's diversity-mania, Groce launched the Black Venture Institute on
Tuesday with two other big-name venture capital firms and the University of California at
Berkeley's Haas School of Business. Odinsson ariadnatheo 1 day ago Insulted by it? Hardly.
Blacks don't want equal treatment; they DEMAND special treatment! ScottMc3 1 day ago Not enough
woman in jail, should try and arrest enough so 50% of prisoners are female, obviously prejudice
against men.. TWOFilms 15 hours ago There's not enough Black Eskimos. I think they're
anti-Eskimo. Reply ariadnatheo TWOFilms 10 hours ago nor black swimming champions. I think the
water is racist Odinsson 1 day ago I can just see the Democrats' solution to this problem now.
They will give out $13 trillion dollars and distribute it equally among the 13% of America's
population that is black. The solution won't work, of course, for the money will be spent on
partying and luxury goods and at the end of a year most blacks will once again be living on
social welfare. Reply 3 fozbotz Odinsson 1 day ago Actually the demos will appropriate the 13
trillion dollars say they are lending it out to black entrepreneurs launder the money and put
it in their back pockets just like they do with foreign aid. Karl_Benz 1 day ago what about
more diversity in the NBA ? we need more diversity in the 100 m Olympics, its all blacks
running. we should put more whites & asians in there . it can't be dominated by one race -
thats not fair. sammy11 23 hours ago If you haven't had the pleasure of a affirmative action
boss, it's an experience ColdFacts 19 hours ago there are 40 million blacks in usa, those
diversity fanatics will only be happy when there are 400 million black venture capitalists out
of this number
"... The hatred of Donald Trump, which certainly to some extent is legitimate if only due to his ignorance and boorishness, has driven a feeding frenzy by the moderate-to liberal media which has made them blind to their own faults. ..."
"... Just as the Israel Firsters in Congress and in the state legislative bodies have had great success in criminalizing any criticism of the Jewish state, the mainstream media's "fake news" in support of the "woke" crowd agenda has already succeeded in forcing out many alternative voices in the public space. ..."
"... This type of "thought control" has been most evident in the media, but it is beginning to dominate in other areas where conversations about policy and rights take place. Universities in particular, which once were bastions of free speech and free thought, are now defining what is acceptable language and behavior even when the alleged perpetrators are neither threatening or abusive. ..."
"... Recently, a student editor at the University of Wisconsin student newspaper was fired because he dared to write a column that objected to the current anti-police consensus. ..."
"... The worst aspect of the increasing thought control taking place in America's public space is that it is not only not over, it is increasing. To be sure, to a certain extent the upcoming election is a driver of the process as left and right increasingly man the barricades to support their respective viewpoints. If that were all, it might be considered politics as usual, but unfortunately the process is going well beyond that point. The righteousness exuded by the social justice warriors has apparently given them the mandate to attempt to control what Americans are allowed to think or say while also at the same time upending the common values that have made the country functional. It is a revolution of sorts, and those who object most strongly could well be the first to go to the guillotine. ..."
Once upon a time it was possible to rely on much of the mainstream media to report on
developments more or less objectively, relegating opinion pieces to the editorial page. But
that was a long time ago. I remember moving to Washington back in 1976 after many years of
New York Times and International Herald Tribune readership, when both those
papers still possessed editorial integrity. My first experience of the Washington Post
had my head spinning, wondering how front-page stories that allegedly reported the "news" could
sink to the level of including editorialized comments from start to finish to place the story
in context.
Today, Washington Post style reporting has become the norm and the New York
Times , if anything, might possibly be the worst exponent of news that is actually largely
unsubstantiated or at best "anonymous" opinion. In the past few weeks, stories about the
often-violent social unrest that continues in numerous states have virtually disappeared from
sight because the mainstream media has its version of reality, that the demonstrations are
legitimate protest that seek to correct "systemic racism." Likewise, counter-demonstrators are
reflexively described as "white supremacists" so they can be dismissed as unreformable racists.
Videos of rampaging mobs looting, burning and destroying while also beating and even killed
innocent citizens who are trying to protect themselves and their property are not shown or
written about to any real extent because such actions are being carried out by the groups that
the mainstream media and its political enablers favor.
The hatred of Donald Trump, which certainly to some extent is legitimate if only due to his
ignorance and boorishness, has driven a feeding frenzy by the moderate-to liberal media which
has made them blind to their own faults. The recent expose by the New
York Times on Donald Trump's taxes might well be considered a new low, with blaring
headlines declaring that the president is a tax avoider. It was a theme rapidly picked up and
promoted by much of the remainder of the television and print media as well as "public radio"
stations like NPR.
But wait a minute. Trump Inc. is a multi-faceted business that includes a great number of
smaller entities, not all of which involve real estate per se. Donald Trump, not surprisingly,
does not do his own taxes and instead employs teams of accountants and lawyers to do the work
for him. They take advantage of every break possible to reduce the taxes paid. Why are there
tax breaks for businesses that individual Americans do not enjoy? Because congress approved
legislation to make it so. So who is to blame if Donald Trump only paid $750 in tax? Congress,
but the media coverage of the issue deliberately made it look like Trump is a tax cheater.
And then there is the question how the Times got the tax returns in the first place. Tax
returns are legally protected confidential documents and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is
obligated to maintain privacy regarding them. Some of the files are currently part of an IRS
audit and it just might be that the auditors are the source of the completely illegal leak, but
we may never know as the Times is piously declaring "We are not making the records
themselves public, because we do not want to jeopardize our sources, who have taken enormous
personal risks to help inform the public." Jacob Hornberger of the Future of Freedom Foundation
wryly observes that when it comes to avoiding taxes "I'll bet that the members of the
Times ' editorial board and its big team of reporters and columnists do the same thing.
They are just upset that they don't do it as well as Trump."
Just as the Israel Firsters in Congress and in the state legislative bodies have had great
success in criminalizing any criticism of the Jewish state, the mainstream media's "fake news"
in support of the "woke" crowd agenda has already succeeded in forcing out many alternative
voices in the public space. The Times has been a leader in bringing about this departure
from "freedom of speech" enshrined in a "free press," having recently forced
the resignation of senior editor James Bennet over the publication of an op-ed written by
Senator Tom Cotton. Cotton's views are certainly not to everyone's taste, but he provided a
reasonable account of how and when federal troops have been used in the past to repress civil
unrest, together with a suggestion that they might play that same role in the current
context.
This type of "thought control" has been most evident in the media, but it is beginning to
dominate in other areas where conversations about policy and rights take place. Universities in
particular, which once were bastions of free speech and free thought, are now defining what is
acceptable language and behavior even when the alleged perpetrators are neither threatening or
abusive.
Recently, a student editor at the University of Wisconsin student newspaper was fired
because he dared to write a column that objected to the current anti-police consensus.
Washington lawyer Jonathan Turley
observes how the case was not unique, how there has been " a crackdown on some campuses
against conservative columnists and newspapers, including the firing of a
conservative student columnist at Syracuse , the public condemnation of a
student columnist at Georgetown , and a
campaign against one of the oldest conservative student newspapers in the country at
Dartmouth. Now, The Badger Herald , a
student newspaper at the University of Wisconsin Madison, has dismissed columnist Tripp Grebe
after he wrote a column opposing the defunding of police departments." Ironically, Grebe
acknowledged in his op-ed that there is considerable police-initiated brutality and also
justified the emergence of black lives matter, but it was not enough to save him.
The worst aspect of the increasing thought control taking place in America's public space is
that it is not only not over, it is increasing. To be sure, to a certain extent the upcoming
election is a driver of the process as left and right increasingly man the barricades to
support their respective viewpoints. If that were all, it might be considered politics as
usual, but unfortunately the process is going well beyond that point. The righteousness exuded
by the social justice warriors has apparently given them the mandate to attempt to control what
Americans are allowed to think or say while also at the same time upending the common values
that have made the country functional. It is a revolution of sorts, and those who object most
strongly could well be the first to go to the guillotine.
Podcaster Dave Rubin has the custom of going "off the grid" for a month each summer, to gain
some perspective on changes. As a scientist who has been retired from the lab for more than ten
years, I feel in a similar position vis-à-vis the state of academic science. To this
campus Rip-van-Winkle, things now look very different.
I didn't notice much until the current anti-racism crisis, when I found that academe, as a
place for free exchange of ideas, had become almost unrecognizable . Higher education has begun
a transformation along the same lines as the 1966 Maoist "Cultural Revolution" in China. Like
the cultural revolution, the energized identity-politics movement presents itself as a
cleansing force. Pure Maoism was being corrupted by covert capitalist sympathizers. They had to
be rooted out.
In U.S. academe, the problem was similar. The "party faithful" took for granted the
permanence of "White privilege" and "systemic racism" which, for many, was also their
livelihood. But then, in the decades following the civil rights acts, things got better.
Measurable indices of racism seemed to be improving: People of color were well represented on
city councils, police forces, and state and national legislatures; Black faces were on many
magazine covers and in ads for prestigious products; interracial marriages increased; Black
entertainers and even opinion leaders were beloved. A Black president was elected and
re-elected. A survey showed a steady decline in
objective measures of racism up until 2014. What's not to like?
Plenty, as it turned out. The "woke" party saw its anti-racist cause going down to
anti-racism! They have fought back, with some success. A survey published
in 2017 showed that from 2014 onward people increasingly agreed that "more needs to be
done" to achieve racial equality. This tendency was exaggerated in academe. From being
relatively content with the state of race relations, administration, faculty, and students have
become
increasingly doctrinaire in their stance against racism. Unable to point to objective
measures of increasing racism, they have turned their attention to something much harder to
refute: systemic (aka institutional, structural) racism.
Systemic racism in higher
education, a petition
One bit of evidence for this is a currently circulating petition/op-ed that, Science (one of
the two leading general-science journals) has apparently agreed to publish about combating
systemic racism in STEM. You can read
Systemic Racism in Higher Education here but I will just discuss a few of its key
assumptions.
Quoting from the petition:
Everyone in academia must acknowledge the role that universities -- faculty, staff, and
students -- play in perpetuating structural racism by subjecting students of color to
unwelcoming academic cultures The misuse of standardized tests, like the GRE, excludes
students who could have otherwise succeeded. [emphases added]
Structural (aka systemic, institutional) racism is not defined. The words could be replaced
by evil spirits without loss of meaning. The idea seems like a way
of deflecting attention from identifiable causes of racial disparities. Careful examination of
a specific context (such as police brutality )
can usually point to measurable causes with no need to invoke an abstraction. Nevertheless, we
all must acknowledge that the GRE, like any predictive test, is not perfect: it fails some good
people and passes a small number of weak ones. But the study cited in the petition seems to
fault the STEM-related GRE more because women and minorities do worse on it than men than
because it is an imperfect predictor of success in graduate school.
What does the petition mean by "unwelcoming academic cultures"? There are two obvious
possibilities: racism, pure and simple, and a problem with the type and level of academic
discussion compared with the environment to which some students are accustomed.
The evidence for any kind of overt racism in academe is negligible and if it emerged would
surely lead to strong correctives. What remains is just that the disciplines of STEM are
difficult, possibly too difficult for students who have been admitted with weaker-than-average
qualifications. Human beings are not equally good at everything. Mathematics, particularly,
separates the wheat from the chaff in dramatic fashion. Some people (your humble correspondent,
for example) just can't handle
tough math . If this is the "unwelcoming academic culture" some students will either drop
out or - and this is the pressure now - will clamor for a simpler curriculum. If such changes
are made, the results will likely be disastrous for the quality of science education.
Reducing structural racism in higher education will require evidence-based,
institution-wide approaches that focus on achieving equity in student learning. If we abandon
the perception of "fixed" student ability, more BIPOC students will succeed.
The petition assumes that essentially any student is capable of succeeding. But at what? Not
at everything. People are not equal; not everyone can master quaternions. The petition assumes
that ineradicable individual differences -- "fixed" student ability -- do not exist, which is
simply false. By all means, give the best education you can. But do not expect to educate
everybody, especially in tough STEM subjects. People are not all equally able. An educational
system aimed at this kind of "equity" is likely instead to end in mediocrity.
[These changes] will require making tenure dependent not only on excellence in research,
teaching, and service, but also meaningful contributions to promote equity and inclusion .
Every scientist should commit to reporting unfair practices All faculty should examine their
courses for performance disparities based on ethnicity and gender
Ready to submit? It is apparently not sufficient to teach well and do excellent research,
faculty must also commit to eliminating disparities, disparities which are as likely to be the
result of differences in interest and talent as inadequate teaching. Faculty are to scrutinize
their grade distributions to see that BIPOC do not fall behind. What if they do? The temptation
to adjust evaluation so as to eliminate disparities will be strong -- will teachers act racist,
but in a good way! They may be "reported" if they don't! This is totalitarianism. not science.
There's more, but you get the idea.
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
If these efforts to eliminate disparities in everything, to match racial proportions in STEM
to those in society, if they succeed, it will be a cultural
revolution indeed. Science is already in trouble; a successful effort to make it conform to
political ends will destroy academic freedom and wreck the nation's science base.
* * *
John Staddon is Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Psychology and Neuroscience
RobbieSmith , 3 hours ago
The persistent so-called "achievement gap" reveals the same racial IQ hierarchy on
standardized academic exams. The SAT is largely a measure of general intelligence. Scores
on the SAT correlate very highly with scores on standardized tests of intelligence, and
like IQ scores, are stable across time and not easily increased through training, coaching,
or practice. SAT preparation courses appear to work, but the gains are small -- on average,
no more than about 20 points per section.
Even after decades of focused attention to the achievement gap, it has remained
unchanged.
Vanderbilt University researchers tracked the educational and occupational
accomplishments of more than 2,000 people who as part of a youth talent search and
determined that scores on the SAT correlate so highly with IQ that they are described as a
"thinly disguised" intelligence test.
The persistent so-called "achievement gap" reveals the same racial IQ hierarchy on
standardized academic exams. The SAT is largely a measure of general intelligence. Scores
on the SAT correlate very highly with scores on standardized tests of intelligence, and
like IQ scores, are stable across time and not easily increased through training, coaching,
or practice. SAT preparation courses appear to work, but the gains are small -- on average,
no more than about 20 points per section.
Even after decades of focused attention to the achievement gap, it has remained
unchanged.
Vanderbilt University researchers tracked the educational and occupational
accomplishments of more than 2,000 people who as part of a youth talent search and
determined that scores on the SAT correlate so highly with IQ that they are described as a
"thinly disguised" intelligence test.
Year White Black Gap
1985 1038 839 199
1990 1031 849 185
1996 1052 857 195
2000 1060 859 201
2005 1061 863 197
2010 1063 855 208
2015 1047 846 201
The new SAT introduced in 2017 was "designed to inspire and increase access to college"
by creating "a more equitable exam". The new SAT cannot be compared to previous
results:
Year White Black Gap
2017 1118 941 177
2018 1123 946 177
The 2017 "college readiness" scores (ability to earn a C or higher in an entry-level
course) showed the stark racial achievement gap; Asians scored 70% college readiness,
Whites 59%, and Blacks only 20%.
SAT scores are highly correlated to intelligence test scores. The SAT correlates with an
IQ test at 0.86, almost the same as an IQ test correlates with itself. For this reason, we
can very reliably take SAT scores and convert them to IQ scores.
Results of psycho-metric IQ and scholastic tests are highly correlated. Rindermann &
Thompson (2013, p. 822)
In the 20 year period from 1994-2014 the Black-White difference increased on both the
verbal and math SATs despite targeted efforts to close the race gap. On the reading test,
it rose from .91 to .96 standard deviations. On the math test, it rose from .95 to 1.03
standard deviations.
In fact, the truncated nature of the SAT math score distribution suggests that these
race gaps would be even larger given a harder exam with a bigger score variance. Note, for
example, how the Black score distribution is cut off at the bottom while the Asian score
distribution is cut off at the top. That suggests that a redesigned exam might feature even
more pronounced race gaps.
Percent by Race Reaching the SAT College and Career Readiness Benchmark:
15% = Black
24% = Non-White Hispanic
35% = Native American
53% = White
56% = Asian
Source: The College Board, 2014
RobbieSmith , 3 hours ago
Blacks and Whites with Equal Educational Attainment Differ in Cognitive Ability
Black and White Americans with the same formal level of education differ significantly
in their cognitive abilities. Specifically, within any given level of formal education
Whites consistently outperform Blacks. Moreover, this effect is so strong that Blacks often
underperform Whites who have lower levels of formal education than they do.
Consider the following data from the General Social Survey. This public data is
frequently used in social science research and contains a test of verbal intelligence as
well as measurements of participant's self-identified race and highest educational degree
obtained. Verbal intelligence tests correlate at around .75 with full-scale IQ and so this
data can also be taken as a fair measure of intelligence in general (Lynn, 1998). If we set
the White mean score on this test to 100 and the standard deviation to 15, we can come up
with an "IQ" style scale.
As can be seen, using this method Blacks with a graduate degree have a level of verbal
intelligence indistinguishable from that of Whites with a junior college degree. Blacks
with a four-year degree are roughly on par with Whites who never went to college at
all.
IQ BY RACE AND HIGHEST DEGREE EARNED (1972 - 2014):
Highest Degree White IQ Black IQ Gap
High School Drop-out: 89 82 7
High School Diploma 98 90 8
Junior College Degree 102 95 7
Bachelor's Degree 108 100 8
Graduate Degree 113 102 11
This data is consistent with evidence from the National Adult Literacy Survey (NALS)
which administered tests of cognitive ability to 26,000 US adults in 1992. These tests were
designed to measure how well people could take information and use it in a way which would
help them function in modern society.
Blacks are such poor academic achievers that the National Achievement Scholarship
Program was created with lower standards for Black candidates only, instead of the National
Merit Scholarship Program which is open to everyone else.
THE SMARTEST STUDENTS: The National Merit Scholarship Program was founded to identify
and honor scholastically talented American youth and to encourage them to develop their
abilities to the fullest.
BLACK STUDENTS ONLY: The National Achievement Scholarship Program was initiated
specifically to identify academically promising Black American youth and encourage their
pursuit of higher education.
They are both measured on the PSAT.
Minimum score for National Merit: 220
Minimum score for National Achievement: 190
Roughly, PSAT x 10 = SAT (out of 2400)
The U.S. government's PACE examination, given to 100,000 university graduates who are
prospective professional or administrative civil-service employees each year, is passed
with a score of 70 or above by 58% of the Whites who take it but by only 12% of the Blacks.
Among top scorers the difference between Black and White performance is even more striking;
16% of the White applicants make scores of 90 or above, while only one-fifth of one percent
of a Black applicants score as high as 90 -- a White-Black success ratio of 80/1. IQ
differences become more pronounced with greater g-loading.
Blacks score so poorly on academic exams that colleges give them 230 "race bonus" SAT
points to help them qualify for admission:
"Personal scores" are the new subterfuge for artificially assisting Blacks gain
admission to universities. Asian-American applicants receive a 2 or better on the personal
score more than 20% of the time only in the top academic index decile. By contrast, white
applicants receive a 2 or better on the personal score more than 20% of the time in the top
six deciles. Hispanics receive such personal scores more than 20% of the time in the top
seven deciles, and Blacks receive such scores more than 20% of the time in the top eight
deciles.
An otherwise identical applicant bearing an Asian male identity with a 25 percent chance
of admission would have a 32 percent chance of admission if he were White, a 77 percent
chance of admission if he were Hispanic, and a 95 percent chance of admission if he were
Black.
typeatme , 3 hours ago
Clearly this guy comes from one of those "Fact" based Universities....
Where "Science" and "Statistics" are used to make "Rational" decisions.....
Imagine the gall....
RAT005 , 2 hours ago
Robbie, there was another ACT (and/or maybe SAT) score translation change before the
recent one you list. It was around year 2000 that the test resulted in higher scores such
that you can't compare a 1980 score to say year 2000 score.
Just a guess from your listed results that it was done around 1995.
It wasn't an SJW type change, it was just a calibration change and a weighting
difference to increase the verbal section to an equal 50% of the scoring.
RobbieSmith , 2 hours ago
Yes, it's in the first post-
"The new SAT introduced in 2017 was "designed to inspire and increase access to college"
by creating "a more equitable exam". The new SAT cannot be compared to previous
results."
RAT005 , 2 hours ago
I found the info for you. Like I said, there was a score inflation adjustment done
before the one you listed. I actually didn't know about the recent one. I only knew about
the mid '90s score inflation adjustment.
RobbieSmith , 2 hours ago
My guess is they will eventually eliminate all standardized testing because the racial
IQ hierarchy is too obvious.
August , 3 hours ago
Hard to believe that the average IQ among whites with a graduate degree is only 113.
They must be including those with degrees in Education, Economics and Journalism.
RobbieSmith , 3 hours ago
IQ 113 is the 80.6 percentile.
Umh , 2 hours ago
Of what? Sorry to be dense.
neopolyidus , 2 hours ago
Sorry, you have to have an IQ of greater than 100 to 'get' bell curve math.
Excellent post. In the real world- the working world- "adjusted success" will go over
like a lead balloon. Square peg + round hole = failure, no matter how creatively you
attempt to cheat the system.
TheTrumanShow , 2 hours ago
"... adjusted success" will go over like a lead balloon."
For now, yes. But given the current BLM bsh*t conformity, for how long?
One possible bright spot might be that the currently BLM bsh*t conforming
companies/institutions will end up being outperformed and overtaken by new, no-nonsense
startups.
eternal_sarcasm , 43 minutes ago
When you combine this data with FBI crime statistics it doesn't paint a rosy
picture.
acetrumchura , 3 hours ago
Yeah, but this is why they attack the actual tests as being culturally bias. ALL THEY DO
IS MOVE THE GOAL POSTS.
Yagyu Jubei , 3 hours ago
This is why leftists believe that facts are racist.
factoryworker , 2 hours ago
Don't forget about jimmies.
I just got a birthday cake with jimmies. I should have tossed it on the floor in disgust
but blew out the candles and begrudgingly ate my piece in silence.
I'm so ashamed.
Trident5000 , 3 hours ago
If I see you got your degree from a "woke" campus with racial quotas, I simply won't
hire you.
J S Bach , 2 hours ago
I DEMAND that we eliminate disparities in all sports, to match racial proportions in BBF
(Basketball, Baseball, Football). There are far too few whites in these sports with regards
to their actual numbers in our society. If we demand quotas with STEM, then we must have
the same quotas for professional and college BBF as well.
fishpoem , 2 hours ago
Furthermore, it shall be mandated that the final scores in all athletic contests shall
be exactly equal...even if that means that one team has to sit on the bench throughout most
of the game.
NO WINNING IS ALLOWED IN A LAND OF LOSERS.
Hapa , 1 hour ago
to be totally fair, we need to include women as a percentage
HopeToLearn , 3 hours ago
As soon as the MLB, NFL and NBA adopt racially-proportionate hiring practices, we can
talk about fact-based SCIENCE.....
oellinas , 2 hours ago
50% of trash collectors must be women = no trash collected.
RAT005 , 2 hours ago
I think an entirely automated playing field with 1,000s of linked sensors to move the
"goal posts" instantaneously on an infinitely wide range. When a guy less than 6ft shoots,
the basket lowers......when a 7ft goes to stuff, the basket goes up :-)
Yagyu Jubei , 3 hours ago
If it's so cool and woke to lower the bar to create equal outcomes in academics it
should be equally as cool to:
1. Have basketball hoops at different heights for those that are shorter or less adept
at jumping
2. Require quotas of unattractive people for acting and modeling jobs
3. Require quotas of stupid people for jobs in the media.....oh never mind they already
do that
ChrisPatriot , 3 hours ago
LOL, you're about 4 or 5 decades late buddy. They only solution now is burn it all down
and recreate it.
typeatme , 3 hours ago
So....who do you want building your bridges, your airplanes, your vaccines, your
economy??
How about the most qualified.....???
Wild Idea, I understand...but...it has been proven to work better....
I KNOW! Strive to be better, instead of whining about not being good enough!!!
YEA! WILD THOUGHTS....
August , 3 hours ago
You're brim full of hate... and privilege!
marx , 3 hours ago
women hate STEM. they go in and hate it.
minorities are in the Bell Curve
quanttech , 3 hours ago
so basically just hire asian men and be done with it, seeing as how they're on the
higher end of the bell curve, right?
RobbieSmith , 2 hours ago
"so basically just hire asian men and be done with it, seeing as how they're on the
higher end of the bell curve, right?"
Asian IQ scores cluster around the mean; thus, the greater cognitive variation among
Whites produces more geniuses, but also more morons.
Umh , 2 hours ago
I have noticed the same relationship between men and women. There seem to be more bright
men and more male dummies too.
RobbieSmith , 1 hour ago
Mans' accomplishments have been documented according to the number of times they were
cited by others. Over 97% of the most important scientists and 74% of the most important
artists and authors were White, almost all males, and most from only four countries, Great
Britain, Germany, France, and Italy; the remainder were mostly Asian, and none were
Black.
RobbieSmith , 2 hours ago
Race differences in intelligence: An evolutionary analysis.
Lynn, Richard (2006)
ABSTRACT
It is widely accepted that race differences in intelligence exist, but no consensus has
emerged on whether these have any genetic basis. The present book is the first fully
comprehensive review that has ever been made of the evidence on race differences in
intelligence worldwide. It reviews these for ten races rather than the three major races
(Africans, Caucasians, and East Asians) analyzed by Rushton (2000). The races analyzed here
are the Europeans, sub-Saharan Africans, Bushmen, South Asians and North Africans,
Southeast Asians, Australian Aborigines, Pacific Islanders, East Asians, Arctic Peoples,
and Native American Indians. (PsycINFO Database Record, 2016 APA)
****'s hard and you to sacrifice to make it. Women are better off making babies unless
they have an undeniable natural talent. Having been part of various physics departments for
20 years, this does happen, but it's rare.
fightapathy , 2 hours ago
School girls hate it too. I was reviewing coding progress for 5-8 graders today: all
boys were exceeding expectations, all girls were lapsing. Well, a few boys were screw-ups
and failing hard. But that's to be expected.
GeezerGeek , 3 hours ago
The goal seems to be equality of outcome, regardless of talent. They sometimes blame
K-12 schools as being at the root of the problem, because K-12 schools are segregated by
class to some extent. Rich folks can send their kids to private schools, regardless of
color of skin. Just ask the previous president.
But of course these Maoists/Bolsheviks don't really want equality, they just want to
tear down what had been an incredibly successful system. If they really wanted to match
racial proportions in occupations, etc., to those in the general population regardless of
talent they would insist that sports teams be balanced like they want STEM to be balanced.
And speaking of balance, anyone else here notice the proliferation of blacks in commercials
these last few months? Or the increase in the number of multi-racial couples?
These are parts of an all-out attack on America, Western Civilization, and at its root
on Christianity. Its no wonder so many American Christians want to be raptured out before
SHTF. (Not that I think it will work out that way.) Who, after all, wants to make hard
choices?
August , 3 hours ago
The nearly-all-black TeeVee commercials have certainly proliferated over the last
half-year or so.
I actually watched TeeVee a few days ago, and there were at least six consecutive
commercials featuring African-Americans, with the only non-blacks shown being attractive
young White or Asian females.
Nothing to see here!
Promethus , 2 hours ago
I've noticed the increase in AAs in commercials, interracial couples and same sex
couples. This is to make them the new norm and traditional white Christian families racist
freaks.
Delving Eye , 56 minutes ago
Commercials with Blacks flooded the networks the second Obama was elected in 2008. I
watched the returns and noticed the shift immediately. I was amazed that there was
virtually NO commentary about it.
Didymus , 3 hours ago
it's really an attack on white people, more than america, the west, or christ.
HRH of Aquitaine 2.0 , 2 hours ago
Ding ding ding. Look at how they took out the white people in South Africa.
awesomepic4u , 3 hours ago
They took over long ago, now they're mobilizing.
"Structural (aka systemic, institutional) racism is not defined. The words could be
replaced by evil spirits without loss of meaning.
Lack of a definition is only part of the problem. I have noticed that---without
exception---claims of systemic racism, especially coming from POC students, never provide
any examples. Never.
The Dean of the University of Massachusetts School of Nursing was summarily fired for
publicly stating the Hippocratic Oath on Twitter.
She was fired for stating that all human lives matter.
That Oath is required of all members of the medical profession.
Except that all human lives no longer matter. That is now official dogma in elite US
institutions.
Just like in 1930s Germany. History does not rhyme. It is a replay.
Get ready if you have a clue. The lives that do not matter may be those of you and your
family.
It was a long crawl through the attic to retrieve and sight-in the SKS.
If someone tries to take your gun away, you have a solemn Duty to perform.
I will do mine. With regret, but I will do it regardless of the consequences.
America began July 4, 1776. A lot of people died. It had nothing to do with Blacks, but
with Tyranny.
Never forget that. Teach your kids. The Bible is not a bad book.
Dying-Of-The-Light , 2 hours ago
We are already seeing more and more completely stupid white and black people with PhDs
and Professorships. If the Cancel Culture goons get their way then dumb cluck whites won't
be getting doctorates but more and more blacks who can barely count will. The West will end
up being run by the victim, hate culture we see in the worst white and black citizens right
now but it will become black only. Already more and more truly nasty and un intelligent
blacks and asians are beginning to infest Western politics. The ones who are Left Wing are
in every instance anti white and anti Western culture, despite the fact that many come from
parents who fled to the West to escape the brutality of their own shXt hole nations. They
are the true racists, hating all whites without any true justification.
rodguy911 , 2 hours ago
Don't look now but its already happening.
greatdisconformity , 2 hours ago
The language of BLM and Critical Race Theory is the language of genocide.
Substitute the word of any other ethnic group for the word 'white' in their manifestos,
and you are in 1930s Germany.
Sadly, most college educated young Americans have no clue what was going in 1930s
Germany.
But they can talk your ear off about normative Gender praxis post-modern
colonialism.
That is by Design folks.
That is by Design.
In N Korea, young people get brainwashed for free. Here, we pay for the privilege.
Captain Phoebus , 3 hours ago
The Great Leap Forward, American style.
GeezerGeek , 3 hours ago
Right off the edge of a cliff...
JD Rock , 3 hours ago
"Systemic racism"🙄
RattieNomNom , 3 hours ago
wankerfistings
Kreator , 3 hours ago
Yeah, they did....
in 1968.
acetrumchura , 3 hours ago
Thanks for already commenting with my answer.
acetrumchura , 3 hours ago
Conservative colleges are growing. Not sure many companies show up to their job fairs
though :/
Lather Rinse Repeat , 3 hours ago
Total BS - these soros paid marxiturds are being videoed and will be erased when the
time is right.
Didymus , 3 hours ago
people have expecting a reaction since 1946.
Make_Mine_A_Double , 2 hours ago
Rotten poisoned fruit of Affirmative Ape-tion.
Let these yard munkays on campus where they are too stupid to learn anything and with
nothing to do they start agitating to lower standards and close down debate least their
obvious inferiorty become blatantly obvious and the Big Lie be revealed.
30 years of this nonsense and now our higher ed institutions are completely gutted.
My kids are done thank god, but if you have them in their teens I would seriously look
at Russia or Eastern Europe - maybe Colombia or Uraguay. But it would abuse to send them to
US campus until all this is destroyed.
Didymus , 3 hours ago
Read Revilo P. Oliver's "The Education of a Conservative" or Henry Ford's "the
international ___" and you'll see that this has been going on for a hundred years.
HRH of Aquitaine 2.0 , 2 hours ago
It is also in the "Hope of the Wicked" by Ted Flynn published in 2000. Dewey was a
commie.
chubbar , 3 hours ago
Why is it we can only select the most qualified if it is a sport but not if it's a
critical job like a doctor or scientist? Why is it important to me, the consumer, that the
person I hire to make me well has a specific skin color or gender?
None of this **** works and the morons pushing it know it doesn't. When less than the
required number of race "X" applies that are qualified, the standards have to be lowered to
bring in the balance. Why is that a good thing?
If there exists equal quality of applicants then the racial equality of outcome would be
assured, but that isn't reality and these idiots driving this narrative know it.
There is no reason to continue to point out that all races have different genetic
differences in IQ, but it's fact. It's also fact that IQ is a significant predictor of
success in many endeavors, STEM being one of those. So without significant concessions in
order to accommodate those of lessor IQ's, you are never going to have equality of outcome.
You can have equality of opportunity, but that doesn't appear to be the goal of these
people.
My suggestion has always been to scrub every application of race & gender and take
every possible step to ensure that information isn't revealed during the application
process. Then pick those candidates MOST qualified, period. I don't give a **** if the
whole class is south pacific islander, just quit with this nonsense about racism being the
reason for STEM classes being mostly X or Y race/gender.
Promethus , 2 hours ago
I would be happier watching a sporting event with white Affirmative Action players than
being treated by a minority AA doctor.
Cabreado , 3 hours ago
This is the rise of the Self-Absorbed -- the Narcissist and Sociopath -- to a critical
mass of places of influence and control.
The only! antidote is a vigorous protection of a righteous rule of law.
The People are failing from every direction.
BGen. Jack Ripper , 3 hours ago
After a few years of starvation they'll be humming a new tune.
HRH of Aquitaine 2.0 , 2 hours ago
The US should have never given out food stamps. They should have given out seeds,
shovels, and access to plots of land.
oellinas , 2 hours ago
nah not really... take a look at zimbabwe... starvation is the new normal
ZENDOG , 3 hours ago
Burn the Witches.
emptybeercan , 2 hours ago
Maybe it's time to just defund higher ed. We're defunding things and cancelling them
these days, so, let's say goodbye to the land of $1,500/credit hour 'tuition' and tweed
jackets with leather elbow pads and people that speak in tongues to avoid being understood
by the lumpen proletariat.
Online is the Great Equalizer. The computer does NOT care what you look like, how much
money you have, who you are related to, gender, religion, political affiliation,
nationality, age, whatever. Either you can use the equipment and access and make sense of
the stored information and perform computations and measurements and analysis and such not
and so on, or you cannot. Either you have the mental capacity to learn and experiement and
study, or you do not. There is no 'equal opportunity', there is only opportunity, and
information.
College, university, is an opportunity to study the higher subjects. Advanced
mathematics, the sciences, art, music, languages, and other than in the context of a
political science class, politics really has no place in it.
I think all colleges and universities should have their own independent admissions
testing standards, and develop their own in-house tests. Either you make the grade, or you
go and study somewhere else, with no respect to any of the items listed above. Go shake
your fist someplace else, come back when you are ready to be a serious student. If you want
to get drunk and spend 4 years screwing off at a party school, that option is also open.
But reserve higher education for those who have earned the privilege of going. Some people
are stupid. And you can't study your way out of that. Or legislate it. Period.
Bastiat , 2 hours ago
The are Marxists--it's their religion. Many of them are fanatics.
greatdisconformity , 2 hours ago
Defund so-called 'Social Science'.
Defund it and evict it from State supported campuses.
This thing will unravel in less than a decade.
We feed this thing that seeks to destroy us.
Templar X , 2 hours ago
Some people are just better at certain things than others. This has always been the
case, and it will always be the case.
You can't force a square peg into a round hole.
Pigs will never fly.
Monkeys will never do calculus.
Arnold Schwarzenegger will never become a ballerina.
Well, you get the picture, or you should anyway.
littlewing , 3 hours ago
One college in Texas had 100 professors on China's payroll.
China bought everyone, which is why they are bankrupt now.
JUICE E SMALL IT EMPIRE , 3 hours ago
I can see why colleges had so many active shooters in the past. Insanity havens for
brainwashing dems. You learn nothing, get nothing besides an exchange for some worthless
paper. Its not even worth it, for anybody. Corporations, students. It distorts the labor
market and time of people who really don't need to go. I hav edone a calcution: The added
costs for labor for corporations is $100,000,000,000,000 for a bunch of idiots who do not
even know what they are doing.
Blondefire , 2 hours ago
I'm a conservative professor at a small private college. Occasionally I get strange
looks from my colleagues but they have not persecuted me for anything yet. Fingers crossed.
Still teaching students how to think rather than what to think. The air is tense here but
still breathable.
fightapathy , 2 hours ago
Higher education? What about lower education? Da Home Dogs don't want to become
teachers, so white-*** states like CT and VT are giving out BIG scholarships and preferred
places for blacks who want a free ride but look like they're working. Hell, its downright
embarrassing in all these democrat ****holes that all the teachers are white and all the
dropouts are black. Will black teachers make for more successful black students? Maybe. Or
else they will be properly positioned to radicalize the students for mass strike actions
even before college.
HRH of Aquitaine 2.0 , 2 hours ago
Higher education has begun a transformation along the same lines as the 1966 Maoist
"Cultural Revolution" in China. Like the cultural revolution, the energized
identity-politics movement presents itself as a cleansing force. Pure Maoism was being
corrupted by covert capitalist sympathizers. They had to be rooted out.
Through the sweeping and indiscriminate indictment of oppression that it makes against the
American republic, wokeism poses the first serious challenge to our constitutional democracy
since communism.
Wokeism aims to remake American constitutionalism root and branch, to transform economics,
politics, education, and other institutions and practices. The free and equal individual under
the rule of law will be replaced with monolithic voices, united by perceived oppression, who
demand a mutating law and politics that reward their grievances with punishments against
alleged oppressors and redistributed resources for supposed "victims."
The first thesis of wokeism is that persons are reducible to their affiliated identity:
above all, race or gender. In this view, we understand ourselves solely through these prisms
and we apply that understanding to others and to institutions.
The second thesis is that no person, no idea, and no historical account can be understood
by independent human reason unfiltered by race, gender, and stories of interlocking
oppression , or, as the case may be, by the acts of oppression one has shared in as a member
of the dominant group. Everything comes to us and is either understood or projected by us
through our racial or gender identity.
The third thesis is that those who have identities that can be grouped under "persons of
color" or LGBTQ possess greater authority to speak -- owing to the various oppressions they
have experienced and the cosmic redress required for justice and liberation -- than oppressor
groups in almost every sphere.
America's national DNA, according to the New York Times' 1619 Project -- wokeism's
anti-American document par excellence -- has been encoded with slavery and anti-black racism.
Indeed, America left the British Empire for the purposes of retaining the slavery regime, the
project's lead author Nikole Hannah-Jones proclaims (against historical evidence). White males
stand as the grand artificer of this oppression, which has been transmitted throughout American
history, informing our constitutional documents, politics, and social structures.
The 1619 Project leaves no space or opportunity for redemption, for forgiveness, or for the
statesmanship of someone like Abraham Lincoln. It cannot acknowledge that American
constitutionalism is a contested space. The 1619 Project cannot understand the succession of
witnesses like Frederick Douglass, Booker T. Washington, and Martin Luther King Jr., who call
upon Americans to understand in full the principles of our Constitution and Union. Consider
that, while American soldiers were still fighting the Civil War, and much of the Democratic
Party was arguing against the abolition of slavery, the 13th Amendment to the Constitution was
passed by Congress on Jan. 31, 1865, later ratified by the requisite number of states in
December 1865. Its central premise stands on the equality language in the Declaration of
Independence, the same principles that outlawed slavery in the lands regulated by the Northwest
Ordinance of 1788. This is part of our heritage, too.
Our political institutions and our Constitution stand or fall ultimately by their
willingness to uphold us as free people pursuing the broad purposes of human existence.
Contrast this with the regime that wokeism would build. It would reject any notion of
individual integrity or distinctive notion of personhood. Intellectual freedom would be
nonexistent. Speech would be filtered through a relentless and constantly evolving set of
censors, who would punish or bless our words according to ideological criteria. Consequently,
our thinking and speaking would revolve around an endless loop of testimonies to oppression --
either committed against us or by people with whom we share tribal traits. In the latter sense,
we would confess our shared guilt and accept whatever punishment is deemed necessary.
Steve Nash, the recently named head coach of the New Jersey Nets, confessed that he had been
given the job unfairly because of his white privilege. He wanted to work for "change," he said.
Many will make similar pronouncements under more stringent conditions or risk becoming
untouchables. Ibram X. Kendi, author of the best-selling "How to Be an Antiracist," asserts
that the point of being an anti-racist is not to refrain from discrimination but to know whom
to discriminate against -- largely whites and Asians, if the woke polity is to become a
reality.
Under wokeism, the function of political institutions would not be to facilitate individual
flourishing but to enforce individual sameness, subsuming us all in an egalitarian stew of
grievance, redistribution, and retribution. The traits that define a decent community, such as
forgiveness, humility and compromise, will not be possible, and those suggesting them will be
accused of racism. Wokeism's social-justice constitution would fuel a federal government built
for one purpose: the evisceration of the freedoms that Americans have always known.
If the progressive notion of a "living Constitution" threw the law in doubt, woke
constitutionalism will destroy all fixed or limited notions of law. How could it be otherwise,
when the operative principle is the elimination of all forms of oppression, as measured by an
endlessly moving set of ideological markers? Man can organize the world without sufficient
notions of virtue, justice, and freedom, to say nothing of the biblical God, but as theologian
Henri de Lubac noted, when man does this he organizes the world against himself. One Nation
Under Woke would make this vision a reality.
* * *
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
Richard M. Reinsch II is the editor of Law & Liberty, host of "Liberty Law Talk," and
co-author of "A Constitution in Full." He and over 1,000 similarly concerned scholars and
citizens recently made common cause in an open letter published at
RealClearPolitics. This article is part of an ongoing " Liberty and
Justice for All " series. Kat , 2 hours ago
I'm originally from the USSR. This is just Socialism and Communism under a different
banner. Where we were fed a constant stream of anti-capitalist and anti-bourgoisie BS, now
it's anti-capitalist and racist BS. But it's all the same thing and they can kiss my behind.
All this does is fan the flames of xenophobia and racism.
Kat , 2 hours ago
I just wrote it in my comments. I'm originally from Moscow, back when it was in the USSR.
This is exactly the same ****e.
chubbar , 2 hours ago
White privilege is being used as an excuse for losers who can't cut the mustard of life
and need someone or something to blame to make them feel better about themselves. It isn't
going to work, we all know they are losers and we aren't giving them our **** just because
they suck at life. Sorry, better luck next time.
Yes, The USA Today is now fact-checking memes detailing black on white crime, to
try and downplay the reality of just how bad black on white crime is in America. [
Fact check: Rates of white-on-white and Black-on-Black crime are similar , USA Today,
September 30, 2020]:
A
viral meme purports to list homicide statistics by race in the United States, as
follows:
Whites killing Blacks -- 2%
Police killing whites -- 3%
Whites killing whites -- 16%
Blacks killing whites -- 81%
Police killing Blacks -- 1%
Blacks killing Blacks -- 97%
The page behind one viral version of the post, I Support Law Enforcement Officers, had
over 611 shares on its post. USA TODAY has reached out to the page for comment.
Some versions of the meme include this line: "America does have a problem. But it's not
what the media tells you it is."
Rates of white-on-white and Black-on-Black homicide are similar, at around 80% and 90%
Overall, most homicides in the United States are intraracial, and the rates of
white-on-white and Black-on-Black killings are similar, both long term and in individual
years.
Between 1980-2008, the U.S. Department of Justice found that 84% of white victims were
killed by white offenders and 93% of Black victims were killed by Black offenders.
In 2018, the
Federal Bureau of Investigation reported that 81% of white victims were killed by white
offenders, and 89% of Black victims were killed by Black offenders.
In 2017, the
FBI reported almost identical figures -- 80% of white victims were killed by white
offenders, and 88% of Black victims were killed by Black offenders.
Though the numbers differ year-to-year, the stark difference that the viral post attempts
to portray between the rates of white-on-white and Black-on-Black homicide -- which it puts
at 16% and 97%, respectively -- is inaccurate.
Both numbers tend to hover between 80% and 90% and remain within 10 percentage points of
each other.
Rates of Black-on-white and white-on-Black homicide also within 8 points
Likewise, the post attempts to portray a gulf in the rate of Black-on-white and
white-on-Black homicide -- which it lists at 81% and 2%, respectively.
Statistics from the FBI in 2018 and 2017 contradict that claim.
In 2018, 16% of white victims were killed by Black offenders, while 8% of Black victims
were killed by white offenders.
Similarly, in 2017, 16% of white victims were killed by Black offenders, while 9% of Black
victims were killed by white offenders.
In both years, the numbers remained within eight percentage points, a much smaller gap
than the 79% alleged in the viral post.
Black on white crime isn't as bad as white people believe it to be on social media, when
they share viral memes, but as The USA Today admits, it's still pretty bad.
But white people noticing how bad it is well, that's the real crime in the eyes of The
USA Today .
Speaking of whites killed by blacks, an attractive white lady working at a 7-11 has been
shot and killed in Waldorf, MD, which is one-third orc. The description of the murderer left
out the race but mentioned a hoodie, a strong indication that it's another dindu crime,
especially since she was killed despite the fact that she was cooperating with the killer's
demands.
Excerpt: Richardson said the suspect was dressed in a hooded sweatshirt, surgical mask and
jeans.
"He approached her, he produced a gun, it looked like she was complying and he shot her at
that time," Richardson said.
I have read of countless similar encounters over the years. Being a white woman working
alone at 1 a.m. in a convenience store must be one of the most dangerous jobs in America.
(((fake news ))) will either do nothing and let the facts fade from normie memory, or
goysplain that all black crime is YT's fault, even black-on-black violence, because YT
exists.
Put nothing past them. Hell, they're gaslighting antifa's riots as 'right-wing
violence.'
Could it be possible that we could learn some important lessons by looking back at how
Americans lived 70 years ago?
Of course there has never been any era in our history when everything has been perfect. But
without a doubt, things are vastly different today than they were back in 1950
In 1950, Texaco Star Theatre, The Lone Ranger and Hopalong Cassidy were some of the most
popular shows that Americans watched on television.
In 2020, a Netflix film entitled "Cuties" is so trashy and so disgusting that four states
have sent a letter to Netflix asking for it to be removed because it is "fodder for those
with criminal imaginations, serving to normalize the view that children are sexual
beings."
In 1950, television networks would not even show husbands and wives in bed together.
In 2020, "adult websites" get more traffic than Netflix, Amazon and Twitter combined.
In 1950, people would greet one another as they walked down the street.
In 2020, Americans are too enamored with their cellphones to be bothered with actual human
contact.
In 1950, gum chewing and talking in class were some of the major disciplinary problems in our
schools.
In 2020, youffs are literally gunning down police officers in the streets.
In 1950, people would make an effort to dress up and look nice when they would go out in
public.
In 2020, most of the population has become utter slobs and "People of Walmart" has become one
of our most popular memes.
In 1950, the typical woman got married for the first time at age 20 and the typical man got
married for the first time at age 22.
In 2020, the typical woman gets married for the first time at age 27 and the typical man gets
married for the first time at age 29.
In 1950, a lot of people would leave their homes and their vehicles unlocked because crime
rates were so low.
In 2020, many that live in urban areas are deathly afraid of all the civil unrest that has
erupted, and gun sales have soared to all-time record highs.
In 1950, Americans actually attempted to parent their children.
In 2020, we pump our kids full of mind-altering drugs and we let our televisions and our
video games raise our children.
In 1950, Baltimore was one of the most beautiful and most prosperous cities on the entire
planet.
In 2020, Baltimore regularly makes headlines because of all the murders that are constantly
occurring. Of course the exact same thing could be said about many of our other major
cities.
In 1950, 78 percent of all households in America contained a married couple.
In 2020, that figure has fallen below 50 percent.
In 1950, about 5 percent of all babies in the United States were born to unmarried
parents.
In 2020, about 40 percent of all babies in the United States will be born to unmarried
parents.
In 1950, new churches were regularly being opened all over the United States.
In 2020, it is being projected that 1 out of every 5 churches in the U.S. "could be forced to
shut their doors in the next 18 months", and the mayor of Lubbock, Texas just said that
opening a new Planned Parenthood clinic is like starting a church.
In 1950, we actually had high standards for our elected officials, and people actually did
research on the candidates before they cast their votes.
In 2020, more than 4,000 people in one county in New Hampshire voted for a "transsexual
Satanic anarchist" in the Republican primary, and she is now the Republican nominee for
sheriff in Cheshire County.
In 1950, children would go outside and play when they got home from school.
In 2020, our parks and our playgrounds are virtually empty and we have the highest childhood
obesity rate in the industrialized world.
In 1950, front porches were community gathering areas, and people would regularly have their
neighbors over for dinner.
In 2020, many of us don't know our neighbors at all, and the average American watches more
than five hours of television a day.
In 1950, Americans used words such as "knucklehead", "moxie" and "jalopy".
In 2020, new terms such as "nomophobia", "peoplekind" and "social distancing" have been
introduced into the English language.
In 1950, the very first credit card was issued in the United States.
In 2020, Americans owe more than 930 billion dollars on their credit cards.
In 1950, one income could support an entire middle class household.
In 2020, tens of millions of Americans have lost their jobs and filed for unemployment, and
more than half of all households in some of our largest cities are currently facing "serious
financial problems".
In 1950, the American people believed that the free market should govern the economy.
In 2020, most Americans seem to believe that the government in Washington and the Federal
Reserve must endlessly "manage" the economy.
In 1950, "socialists" and "communists" were considered to be our greatest national
enemies.
In 2020, most of our politicians in Washington have eagerly embraced socialist and communist
policy goals.
In 1950, the U.S. Constitution was deeply loved and highly revered.
In 2020, anyone that actually admits to being a "constitutionalist" is considered to be a
potential domestic terrorist.
In 1950, the United States loaned more money to the rest of the world than anybody else.
In 2020, the United States owes more money to the rest of the world than anybody else.
In 1950, the total U.S. national debt reached the 257 billion dollar mark for the first time
in our history.
In 2020, we added 864 billion dollars to the national debt in the month of June alone. In
other words, we added over three times more to the national debt in that one month than the
total amount of debt that had been accumulated from the founding of our nation all the way to
1950.
In 1950, most Americans were generally happy with their lives.
In 2020, the suicide rate is at an all-time record high, and it has been rising every single
year since 2007.
*** Michael's new book entitled "Lost Prophecies Of The Future Of America" is now
available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com . ***
Where you from Kev? Ever live in or near a black neighborhood, maybe go to a school with a
high black population? Or did you spend your life in a lily White suburb where the only
blacks you ever met were domestic help or on TV? Try living the life of an average White
person stuck near a violent black population center, then get back to me. You are clueless
about race relations in the US.
@Mr. Rational e SHR data provide additional details about each homicide incident,
including the jurisdiction, month, year, victim and offender demographic characteristics,
weapon, the circumstances surrounding the incident (e.g., argument, robbery, gang-related),
and the relationship between the victim and offender, if known.
But that would not adequately account for your interaction point.
Another element I think should be added is relative risk from non/strangers of different
races. How many of the white on white murders are strangers compared to how many of the black
on white murders? Because I think the most obvious question is how to evaluate risk for random
interactions. Non-strangers can be evaluated as individuals to a larger degree.
One of the things about FBI/Justice Dept. violent crime statistics that has infuriated me
for decades is their damnable habit of lumping Hispanics and who-knows-what into the "White"
offender category.
Kevin is a kind hearted person, and I know he is coming from a place of not wanting to speak
ill of his circle of friends.
But the reality of life in America is that (murder aside) blacks violently attack white
people more than 1,500 times per day, each and every single day. (USBOJ Household survey)
Now, that is a very serious problem. Many of these black on white attacks are in ways that
are unbelievably serious, and would be completely unthinkable to white people, ie slashing or
gang beating someone just for "fun" and laughing while while you are doing it.
If noticing reality all around us and thinking that something should be done about it makes
someone racist, I guess I am racist, too.
@Rich ly beginning to gentrify) neighborhoods in San Francisco in the 1980s, when crime
rates were considerably higher than they are now. Also lived at the corner of Oakland, Berkeley
and Emeryville in 1992-3. I played pickup basketball with mostly black guys regularly
throughout many of those years. Subbed in the SF public high schools including one that was
majority black or close to it. Went to quite a few mostly-black parties in the Lower Haight. I
generally got along at least as well with black folks as with white folks.
Also when I lived in Paris in 1988-89 I hung out with and played on the Paris 8 basketball
team with mostly Africans. Our best player was a black guy from NYC.
Overall black folks are at least as nice as white folks, and in certain ways, more real.
Maybe you guys just haven't been hanging out with the right black people?
@Kevin Barrett er wrong action. Only white people are responsible for their own actions,
but not blacks because blacks are like good-natured children who lack full mental capacity and
only respond to their environment, which of course white people created. When you ask racist
liberal weenies like Kevin to point to low-crime black societies anywhere in deep Africa, they
cannot of course. Then white colonialism gets blamed. That there might be black moral turpitude
or at least deeply ingrained cultural patterns of depraved behavior in blacks is automatically
eschewed by racist liberal weenie circles in academia from whence Kevin came. And so because
the data will not be looked at nor new approaches considered, the problem of black criminality
has reached the point where it threatens the survival of America.
“Between 1980-2008, the U.S. Department of Justice found that 84% of white victims
were killed by white offenders and 93% of Black victims were killed by Black
offenders.”
So white victims were over 2x more likely to have been killed by blacks than vice-versa (16%
and 7% of cases). That white number also includes hispanics. The article also omits mention of
the black homicide rate being 8 times higher than whites+hispanics.
The argument that black-on-black violence is a greater problem than police violence entirely
misses the point. If I am confronted with a criminal, I have the legal right to defend myself.
If I am confronted by an aggressive police officer, I can invoke no such right.
Have you not ever had an interaction with a policeman? Did you enjoy how they disrespect
you, provoke you, dare you to defy them so they can assault you? They’ve done this to me,
a harmless white man who generally travels around in jeans and sneakers, maybe looking a little
rough around the edges even though I own rental property and a business. So it doesn’t
take much to picture how the thuggish bully-boy element so prevalent in the oinking fraternity
would act out against someone they consider without status.
Breaking the power of the policemen’s unions is an essential first step to remedying
rampant abuses in the system. The police are not members of the working class. They are agents
of state power and as such must be held to a very strict standard of conduct. In a republic,
there can be no greater crime than abuse of authority, be it by violence or corruption, by
those whom, in Thomas Jefferson’s memorable phrase, “we are obliged to entrust with
power.”
Such a betrayal of the public trust, by men entrusted with the power of life and death over
the citizenry, is the only transgression for which the death penalty is the truly appropriate
punishment and deterrent.
@Kevin Barrett 8221; – meaning me. They didn’t like it that the big white boy
was dunking on them.
I was then attacked by about 12 groids in a pre-meditated manner, and I know this for a fact
because I heard their planning.
The statistics are what they are, and people like you who are in la la land are annoying.
You are not connected to reality when you let your exceptional experiences overcome what others
are noticing.
I don’t allow my negative experiences with blacks overcome my ability to see many of
them as people. But, on the other hand, I don’t ignore the crime statistics.
Your willful ignorance is dangerous. Clown world is bad enough already without illogical
“exceptions makes the rules” blathering.
USA Today seems unaware of this and thinks they are clearing the air by trying to get to
the truth about race and crime. Hilarious.
Yes.
And the interracial crime stat they harp on helps hide the scope of Black crime.
There’s roughly six times more Whites in the US than Blacks, so a truly equal society
would have six times as many Blacks killed by Whites and vice versa.
So, per the 2018 stats, if twice as many Whites are killed by Blacks as vice versa, then
Blacks are killing at twelve times the rate of a “fair” society.
One factor these statistics oversimplify is that there is a topological overlay to the
issue. Vast sectors of the country are still overwhelmingly white, for example the north west
and southwest. That’s a huge area where any homicide will be by definition white on
white. And most blacks are de facto segregated into large inner cities, where most crime will
be black on black. These differential homicide rates pertain to the narrow border zones where
white and black interact.
Unfortunately, I live in precisely such a place and the relative homicide rates seem to me
to be like the meme. There have been paltry few white on white murders and these are mostly
within families, such as a guy killing his wife. Some drug related. The one white on black
murder I know of was more in the nature of manslaughter and was drug related. This received
national media attention! The black on white murders on the other hand are predatory, vicious
and comparatively common. If you are walking down the street you are much more afraid of a
black male than a white. That’s the reality from a deplorable on the ground like me.
You were good enough at basketball to be paid to do it, so good enough to run rings round
those SF black pick-up players and make a complete fool of some of them. I suspect you quickly
became careful not to do that, because you knew a humiliated male African American individual
would react with quite a bit more hostility that a white would have. Similarly, had you had been
getting a huge amount of attention from all the women at those mostly black Lower Haigh parties
the other men there would get very annoyed, and you would feel less threatened by the white ones.
You did not have that problem because you conducted yourself with humility and self control,
which was easier for you than a black athlete, AOTBE. CAL2 , says:
October 3, 2020 at 2:29 pm GMT
Out of white murders, 2,677 were committed by whites. However, 803 Hispanics are lumped into
the murder category. Let’s say half are white Hispanics. That means white-on-white
murders drop to 2,276 or 68%. Using the same model, black-on-black is at 86%. That is a more
significant difference.
@lavoisier before I got my growth spurt, I could out-run the black kids. They would also
say “catch that m-fuc!r” then as well. I took a lot of beatings, and it was always
5,6 or 7 to 1. Sometimes the numbers were much higher. The white liberal adults who ran the
school were completely out of their depth with regards to the black problem.
White men that don’t get it have not lived the same experiences… and further
they are ignoring data that is right in front of their face.
To ignore overwhelming data is quite a feat of denial. Denial on that level borders on a
form of pathology. Maybe they don’t want to admit the world is the way it is?
The races are different. The sexes are different. Liberalism is a mental disorder.
@PO'd in PG County . It actually means that while only 11% of black victimes are killed by
non-blacks, 19% of white vicitms are killed by non-whites, so nearly twice as many whites are
killed by blacks as vice versa, but since black population is only about 1/5 of white
population, it means that per capita blacks are killing almost ten times as many whites as vice
versa. (This leaves out the Hispanic obfuscation mentioned above.)
As others might have already said blacks are indeed about 8 times more likely to murder
whites based on percentages of the population using the 2018 statistics. I’d like to
think that most racially aware whites already know this, but the normies need to know.
USA Today frames the statistics in such a way to make it appear that there is parity
between blacks and whites and that “racist” whites are all up in arms over nothing
and it’s really all much ado about nothing.
A problem with the stat that 80% of whites are killed by whites and 90-93% of blacks are
killed by blacks is that it doesn’t factor in the number of whites killed by hispanics
since most years the FBI does not break them out as a separate racial category. If they did I
believe the true white on white murder rate would drop to between 60-70%.
The other area that the 80% for whites and 90% for blacks metric is misleading is that
whites commit less than half the homicides of blacks while being 4.5x numerous. Blacks commit
murder at about 8-9x the white rate when hispanics are factored out of the white rate.
The other thing mainstream outlets avoid is the dreaded 13/56, or blacks commit 56% of the
murders while only being slightly over 13% of the population. Meanwhile, assuming hispanics
commit murder at roughly their percentage of the population (18%) this means that blacks and
hispanics account for 76% of the 15-16K annual murders while whites account for just 24% while
being 59-60% of the population.
Without blacks and browns America truly would have crime rates more resembling Sweden or
Norway.
This guy. Sheesh.
I worked with hundreds upon hundreds of blacks @ FORDS FRAP. Many of whom were temps from
Detroit. I can speak from experience they are a net drain on a business or town/city.
The language.
The poor approach to job performance.
Lousy attitude/ demeanor.
I am owed and entitled.
Filthy break areas and cafeterias.
Theft of products and supplies.
Theft of time, they are almost genius at scheming in various ways to escape job duties.
The entrances and approaches, roadways and highways near the plant are dangerous. Especially
aftershift.
The fraudulent medical claims must cost FOMOCO enough to fund a small nation.
@Anonymous population 6 times that of blacks… blacks kill whites at a rate 1,5 times
higher than whites kill whites. So, only correcting for population size we get 50% higher rate
of black on white murder instead of USA Today’s 8%…
Further, given the still strong separation between races, assume that white-white encounters
are 5 times more prevalent than white-black encounters. That’s an extremely low-ball
estimate and the real number is somewhere between 10 and 20. With that correction, on
population and encounter basis, blacks are around 8 times more likely to kill whites than
whites – whites.
Let’s compare the USA Today number of 0.08 to the real number of 8… USA Today
lied 100 times over… fake media indeed.
I had essentially the same experience at a job that became infested with lower class blacks
from the hood except they’d scream racism any time they were held to account for any of
their misbehaviors and lack of performance. Plus they’d try to shift their workloads off
on every white person they could and-again -- any complaints about it and they’d screech,
“Racist!”
I learned to despise them for the content of their character. Any comment on their low life
character was immediately met with not only shrieks of racism but also shrieks of, “You
goan respeks me!” They were the foulest of the foul and were utterly contemptible.
@El Dato versa. A Hispanic was eight times more likely to attack a white person than vice
versa.
– in New York City, a black was 31 times more likely than a white to be arrested for
murder, and a Hispanic was 12.4 times more likely . For the crime of “shooting”
— defined as firing a bullet that hits someone — a black was 98.4 times more
likely than a white to be arrested, and a Hispanic was 23.6 times more likely.
– If New York City were all white, the murder rate would drop by 91 percent, the robbery
rate by 81 percent, and the shootings rate by 97 percent.
– In an all-white Chicago, murder would decline 90 percent, rape by 81 percent, and
robbery by 90 percent.
The video of Daniel Shaver's murder was horrifying. It raises an important point. Studies
have shown that the police kill white suspects at the same or slightly higher rate than they
kill black suspects. Black police officers kill black suspects at the same rate that white
police officers kill black suspects. The people the police are killing are almost exclusively
poor people. The poverty rate of blacks is substantially higher than it is for white. That is
why they are disproportionately the victims of police violence. I will probably get flamed
for writing this but what we have in this country with respect to the cops killing black
people isn't a race issue. We have a police problem. Too many cops are trigger happy or just
too unstable to do the job. The man who killed Shaver should never have been allowed to be a
cop. Shaver was doing everthing he could to comply. He was murdered. There is no other word
for it.
I agree with you about George. Before anyone renders judgement, there has to be a trial.
It is hard to make the case that it was the cops intention to kill him. They had already
called for an ambulance. It isn't at all clear that he suffocated because of the knee on his
neck. Pressure on the side of the neck does not obstruct breathing. He was compromised with
Covid and he had a significant dose of fentanyl. Acquitals will set the country on fire.
Re: "Trump who gassed protesters demanding justice for George Floyd; murdered by police
suffocation"
I presume by that statement that you have no respect for the principle that a person
should be presumed innocent until proven guilty. As far as I am aware the trial has not yet
taken place. Personally I am always a little suspicious when conclusions are drawn and
announced by the media as if they were unarguable facts before all the evidence has been
revealed. i am also aware that I will be denounced as some sort of heretic for saying that
much. As the saying goes I 'may as well be hanged for a sheep as a lamb'. For anyone who
hasn't seen the footage of the events leading up to the iconic scene, you can see it
here.
For anyone who is prepared to risk the heresy of doubting the sacred testament and
actually watch the video, the following becomes clear:-
George Floyd lied to the police repeatedly, he claimed he had just lost his mother, he
hadn't. He refused to sit in the police car claiming to be claustrophobic, yet when the
police arrived he was happily sitting in his own car, with the windows shut.
He was also clearly in an abnormal mental state, either intoxicated or mentally disturbed or
both. It is astonishing that someone so obviously paranoid about the police would refuse the
chance he was given to make good the transaction made with a counterfeit note, thus involving
the police in the first place.
He also clearly claimed that he couldn't breath before he was on the ground.
He asked to lay on the ground.
Additionally the toxicologists report suggests that he had a level of fentanyl in his blood
which would normally be regarded as a fatal dose, one of the effects of which is difficulty
breathing.
That video was deliberately withheld on the grounds that it might prejudice the trial, a
ludicrous decision given that the trial was already irredeemably compromised. I expect all
manner of indignant strawman attacks, accusations and insults to be aimed at me, for that is
the fate of heretics generally. I haven't the time or the inclination to carefully list all
the things that I am NOT saying, that would take forever. What I am saying is that a trial
has not yet happened and I am tired of hearing the event casually described as if it was a
clear cut deliberate public execution.
Perhaps people might like to view the following video for comparison and ask themselves
who they would prefer as an arresting officer.
Despite committing no crime and doing his best to cooperate totally with the police,
Daniel Shaver was gratuitously executed. Few people have even heard of him, he was not buried
in a golden casket with local dignitaries weeping and nobody burned down the neighbourhood.
The officer involved was exonerated and returned to duty until he was retired with a pension
due to the trauma that the incident had caused him.
The video of Daniel Shaver's murder was horrifying. It raises an important point. Studies
have shown that the police kill white suspects at the same or slightly higher rate than they
kill black suspects. Black police officers kill black suspects at the same rate that white
police officers kill black suspects. The people the police are killing are almost exclusively
poor people. The poverty rate of blacks is substantially higher than it is for white. That is
why they are disproportionately the victims of police violence. I will probably get flamed
for writing this but what we have in this country with respect to the cops killing black
people isn't a race issue. We have a police problem. Too many cops are trigger happy or just
too unstable to do the job. The man who killed Shaver should never have been allowed to be a
cop. Shaver was doing everthing he could to comply. He was murdered. There is no other word
for it.
I agree with you about George. Before anyone renders judgement, there has to be a trial.
It is hard to make the case that it was the cops intention to kill him. They had already
called for an ambulance. It isn't at all clear that he suffocated because of the knee on his
neck. Pressure on the side of the neck does not obstruct breathing. He was compromised with
Covid and he had a significant dose of fentanyl. Acquitals will set the country on fire.
Are you ready for this week's absurdity? Here's our Friday roll-up of the most ridiculous
stories from around the world that are threats to your liberty, risks to your prosperity and on
occasion, inspiring poetic justice.
Beethoven is a symbol of "exclusion and elitism"
The woke mob is attempting to cancel one of the most famous pieces of music in history
– Beethoven's Fifth Symphony.
Their aim? To thwart "wealthy white men who embraced Beethoven and turned his symphony into
a symbol of their superiority and importance."
Come again?
Prior to Beethoven in the mid 1700s, lower class Europeans would regularly attend
symphonies. And they were apparently quite a rowdy bunch– hooting and hollering all
throughout the performance, like a modern day rock concert.
Around the time that Beethoven rose to prominence in the early 1800s, however, the lower
classes were excluded from attending symphonies because they didn't keep quiet and applaud at
the appropriate time.
So today's woke mob believes that by playing or enjoying Beethoven's Fifth, you are
glorifying the exclusion of poor people, and by extension, women and minorities.
ay_arrow
Billy the Poet , 5 hours ago
Jon Voight as Conrack introduces his students to Beecloven:
Movies where a white person educates poor children of color are racist, obviously.
Unknown User , 4 hours ago
War is Peace / Freedom is Slavery / Ignorance is Strength
Unknown User , 3 hours ago
"He has made a marvellous fight in this world, in all the ages; and has done it with his
hands tied behind him. He could be vain of himself, and be excused for it. The Egyptian,
the Babylonian, and the Persian rose, filled the planet with sound and splendor, then faded
to dream-stuff and passed away; the Greek and the Roman followed, and made a vast noise,
and they are gone; other peoples have sprung up and held their torch high for a time, but
it burned out, and they sit in twilight now, or have vanished. The *** saw them all, beat
them all, and is now what he always was, exhibiting no decadence, no infirmities of age, no
weakening of his parts, no slowing of his energies, no dulling of his alert and aggressive
mind. All things are mortal but the ***; all other forces pass, but he remains. What is the
secret of his immortality?" - Mark Twain
yerfej , 5 hours ago
When low IQ reetaryds are manipulated to seize control they immediately attack everything
beyond their cultural status and eliminate it. The west is witnessing rich progressive elites
leveraging idiots to destroy society. What is funny is the idiots doing the manual
destruction and footwork will of course get nothing out of all their efforts. They too will
be culled, eventually, as always.
Bay Area Guy , 5 hours ago
But Beethoven was disabled (deaf at 26 or 27), so the woke crowd is prejudiced against the
hearing impaired. They better self-cancel because of that.
drjimi , 4 hours ago
People don't go to classical music concerts because of the behavioral expectations????
Seriously???
People don't go to classical music concerts because they don't like classical music.
i can just as validly argue hip hop is elitist and exclusionary because I don't care for
the chimp-like antics of its imbecilic fans.
MilwaukeeMark , 5 hours ago
Beethoven refuses to bow to the elites of his time. He demanded a place at their tables
with them. He refused to become their hired help. Of course the left is too stupid to know
that history.
Pernicious Gold Phallusy , 2 hours ago
The poem used in the last, choral, movement of Beethoven's 9th symphony was written by
Friedrich Schiller and is know as "An die Freude", translated as Ode To Joy. But Schiller
originally wrote the poem as "An die Freie" or "To the Free." Europe was in the grip of
antimonarchic sentiment. The poem was not permitted to be published in Austria by the
Emperor's censors. Schiller changed the word throughout the poem from Freie to Freude, and
the censors permitted it. But everybody in the audience would have known this story, and
realized the meaning of the poem.
Joe A , 3 hours ago
That is what communism does: it deconstructs and destroys history because it is all bad.
History is a reminder of the oppression of the poor and downtrodden, of the class struggle.
Everywhere in communist Europe they tore down churches and historical buildings and replaced
them with ugly concrete colossal monstrosities.
Communists are insane.
Savvy , 3 hours ago
Rap is the most racist violent 'music' there is and they go after Beethoven? LOL
Jethro , 4 hours ago
The left is too stupid realize that they are creating the monsters that they've been
autisticly screeching about.
Choomwagon Roof Hits , 4 hours ago
Sort of like the Old Bolsheviks back in the USSR...
Patmos , 5 hours ago
Their aim? To thwart "wealthy white men who embraced Beethoven and turned his symphony
into a symbol of their superiority and importance."
I understand the desire of youth to shake things up when things don't seem right, to break
out of the mold. It's James Dean, Rebel Without A Cause.
The modern "woke" mob isn't that though, it's rheetards without a clue.
Fox News
Fox News
5.73M subscribers
SUBSCRIBE
White employees were informed that their so-called 'white' qualities were offensive and unacceptable.
#FoxNews
#Tucker
If one needed any further evidence of Twitter's far-left corporate culture, look no further
than former CEO Dick Costolo - who went full Bolshevik in a Thursday Twitter rant warning that
"me-first capitalists" who don't agree with injecting political activism into the workplace
will be "the first people lined up against the wall and shot in the revolution," adding "I'll
happily provide video commentary."
Costolo, a partner at
Index Ventures and who sits on the board of Patreon (which got
spanked in court for deplatforming conservatives), ran Twitter from 2010 to 2015.
As Reclaim The Net
writes, "Costolo was replying to a tweet related to how Coinbase's CEO has decided to separate
business from political activism and offer an exit package for those employees who feel they
can't work in a company that doesn't want to be hindered by politics and activism, as so many
other companies have been distracted by in recent times."
Truth be told: political operatives own and run our MSM. This is why the press is called
the 'Fourth Estate'.
They are more correctly described as a Fifth Column , one far more open and sworn to
destroy our country and its foundational citizens – and taxpayers – as any that
ever operated during World War II. You would think this would be of vital interest to people
who loudly declare themselves to be "Nazi-punchers", but who time and again show themselves to
be merely low-level street terrorists informed and inspired by Mao's Red Guard and the
irredeemable thugs of the African National Congress.
One wonders what's preventing them from
mimicking the Red Terror waged by the leftists of Spain, when the battle for "freedom" involved
the disinterment of the graves of Catholic clergy to better pose the corpses in blasphemous
positions. Imagine how depraved those Mostly Peaceful protesters had to have been for even a
leftist-supporting site such as Wikipedia to baldly state
The violence consisted of the killing of tens of thousands of people (including 6,832
Roman Catholic priests, the vast majority in the summer of 1936 in the wake of the military
coup), attacks on the Spanish nobility, industrialists, and conservative politicians, as well
as the desecration and burning of monasteries and churches.
Directly in the crosshairs this time are small and medium-sized owner-operated businesses
– the true backbone of American freedom and prosperity – who have largely been
sacrificed in exchange for the knock-kneed offerings of Danegeld from our giant conglomerates,
all of whom have prospered immensely from the suffering and privation brought on by the
Democratic lockdown of society – and the total shutdown of our economy.
Think! – have you read a single article charting how the government war on small
business directly enriched Amazon.com and
world's richest autocrat, Jeff Bezos? . who then funnels his windfall into a newspaper that
blatantly pimps for the Democratic Party, which translates into a vast payday for the DNC, not
least from its newly-approved partnership with the shadowy and many-tentacled Soros-surrogate
group, BLM?
The result is what you'd expect when a fringe group operates with the full cooperation and
partnership of major industry and both political parties (don't confuse Trump with a
standard-issue Republican, please – he may have terrible flaws, but that isn't one of
them) – 10% of the population holding the other 90% in a chokehold with only one set of
rules: no arrest and prosecution for Bolshevik violence and terror ..but the zero-tolerance
heavy hand of corrupt Leviathan coming down hard against any and all citizens who fight back
or, eventually – inevitably – who even struggle against their restraints.
Short of the sudden arrival of celestial horsemen to punish the guilty and reward the
set-upon, it has become clear that the only answer is the one that the Powers That Be claim to
be dead set against: racial separatism. (Particularly when we consider that all that will be
necessary to turn America into Hell on earth will be the adoption of Ibram Kendi's First Law,
sometimes known as equality of outcome :
To fix the original sin of racism, Americans should pass an anti-racist amendment to the
U.S. Constitution that enshrines two guiding anti-racist principals: Racial inequity is
evidence of racist policy and the different racial groups are equals.
Could any "amendment" be more terrifyingly totalitarian than this?)
White and black separation would, instead, accomplish two goals, both more important than
Kendi's quick fix: we would learn soon enough about actual equality of outcomes (which
is why no Communist, black or white, wants anything to do with the creation of one more failed
basket-case black state), and much more importantly, white families can sleep secure in their
beds at night, without worrying about Apache raids at midnight, egged on and recorded for
"posterity" by that Fourth Estate/Fifth Column referred to up top. Because the fact of the
matter is that, even should some combination of government and law-enforcement halt the burning
and looting of America – as things stand now, none of the worst malefactors will ever see
the inside of a prison cell .which means any ceasefire will only be temporary, to be violently
ripped asunder the moment they sense white Americans have at last lowered their guard once
more. And living in perpetual paranoid readiness for violent uprisings and mindless destruction
is no way to live at all.
Trump has it half right, a border wall is the answer: only it needs to run
lengthwise , between the Southern and Northern borders. If we don't use the next four
years to plan out such a separation, fretting over our children's children will be a fruitless
exercise – those who aren't murdered will be captured and 'go native' .and in case you
haven't looked at a globe lately, there's no place left to run.
As a recovering journalist, I can point out that even on a rinkydink rag in a small city,
where I got fired for being a real journalist back in the early '70's; he who owns the
presses and distribution networks calls the tune. It's a matter of working-class (no matter
how middle-class your income or social-status) versus the ownership class. The latter wins
every time.
Over the next 4 years, Trump promises to lower the cost of healthcare, and "bring better and
tailored healthcare to address historic disparities" for the black community. The president
will also ensure that black churches can compete for federal resources, and "defend religious
freedom exemptions to respect religious believers and always protect life."
The president also seeks to further criminal justice reform, with his plan saying that he
will "commit to working on a Second Step Act." He will also work towards "safe urban
neighborhoods with highest policing standards," the plan states.
Other aspects of the plan includes making Juneteenth a National Holiday, prosecuting the
KKK, designating Antifa a terrorist organization, and making lynching a national hate
crime.
Trump's move to designate Antifa as a terrorist organization came after FBI Director
Christopher Wray told Congress that those who engaged in recent violent protests are targets
of serious FBI investigations.
"We have seen Antifa adherence coalescing and working together in what I would describe as
small groups and nodes," Wray has said. Wray added that the bureau is conducting multiple
investigations "into some anarchist violent extremists, some of whom operate through these
nodes."
Before that, Attorney General William Barr in August said Antifa is a "revolutionary
group" that is bent on establishing communism or socialism in the United States.
"They are a revolutionary group that is interested in some form of socialism, communism.
They're essentially Bolsheviks. Their tactics are fascistic," Barr said in an interview with
Fox News on Aug. 9.
At a "Black Voices for Trump" campaign rally in Atlanta, Georgia, Trump characterized his
Platinum Plan as a "black empowerment plan," and warned black voters against supporting his
opponent, former Vice President Joe Biden.
"Though black Americans have traditionally been shut out of opportunities to grow our own
businesses and create generational wealth, President Trump is working hard to give us access
to the American Dream," K. Carl Smith, Black Voices for Trump advisory board member, said in
a
statement .
"President Trump is a businessman and understands that pride, community, and dedication
are built through entrepreneurship."
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
President Donald Trump elbow bumps with Herschel Walker during a campaign rally in Atlanta,
Georgia, on Sept. 25, 2020. (John Bazemore/AP Photo)
"No one in Washington politics today has done more to hurt black Americans than Joe
Biden," Trump told supporters on Friday. "For half a century, Joe's personally advocated or
enacted virtually every policy that has caused pain and suffering in the black community. You
know that."
In a statement prior to Trump's rally in Georgia, Biden said, "As president, I will work to
advance racial equity across the American economy and build back better I promise to fight for
black working families and direct real investments to advance racial equity as part of our
nation's economic recovery."
play_arrow
Stormtrooper , 6 hours ago
Hey Donald, don't forget about us non-privileged, unemployed white folk. We could use
a few greenbacks too.
risitasse , 6 hours ago
Trump likes everybody but whites.
YesWeKahn , 6 hours ago
This is insanity, while everyone is suffering, only black people get special
treatment, only because of their skin color. In this country, we can see: only black
lives matter.
risitasse , 6 hours ago
So, KKK is terrorist but not BLM ?
Hilarious.
farflungstar , 6 hours ago
90% of interracial crime is black on white.
Bribing them even more won't fix that.
Cornbred , 6 hours ago
"Prosecuting the kkk" for what exactly? They've been irrelevant for 30 +/- years and I
can't remember a crime committed by that organization that made National news.
echoes , 7 hours ago
Trump's all in on BLM lmao
The fraudster-in-chief.
farflungstar , 7 hours ago
Wait BLM not a terrorist organization? Yes Antifa is but the KKK? Isn't that an
irrelevant Boomer organization filled with feds?
Lol BLM will be relieved to hear that so they can carry on harassing people and
rioting every time one of their criminal good boys gets shot by the police.
Xena fobe , 7 hours ago
BLM is a front for billionaires. Antifa is easier to pick on.
pods , 7 hours ago
13% of population. High % cannot vote due to felony conviction. Turnout %?
And on a good republican year they get 10% of that? Most monolithic voting block there
ever was. 500 billion (promised lol) for another 5% of that? Might better court the
beaners. They are the up and comers anyways.
Deep Snorkeler , 3 hours ago
WOW! I wish I was black.
I could enjoy immense privileges and free money.
Poor white Trumpkins, suckers.
Locker up , 3 hours ago
Platinum plan for black votes but Dog-Poop Plan for whitey.
Taffer , 4 hours ago
So, as a heterosexual white man that makes up the majority of Trump's base....why
should I be voting for him again? I mean, where's my "Platinum Plan?"
Making Juneteenth a National Holiday alone might actually be enough to just make me
skip the election this year. I mean crap, if the Republicans new brilliant plan is just
to go ahead and become Democrats to win votes for people who will never vote for them,
I'm done.
risitasse , 3 hours ago
No matter who wins the election, (((Goldman Sachs))) wins.
Hope we get some real conservatives next election.
outsider88 , 6 hours ago
pandering for votes. donald biden or joe trump?
outsider88 , 6 hours ago
pandering for votes. donald biden or joe trump?
Manthong , 6 hours ago
So now maybe we will get the Gold Plan for Hispanic Americans, the Silver Plan for
Asian Americans, the Red Plan for Native Americans and then finally the Brown Plan for
White Americans who will incrementally become more brown over time because of government
"policy"..
This is not racist, it is physics and biology.
Chuck Walla , 6 hours ago
Amen! When a culture fosters violence and killing as the first option in any conflict,
civilization will be hard to acquire and retain. Avoid them until they can reform their
child rearing skills.
R Crumb , 6 hours ago
LBJ did it to us with his "Great Society".
He should have had his head blown off, not JFK.
yojimbo , 5 hours ago
What about the Nation of Islam, that works against all that? And if you have issues -
why is Christianity failing the black community?!
flajim7 , 4 hours ago
They are trying to protect themselves, when the time comes they are outed and the
ropes are strung. They feel empowered knowing their hangman committed a national hate
crime.
teutonicate , 3 hours ago
Trump Unveils "Platinum Plan" For Black Americans, Designates Antifa, KKK As
"Terrorist Organizations"
Just as an aside, as far as I am concerned, blacks have been on the platinum plan
since the sixties - and it hasn't helped them one bit.
I am agnostic regarding the KKK, but to truly understand the origins of this
organization you need to do some historical research - and understand that it was
literally the only law and order in the south during the reconstruction period after the
civil war. Also, as you evaluate the KKK in its historical context, please remember that
five presidents were members of the KKK - so please don't pretend that it had no rational
justified political support, at least at one time in our history.
Categorizing the KKK as a terrorist organization, given the fact that to the best of
cosmic knowledge there is no recent evidence of "terrorist behavior" exercised by the
KKK, in stark contrast to the actual behavior of Antifa, dilutes the categorization of
Antifa as a terrorist organization. This is a political move, but at this point if I can
find any politician willing to identify Antifa (and don't forget BLM) as terrorist, I am
willing to accept political sops like parallel identification of the KKK as such - if
that happens to placate the current political zeitgeist.
WTF, I'm white and I don't even get a "platinum plan". Not fair.
metaforge , 33 minutes ago
It's carefully targeted to "areas" that are typically largely black, not direct
reparations just because of skin color. And it's an investment in business, not just the
usual Dem dole. Clever.
FolloDaMoney , 46 seconds ago
(((They))) gave you a "platinum plan" and you do not realize it .
(((Their))) plan to genocide your White race into oblivion is succeeding beyond all
expectations and has acquired record breaking platinum status .
Trump's Five Hundred BILLION USD reparations plan for "black empowerment" is on top of
the more than two TRILLION USD federal spending on blacks , since ww2 , and on top of the
650,000 White lives expended by the federal government to win the US Civil War which was
fought to prevent the Southern Confederate secession that was instigated by northern
abolitionists of southern enslavements of African kneegroes whom are now called American
Blacks .
That 500 BILLION USD will be underwritten by the politicly anemic and largest ethnic
culture , which is White Christian sheepill , in the USA .
The fanaticly loyal White Trumppians are completely delusional about Trump being their
God-ordained savior .
The vast majority of Whites are Christian sheepill and they simply do not have the
political intelligence ( not IQ ) to end their racial suicide which is also known as
nothing less than a technical genocide against Whites that ends in a very real extinction
.
vovishka.2018 , 5 hours ago
socialism is here
US has socialism for the corporations, MIC, the bankers and the 1% where earning are
privatize & losses and debt are socialized. The rest is pretend socialism (:
The plan is a desperate vote buying scheme. Why Trump didn't announce this 2-3 months
after he took office but waits until about 1 month before the election?
Because Trump knows the proposal will not get through Congress. It is a mere plan, a
declaration of intent. Congress will eventually trash it, but the plan will survive long
enough to get Trump past the election, or at least through first debate.
The election lies are flying thick and fast like always , neither prospect will be a
good choice as the whole thing is just a farce.
ineluctable , 3 hours ago
Tax dollars ... yeah right... Everything is bought with DEBT. It will be your grand
kids who pay up. Enjoy living large on their backs.
Blackcubic , 7 hours ago
Fvck off with your MAGA. It was a lie and scam by Trump
GlobeTrekker , 6 hours ago
You can support MAGA (Trump) and not like this move.
It's just more pandering to blacks, and designating the KKK a terrorist organization
is ridiculous, because it has been toothless for 50 years, and blacks kill more blacks in
one year than the blacks lynched by the KKK in 100 years.
y_arrow
Leroy Whitby , 7 hours ago
Most likely Trump will deregulate massively in a way that helps blacks form
businesses, get jobs, compete for EXISTING state funds by black churches etc. I don't see
how you could read Trump's proposal negatively.
Mineshaft Gap , 6 hours ago
You must realize it's a game.
Trump has literally no allies in Congress who will fund Platinumania. The GOP would
always rather fight a nice profitable war somewhere. The Dems won't let him help their
urban vassals one iota.
It's all empty promises for votes. . .which may just work! Peter Kirsanow runs the
numbers authoritatively: Dems are right at the tipping point where black support for
Trump could cost them fatally.
hal0bender , 7 hours ago
So what's he gonna do for White americans, the founding stock of this country? Why are
these people treated like sacred cows? Have we not had 50+ years of ******** welfare,
affirmative action, etc?
GlobeTrekker , 6 hours ago
That also!
Whites, and especially white men, are treated like sheeot nowadays, and occupy a lower
status than every other race (except maybe Asians) in college admissions, college
scholarships, loans, and jobs. You cannot create or continue a top-shelf society by
continually lifting up the less capable, less hard-working, less intelligent, at the
expense of the best.
I'm sick of the mindless pandering to minorities and women (yes, it is true) at the
expense of white men (and Asians many times as well). This is why Atlas shruggs.
Shadow1275 , 7 hours ago
And we have officially become South Africa. Witness how in two single generations,
White Europeans have undone the work of thousands of past generations of their ancestors.
All that spilt blood, all those tears, war after bloody war to gain land and
prosperity.
Supreme Dudeness , 3 hours ago
What is privilege???
1) Privilege is wearing $200 sneakers when you've never had a job.
2) Privilege is wearing $300 Beats headphones while living on public assistance.
3) Privilege is having a Smartphone with a Data plan, which you receive no bill
for.
4) Privilege is living in public subsidized housing where you don't have a utility or
phone bill and where rising property taxes, rents and energy costs have absolutely no
effect on the amount of food you can put on your table, which is largely covered by
Government Food Stamps.
5) Privilege is having free health insurance for you and your family that's paid for
by working taxpayers who often can't afford proper health coverage for their own
families.
6) Privilege is having multiple national organizations promoting and protecting just
your race alone -- that are subsidized by federal tax dollars.
7) Privilege is having access to a national college fund that supports only one
race.
8) Privilege is having a television network that supports only one race.
9) Privilege is having most of the media news networks refuse to cover incidents
wherein one race (one-eighth of the population) commits 50% of the crimes.
10) Privilege is the ability to go march against, and protest against anything that
triggers you, without worrying about calling off from work and the consequences that
accompany such.
11) Privilege is having as many children as you want, regardless of your employment
status, and be able to send them off to daycare or pre-school you don't pay for.
12) Privilege is being able to vote in many states without showing a driver's license,
voter ID card or other credentials -- just because your race claims they should be exempt
from such requirements.
13) Privilege is being able to riot, loot, commit arson and tear down historic
monuments without consequences -- just because you don't like folks such as Columbus, U.
S. Grant or even Lincoln.
14) Privilege is being able to get into almost any college of your choosing based on
your race, not your grades or merit.
15) Privilege is having most of your life paid for by the working men and women who DO
HAVE TO DEAL WITH RISING TAXES AND COSTS! you know, those you now call
"PRIVILEGED."
_arrow
Son of Loki , 5 hours ago
Biden calls it a "Reparation Tax"
Trump calls it a "Platinum Plan"
In any case, the middle class whitey gets screwed and needs to work harder.
Blankone , 3 hours ago
You could give the black community $5 trillion and they would not produce new wealth,
but would simply ask for more.
For example, look at every once White dominated country in Africa where the blacks
have taken over. Every single time the productive country turns to subsistence level
existence.
Look at the great farms taken from the Whites in Africa, they all decayed to nothing
due to the blacks.
No motivation, no ability.
Psst - look at every once productive city in the USA once the blacks become 50% of the
occupants.
play_arrow 1
Billy the Poet , 7 hours ago
Looks like maybe Trump is trying to buy the black vote with big government programs.
He has a good chance of success. But do we really need more socialism?
Trump has committed himself to deregulation. Perhaps he could focus on eliminating
taxes and regulations that weigh heaviest on poor and minority neighborhoods rather than
by making even more expensive promises about forty acres and a mule.
GlobeTrekker , 6 hours ago
Love Trump, but calling the KKK a terrorist organization smacks of Clinton-era
"domestic right-wing terrorism" BS, and mindless pandering to blacks. The KKK has been
toothless for 40 years, and even if they weren't, as Bob Woodson (civil rights leader,
and not your typical black race pimp) has said many times blacks kill more blacks in ONE
YEAR than the KKK did in lynching blacks over a period of 100 years.
Alot of the rest seems like more gibs for blacks.
Liesel , 7 hours ago
Some people figured out that by backing white Americans in a corner by using the race
card against them, they could change the very fabric of our nation. That's where we are
right now. No politician has enough gonads to call BLM the terrorist organization that
they are. This is one of the most concerning events I have ever seen in my lifetime.
inorganic , 6 hours ago
As much as I like the idea of "blacks" (whatever that actually means) living and
enjoying better and more prosperous lives ... I very much dislike adopting inherently
racist approaches.
Seriously. Why have a separate plan for blacks? And another for hispanics? And another
for asians? And another for females? And another for gays and lesbians? And another for
transgenders? And another for multigenders? And another for the poor? And 50 more for
every other real and fictional category one can conceive?
Seriously!
How about you just stop the rich and elites and connected and hyper-rich and
globalists from having special artificial advantages over everyone else? Ever think of
that? Ever think of the fact that if ALL the artificial special advantages were removed,
then everyone down below (at ALL levels below) would have a VASTLY easier time to improve
their own lives ... WITH NO SPECIAL PLANS OR HANDOUTS OR PROGRAMS REQUIRED .
-----
This creating special programs for every freaking real and fictional distinction that
any warped mind can conceive of does what? It tells people to think of others NOT as
human beings LIKE THEMSELVES ... but as member of other groups that have special programs
to aid them. So now EVERYONE has to compete with everyone else to get more and better
special handouts and programs and treatment than all the other groups. Which means
everyone is encouraged to think of all others as fundamentally NOT LIKE THEMSELVES and in
fact INHERENTLY AGAINST THEM as in INHERENTLY THEIR ENEMY .
-----
Seriously. Do I want to see blacks have better and more enjoyable lives? Yes! Damn
straight! Do I want everyone else to have better and more enjoyable lives? Yes! Damn
straight! Do I want the rich, privileged, connected and hyper-rich live worse and less
enjoyable lives? Well, YES --- to the 99.9% of them who did not earn their wealth
honestly without taking advantage of any special setups. To the other 0.1% --- more power
to you, and enjoy your wonderful lives. And that 99.9% who didn't earn what they have?
Even with a massively reduced wealth and privilege they'll live a vastly better life than
the other 99.9% ... so I'm not gonna cry for them, that's for sure!
Why set everyone against everyone else?
That is NOT necessary. I'm betting that 99.999% of blacks and all those other bogus
"groups" understand very clearly that a tiny percentage of rich and connected have a VAST
and mostly ARTIFICIAL advantage over everyone else --- AND they understand that if all
those artificial advantages were removed, THEY would do vastly better. And most
important, they would have a vastly better chance and easier time moving up the success
and wealth ladder.
Trump should stop falling into the Marxist trap by adopting the Marxist approach. I
agree that disadvantaged should be helped ... but they can be helped without creating
more artificial injustices. Where does the current Marxist approach end? With everyone
against everyone ... and a tiny elite at the top who are hyper-doodle-dandy rich and
powerful, with everyone else an abject slave.
-----
PS: Another problem with these endless special programs is ... the already rich and
connected always get richer and more connected by "administering" and "executing" these
special programs.
Maghreb2 , 6 hours ago
I agree with what your saying but your a ****** because its not a free market and
those rules haven't applied anywhere on the planet since 1970. It was dangerous idea to
think that way in the 19th century because the rich inherit and the middle class invent
jobs to fleece the tax payer. Now they do both plus they print money and give it to the
stock market all the time. Black areas can't afford to exist because they are caught
between tens of millions of Hispanic migrants, hundreds of millions of factory workers
Artificial intelligence automation and trillions of dollars pumped into the system to
gentrify. Its a fools errand.
If the whites stopped playing pretend for ten seconds they would realize 90% of jobs
can be automated with robotics and AI and/or done cheaper somewhere else. You have to be
Godlike to be relevant and funnily enough the Sportsman and Musicians occasionally are.
They don't make billions on Wall Street and can't retire if they don't make enough
money.
I predicted a plane crash 2 days ago it was actually a bombing. Its not a meritocracy
its a war. Humans have to fight for survival now and the fight will just get tougher. I
know the people who run the show its amusing for them .
inorganic , 6 hours ago
Every now and then I ask myself whether my desire for everyone to have a more fair
chance to rise to better situations is delusional ... if not wrong.
Well, I'm a long way from saying it is wrong, but the question of whether it is
delusional is always a difficult call for me. But I must say, as time passes, I have to
admit I am monotonically getting closer to saying it is. Which would be to agree with
you.
Part of the reason is ... there has always been (since I was 4 years old) such a huge
intellectual and existential gulf between my thoughts and actions versus the thoughts and
actions of others. The following are a few, just for context. Some are actually kind of
funny, but all were relevant.
age 4 : Based on hearing utterly contradictory statements from different adults, I
decided that I could not believe what adults tell me (meaning TRUST NO ONE ). Implicit in
this is the fact that I valued understanding reality infinitely more than getting treated
well (by repeating whatever adults told me).
age 4 : I taught myself to read (at least "well enough for now"). I still remember how
huge a struggle this was, and how much persistence was required. And got hooked on
astronomy. So I started reading lots of science books.
age 4 : I decided god does not exist. I won't go into the details of my reasoning, but
I literally thought I was the only human who believed this, because I never heard of of
anyone who also came to this conclusion.
age 5 : I decided to pretend I was an alien from another planet. This was a purposeful
intellectual device that I came up with to help me feel comfortable with not believing
what humans believe, and not feel pressure to conform (and thereby accept fiction and
nonsense). I decided I would operate as if I was an alien from somewhere far, far away
... and my job was simply to observe what these strange creatures do and believe.
age 5 : I figured out that "authority" was a bogus concept (later I would say
"fictional" concept). I distinguished "trade" from "authority".
age 5 : The very first thing at the start of the very first day of first grade, the
teacher made all the kids stand up, solemnly place their hand over their heart, and
repeat the "pledge of allegiance". I stood up, and I crossed both arms across my chest to
slightly simulate the whole reverence action, but did not say a word. I just listened.
And I thought about what was said. I recognized exactly what was being said, right from
the start. They wanted me to pledge to obey (in effect, to be a slave). But that wasn't
bad enough, I was supposed to be a slave to an inanimate object (a flag). That somehow
represents a "republic" (whatever that is, which I didn't know at the time). Then some
absurd filler. Then the payoff! The "with liberty and justice for all". I don't know why
I was different than the rest of the kids, but I recognized what I would later learn is a
concept called "bookends". This "pledge" was explicitly saying that "what constitutes
liberty and justice is ... being a slave!!! ". Holy crap! Until that moment I had not
realized how infinitely nefarious and diabolical human beings could be! But that set me
straight. Furthermore, at recess I tried to have conversations with other kids about what
happened first thing that morning. Not a single one of them noticed a thing. Some just
ran away laughing. Obviously the most evil and atrocious thing I had ever witnessed meant
nothing to them.
age 5 : Later that day (first day of school) the teacher pointed at the big A above
the blackboard and told the class "repeat after me". Then she said the word "A". The
class repeated. Then she did the same with "B" and "C" and "D". At first, I thought
something very sophisticated and "beyond my pea brain" was going on. What are they doing?
After a while, I figured it out ... the other kids can't read! They don't even know the
freaking alphabet. What am I doing here? :-o
age 5 : Based on the previous item I mentioned, I decided to ignore teachers. I would
spend all day reading my science books while the teachers were doing ... whatever they
were doing.
The rest of my life is just as "different" and "wacko" as the above. Even more so,
actually. But one constant was ... I diligently worked to observe and understand reality
based on my own observations (including with telescopes, which I taught myself to build).
And though I did play physical sports outside with other kids, almost all my time was
spent working on my own studies and projects.
In fact, after I got out of high school, the rest of my life I lived on an average of
36 to 48 hour days ... 12 hours of sleep and 24 to 36 hours of observe, study, work. And
mow lawns, shovel snow and babysit for neighbors for money to do my projects.
The bottom line is ... can I expect other humans to be or think even REMOTELY like me
after living such a different life? I think you are saying NO WAY . And I am getting
closer to agreement.
John Grady , 6 hours ago
BLM took that **** off their website saying that part of their plan was to destroy the
nuclear family a few days ago so I guess now they're wholesome. It's a LGBTQ outfit ran
by Marxist lesbians. Compared to them the KKK looks like the 4H Club.
Arch_Stanton , 4 hours ago
If antifa is a terrorist organization, then the Feds should go after their funding
sources immediately. It's publicly known who many of them are.
Not happening. Ever.
As for the KKK, you'd be arresting a lot of FBI agents working undercover in what is
essentially a honey pot.
"... If your category is "white," bad news: you have no identity apart from your participation in white supremacy ("Anti-blackness is foundational to our very identities Whiteness has always been predicated on blackness"), which naturally means "a positive white identity is an impossible goal." ..."
"... DiAngelo instructs us there is nothing to be done here, except "strive to be less white." To deny this theory, or to have the effrontery to sneak away from the tedium of DiAngelo's lecturing – what she describes as "leaving the stress-inducing situation" – is to affirm her conception of white supremacy. This intellectual equivalent of the "ordeal by water" (if you float, you're a witch) is orthodoxy across much of academia. ..."
"... White Fragility is based upon the idea that human beings are incapable of judging each other by the content of their character, and if people of different races think they are getting along or even loving one another, they probably need immediate antiracism training. ..."
"... It takes a special kind of ignorant for an author to choose an example that illustrates the mathematical opposite of one's intended point, but this isn't uncommon in White Fragility, which may be the dumbest book ever written. It makes The Art of the Deal read like Anna Karenina. ..."
"... Yet these ideas are taking America by storm. The movement that calls itself "antiracism" – I think it deserves that name a lot less than "pro-lifers" deserve theirs and am amazed journalists parrot it without question – is complete in its pessimism about race relations. It sees the human being as locked into one of three categories: members of oppressed groups, allies, and white oppressors. ..."
"... This dingbat racialist cult, which has no art, music, literature, and certainly no comedy, is the vision of "progress" institutional America has chosen to endorse in the Trump era. Why? Maybe because it fits. It won't hurt the business model of the news media, which for decades now has been monetizing division and has known how to profit from moral panics and witch hunts since before Fleet street discovered the Mod/Rocker wars. ..."
"... For corporate America the calculation is simple. What's easier, giving up business models based on war, slave labor, and regulatory arbitrage, or benching Aunt Jemima? There's a deal to be made here, greased by the fact that the "antiracism" prophets promoted in books like White Fragility share corporate Americas instinctive hostility to privacy, individual rights, freedom of speech, etc. ..."
"... Corporate America doubtless views the current protest movement as something that can be addressed as an H.R. matter, among other things by hiring thousands of DiAngelos to institute codes for the proper mode of Black-white workplace interaction. ..."
"... If you're wondering what that might look like, here's DiAngelo explaining how she handled the fallout from making a bad joke while she was "facilitating antiracism training" at the office of one of her clients. ..."
"... DiAngelo doesn't grasp the joke flopped and has to be told two days later that one of her web developer clients was offended. In despair, she writes, "I seek out a friend who is white and has a solid understanding of cross-racial dynamics." ..."
"... After DiAngelo confesses her feelings of embarrassment, shame and guilt to the enlightened white cross-racial dynamics expert (everyone should have such a person on speed-dial), she approaches the offended web developer. She asks, "Would you be willing to grant me the opportunity to repair the racism I perpetrated toward you in that meeting?" At which point the web developer agrees, leading to a conversation establishing the parameters of problematic joke resolution. ..."
"... This dialogue straight out of South Park – "Is it okay if I touch your penis? No, you may not touch my penis at this time!" – has a good shot of becoming standard at every transnational corporation, law firm, university, newsroom, etc. ..."
"... One of the central tenets of DiAngelo's book (and others like it) is that racism cannot be eradicated and can only be managed through constant, "lifelong" vigilance, much like the battle with addiction . A useful theory, if your business is selling teams of high-priced toxicity-hunters to corporations as next-generation versions of efficiency experts -- in the fight against this disease, companies will need the help forever and ever. ..."
"... Cancelations already are happening too fast to track. In a phenomenon that will be familiar to students of Russian history, accusers are beginning to appear alongside the accused. Three years ago a popular Canadian writer named Hal Niedzviecki was denounced for expressing the opinion that "anyone, anywhere, should be encouraged to imagine other peoples, other cultures, other identities." He reportedly was forced out of the Writer's Union of Canada for the crime of "cultural appropriation," and denounced as a racist by many, including a poet named Gwen Benaway. The latter said Niedzviecki "doesn't see the humanity of indigenous peoples." Last week, Benaway herself was denounced on Twitter for failing to provide proof that she was Indigenous. ..."
"... People everywhere today are being encouraged to snitch out schoolmates, parents, and colleagues for thoughtcrime. The New York Times wrote a salutary piece about high schoolers scanning social media accounts of peers for evidence of "anti-black racism" to make public, because what can go wrong with encouraging teenagers to start submarining each other's careers before they've even finished growing? ..."
This is part of a larger piece that will be made available to subscribers later this
week:
A core principle of the academic movement that shot through elite schools in America since
the early nineties was the view that individual rights, humanism, and the democratic process
are all just stalking-horses for white supremacy. The concept, as articulated in books like
former corporate consultant Robin DiAngelo's White Fragility (Amazon's #1
seller !) reduces everything, even the smallest and most innocent human interactions, to
racial power contests.
It's been mind-boggling to watch White Fragility celebrated in recent weeks. When it
surged past a Hunger Games book on bestseller lists, USA Today
cheered , "American readers are more interested in combatting racism than in literary
escapism." When DiAngelo appeared on The Tonight Show, Jimmy Fallon
gushed , "I know everyone wants to talk to you right now!" White Fragility has been
pitched as an uncontroversial road-map for fighting racism, at a time when after the murder of
George Floyd Americans are suddenly (and appropriately) interested in doing just that. Except
this isn't a straightforward book about examining one's own prejudices. Have the people hyping
this impressively crazy book actually read it?
DiAngelo isn't the first person to make a buck pushing tricked-up pseudo-intellectual
horseshit as corporate wisdom, but she might be the first to do it selling Hitlerian race
theory. White Fragility has a simple message: there is no such thing as a universal
human experience, and we are defined not by our individual personalities or moral choices, but
only by our racial category.
If your category is "white," bad news: you have no identity apart from your participation in
white supremacy ("Anti-blackness is foundational to our very identities Whiteness has always
been predicated on blackness"), which naturally means "a positive white identity is an
impossible goal."
DiAngelo instructs us there is nothing to be done here, except "strive to be less white." To
deny this theory, or to have the effrontery to sneak away from the tedium of DiAngelo's
lecturing – what she describes as "leaving the stress-inducing situation" – is to
affirm her conception of white supremacy. This intellectual equivalent of the "ordeal by water"
(if you float, you're a witch) is orthodoxy across much of academia.
DiAngelo's writing style is pure pain. The lexicon favored by intersectional theorists of
this type is built around the same principles as Orwell's Newspeak : it banishes
ambiguity, nuance, and feeling and structures itself around sterile word pairs, like
racist and antiracist, platform and deplatform , center and
silence, that reduce all thinking to a series of binary choices . Ironically,
Donald Trump does something similar, only with words like " AMAZING !" and "
SAD !" that are
simultaneously more childish and livelier.
Writers like DiAngelo like to make ugly verbs out of ugly nouns and ugly nouns out of ugly
verbs (there are countless permutations on centering and privileging alone). In a
world where only a few ideas are considered important, redundancy is encouraged, e.g. "To be
less white is to break with white silence and white solidarity, to stop privileging the comfort
of white people," or "Ruth Frankenberg, a premier white scholar in the field of whiteness,
describes whiteness as multidimensional "
DiAngelo writes like a person who was put in timeout as a child for speaking clearly. "When
there is disequilibrium in the habitus -- when social cues are unfamiliar and/or when they
challenge our capital -- we use strategies to regain our balance," she says ("People taken out
of their comfort zones find ways to deal," according to Google Translate). Ideas that go
through the English-DiAngelo translator usually end up significantly altered, as in this key
part of the book when she addresses Dr. Martin Luther King's "I have a dream," speech:
One line of King's speech in particular -- that one day he might be judged by the content
of his character and not the color of his skin -- was seized upon by the white public because
the words were seen to provide a simple and immediate solution to racial tensions: pretend that
we don't see race, and racism will end. Color blindness was now promoted as the remedy for
racism, with white people insisting that they didn't see race or, if they did, that it had no
meaning to them.
That this speech was held up as the framework for American race relations for more than half
a century precisely because people of all races understood King to be referring to a difficult
and beautiful long-term goal worth pursuing is discounted, of course.
White Fragility is
based upon the idea that human beings are incapable of judging each other by the content of
their character, and if people of different races think they are getting along or even loving
one another, they probably need immediate antiracism training. This is an important passage
because rejection of King's "dream" of racial harmony -- not even as a description of the
obviously flawed present, but as the aspirational goal of a better future -- has become a
central tenet of this brand of antiracist doctrine mainstream press outlets are rushing to
embrace.
The book's most amazing passage concerns the story of Jackie Robinson:
The story of Jackie Robinson is a classic example of how whiteness obscures racism by
rendering whites, white privilege, and racist institutions invisible. Robinson is often
celebrated as the first African American to break the color line
While Robinson was certainly an amazing baseball player, this story line depicts him as
racially special, a black man who broke the color line himself. The subtext is that Robinson
finally had what it took to play with whites, as if no black athlete before him was strong
enough to compete at that level. Imagine if instead, the story went something like this:
"Jackie Robinson, the first black man whites allowed to play major-league baseball."
There is not a single baseball fan anywhere – literally not one, except perhaps Robin
DiAngelo, I guess – who believes Jackie Robinson broke the color barrier because he
"finally had what it took to play with whites." Everyone familiar with this story understands
that Robinson had to be exceptional, both as a player and as a human being, to confront the
racist institution known as Major League Baseball.
His story has always been understood as a
complex, long-developing political tale about overcoming violent systemic oppression. For DiAngelo to suggest history should re-cast Robinson as "the first black man whites allowed to
play major league baseball" is grotesque and profoundly belittling.
Robinson's story moreover did not render "whites, white privilege, and racist institutions
invisible." It did the opposite. Robinson uncovered a generation of job inflation for mediocre
white ballplayers in a dramatic example of "privilege" that was keenly understood by baseball
fans of all races fifty years before White Fragility. Baseball statistics nerds have
long been arguing about whether to put asterisks next to
the records of white stars who never had to pitch to Josh Gibson, or hit against prime Satchel
Paige or Webster McDonald. Robinson's story, on every level, exposed and evangelized the truth
about the very forces DiAngelo argues it rendered "invisible."
It takes a special kind of ignorant for an author to choose an example that illustrates the
mathematical opposite of one's intended point, but this isn't uncommon in White
Fragility, which may be the dumbest book ever written. It makes The Art of the Deal
read like Anna Karenina.
Yet these ideas are taking America by storm. The movement that calls itself "antiracism"
– I think it deserves that name a lot less than "pro-lifers" deserve theirs and am amazed
journalists parrot it without question – is complete in its pessimism about race
relations. It sees the human being as locked into one of three categories: members of oppressed
groups, allies, and white oppressors.
Where we reside on the spectrum of righteousness is, they say, almost entirely determined by
birth, a view probably shared by a lot of 4chan readers. With a full commitment to the
program of psychological ablutions outlined in the book, one may strive for a "less white
identity," but again, DiAngelo explicitly rejects the Kingian goal of just trying to love one
another as impossible, for two people born with different skin colors.
This dingbat racialist cult, which has no art, music, literature, and certainly no comedy,
is the vision of "progress" institutional America has chosen to endorse in the Trump era. Why?
Maybe because it fits. It won't hurt the business model of the news media, which for decades
now has been monetizing division and has known how to profit from moral panics and witch hunts
since before Fleet street discovered the Mod/Rocker wars.
Democratic Party leaders, pioneers of the costless gesture, have already embraced this
performative race politics as a useful tool for disciplining apostates like Bernie Sanders.
Bernie took off in presidential politics as a hard-charging crusader against a Wall
Street-fattened political establishment, and exited four years later a self-flagellating,
defeated old white man who seemed to regret not apologizing more for his third house. Clad in
kente cloth scarves, the Democrats who crushed him will burn up CSPAN with homilies on
privilege even as they reassure donors they'll stay away from Medicare for All or the carried
interest tax break.
For corporate America the calculation is simple. What's easier, giving up business models
based on war, slave labor, and regulatory arbitrage, or benching Aunt Jemima? There's a deal to
be made here, greased by the fact that the "antiracism" prophets promoted in books like
White Fragility share corporate Americas instinctive hostility to privacy, individual
rights, freedom of speech, etc.
Corporate America doubtless views the current protest movement as something that can be
addressed as an H.R. matter, among other things by hiring thousands of DiAngelos to institute
codes for the proper mode of Black-white workplace interaction.
If you're wondering what that might look like, here's DiAngelo explaining how she handled
the fallout from making a bad joke while she was "facilitating antiracism training" at the
office of one of her clients.
When one employee responds negatively to the training, DiAngelo quips the person must have
been put off by one of her Black female team members: "The white people," she says, "were
scared by Deborah's hair." (White priests of antiracism like DiAngelo seem universally to be
more awkward and clueless around minorities than your average Trump-supporting construction
worker).
DiAngelo doesn't grasp the joke flopped and has to be told two days later that one of her
web developer clients was offended. In despair, she writes, "I seek out a friend who is white
and has a solid understanding of cross-racial dynamics."
After DiAngelo confesses her feelings of embarrassment, shame and guilt to the enlightened
white cross-racial dynamics expert (everyone should have such a person on speed-dial), she
approaches the offended web developer. She asks, "Would you be willing to grant me the
opportunity to repair the racism I perpetrated toward you in that meeting?" At which point the
web developer agrees, leading to a conversation establishing the parameters of problematic joke
resolution.
This dialogue straight
out ofSouth
Park – "Is it okay if I touch your penis? No, you may not touch my penis at this
time!" – has a good shot of becoming standard at every transnational corporation, law
firm, university, newsroom, etc.
Of course the upside such consultants can offer is an important one. Under pressure from
people like this, companies might address long-overdue inequities in boardroom diversity.
The downside, which we're already seeing, is that organizations everywhere will embrace
powerful new tools for solving professional disputes, through a never-ending purge. One of the
central tenets of DiAngelo's book (and others like it) is that racism cannot be eradicated and
can only be managed through constant, "lifelong" vigilance, much like the
battle with addiction . A useful theory, if your business is selling teams of high-priced
toxicity-hunters to corporations as next-generation versions of efficiency experts -- in the
fight against this disease, companies will need the help forever and ever.
Cancelations already are happening too fast to track. In a phenomenon that will be familiar
to students of Russian history, accusers are beginning to appear alongside the accused. Three
years ago a popular Canadian writer named Hal Niedzviecki was
denounced for expressing the opinion that "anyone, anywhere, should be encouraged to
imagine other peoples, other cultures, other identities." He reportedly was forced out of the
Writer's Union of Canada for the crime of "cultural appropriation," and denounced as a racist
by many, including a poet named Gwen Benaway. The latter said Niedzviecki "doesn't see the
humanity of indigenous peoples." Last week, Benaway herself was denounced on Twitter for failing
to provide proof that she was Indigenous.
Michael Korenberg, the chair of the board at the University of British Columbia, was
forced to
resign for liking tweets by Dinesh D'Souza and Donald Trump, which you might think is fine
– but what about Latino electrical worker Emmanuel Cafferty, fired
after a white activist took a photo of him making an OK symbol (it was described online as a
"white power" sign)? How about Sue Schafer, the heretofore unknown graphic designer the
Washington Post
decided to out in a 3000-word article for attending a Halloween party two years ago in
blackface (a failed parody of a different blackface incident involving Megyn Kelly)? She
was fired, of course. How was this news? Why was ruining this person's life necessary?
People everywhere today are being encouraged to snitch out schoolmates, parents, and
colleagues for thoughtcrime. The New York Times wrote a
salutary piece about high schoolers scanning social media accounts of peers for evidence of
"anti-black racism" to make public, because what can go wrong with encouraging teenagers to
start submarining each other's careers before they've even finished growing?
"People who go to college end up becoming racist lawyers and doctors. I don't want people
like that to keep getting jobs," one 16 year-old said. "Someone rly started a Google doc of
racists and their info for us to ruin their lives I love twitter," wrote a different person,
adding cheery emojis.
A bizarre echo of North Korea's "
three generations of punishment " doctrine could be seen in the
boycotts of Holy Land grocery , a well-known hummus maker in Minneapolis. In recent weeks
it's been abandoned by clients and seen
its lease pulled because of racist tweets made by the CEO's 14 year-old daughter eight
years ago.
Parents calling out their kids is also in vogue. In Slate, "Making a Mountain Out of
a Molehill" wrote to advice columnist Michelle Herman in a letter headlined, " I
think I've screwed up the way my kids think about race ." The problem, the aggrieved parent
noted, was that his/her sons had gone to a diverse school, and their "closest friends are still
a mix of black, Hispanic, and white kids," which to them was natural. The parent worried when
one son was asked to fill out an application for a potential college roommate and expressed
annoyance at having to specify race, because "I don't care about race."
Clearly, a situation needing fixing! The parent asked if someone who didn't care about race
was "just as racist as someone who only has white friends" and asked if it was "too late" to do
anything. No fear, Herman wrote: it's never too late for kids like yours to educate themselves.
To help, she linked to a program of materials designed for just that purpose, a " Lesson
Plan for Being An Ally ," that included a month of readings of White Fragility.
Hopefully that kid with the Black and Hispanic friends can be cured!
This notion that color-blindness is itself racist, one of the main themes of White
Fragility , could have amazing consequences. In researching I Can't Breathe, I met
civil rights activists who recounted decades of struggle to remove race from the law. I heard
stories of lawyers who were physically threatened for years in places like rural Arkansas just
for trying to end explicit hiring and housing discrimination and other remnants of Jim Crow.
Last week, an Oregon County casually exempted "people of color
who have heightened concerns about racial profiling" from a Covid-19 related mask order. Who
thinks creating different laws for different racial categories is going to end well? When has
it ever?
At a time of catastrophe and national despair, when conservative nationalism is on the rise
and violent confrontation on the streets is becoming commonplace, it's extremely suspicious
that the books politicians, the press, university administrators, and corporate consultants
alike are asking us to read are urging us to put race even more at the center of our
identities, and fetishize the unbridgeable nature of our differences. Meanwhile books like
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and To Kill a Mockingbird, which are both
beautiful and actually anti-racist, have been banned, for
containing the "N-word ." ( White Fragility contains it too, by the way). It's
almost like someone thinks there's a benefit to keeping people divided.
If we allow the Black Lives Matter movement to become America's Bolshevik Revolution, we
will lose our liberty, and many of us will likely lose our lives, as well, for daring to
question them. This was never about racism. It has been about power anBlack Lives
Matter is a Modern Totalitarian Revolution
Classic totalitarian regimes share a number of common characteristics. The
rise of these regimes began with a cultural revolution, aimed at angering the citizens against
the current system. During that period domestic enemies are designated, and the people in the
radical movement aiming at overthrowing the old system rally together against those common
enemies, calling it a common struggle, as they adopt a new official ideology that stands
significantly apart from the old one. They seek to control every aspect of the lives of their
people, enlisting everyone they can to participate in the struggle. Even persons who may belong
to enemy classes or groups join up, hoping to receive mercy when the new regime gains control.
In Stalin's Russia and Mao's China the enemies were anyone who reminded them of the old system,
and anyone who could challenge them if left with enough power. The state enemies were the
capitalists, landlords, richer peasants and foreign agents of all kinds. Nazi Germany included
those outside the national community, which included socialists (even though Nazism was a form
of socialism) and communists, Jews, Christians, and any ethnic minorities that did not fit into
the German model of a loyal elite specimen.
The goal of each of the totalitarian regimes of the past were to eliminate the old system,
eradicate any history or remnant of the old regimes, and create a dominant single party that
stood as a rebellious alternative of the traditional State. Then, once in power, the perceived
enemies were murdered or imprisoned, as were many of their allies for the crime of knowing too
much. The younger generation was used as a controlling mechanism, taught to tattle on their
older counterparts for not being one hundred percent in favor of the new party in charge. The
youngsters were uniformed and organized into militias to turn their energies towards advancing
the party line, and improving upon the power of the new political elite.
In each case anything that even resembled the free market was eliminated, and the new
government controlled the economy. They took over the means of production either by taking
control of it and nationalizing it, or through heavy regulations (as we saw in Italy and
Germany). The immigration structure was altered, they orchestrated a break-down of morality and
what were considered moral norms in their culture, they worked on the destruction of the
nuclear family, they forcibly reallocated farmland, they formed a socialist economy that was
designed to redistribute the wealth away from the designated domestic enemies into the hands of
those revolutionaries who deserved some kind of reparations for what was allegedly lost at the
hands of the domestic enemies, and early on looting and rioting was encouraged and championed.
Interestingly, the list I just gave you was not just something the NAZIs and communists did,
but is also a list of demands currently being voiced by Black Lives Matter.
Public expression was also controlled by past dictatorial regimes so that no dissent could
emerge. If dissent was spotted, the party members acted as a mob, actively mobilized to quell
the dissent in the name of the "people's struggle" against a constant list of enemies. Again,
Black Lives Matter fits the bill on this one, too.
These regimes exaggerated real problems, and real aspects of human nature, and created an
on-going revolution against their enemies. It was a common struggle to liberate the people from
whomever the leadership designated as an enemy. To not pull the party line was to be socially
asleep, or an agent of the enemy, which then would place the person under great scrutiny, and
if they remained uncorrected, they would be ridiculed, shamed, and eventually jailed, or
murdered.
The fuel was passion, and anger, and a common demand for answers.
Sound familiar?
Black Lives Matter is an embodiment of everything that the 20th Century dictatorships
were
Eventually, Black Lives Matter will lose its appeal, and the players will grow weary of the
struggle. The regime will weaken, and when they try to invigorate their revolutionaries for a
new fight in order to strengthen the resolve of the regime and its followers, they will find
that all of their enemies are dead or in exile, and the problem can no longer be blamed on
others. However, it could take half a century, or more, before that happens, and in a Black
Lives Matter America the damage will already have been done. The death of liberty and the
annihilation of the free market will have left a long path of sorrow and misery following it.
By then, the enemy will only be themselves, and as all regimes in history, the struggle will
turn inward, and the murders will be against their own. Through the paranoia imaginary enemies
will be concocted, where nobody is safe from the suspicions of one's neighbors or children.
People begin to vanish, and the party begins to struggle to hold on to control.
Black Lives Matter, like all past dictatorial regimes, has successfully unleashed the
passions of many members of the public. The campaigns of terror are in full swing, in the name
of protesting, in the name of social justice, and in the name of standing against racism. They
claim that science and reason are in their corner, when, like Stalin and Mao of the Soviet
Union and Communist China, it is all a great big lie. They claim whites have unfair privilege
and must be forced to kneel to their true overlords, as Hitler did with the Jews when he
believed it would allow him to create a better Germany. In the end, as with all violent
totalitarian regimes, violence will bring them down just as violence brought them into
power.
Tucker on the incredible popularity of Black Lives Matter
Islamic totalitarianism solidifies in the Middle East, and works to spread across the
nations of Europe
As Islamic totalitarianism solidifies in the Middle East, and works to spread across the
nations of Europe, Black Lives Matter totalitarianism is working its way through its birthing
canal in the United States. Both bear all of the markers of totalitarianism. They work to
control the lives, speech, and actions of those below them. They terrorize and murder,
committing themselves to endless struggles against a long list of designated enemies. They pose
as more than an ideological challenge. They are poised to bring down Western Civilization,
which has prospered due to America's Liberty, and free market capitalistic system.
Should we fall, to where may one escape? There is no other place to go. Black Lives Matter
is a real threat, an enemy who desires to overthrow America and control this country. There is
no criticizing Black Lives Matter. The mobs threaten anyone who holds dissent. It is already
happening. People are losing their jobs for criticizing Black Lives Matter, and they are still
only a political movement. Black Lives Matter is enjoying complete immunity from criticism
while they are not in power. Imagine what will happen if they ever gain a hold on the reins of
our system.
It has gone beyond a demand for equality. Equality is no longer acceptable. If one were to
say "All Lives Matter," for example, that is now unacceptable, and racist. Only "Black Lives
Matter" we are told. White lives don't matter because of what your ancestors allegedly did a
couple hundred years ago. Christianity and the American System is based on the idea of equality
in the eyes of God, and equality in opportunity (or at least the attempt to create a system
that accomplishes such), but now if you say that out loud, you are called a racist, and your
very life could be at risk. Dissent is hate speech. You could be fired from your job, or in
some cases, fined and jailed for daring to speak out against the rising totalitarian regime
known as Black Lives Matter because such murmurings could be considered "hate speech".
The latest demand by Black Lives Matter is ridiculous, yet it is happening. It began with a
chant, "defund the police," and now has advanced to cries to abolish the police. The City of
Minneapolis is in the process of doing exactly that. When asked on CNN who, then, if the police
were gone, should we call in the middle of the night while our house is being burglarized,
a member of the Minneapolis city council said that the question "comes from a place of
privilege." In other words, if some feel like law enforcement is not on their side,
everyone should feel that way, otherwise, you have an unfair privilege, and you are racist.
Black Lives Matter is enjoying a rise to power largely because of the liberal media
Black Lives Matter is enjoying a rise to power largely because of the liberal media. Any
counter-arguments against their claims are going unheard. CNN, MSNBC, NPR, the alphabet
networks, and any of the other liberal outlets aren't going to report any criticism of Black
Lives Matter. And as Hitler's team explained, if you tell a lie often enough, it becomes the
truth. In this case, if you tell one side of the story, and the other side is never heard, it
becomes true.
Unchallenged claims must be true, therefore, Black Lives Matter must be on to something. The
polls say so.
Black Lives Matter is achieving their power in the same way past revolutionaries did.
Through force. They break things, they burn things, and they hurt anyone who gets in the way.
They believe they deserve whatever they want, and if you don't give it to them, they will take
it. Then, on the way out, they will set your business on fire. They occupy, they terrorize, and
nobody is willing to stop them, because if you do, you are a racist. They know this. They know
you are paralyzed by your fear of them, and fear of being considered racist. They have a
message. Step out of line and we will hurt you, your family, or your business. That is the
strategy of Black Lives Matter, and it is becoming the strategy of the Democrat Party. If you
are afraid to defy the mob, the mob rules.
The Framers of the U.S. Constitution created this system to protect us from the mob. That is
why they created a constitutional republic, not a democracy (as some people like to say).
Democracy is historically a transitional type of government. When the mobs of democracy begin
to take control, which usually accompanies a continuous vote for benefits from the treasury,
liberty breaks down and dictators begin to take control.
If we allow the Black Lives Matter movement to become America's Bolshevik Revolution, we
will lose our liberty, and many of us will likely lose our lives, as well, for daring to
question them. This was never about racism. It has been about power and control since the very
beginning. Black Lives Matter seeks to overthrow the U.S. Constitution, and replace our system
with a Marxist-based government that destroys liberty and the free market, and places their
radical leaders in control of the country. If we don't stop it, and recognize the revolutionary
nature of what is going on, America will disappear forever. And, if there is no America,
Liberty dies worldwide.
Douglas V. Gibbs of Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary,
has been featured on "Hannity" and "Fox and Friends" on Fox News Channel, and other television
shows and networks. Doug is a Radio Host on KMET 1490-AM on Saturdays with his Constitution
Radio program, as well as a longtime podcaster, conservative political activist, writ
The CEO of Wells Fargo
offered a groveling apology for his "unconscious bias" and promised more diversity at one of
the largest US banks, after a quote from an internal memo caused outrage; even some members of
Congress joined in.
"I apologize for making an insensitive comment reflecting my own unconscious bias,"
Charlie Scharf said in a
statement released on Wednesday. "There are many talented diverse individuals working at
Wells Fargo and throughout the financial services industry and I never meant to imply
otherwise."
The San Francisco-based Wells Fargo is now "requiring diverse candidate slates for key
roles with compensation of more than $100,000 and increasing business with diverse
suppliers," the statement said. Moreover, year-end bonuses for executives will be tied to
"progress in improving diverse representation and inclusion in their area of
responsibility."
Scharf's apology and Wells Fargo's newly reasserted commitment to diversity follows a storm
of criticism, including from Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-New York) after a remark
in an internal memo was quoted by Reuters.
"While it might sound like an excuse, the unfortunate reality is that there is a very
limited pool of black talent to recruit from," Scharf had written in a memo dated June 18,
which pledged more diversity at the bank, the largest in the US by the number of employees.
Initially, the CEO tried to say his comment had been "misinterpreted," adding that
the financial industry doesn't "reflect the diversity of our population" and that Wells
Fargo was committed to changing that. The explanation was not accepted by the online outrage
mob.
It is unclear whether such a course would fall afoul of the executive order issued by
President Donald Trump on Tuesday, which prohibits federal agencies and the military from
funding ideologies that "promote race or sex stereotyping or scapegoating," including
among contractors who wish to do business with the government.
In the
executive order , titled "Executive Order on Combating Race and Sex Stereotyping," Trump
wrote that many people are pushing an ideology that is a "different vision of America that is
grounded in hierarchies based on collective social and political identities rather than in the
inherent and equal dignity of every person as an individual."
"This ideology is rooted in the pernicious and false belief that America is an
irredeemably racist and sexist country; that some people, simply on account of their race or
sex, are oppressors ; and that racial and sexual identities are more important than our
common status as human beings and Americans," Trump wrote, later calling the ideology
"divisive."
The president provided a number of examples of such critical race theory trainings, which
included a seminar recently held by the Treasury Department that promoted the message that
"virtually all White people, regardless of how 'woke' they are, contribute to racism." The same
seminar was found to have told small group leaders to encourage employees to avoid the idea
that Americans should be "more color-blind" or "let people's skills and personalities be what
differentiates them."
In another example, the Sandia National Laboratories, a research lab and a federal entity,
was found to have stated in training materials for non-minority males that an emphasis on
"rationality over emotionality" was a characteristic of "white male[s]." The training materials
also asked the trainees to "acknowledge" their "privilege" to each other.
The Argonne National Laboratories, a research center under the U.S. Department of Energy,
was found to have stated in its training materials that racism "is interwoven into every fabric
of America." It also characterized statements like "color blindness" and "meritocracy" as
"action of bias."
The executive order also pointed to the Smithsonian Institution in another example, where
one of the museum's graphics asserted that concepts such as "objective, rational linear
thinking," "hard work" being "the key to success," the "nuclear family," and belief in a single
god are "aspects and assumptions of whiteness" and not values that would unite Americans. The
museum also stated that "[f]acing your whiteness is hard and can result in feelings of guilt,
sadness, confusion, defensiveness, or fear," according to the order.
Macho Latte , 6 hours ago
After 30+ years of brain washing, the students of our public schools and Ivy League
universities are now the leaders of corporate America and populate all branches of federal,
state and local government. They actually believe all the racist propaganda they have been
taught, which is one of the reasons they give money to outfits like BLM. It is their belief
system now. They are automatons living in a science fiction world where they are triggered to
act and react in a per-programmed manner. It has nothing to do with intelligence. They cannot
help themselves.
And to what end? Are those privileged white corporate giants and mega rich blacks anxious
to sacrifice their life, their job or their wealth for some nameless, faceless black person?
NO way Jose! It's YOUR job and YOUR life they intend to destroy as an unintended consequence
of cleansing the earth of white, heterosexual male racists and all non-believers.
Insane? Absolutely. And they will fight tooth and nail to maintain their belief system.
It's happening now and is going to get worse. Normal people are going to have to figure a way
to deal with them and it won't be pretty. There is no choice. Fight fire with fire.
Black Lies Matter
toady , 6 hours ago
This is the kind of thing that drives the demonrats nuts.
They continually INSIST that Trump is racist, but can never provide any proof, just
innuendo and sniveling.
Now Trump comes out and provides proof that THEY are racist AND sexist, and are actively
pushing this agenda using their official capacity.
onemorething , 6 hours ago
facts don't matter
High Vigilante , 5 hours ago
It's the old Mao style cultural revolution shoved through Americans throats. Here is the 2
minutes video, same middle class shaming, statue destroying, history rewriting:
"" President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Tuesday to
stop funding to federal government contractors who hold critical race theory training
sessions."
YES!! "Silence is complicity" as leftarded sheep often bleat, and silence in the face of
this ultra-racist bullsh!t has gone on far too long. Never should've been allowed to begin
with.
Son of Loki , 6 hours ago
Obama and his pet Wookie encouraged it.
Nunyadambizness , 4 hours ago
His pet Wookie Biden?
Oh, wait... you meant Michael. Never mind...
Gold Banit , 6 hours ago
This is the end for the lying racist corrupt DemoRat Scum party!
In 2016 Trump won big with only 8% of the black support and 29% of the Hispanic
support.
The DemoRat Party CNN and the Fake News are in a panic and are very desperate cause their
internal polling is showing that 60% of blacks will be voting for Trump and 70% of Hispanics
will be voting for Trump and Trump will win in a landslide 50 states on Nov. 2020...
And when and if the guns come out and the shootings starts the DemoRat cowards will put
their tails between their legs and run away and never to bee seen again...
bobert , 5 hours ago
Black Lies Matter (BLM) and I'm getting tired of this charade.
Good for President Trump. One brave guy!
Isn't it clear by now that POTUS just does what is right?
What has he done or said in three and a half years to deserve the animosity directed
toward him?
Trump haters need to listen to what he says and look at what he does and then form their
opinion of him rather than forming their opinion based on what somebody else says.
Geeeezzzzz..........
Nunyadambizness , 4 hours ago
Trump haters and never Trumpers CANNOT form their opinion outside of the media. They don't
have the critical thinking ability to do so, so they listen to the bullshiite prattled by the
media (of all channels), and form their opinions around it.
Look, Trump was not my guy in the primaries of 2016 and I didn't think he would amount to
much if elected. However, when he became the nominee against the most corrupt and evil
candidate ever for President from any party, my choice was clear. Since becoming President he
has accomplished much--even with Congress initially failing to support him, and then 1/2 of
Congress actively working against him. He has won me over, but not just me--millions of
others who doubted him, and I am hopeful he will continue to do the right things.
Xev Bellringer , 6 hours ago
Great! Now get rid of affirmative action and all the other racist / sexist programs.
TBT or not TBT , 6 hours ago
California has it on the ballot to allow racial discrimination, in the California
Constitution.
Awesome, not politically correct but truly correct!
Good start...
palmereldritch , 5 hours ago
They are anti-family, anti-human, anti-human rights operating under the guise of equity
when they instead seek the opposite, to sow division and inequity so that they can then loot
and conquer from the resulting carnage.
They are the Satanic Death Cult called Communism and are funded and spawned by
International Banksters.
CosmoJoe , 5 hours ago
Thats right. Trump stomping his foot right on the nutsack of these lunatics and grinding
his foot back and forth.
Walking Turtle , 6 hours ago
Well GOOD!
Don't stop, Sir! This **** is being pulled all up and down the line. Our city halls are
swarming now with thirty-something University degree-holders who take no little delight in
subjugating the vulnerable townsfolk they draw into their sphere with their destructive
regulations and Bolshevistic protocols of governance with that very crap and its derivative
power plays. Our sweet nation's corporate boards are infested; the Critical Attitude
Adjustment policies, when adhered-to, out-and-out violate all fiduciary responsibility
previously enforced. "Get Woke Go Broke" is NOT why we buy shares in these "persons",
Sir!
Not for the sake of the mere color of any mere bag of living human skin. Rather for the
sake of the content of the wearer's character . Once we return to that long-subverted and
original ML King standard, we shall recover from this war's ravages just dandy.
Oh but how did we get this way tbw, Sir...? Well, it was your foes and mine, the Crooked
Fibbies, who shot the Good Man who set the standard (enunciated above) down like a dog. Then
various [DS] cadres stepped into the Moral Vacuum and the abject creeping degradation has
been on our backs ever since.
Kindly DO carry on with this WONDERFUL prohibition, Sir! It is imvho long overdue . Oh,
and please see that the FDA/CDC/etc FINALLY speak the TRUTH about what the consumption of
fluoridated drinking water does to human intelligence levels - those poor saps out there
being usefully destructive idiots for Uncle George could do far better without it.
All the Rest of Us too, for that matter. And that is all. 0{:-)o[
RedNeckMother , 4 hours ago
Company I work at is 90% snowflakes, academic types. They've had a series of black
awareness programs ever since the corporate apologies started. Latest one is to watch some
black victim documentary and then zoom in for a discussion. What the ****. Whatever happened
to just working for a paycheck?
snatchpounder , 6 hours ago
CRT to AmeriKa is like Nelson Mandela to S.Africa . In the former it'll lead to violence against Caucasians
because of their skin color. In the latter it lead to blacks killing Caucasians and stealing
their farms. Soros and like minded psychopaths are funding all of this and they're the ones
who need to be dealt with. You take away the funding and these vermin in the streets will
fade away.
WorkingClassMan , 6 hours ago
Barr-none is right on it!
alia2526 , 6 hours ago
Racist and sectarian comment.
snatchpounder , 6 hours ago
CRT is racist you idiot.
NewDarwin , 6 hours ago
Make America Fair Again!
ebworthen , 6 hours ago
Black Lives Matter but White Privilege?
Isn't valuing people by race one way or another discrimination and bias?
What do you do with a mulatto, or half-Asian half-Latino?
Oh wait...I know...value an individual by the content of their character?
Let me guess..."Dat's rayciss!".
Petrodollar System Beneficiary , 4 hours ago
Sad that this country requires an executive order to combat this kind of problem. Cultural
mistakes usually garner quick feedback, what is amazing is how so many deer in headlights
allow these programs to even begin. Logic and reason is unbiased. Being fearful of truth is
unreasonable and illogical. This country is weak minded for allowing to occur in the first
place
Angular Momentum , 4 hours ago
Trouble is these pod people have infiltrated business management. Now it isn't enough to
do good work, you have to agree with the ideology. Another problem is all it takes to get
sued is one marginalized employee to whine about a hostile work environment. Businesses
protect themselves from liability by having a record of combatting discrimination through
worker training. The more lawyers in on this scam, the more lawyers are needed.
In the early 1980s, students of color at Harvard Law School organized protests in various
forms to problematize the lack of racial diversity in the curriculum, as well as among students
and faculty. These students supported Professor Derrick Bell, who left Harvard Law in 1980 to
become the dean at University of Oregon School of Law. During his time at Harvard, Bell had
developed new courses which studied American law through a racial lens that students of color
wanted faculty of color to teach in his absence. However, the university, ignoring student
requests, hired two white civil rights attorneys instead. In response, numerous students,
including Kimberlé Crenshaw and Mari Matsuda, boycotted and organized to develop an
"Alternative Course" using Bell's Race, Racism, and American Law (1973, 1st edition) as a core
text and included guest speakers Richard Delgado and Neil Gotanda.[11][12]
The theory itself is a kind of Lysenkoism in this particular area. Read voodoo science. This pseudoscience includes
several themes (Wikipedia)
Critique of liberalism: CRT scholars favor a more aggressive approach to social
transformation, as opposed to liberalism's more cautious approach; a race-conscious approach
to transformation rejecting liberal embrace of affirmative action, color blindness, role
modeling, or the merit principle; and an approach that relies more on political organizing,
in contrast to liberalism's reliance on rights-based remedies.
Storytelling, counter-storytelling, and "naming one's own reality": The use of narrative to illuminate and explore
experiences of racial oppression. B
Revisionist interpretations of American civil rights law and progress: Criticism
of civil-rights scholarship and anti-discrimination law, such as Brown v. Board of Education.
Derrick Bell, one of CRT's founders, argued that civil rights advances for blacks coincided
with the self-interest of white elitists. Likewise, Mary L. Dudziak performed extensive
archival research in the U.S. Department of State and Department of Justice, including the
correspondence by U.S. ambassadors abroad, and found that U.S. civil rights legislation was
not passed because people of color were discriminated against. Rather, it was enacted in
order to improve the image of the United States in the eyes of third-world countries that the
US needed as allies during the Cold War.
Applying insights from social science writing on race and racism to legal problems.
Intersectional theory: The examination of race, sex, class, national origin, and
sexual orientation, and how their combination plays out in various settings, e.g., how the
needs of a Latina female are different from those of a black male and whose needs are the
ones promoted.
Essentialism: Reducing the experience of a category (gender or race) to the
experience of one sub-group (white women or African-Americans). In essence, all oppressed
people share the commonality of oppression. However, such oppression varies by gender, class,
race, etc., and therefore, the aims and strategies will differ for each of these groups.
Non-white cultural nationalism and separatism (incl. Black nationalism): The
exploration of more radical views that argue for separation and reparations as a form of
foreign aid.
Legal institutions, critical pedagogy , and minority
lawyers in the bar.
Structural determinism : Exploration of how "the
structure of legal thought or culture influences its content," whereby a particular mode of
thought or widely shared practice determines significant social outcomes, usually occurring
without conscious knowledge. As such, theorists posit that our system cannot redress certain
kinds of wrongs.
White
privilege : Belief in the notion of a myriad of social advantages, benefits, and
courtesies that come with being a member of the dominant race (i.e. white people). A clerk
not following you around in a store or not having people cross the street at night to avoid
you, are two examples of white privilege.
Microaggression : Belief in the
notion that sudden, stunning, or dispiriting transactions have the power to mar the everyday
of oppressed individuals. These include small acts of racism consciously or unconsciously
perpetrated, whereby an analogy could be that of water dripping on a rock wearing away at it
slowly. Microaggressions are based on the assumptions about racial matters that are absorbed
from cultural
heritage .
Empathetic fallacy : Believing that one can change a narrative by offering an
alternative narrative in hopes that the listener's empathy will quickly and reliably take
over. Empathy is not enough to change racism as most people are not exposed to many people
different from themselves and people mostly seek out information about their own culture and
group.
Critique
Any rational legal scholar should reject CRT as voood science. But somehow it crioped in many federal againces.
President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Tuesday to stop funding to federal government contractors who hold critical
race theory training sessions.
“The President signed an Executive Order to end training sessions based on race and sex stereotyping and scapegoating in
the Federal workforce, the Uniformed Services, and among Federal contractors,” the White House said in an announcement.
“This order will prohibit Federal agencies and Federal contractors from conducting training that promotes race stereotyping,
for example, by portraying certain races as oppressors by virtue of their birth.”
The president provided a number of examples of such critical race theory trainings, which included a seminar recently held by
the Treasury Department that promoted the message that “virtually all White people, regardless of how ‘woke’ they are,
contribute to racism.” The same seminar was found to have told small group leaders to encourage employees to avoid the idea that
Americans should be “more color-blind” or “let people’s skills and personalities be what differentiates them.”
In another example, the Sandia National Laboratories, a research lab and a federal entity, was found to have stated in
training materials for non-minority males that an emphasis on “rationality over emotionality” was a characteristic of “white
male[s].” The training materials also asked the trainees to “acknowledge” their “privilege” to each other.
The Argonne National Laboratories, a research center under the U.S. Department of Energy, was found to have stated in its
training materials that racism “is interwoven into every fabric of America.” It also characterized statements like “color
blindness” and “meritocracy” as “action of bias.”
The executive order also pointed to the Smithsonian Institution in another example, where one of the museum’s graphics
asserted that concepts such as “objective, rational linear thinking,” “hard work” being “the key to success,” the “nuclear
family,” and belief in a single god are “aspects and assumptions of whiteness” and not values that would unite Americans. The
museum also stated that “[f]acing your whiteness is hard and can result in feelings of guilt, sadness, confusion, defensiveness,
or fear,” according to the order.
Many rational legal scholars have criticized CRT as pseudoscience and voodoo: CRT scholars'
reliance on narrative and storytelling, or CRT's critique of objectivity.
Judge Richard
Posner of the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has "labeled critical race theorists and
postmodernists the 'lunatic core' of 'radical legal egalitarianism.'" He wrote:
What is most arresting about critical race theory is that it turns its back on the Western
tradition of rational inquiry, forswearing analysis for narrative. Rather than marshal
logical arguments and empirical data, critical race theorists tell stories – fictional,
science-fictional, quasi-fictional, autobiographical, anecdotal – designed to expose
the pervasive and debilitating racism of America today. By repudiating reasoned
argumentation, the storytellers reinforce stereotypes about the intellectual capacities of
nonwhites.
Judge Alex Kozinski of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals wrote that critical race theorists
have constructed a philosophy which makes a valid exchange of ideas between the various
disciplines unattainable:
The radical multiculturalists' views raise insuperable barriers to mutual understanding.
Consider the "Space Traders" story. How does one have a meaningful dialogue with Derrick
Bell? Because his thesis is utterly untestable, one quickly reaches a dead end after either
accepting or rejecting his assertion that white Americans would cheerfully sell all blacks to
the aliens. The story is also a poke in the eye of American Jews, particularly those who
risked life and limb by actively participating in the civil rights protests of the 1960s.
Bell clearly implies that this was done out of tawdry self-interest. Perhaps most galling is
Bell's insensitivity in making the symbol of Jewish hypocrisy the little girl who perished in
the Holocaust – as close to a saint as Jews have. A Jewish professor who invoked the
name of Rosa Parks so derisively would be bitterly condemned – and rightly so.
Daniel Farber and Suzanna Sherry have argued that critical race theory, along with critical
feminism and critical legal studies, has anti-Semitic and anti-Asian implications, has worked
to undermine notions of democratic community, and has impeded dialogue.
Jeffrey J. Pyle wrote in the Boston College Law Review:[40]
Critical race theorists attack the very foundations of the [classical] liberal legal
order, including equality theory, legal reasoning, Enlightenment rationalism and neutral
principles of constitutional law. These liberal values, they allege, have no enduring basis
in principle, but are mere social constructs calculated to legitimate white supremacy. The
rule of law, according to critical race theorists, is a false promise of principled
government, and they have lost patience with false promises.
Peter Wood, president of the National Association of Scholars, considers CRT a "grievance
ideology" and an "absurdity". He sees the central tenet of "white racism in the American legal
system" to be shown false because of items such as the 14th Amendment, the Voting Rights Acts,
and Brown v. Board of Education.[41] Critics including George Will saw resonances between
critical race theory's use of storytelling and insistence that race poses challenges to
objective judgments in the US and the acquittal of O. J. Simpson.[42][43]
In September 2020, the White House Office of Management and Budget took steps to cancel
funding for training in critical race theory among federal agencies on the basis that it
constituted "divisive, un-American propaganda".[
Controversies Critical race theory has stirred controversy since the 1980s over such issues
as its:
deviation from the ideal of color blindness; promotion of the use of narrative in legal
studies;
advocacy of "legal instrumentalism" as opposed to ideal-driven uses of the law;
analysis of the U.S. Constitution and existing law as constructed according to and
perpetuating racial power;
and encouragement of legal scholars to be partial on the side of promoting racial
equity.[43]
In 2010, the Mexican American Studies Department Programs in Tucson, Arizona were
effectively banned due to their connection to CRT, which was seen to be in violation of a
recently-passed state law that "prohibits schools from offering courses that 'advocate ethnic
solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals'."[46] The ban included the
confiscation of books, in some cases in front of students, by the Tucson Unified School
District.
Matt de la Peña's young-adult novel Mexican WhiteBoy was banned for containing CRT,
However, this ban was later deemed unconstitutional on the grounds that the state showed
discriminatory intent. "Both enactment and enforcement were motivated by racial animus,"
federal Judge A. Wallace Tashima said in the ruling.
Derrick Bell as the founder of
critical rase thory and black racism
Derrick Albert Bell Jr. (November 6, 1930 – October 5, 2011) became the first tenured
African-American professor of law at Harvard Law School, and he is often credited as one of the
originators of critical race theory along with Richard Delgado, Charles Lawrence, Mari Matsuda,
and Patricia Williams. He promoted quota systems for racial groups in faculty which is a racist
stance in itself.
He was a visiting professor at New York University School of Law[3] from 1991 until his
death. For five years he was also a dean of the University of Oregon School of Law.
He was hired by Harvard Law School In the 1970s, with the help of protests from black
Harvard Law School students for a minority faculty member. At Harvard, Bell established a new
course in civil rights law, published a book, Race, Racism and American Law, and produced
several law review articles.
In 1980, he started a five-year tenure as dean of the University of Oregon School of Law,
interrupted by his resignation after the university refused to hire an Asian-American woman he
had chosen to join the faculty.
Returning to Harvard in 1986, after a year-long stint at Stanford University, Bell staged a
five-day sit-in in his office to protest the school's failure to grant tenure to two professors
on staff, both of whose work promoted critical race theory. The sit-in was widely supported by
students, but divided the faculty, as Harvard administrators claimed the professors were denied
tenure for substandard scholarship and teaching.[8]
In 1990, Harvard Law School had 60 tenured professors. Three of these were black men, and
five of them were women, but there were no African-American women among them -- a dearth Bell
decided to protest with an unpaid leave of absence.[8][11] Students supported the move which
critics found "counterproductive," while Harvard administrators cited a lack of qualified
candidates, defending that they had taken great strides in the previous decade to bring women
and black people onto the faculty.[8] The story of his protest is detailed in his book
Confronting Authority.
Bell's protest at Harvard stirred angry criticism by opposing Harvard Law faculty who
called him "a media manipulator who unfairly attacked the school," noting that other people had
accused him of "depriv[ing] students of an education while he makes money on the lecture
circuit."[12]
Bell took his leave of absence and accepted a visiting professorship at NYU Law, starting in
1991. After two years, Harvard had still not hired any minority women, and Bell requested an
extension of his leave, which the school refused, thereby ending his tenure.
Later in 1998, Harvard Law hired civil rights attorney and U.S. assistant attorney general
nominee Lani Guinier, who became the law school's first black female tenured
professor.[1][13]
In March 2012, five months after his death, Bell became the target of conservative media,
including Breitbart and Sean Hannity, in an exposé of President Barack Obama. The
controversy focused on a 1990 video of Obama praising Bell at a protest by Harvard Law School
students over the perceived lack of diversity in the school's faculty. Bell's widow stated that
Bell and Obama had "very little contact" after Obama's law school graduation. She said that as
far as she remembered, "He never had contact with the president as president."[14] An
examination of Senior Lecturer Obama's syllabus for his course on race and law at the
University of Chicago revealed significant differences between Obama's perspective and that of
Derrick Bell, even as Obama drew on major writings of critical race theory.[15]
NYU School of Law Bell's visiting professorship at New York University began in 1991. After
his two-year leave of absence, his position at Harvard ended and he remained at NYU where he
continued to write and lecture on issues of race and civil rights.
Bell and other legal scholars began using the phrase "critical race theory" (CRT) in the
1970s as a takeoff on "critical legal theory", a branch of legal scholarship that challenges
the validity of concepts such as rationality, objective truth, and judicial neutrality.
Critical legal theory was itself a takeoff on critical theory, a philosophical framework with
roots in Marxist thought.
Bell continued writing about critical race theory after accepting a teaching position at
Harvard University. He worked alongside lawyers, activists, and legal scholars across the
country. Much of his legal scholarship was influenced by his experience both as a black man and
as a civil rights attorney. Writing in a narrative style, Bell contributed to the intellectual
discussions on race. According to Bell, his purpose in writing was to examine the racial issues
within the context of their economic and social and political dimensions from a legal
standpoint. Bell's critical race theory was eventually branched into more theories describing
the hardships of other races as well, such as AsianCrit (Asian), FemCrit (Women), LatCrit
(Latino), TribalCrit (American Indian), and WhiteCrit (White).[21] His theories were based on
the following propositions:
First, racism is ordinary, not aberrational.[22] Second, white-over-color ascendancy serves
important purposes, both psychic and material, for the dominant group.[22] Third, "social
construction" thesis holds that race and races are products of social thought and
relations.[22] Fourth, how a dominant society racializes different minority groups at different
times, in response to shifting needs such as the labor market.[22] Fifth, intersectionality and
anti-essentialism is the idea that each race has its own origins and ever-evolving history.[22]
Sixth, voice-of-color thesis holds that because of different histories and experiences to white
counterparts', matters that the whites are unlikely to know can be conveyed.[22] CRT has also
led to the study of microaggressions, Paradigmatic kinship, the historical origins and shifting
paradigmatic vision of CRT, and how in depth legal studies show law serves the interests of the
powerful groups in society. Microaggressions are subtle insults (verbal, nonverbal, and/or
visual) directed toward people of color, often automatically or unconsciously.[23]
For instance, in The Constitutional Contradiction, Bell argued that the framers of the
Constitution chose the rewards of property over justice. With regard to the interest
convergence, he maintains that "whites will promote racial advances for blacks only when they
also promote white self-interest." Finally, in The Price of Racial Remedies, Bell argues that
whites will not support civil rights policies that may threaten white social status. Similar
themes can be found in another well-known piece entitled, "Who's Afraid of Critical Race
Theory?" from 1995.[24]
His 2002 book, Ethical Ambition, encourages a life of ethical behavior, including "a good
job well done, giving credit to others, standing up for what you believe in, voluntarily
returning lost valuables, choosing what feels right over what might feel good right
now".[25]
Over the past few months, most Americans have begun to hear the terms "Critical Theory" or "Critical Race Theory".
Critical Race Theory (CRT) is the better moniker, as the theory is about "race, racism and power", and so I will
use CRT throughout this article. Though the roots of CRT go back to at least the 1970s, the theory has come from
beyond the halls of academia to becoming a profound influence on modern society.
The problem comes with the
general misunderstanding of CRT as being solely about helping fight racism. CRT goes well beyond fighting racism.
It not only demands a reordering of American society, but acts as a replacement for the Christian worldview in
America. Let me explain.
First, I have previously written about the ideas of Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci, and Gramsci relates directly
to CRT. Gramsci wrote about the need to overturn the alleged "cultural hegemony" of a society with an alternative
narrative as a necessary precursor to Communist Revolution. Gramsci's ideas generated what has become known as
"Cultural Marxism", which infiltrated American academia starting as early as the 1940s. CRT was developed at the
time many American socialist and/or Marxist academics were adapting Gramscian theory to American society. It was
a way to help flip the alleged cultural hegemony through the rhetoric of racism, and yet going well beyond
individual racism. It was developed with a Marxist, therefore Materialist and atheist worldview, and focuses on
power relationships over actual racism.
Richard Delgado's & Jean Stefancic's book,
Critical
Race Theory: An Introduction
provides the following insights: "The critical race theory (CRT) movement is
a collection of activists and scholars interested in studying
and transforming
the
relationship among race, racism, and power It not only tries to understand our social situation,
but
to change it
; it sets out not only to ascertain how society organizes itself along racial lines and
hierarchies, but to transform it for the better (pp. 2-3; emphasis added)." Delgado and Stefancic write that CRT
holds "racism is engrained in the fabric and system of the American society ..the individual racist need not
exist (in order for) institutional racism [to be] pervasive in the dominant culture." In other words, even if
whites, as an alleged dominant group, are not individually racist, racism still exists and will exists due to
whites being a dominant culture. The only seeming way to end racism is ending the alleged cultural hegemony,
though CRT seems to hold whites as irredeemably racist without means of redemption.
UCLAs School of Public Affairs provides perhaps the iconic statement of CRT. The statement is rooted in Marxist
understanding of materialism, power relationship, and atheist worldview. According to the school of public
affairs CRT is justified "based on white privilege and white supremacy, which perpetuates the marginalization of
people of color". Non-Whites are alleged to be systematically oppressed by cultural hegemonic structures.
Regardless of whether or not whites are racist, and whether the system allows legal equal opportunity, white
privilege and white supremacy is assumed to exist. CRT doesn't seek to fix individual acts of racism, but is
committed to transforming the hegemony. Ironically, whites can "never" question the basis of CRT: If you question
it, you are proving your racism. Additionally, CRT holds that those in the alleged dominant group cannot know
about racism, but those in the non-dominant group always understand racism. If one from the dominant group denies
something had a racist intent, the non-dominant group is the final judge and only one to understand what is
actually racism.
As nationally recognized theologian, pastor, and Christian author John F. MacArthur has noted about the threat of
CRT to Christianity: "CRT (along with every other Marxist ideology) cannot be reconciled with what the Bible
teaches about sin and salvation. First, to view all relationships in terms of power dynamics requires that people
be seen in terms of the powerful (privileged, oppressors) and the powerless (marginalized, oppressed). Apart from
striking out against God-ordained hierarchies and authority structures (by evaluating them as oppressive power
structures), this way of viewing the world fails to evaluate people in their primary relationship, which is as
creatures made in the image of their Creator. He who defines the problem gets to define the solution. If the main
problem for "people of color" is that they are inevitably oppressed by structures that are inherently oppressive,
then the only solution is to tear down those structures in the pursuit of justice. This way of thinking at the
very least clouds the fact revealed in the Bible that every person's fundamental problem is that they have sinned
against the holy God who created them. This is true for people in any and every category -- whether oppressed or
oppressor, victim or victimizer, marginalized or privileged. The fundamental need, therefore, of every person is
to be reconciled to God. This is exactly what has been provided through the life, death, and resurrection of
Jesus. In other words, mankind's greatest need is met in the gospel."
The Christian worldview has been the American worldview from the founding. Alexis de Tocqueville wrote of America
a half century after it's founding: "There is no country on Earth in which the Christian religion holds great sway
over the souls of men than in America". Part of that worldview is the acceptance of the equal sin condition of
every man, regardless of race, and the equal need for forgiveness and redemption through Jesus Christ. It is not a
worldview of group power struggles and materialism, as with atheistic communism. As the Bible asserts about the
focus on the importance of individual redemption and unity in Christ: Galatians 3:27-28, "For as many of you as
were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free,
there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." CRT is diametrically opposed to the Christian
worldview. Marx held that "religion is the opiate of the people" and that his principal aim in life was "to
dethrone God and destroy capitalism.
CRT has all the characteristics of a religion and acts as a competitor religion to Christianity in America. Even
the special and almost mystical knowledge of racism by non-dominant groups that dominant groups cannot know.
Unlike Christianity, CRT holds the alleged cultural hegemony (founded on the Christian worldview) is the root of
all problems and must be overturned. The Christian focus on individual recognition of sin, regardless of place in
any alleged power structure, and the need for redemption through Christ is anathema to CRT. With this, CRT follows
the Gramscian alternative narrative holds that American history that of an evil oppression of minority groups by a
cultural hegemony that must be undermined and flipped. Next step is a Communist Revolution in following Gramsci to
the end.
America is at a crossroad. Our future is in question. We can continue with the America envisioned by our founders
and enjoy the greatest nation on Earth, or we can follow ideas like CRT to see the end of the American
experiment. The choice is ours.
Bill Connor, an Army Infantry colonel, author and Orangeburg attorney, has deployed multiple times to the
Middle East. Connor was the senior U.S. military adviser to Afghan forces in Helmand Province, where he
received the Bronze Star. A Citadel graduate with a JD from USC, he is also a Distinguished Graduate of the
U.S. Army War College, earning his master of strategic studies. He is the author of the book
Articles
from War
.
President Donald Trump
signed an executive order on Tuesday to stop funding to federal government contractors who hold
critical race
theory training sessions.
"The President signed an Executive Order to end training sessions based on race and sex
stereotyping and scapegoating in the Federal workforce, the Uniformed Services, and among
Federal contractors," the White House said in an
announcement .
"This order will prohibit Federal agencies and Federal contractors from conducting
training that promotes race stereotyping, for example, by portraying certain races as
oppressors by virtue of their birth."
In the
executive order , titled "Executive Order on Combating Race and Sex Stereotyping," Trump
wrote that many people are pushing an ideology that is a "different vision of America that is
grounded in hierarchies based on collective social and political identities rather than in the
inherent and equal dignity of every person as an individual."
"This ideology is rooted in the pernicious and false belief that America is an
irredeemably racist and sexist country; that some people, simply on account of their race or
sex, are oppressors ; and that racial and sexual identities are more important than our
common status as human beings and Americans," Trump wrote, later calling the ideology
"divisive."
The president provided a number of examples of such critical race theory trainings, which
included a seminar recently held by the Treasury Department that promoted the message that
"virtually all White people, regardless of how 'woke' they are, contribute to racism." The same
seminar was found to have told small group leaders to encourage employees to avoid the idea
that Americans should be "more color-blind" or "let people's skills and personalities be what
differentiates them."
In another example, the Sandia National Laboratories, a research lab and a federal entity,
was found to have stated in training materials for non-minority males that an emphasis on
"rationality over emotionality" was a characteristic of "white male[s]." The training materials
also asked the trainees to "acknowledge" their "privilege" to each other.
The Argonne National Laboratories, a research center under the U.S. Department of Energy,
was found to have stated in its training materials that racism "is interwoven into every fabric
of America." It also characterized statements like "color blindness" and "meritocracy" as
"action of bias."
The executive order also pointed to the Smithsonian Institution in another example, where
one of the museum's graphics asserted that concepts such as "objective, rational linear
thinking," "hard work" being "the key to success," the "nuclear family," and belief in a single
god are "aspects and assumptions of whiteness" and not values that would unite Americans. The
museum also stated that "[f]acing your whiteness is hard and can result in feelings of guilt,
sadness, confusion, defensiveness, or fear," according to the order.
"All of this is contrary to the fundamental premises underpinning our Republic: that all
individuals are created equal and should be allowed an equal opportunity under the law to
pursue happiness and prosper based on individual merit," Trump wrote in the order.
Trump said in the order that such trainings "[perpetuate] racial stereotypes and division
and can use subtle coercive pressure to ensure conformity of viewpoint."
"Such ideas may be fashionable in the academy, but they have no place in programs and
activities supported by Federal taxpayer dollars," the president wrote. "Research also
suggests that blame-focused diversity training reinforces biases and decreases opportunities
for minorities."
Trump's latest action comes after the White House
announced an order earlier this month to stop taxpayer-funded critical race theory training
sessions to government workers in various U.S. executive branch agencies.
In a statement on Twitter, the president announced late Tuesday: "A few weeks ago, I BANNED
efforts to indoctrinate government employees with divisive and harmful sex and race-based
ideologies.
"Today, I've expanded that ban to people and companies that do business with our Country,
the United States Military, Government Contractors, and Grantees. Americans should be taught
to take PRIDE in our Great Country, and if you don't, there's nothing in it for you!"
Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought said on Twitter: "This is
another important step that builds off his directive to agencies to stop trainings that push a
radical anti-American agenda."
"In the face of lies meant to divide us, demoralize us, and diminish us, we will show that
the story of America unites us, inspires us, includes us all, and makes everyone free," Trump
said in a
statement .
"" President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Tuesday to
stop funding to federal government contractors who hold critical race theory training
sessions."
YES!! "Silence is complicity" as leftarded sheep often bleat, and silence in the face of
this ultra-racist bullsh!t has gone on far too long. Never should've been allowed to begin
with.
Antifa and BLM are just shows with stunts designed to distract people from the level they are
fleeced by MIC and financial oligarchy. As well as restore the legitimacy of Clinton wing of
neoliberal oligarchy which was badly shaken during 2016 election, when their candidate was send
packing.
Nicholas Kristof is member of "Clinton gang of neoliberals" and a part of this effort to
distract people. The number of people who pay attention to Nicholas Kristof bloviations is
astounding. Few understand that we do not know the facts and the real issue if the tight grip of
MIC and financial oligarchy on the society. What is interesting is that s in California, there
are 8.5 million residents born outside the country and about 150,000 homeless. "The melting pot
burned over. It is now a ... salad.
For example, if money spend on wars were used to manage thoseforests with difficult terrain
and perioc drauts, would the outcome be different?
Can those fires and destruction be viewed as God punishment for war the USA unleashed? As
Thomas Jefferson said "I tremble for my country when I consider that God is just."
BTW, the number of commenters with Russian paranoia symptom is frightening. Of course NYT
attracts specific audience, but still. In this sense NYT columnists including Nickolas Kristof
are just warmongering bottom feeders of MIC crumps. It is pathetic how he tries to hide the lack
of money for forest management and mismanagement if this issue by Oregon Dem politician under the
broad banner of "climate change" Existence of climate change does not mean that fire should burn
uncontrollably.
MIC steals half trillion dollars and then financial oligarchy steals probably another half,
if not more. What is left is not enough for proper maintenance of land, water and environment in
general. Stupid situation, but this is neoliberalism my friend, where "greed is good". And people
chose this mousetrap themselves in 1970th by electing first Carter and then Reagan and then
Clinton , allowing financial oligarchy to dismantle New Deal Capitalism. Clinton presidency was
especially destructive, In a way he should be views as the top villain in this story, a real
criminal boss.
Below I selected only more or less sane comment (which constitute probably less 1% of the
total)
Notable quotes:
"... How about a judicious Forrest management? ..."
"... So much for our useless 750 Billion dollar military budget. ..."
"... Amazing how ,close minded people become when, for them, everything is political. ..."
Wouldn't the conspiracy theories and concerns about antifa be lessened if progresses were as
vitriolic about violence committed in the name of equity, diversity and inclusion as they are
about violence committed in support of MAGA? Would the right have anything to crow about if
the NYT was as critical of physical altercations caused by social justice warriors as they
are of white supremacists? Wouldn't we all have more trust in MSM if they investigated the
facts before accusing Nick Sandman of racism or claiming a garbage pull was a noose? One
sided reporting and editorials like these fan the flames rather than squelch them.
It's amazing. You can write a column in the NY Times full of conspiracy theories -- all fully
believed by the left -- and accuse the right of being prone to believing conspiracy theories.
From Russia - collusion to rubes in the red states --a majority of dems share a set of
beliefs that are as delusional as anything a small group on the right might believe. But,
that's Kristof and the Ny Times for you.
People seemed to have lost a sense of what is plausible. While few of us know the news first
hand, we have to both trust and evaluate what is reported. Nothing is absolute. Jurors are
asked to decide cases beyond a reasonable doubt. That is how I feel taking in the news. But
within that sliver of doubt, within the fact that nothing is absolute is where conspiracy
theories begin to fester. It is where some have found solace to confirm what they want to
choose to believe despite how much there might be to question that. Events like this create
an opportunism to demonize those you hate and in doing so the essence of what we should be
debating is lost. How to prevent these fires in the first place? We will probably continue to
debate it despite the evidence on climate change, whether there is a deep state trying to
discredit Trump, whether the seriousness of covid is a hoax. Yes there is no absolute
certainty but there is taking an educated guess as opposed to an emotional response. I'll go
with the educated guess. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, I
will say it is a duck and accept that sliver of possibility I might be wrong.
Why do people attach themselves to "conspiracy theories?" It's actually quite simple. Take
QAnon for example: it is functionally just another religion competing for adherents. As with
any religion, it offers its believers an explanation of what they deem is wrong while
offering a path to right those wrongs. Certainty and simplicity: those are the essential
elements of cults/religion/bumpersticker politics. And the internet guarantees that whatever
you believe will be "validated." "Conspiracy theories" are, for the most part, not theories,
merely assertions. A theory is subject to proof and disproof by evidence. In a world where
truth has no inherent monetary value, don't expect it. Why the rapid spread? To paraphrase
Bill Clinton, "It's the internet, Stupid!" Follow the money: Agenda + Clickbaitability =
Profit That is the business model of the internet, a medium where "news" is whatever will
produce the most clicks. As in profit. Unless and until the youngest generation developes a
means of communication that does not depend on megacorporations, nothing will change. In the
Sixties, a generation which disbelieved and had no honest access to the traditional media,
created its own, the "alternative press." Hopefully, today's teenagers will develope their
own way to communicate that is reliable. It is 100% guaranteed that if their "opposition"
becomes an actual threat to the profits of Facebook, Google, Apple, Twitter, and the rest of
their ilk, they will be cut off.
The antifa movement has grown since the 2016 United States presidential election. As of
August 2017, approximately 200 groups existed, of varying sizes and levels of activity.[73]
It is particularly present in the Pacific Northwest.[74] Wikipedia
In an age when the US Justice Department is anything but just, more closely resembling
something akin to "just us," I call to mind Thomas Jefferson, in a somewhat different
context: "I tremble for my country when I consider that God is just."
We spend hundred of billions of dollars every year on the types of weapons that won WWII,
while the real threat to our Republic and yes, our civilization, is ,,, It's funny and
tragic, simultaneously.
Antifa has done a lot of things. They have chosen to step into the arena. Whether they did it
or not, this is accusation is a result of wading into the fight. If Antifa doesnt like to be
accused of things and cant handle it, then Antifa should step off. Or does Antifa only want
praise? Because that isnt going to happen. Many people dont like Antifa nor trust Antifa. And
rightfully so. Ask any career criminal how many times they've been wrongfully accused of
something. If an individual or group doesnt want to be accused of things, then dont get
involved from the start.
Except that about a dozen people have been arrested and charged with starting the forest
fires. Shouting "without evidence!" doesn't make it so. Facts matter.
@JQGALT There are always people who are setting fires whether accidentally or intentionally.
Do you have any proof that these arsonists were politically motivated I any way ?
Yet the Almeda fire in Oregon that destroyed more than 2,300 homes was, according to NYT
reporting, caused by human activity and is subject of a "criminal investigation." Perhaps it
would be wise to reserve total judgment until that investigation is completed.
Who needs rumors? The organization showed what it is made of when it created its free zone in
downtown Seattle and had the highest crime and murder rate per capita in its short life in
the country.
Rational people know that Antifa is not staring forest fires. However, burning and looting
and using fireworks as weapons in the recent riots make even the dumbest claims of Trump
supporters more believable.
Leftwing activists have literally been arrested for starting some of these fires. There is
video of arsonists being caught, yet the media ignores this, and actively denies it. Gee, why
could that be?
@LV Do you have any proof that these people were were left wing activist or just the kind of
people who are always starting fires ad they have in the past ?
The [neoliberal] left spends 24/7 preaching to their choir about Trump fascists dictatorship,
an illegal government installed by a foreign power, destroying the constitution while
preparing to seize power and ignore coming election results. There is a zero factual evidence
for it, such as a refusal to follow judicial injunctions for example, but their well educated
audiences are buying it whole day long. So what is so baffling that a rural audience after
watching night after night Portland burning by arson and accompanied by "peaceful protest"
graphics on TV would buy into arson speculations and rumors and ignore your disclaimers?
Facebook needs to be regulated since it has effectively organ-harvested the critical thinking
skills of a significant portion of the population. It'd be better if thinking people simply
deleted Facebook and let Facebook shrink and become the right-wing agit-prop tool that it
truly is. Mark Zuckerberg is happy to to destabilize society with his little toy invention.
You'd think with all that money, he could afford a conscience. What a wrecking ball Facebook
is.
"All this rumormongering leaves me feeling that the social fabric is unraveling, as if the
shared understanding of reality that is the basis for any society is eroding." Ya think?
@California Scientist Amen. We are more like an international terminal at this point. A bunch
of people gathered by happenstance, heading in different directions, and often with very
little in common.
@California Scientist: It is even worse than when Adlai Stevenson noted that there aren't
enough educated people to elect a liberal government in the US.
@LV - The point is that "urbanites" aren't able to boss anyone around. It's the low
population rural areas that have outsize political power thanks to the unfortunate design of
our government. Every state gets two senators, regardless of population, and that also
factors into the allocation of Electoral College votes, so that an EC vote from WY is worth 4
times as much as an EC vote from CA, for example. In 2016, Senate Democrats got 20 million
more votes than Senate Republicans, yet Republicans kept control. In 2018, Senate Democrats
got "only" 11.5 million more votes, and consequently lost seats. We're being governed by a
minority in may areas of the country, and nationally, yet the "rural rubes" or whatever you
want to call them, insist that they don't have nearly enough power.
Strange that anyone living in or just knowing the west would NOT know that arsonists could
not burn down huge chunks of forest if they where not so very dry.
Augury Unhappy Bird Watcher, State of Grave Doubt
Sept. 20
The ugly truth of Oregon's political past is asserting itself...we aren't in "Portlandia"
anymore Nick.
Ominous! There are two information ecosystems in this country and Americans increasingly live
in different realities. Much of the media is in the business of massaging the egos of their
readers by feeding them stories that confirm their biases and make them feel clever. There is
less and less fact based news and more and more propaganda. A lot of people aren't really
interested in facts. They just want to be told how right they are and how stupid and evil the
people who disagree with them are. Media corporations are providing the market with what it
desires, and what it desires is poisonous.
There is a reptilian brain need to believe this nonsense and to propagate it- because the
believers are so terrified of the facts of the truth (and the lack of knowing what might be
done to address those facts). The people who are true believers are pointless to discuss.
They are too frightened. They need to believe this stuff. It is hopeless to address them.
Dark times, indeed.
With the natural buildup of combustible matter, combined with houses everywhere now and
little land management, these fires will happen and will cause problems. Lots of things can
start them and they will.
You left out "a century of zero-tolerance policies toward wildland fires (creating
precariously dense underbrush), and resistance to traditional controlled burning at the
human/wilderness interface". It's not the whole story, but neither is climate change which,
due to global technological leveling, is evermore the responsibility of China and India than
Western civilization. Signed, a moderate progressive endlessly frustrated with breathless
liberalism
If only there were no arsonists. Here is a video of a woman who found a man on her property
with matches in his hand (and no cigarettes, which was his excuse for having matches in his
hand). She made a citizen's arrest. This happened in peaceful Oregon. Don't listen if you
can't handle harsh language by a woman who is trying to save her property. Arson is real, and
it is no joke. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJW_M4pBCnY
A man was arrested for arson in Southern Oregon. His fire damaged or destroyed numerous
homes.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/man-charged-arson-connection-almeda-fire-southern-oregon/story?id=72960208
Rumors of antifa notwithstanding, people in Oregon were looking for arsonists because there
are arsonists.
"Conspiracy theories" are, for the most part, not theories, merely assertions. A theory is
subject to proof and disproof by evidence. In a world where truth has no inherent monetary
value, don't expect it. To paraphrase President Clinton, "It's the internet, Stupid!" Follow
the money: Agenda + Clickbaitability = Prominence That is the business model of the internet,
a medium where "news" is whatever will produce the most clicks. As in profit. Unless and
until the youngest generation developes a means of communication that does not depend on
megacorporations, nothing will change. In the Sixties, a generation which disbelieved and had
no honest access to the traditional media, created its own, the "alternative press."
Hopefully, today's teenagers will develope their own way to communicate that is reliable. It
is 100% guaranteed that if their "opposition" becomes an actual threat to the profits of
Facebook, Google, Apple, Twitter, and the rest of their ilk, they will be cut off. As to why
people attach themselves to "conspiracy theories", it's actually quite simple. Take QAnon for
example: it is functionally just another religion competing for adherents. As with any
religion, it offers its believers an explanation of what they deem is wrong while offering a
path to right those wrongs. Certainty and simplicity: those are the essential elements of
cults/religion/bumpersticker politics. And the internet guarantees that whatever you believe
will be "validated."
"Conspiracy theories" are, for the most part, not theories, merely assertions. A theory is
subject to proof and disproof by evidence. In a world where truth has no inherent monetary
value, don't expect it. To paraphrase President Clinton, "It's the internet, Stupid!" Follow
the money: Agenda + Clickbaitability = Prominence That is the business model of the internet,
a medium where "news" is whatever will produce the most clicks. As in profit. Unless and
until the youngest generation developes a means of communication that does not depend on
megacorporations, nothing will change. In the Sixties, a generation which disbelieved and had
no honest access to the traditional media, created its own, the "alternative press."
Hopefully, today's teenagers will develope their own way to communicate that is reliable. It
is 100% guaranteed that if their "opposition" becomes an actual threat to the profits of
Facebook, Google, Apple, Twitter, and the rest of their ilk, they will be cut off. As to why
people attach themselves to "conspiracy theories", it's actually quite simple. Take QAnon for
example: it is functionally just another religion competing for adherents. As with any
religion, it offers its believers an explanation of what they deem is wrong while offering a
path to right those wrongs. Certainty and simplicity: those are the essential elements of
cults/religion/bumpersticker politics. And the internet guarantees that whatever you believe
will be "validated."
" All this rumormongering leaves me feeling that the social fabric is unraveling, as if the
shared understanding of reality that is the basis for any society is eroding." You betcha.
(Palin doesn't look half bad compared to the current batch.) It's a simple formula: social
media driven disinformation + extreme capitalism which leaves us with no real will to address
it + legitimate grievances like racism and financial insecurity = craziness on all sides,
fanned by a president whose personal agenda takes precedence over absolutely everything. All
societies are constantly dealing with potentially destabilizing threats. Their institutions,
media, leadership, and understanding of a common good are their immune system. Ours is
compromised, we are destabilized.
How about a judicious Forrest management? We live in a period of global warming
because of our planet axis precision, aggravated by the presence of an unprecedented
population explosion needing more water, more food, the production of which needs more arable
land, cutting trees, displacing wild animals, exhausting the aquifer. Cutting trees increases
the CO2 in the atmosphere. More people in India, more cattle emitting methane, more old
fashioned way of cooking food and producing more CO2 ... Permanent frost melting also sends
more methane in the atmosphere ... The climate is extremely complex to permit exact modeling,
but it is clear that if we want to stay healthy, it is vital to regularly clear our western
forests of dead wood in order to prevent today's disaster of millions of people, particularly
children with asthma and old people breathing the heavily polluted air. It is time to move to
solar, wind power, electric trucks, cars etc. The technology is here. Let's hope that Biden
will support clean air as means to better health. If all these years instead of using
abstract terms like global warming or climate change, we have been appealing to people to
keep the air clean in order to have better health, perhaps they would have stopped buying the
behemoths cars, producing so much pollution?
As Nicholas and many readers on this page already know, this commentary is more evidence of
how needlessly and recklessly polarized our country has become. When tribal instincts push
people to look for anything - fact, fiction or fantasy - on social media or "rage commentary"
that supports and validates their identities they will glom onto it faster than maggots on
dead flesh. It is a sad state of affairs when so many people of all political persuasions
will not take the time - even a few minutes - to question and investigate the latest "truth"
being promoted. The new culture of low information consumers seems to be spreading as fast as
a pandemic despite the heroic efforts of honest journalism. I wonder if low information
consumption was so endemic to the citizens of Ancient Rome and Greece - long before Twitter,
Facebook and Rage TV? People, please take a moment to "click" one step further to see if the
latest conspiracy story is true. Why help propagate lies? It will only come back to haunt
you, or your children.
Antifa or not, at least some of the big fires have been started by arsonists. Of this fact we
have video proof. By downplaying or even denying it, the media are just as bad as the
conspiracy theorists in promoting disinformation.
This reminds me of a time when people saw "Reds" behind anything that was going wrong in the
country. Nothing new, but just as pathetically paranoid. I wonder how many people, or their
parents, fit into both groups?
Here's another urban myth. Ok, more a lefty myth. That we can just keep adding people to this
country (urban, suburban, rural, big city, anywhere and everywhere) and it won't have any
effect. With the corollary that it's just a matter of "green new deal" or everybody getting a
Prius or the dummies in the sticks realizing climate change is real and then we can just go
on like this forever. We can't. Not only is our much hated lifestyle, which from what I can
see, nobody really wants to give up, killing us, but believing 330 million Americans that add
2-3 million more a year is not a problem at all. Our entire way of life: endless population
and economic growth is unsustainable. We don't need to wait until 2050 to see it. Just step
outside.
It is very difficult to teach people that "research," doesn't mean you go to some TV show or
website you like and root around for stuff that tells you what you want to hear. One prob
seems to be really simple: it takes actual work to do it right. Another is that research,
done well, has an ugly habit of forcing you to think at least a little about whether your own
ideas make any sense. And a third is that people really, really don't like it when their
political views start getting contradicted by reality. It seems to be easier to change
reality than to change views, even a little. Oh, and another prob? Too few Americans really
read anything worth reading. I'm all for funsies (and I've probably read more crummy science
fiction than all y'all put together) but one of the joys of walking around in Paris is seeing
that the kiosks and bookstores still sell a ton of stuff on philosophy, lit, economics, and
that everywhere, people actually read them. Books teach thought. Newsmax don't.
@Beer Can Boyd: As a native-born American, I think the US fell down when the Congress put
"under God" into the Pledge of Allegiance in 1953, ostensibly to preclude anyone thinking
about Godless communism, and gave itself a stroke.
The melting pot burned over. It is now a word salad. But appears there is a method to the
madness. It is hard for the world to tell the madness from the method
@Carolyn then there are the lies and the demonization of China and Russia by both parties to
top it off. How can voters believe anything and decide before they vote?
Supporting this atmosphere of potential violence are some of my republican friends. They are
mostly educated and not stupid. Yet they continue to support a man whom I think holds the
responsibility for most of the violence if it comes. Now I want to get down to my point about
these supporters. I believe they have succumbed to a cult-like dynamic. I say this because no
rational person could possibly support Trump. Religious cults create this same addiction and
irrationality. When my friends disagree with me, they try to put our friendship hostage to no
further discussion of politics. They are unwilling to even be confronted with objections to
their support of Trump. I have decided that I can always make new friends. What I do not want
to do is take on the task of building a new country because I stayed silent.
@Harcourt "They are mostly educated and not stupid." In my opinion, educated persons who
behave as you describe never benefited from their education. Even worse, to me it seems like
persons who behave like that are of the opinion that what they learnt in school is only for
the purpose of writing the exams they needed to pass to get out of school. It was all just
noise to them.
You nailed it. There is no longer "a shared reality" in America. So we have wildly different
views of who Joe Biden and Donald Trump are. And how serious climate change is. And whether
it's important to wear a mask. And if left-wing anarchists set forest fires. Thank you,
Internet. Thank you, social media barons who refuse to ban Russian propaganda and manipulated
videos. Thank you FCC that does not rein in Fox News and their promotion of lies. Who will
step in and stop this madness?
@CA I agree with you completely except for the refusal to stop Russian interference. We
can't. We can't unless we stop US interference in the process. The problem is that US
interference, and rumor mongering, are the business model of these platforms which happen to
be some of our largest companies. Extreme capitalism is preventing us from addressing any and
all issues propagated by these companies. Russia is just a speck.
Antifa adherents and wildfires ? Seems pretty far-fetched. Even ridiculous. But setting fire
to occupied apartment buildings in Portland ? Oh yes, definitely. It happened, and more is on
the menu, as well as municipal and federal buildings. Don't believe it ? Read the news
releases for yourself, on the Portland Police Bureau's website.
An excellent discussion of the perils of social media. Although newspapers, TV, radio,
magazines have a historical principal of "generally" telling the truth, social media has
opened up the world to every single Tom, Dick and Harry who with to spread their message. I
believe that how we, as a nation, as a species, handle social media will define what happens
over the next decade.
The state of this country is absolutely terrifying. While the shift to ever more
conservative, insular, xenophobic, coroporate-controlled government has been going on for
years, with the faux election of trump democracy is what has become fake, while common sense,
empathy, and both fiscal and environmental responsibility have virtually disappeared. The US
has gone off the deep end...
Years ago I read a science fiction short story that is unsettling in its analogy to this
situation. I starts with aliens visiting the Earth and accidently leaving behind a device
that can allow metal to be manipulated by softening it, then hardening it. The device gets
copied and mass produced. When they returned a year later, they come back and cannot fathom
how their device could have resulted in anarchy. THAT is the internet. 5 Recommend Share
Let me ask you all a question. If your neighbor told you the fire in a nearby Oregon town was
started by antifa, how would you disprove it? Since you cannot provide evidence for a
negative statement, it's difficult. There is actually some evidence that antifa did start the
fire: a voice said it on the radio, and tv showed them lighting fireworks in Portland. This
isn't very good evidence, but it is evidence, and you can't produce any evidence that antifa
did not do it (because there can't be any.) So you are in the position of asking your
neighbor to look at the quality of the evidence. This is something very few outside the legal
and scientific world are capable of. But that is all you have. Ultimately, it really does go
back to belief. How many of us could independently prove that the earth turns around the sun?
Those of us who aren't astronomers choose to accept this belief based on what we've been
told, and that's how it is with antifa starting the fires.
Kristof is afraid that fires in the West represent the new normal. The evidence suggests that
this fear is well-founded. He is concerned about the government's paralysis. That is partly
due to Trump, who stands a good chance of being reelected on November 3. He is worried about
ordinary citizens seeking oversimplified answers and finding them in the conspiracy theories
presenting the fire as the work of antifa. I am more worried about the breakdown in
credibility of news sources like the NY Times, which finds itself in competition with Fox
News and a host of online sources. Indeed, you-tube and facebook will select news stories for
you, confirming whatever bias you bring to your reading of the news. There is no guarantee
that democracy will survive. One of the things that keeps me up at night is the realization
that not only the right, but the left, is subject to oversimplified presentations of global
warming. Global warming is a consequence of too much population growth. But as we argue over
freedoms for LGBTQ minorities liberals have neglected the importance of freedom of speech.
And voices which have warned about population growth have been simply ignored by the left. It
isn't enough to shift from Fords using gasoline to Teslas running on electricity. We also
need to control population growth. The population of earth will double again by 2072 if
current rates continue. Population growth threatens to overwhelm the attempts to move to
clean energy. 2 Recommend
The scientific consensus will also conclude that not allowing wildfires to burn compounds the
problem. While what I am about to type is not science, continued development in fire prone
areas amplifies and compounds every aspect of the problem. From my perspective the system has
evolved to socializing cost and privatizing cost in every way. I don't see it getting better,
until such time as individuals are held accountable this should be considered normal.
@secular socialist dem PG&E just paid billions in fines and PLEADED GUILTY in starting
last year's Paradise fire. They also have already admitted fault in several fires started by
their faulty, untended grid. "Individuals" don't need to be held accountable unless there are
rules in place for them to follow regarding wildfire. There already are. Most already do. Why
do folks act so proud about their 'anti-science' opinion? It's not like this conversation
isn't ongoing; nobody argues that development in fire prone areas' carries risks. So does
rebuilding in Oklahoma, Florida and Louisiana..... You're right (although confused) about
socializing RISK and privatizing PROFIT. See PG&E above.
Unsure how people lighting fires directly indicates climate change is corroborated. The
fellow who was arrested in Tacoma, WA: https://thepostmillennial.com/antifa-activist-charged-for-fire-set-in-washington
Looking to past wildfires, like the one's in Montana & Idaho in 2008, 5.5 million acres
were burned and certain interest groups advocated for them to burn out because it's apart of
the natural cycle. Federal government shouldn't send assistance unless it's possibly to
communities in threat of burning, who are humans to say we ought to stop mother nature? It's
natural to let these fires burn, if you try to hinder it's course you are stopping the cycle.
Doug Terry Maryland, Washington DC metro
Sept. 20 Times Pick
Why do people believe wild stupid things more than actual facts? Partly it is because they
like the wild stupid thing more, it gives them some weird comfort. It is also because people
are busying with their lives and don't have time to gather enough information to counter the
wild rumor that flies around faster than the speed of sound. The most important aspect of
successful conspiracy theories is they impart to the person holding them the idea that they
are smarter than other people and have "cracked the code" that explains everything or a lot
of big things that people don't understand. Reading, thinking, considering and re-considering
can seem like hard work, particularly if it is foreign to one's experience and life training.
Why not just lock on to a cool idea that comes around, even if it is weird? .
This story highlights for me an equally growing problem, the "selective framing" by media
outlets on the left and right (NYT and Fox as just two examples). To read Mr Kristof's
version, you may believe that arsonists are wild figments of the unhinged radical right
imagination. To read the same story on Fox, Antifa arsonists are working their way up your
street.
"...the shared understanding of reality that is the basis for any society is eroding." And
yet reality still exist. Normally, if someone starts to exhibit the kind of behavior that
these "vigilantes" are - screaming about boogeymen, thinking people are out to get them,
engaging in aggressive behavior based on paranoid fantasies, creating self-reinforcing
delusions, becoming obsessed with baseless conspiracy theories - we would rightly diagnose
them as being mentally ill, and to the extent that they represent a danger to others, confine
them. I don't think we can afford to see this as just a time of extreme differences of
opinion. Facts, truth and reality are still actual, tangible things. And those who have
become so disassociated from them that they are stopping vehicles and hunting down their
fellow citizen need to be dealt with appropriately.
We have been witnessing the start of the Second Civil War in America. If we accept the
definition of a civil war as a conflict between factions of citizens for either secession or
control of the government--including organizations within the existing government--then we
are in the beginning stages of a Second Civil War. The question is what the level of violence
will be (not will there be violence, but how much violence). We are beginning to see
indications of that level. When naturally or accidentally caused wildfires are attributed to
one faction as a way to stoke the fires of civil violence, then physical violence between
factions is a heartbeat away simply because of the falsity and extremity of the accusations.
The era of peaceful protest has passed because of the intensity of feelings on both sides;
the anger produced when a government begins denying civil rights, e.g., Freedom of Speech and
the Right to Assemble, through legal actions where protest organizers could be charged with
sedition (see Barr's comments, 9/16/2020, NYT), which then suggests that all protests become
illegal, the fires of violence are stoked. With a heavily-armed populace on both sides,
gunfire is a hair-trigger pull away. If Trump and the Republican's intention was to remake
America in their image (I leave it to you to supply that image), they are succeeding. If
Putin's intention was to bring down America, he is succeeding. If Xi's intention was to
dominate the world, he is on that path. Vote 33 Recommend Share
... There's an old saying "Those who the gods would destroy they first make mad." I have come
to the conclusion that America has gone qute a long way down that road.
And yet, Mr. Kristoff, you never make mention of the real threat that groups like Antifa and
other radical left rioters pose to this country (forgetting about attacks on federal
buildings in Portland? Attempts to firebomb courthouses? Violence against law enforcement
officers?). No, instead it's always Trump, or Trump supporters who are your focus. I do not
know whether Antifa has been involved in any of these recent fires, but I do know that these
violent elements on the left pose a massive danger to our democracy. You are correct about
one thing, though: We should brace ourselves. It's just "what" we need to brace for that is
off mark in your article...
It's heartbreaking to watch these three West Coast states burned. For days, the sky was red
and the air was unbreathable. But the saddest part was the feeling of helplessness.
40 years ago, I hitchhiked around the Pacific Northwest during the summer after Mt. St.
Helens blew up. Mt. Rainier was ash-coated, as were the wild blueberries I often ate. Epic
and Biblical are words inadequate to describe that destruction near Mt. St. Helens, with
millions of huge, old trees blown down, piles of mud, and rivers diverted. Yet I and others
knew that eventually, that land would regrow, and it did.
I see a lot of egotism and self-love on both sides. The so-called progressives in our
community are breeding at baby boom levels, driving SUVs, and, before the pandemic, you'd see
a dozen school buses idling outside every school. Development is out of control as people
flee from the city, and people flee from here, or downsize, and breed and breed and breed.
Two years ago, we had a flash flood and our street was under water, and there was a lot of
damage all over town. Hurricane Irene in 2011 left many with over a foot of water in their
basements. And let's not even start on Sandy. My friend lives in Pensacola; their downtown
area is under three or four feet of water from Hurricane Sally. It's not just fire, it's
floods, and it's not just the GOP which is the problem...
I don't blame anyone for guarding their roads if they think arsonists are about. The
Tillamook Burn was larger and more devastating than these fires but are we to blame climate
change ? Environmentalists and Liberals who do not even live out West, who did not rely upon
Logging, placed their concerns about the Spotted Owl and Virgin Forests about the danger of
Forest Fires and the livelihood of Loggers and the Towns and Peoples who depended upon
Logging. Managed Logging of Forests is not an inherently evil act. Clearing the bush and dead
trees is not bad in and of itself. Let Logging companies responsibly manage sections of the
Forrests, let Towns clear fire breaks around their perimeters. Place large Water towers in
strategic points throughout the Forests, huge mounds of dirt/sand/gravel next to them so that
the Firefighters have what they need to fight the fires. Force developers to build houses 50
feet apart. Require fireproof roofs, require thinning of trees in housing developments.
Require volunteer Fire Departments in every neighborhood so that if they do nothing else,
they can cut a fire break, water down the grasses around their neighborhoods, chase and
extinguish embers, something/anything versus fleeing their homes without putting up a fight.
"... dry conditions exacerbated by climate change coupled with an unusual windstorm ..." May
I add that a couple of other things have also contributed to making the fires worse or making
them harder to manage? For a century or so, in California, Oregon and Washington we have not
been letting the normal, periodic fires burn. Consequently, a great deal of fuel has built up
on the forest floor. Second, folks have increasingly been building homes or even
neighborhoods in places which have historically seen such normal, periodic fires.
@Robert Yes. But now controlled burns are a bit problematic, given the droughts, the heat,
the massive fuel loads from all the dead trees. It's just so easy for the controlled burns to
get out of control.
Hi, I am from Clackamas County metro. Every time a FaceBook "Friend" (and I personally know
all of mine) posted a rumor, I tried to find the footage from any of our 4 local news
stations to depute their post but they just shared another one. One said she didn't trust KGW
8 the local NBC station and when I told her the same story was on KPTV 12, the local Fox
station. She said, "I'm just stressed"
@David Biesecker Remember that half the people are of below average intelligence. That may
answer the existence of the small percentage of conspiracy theorists. One problem is social
media provides free and outsized loudspeaker systems that enables them to find each other.
@M.i. Estner First, let me identify myself as a liberal Democrat who has a masters degree. I
find it more than disheartening when half of the country, or half of rural or not formally
educated folks are said to have low intelligent quotas, critical thinking skills or
analytical abilities. You better believe that when a highly trained Eastern Oregon
firefighter is assessing how to save peoples lives, homes and land, has to quickly act with
their many faceted skill set and are calling on abilities you or I would not be able to
fathom. Same with farmers of large pieces of complicated crops and land. Same with city
managers, librarians, and social workers for the elderly--all having low city budgets. What
about the veterinarians, doctors and nurses in rural areas? This is exactly the same as
calling Black or Hispanics people of lower intelligence. And, there are different types of
intelligence. I know a literary critic, a liberal Democrat, who doesn't have the critical
thinking skills to run her own home or raise her children. If you look, you can see these
same differences in any group. It has to do with the way people are raised, what they are
using their skill sets for, what information they are used to consuming, money, ideology,
etc...And it has to do with being devalued for growing your food, producing your meat,
chicken and eggs. I'm not excusing the violence, guns, racism and hatred. These divides have
been with us for ages. Please don't stoke the fires.
If we have a selfish federal government, then we will have selfish states and people.
Everyone is for himself or herself. No one will think about other people or public good. It
all started from the top
In 2017, 2018, and 2019 northern California's new phenomenon of forceful 40 to 60 miles per
hour winds - in Fall, no less - caused old and aging electrical equipment to malfunction. As
a consequence, too much of Santa Rosa burnt to the ground, and the entire town of Paradise
ceased to exist. This year during the heat of a hotter than usual summer following yet
another dry winter, we had dry lightning strikes from Sonoma County to Santa Clara County and
beyond.
Yes, the science is clear and you fail to mention it. The forest fires reach critical mass
and spread because of the surplus of dead or dying trees. They are there because the federal
government essentially no longer allows logging on its vast landholdings and also fails to
allow controlled burns to clean out the tinderbox. I won't bother attaching a link because
any Google search proves the point. Why focus on hysteria and rumermongering among the
Deplorables? Come on, Mr. Kristof, you were a Deplorable once (when you were a kid growing up
in the countryside) as was I. Please defend them sometimes, particularly when the actual
causes are so well documented.
@Stuck on a mountain Western States are working to clear the brush from forests where, due to
our previous incomplete understanding of forest ecology, fires were suppressed for a century.
However, the cost is astronomical and there are millions of acres left to clear. Spending
their entire forest management budgets fighting current wildfires doesn't help. We've been
doing controlled burns for decades but in many areas, they're now too dangerous. Dry forests
and a dense understory can quickly turn a "controlled burn" into a conflagration. Many
ranchers and timber companies who profit from our state and national forests seem unwilling
to pay to keep those forests healthy. People who live in or near forests mostly have incomes
too low to pay for forest management. The National Forest Service, Department of the Interior
and USDA have made some progress, but the problem is huge. Saying we can prevent forest fires
by allowing larger timber harvests is an oversimplification. No solution to this complex
issue will be simple, perfect or cheap.
Wacky conspiracy theories to explain seemingly bizarre and unusual occurrences have been
around since the dawn of human cognition. But in an electronic/social media age, these get
spread even faster than a wind-blown fire climbs a canyon hillside. Previously, they were
spread one set of ears at a time; now millions of eyes can read them every second. And that
is a major part of the problem.
As a grad student in sociology, having lived through the 60s and participated in the
counterculture, I was deeply intrigued by the social construction of reality - how we come to
share a taken-for-granted world. This is a long-standing concern within sociological social
psychology. We examined how language, interpersonal communications, media and social
structure shaped ones perception of one's self, what is real, what's important. At the time,
however, this was considered theoretical and academic. 40 years later, understanding how
Americans' realities have come to diverge is no longer armchair social science. It's urgent
and in our faces, as is the question of how can we heal this terrible fracturing of our
world?
@DeHypnotist Yes. When studying for the degree in and then teaching sociology in my early
years, I learned that, too. But, I have to admit, it's actually taken all the decades of life
since then, and now the obvious confirmation of it by this current 'reality' to actually
realize, deep down in my guts, that we 'make up' our so-called 'social reality' simply to
serve the most basic of biological requirements: the need to dominate in the deadly
completion with the other 'tribes' of our species just to survive. We are, after all, animals
like all the others, no matter how much we blab about how much 'smarter' we are.
@Alex B The primal driver, deep in the core of our brain, is usefully thought of as
"reptilian." Cold-blooded. Egoistic. Hedonistic. And, in extreme cases, narcissistic, and,
heaven forbid when all three are present...
I lived for a few years in Brazil when it was a dictatorship. The similarities between Brazil
and what is happening in the US is startling. The police were being used to quell peaceful
protesters and the justice system co-opted by authorities, fear mongering were present, just
as now in the US....
I didn't live in the US from 1977-1999, only visiting on short trips. That enabled me to see
changes in society that were slow and not seen by those residing here. And when I came back
permanently I could feel immediately a deep change....
Perhaps an apt metaphor for the "danger sign ahead" is the approach of a Category three
hurricane and it's increasing in intensity. One of the stark disconnects is between the
message in an article like this and the politicians and citizens who are little concerned
about tempering rhetoric and elevating the importance of eschewing misinformation. We are in
the Misinformation Age and the victims of a cyber war, evolving into a civil war.
@ML What is happening here? These are the beginnings of what happened in Germany in the 30s.
Over there the reason was the loss of WWI. Here, is the obvious decline of the American
lifestyle and we have not seen anything yet. The range of the economic decline is covered by
7 trillion dollars in phony money. I fervently hope and pray that is not too late to stop the
process. All men and women of goodwill have to rally to restore a sane, and one, country .
Stay safe! It is going to get worse before it gets better.
@FunkyIrishman Right on. Water is an enormous issue waiting to happen here -- and Wisconsin
is estimated to have between 10 and 20 percent of the world's fresh water (depending on how
it's calculated and whether that includes some of Lakes Michigan and Superior. A Dept. of
Climate, Weather and Water would be a logical cabinet department.
@FunkyIrishman And polluting the potable water continues sometimes by the most resolvable
modern approaches: sewers and water treatment plants. Reagan ended federal funding for sewers
leaving septic systems (and now ancient sewers) where sewers would lead to protected fresh
water. All the medicines, chemicals, and toxins seep unseen but very real into fresh and also
salt water. We are not a modern nation any more.
Looks like neoliberal Dems are playing with fire. Another couple of such success stories and
Biden can safely enroll to the assisted living senior citizen community where he belongs. This is
an excellent way to mobilize Trump voters. Just look at the comments section of this story.
This is somewhat similar to hysteria in Germany in 1930th.
Notable quotes:
"... And Costco was once a retail store. Bravo! Today transformed into a political party? ..."
Costco has halted sales of Palmetto Cheese, a popular brand of pimento cheese spread that
had been offered in over 120 of its stores, after the company's owner triggered outrage with a
Facebook post criticizing Black Lives Matter.
A sign posted at a store in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, indicates that Palmetto Cheese has
been discontinued and will not be ordered again by Costco. The retailer hasn't made a statement
on its decision, but the move came after consumers called for a boycott of the brand because of
social media comments by Palmetto Cheese's owner, Brian Henry.
"This BLM and Antifa movement must be treated like the terror organizations that they
are," Henry said in an August 25 Facebook post that has since been deleted. He wrote the
message in response to the alleged shootings of three white people by a black man in
Georgetown, South Carolina. He complained that BLM and Antifa were being allowed to
"lawlessly destroy great American cities and threaten their citizens on a daily basis"
and declared "All lives matter. There, I said it. So am I a racist now?"
The reaction on social media was swift, with commenters calling Henry a racist. Activists
jumped into action with a boycott campaign against Palmetto Cheese. A Twitter account was set
up mocking the company as "Appropriation Cheese," because of its use of a black woman on
its packaging who worked for the company before dying earlier this year.
Activists on the Appropriation Cheese page celebrated Costco's decision and pressed for
more. One commenter on Tuesday thanked Costco and demanded that Kroger, Lowes Foods and other
retailers cancel Palmetto Cheese. Another boycott supporter called on Publix Super Markets to
drop the product, saying: "Costco pulled Palmetto Cheese because of the open racism of its
owner. We are hoping you are considering the same." Still another said: "Attention
Corporate America. This is how you ally."
But others lamented Costco's move and the divisiveness it represents. "This is how
divided the country has become," one commenter tweeted. "Even store chains are picking
sides now. This is insane." There were those who defended Henry, saying that criticizing
the group doesn't mean that one is racist.
Henry, who also is mayor of the small South Carolina coastal town of Pawleys Island, may
have squandered a chance to inspire a boycott-backlash movement – like that which Goya
Foods enjoyed after its owner was vilified for praising President Donald Trump – when he
issued an apology on September 3.
He said his comments were "hurtful and insensitive."
"I spent the last 10 days listening and learning," Henry said. "The conversations
I have had with friends, our staff, the community and faith-based leaders provided me with a
deeper understanding of racial inequality and the importance of diversity
sensitivity."
Henry added that his family and company will donate $100,000 in the first year of a new
foundation set up to improve race relations, and Palmetto Cheese will rebrand its product
"to be more sensitive to cultural diversity." In addition to having a picture of a black
woman, the current packaging refers to Palmetto Cheese as "the pimento cheese with
soul."
The company sold more than 15 million units last year in about 4,000 stores. Henry warned
that a boycott would only hurt the hundreds of people employed by the company in South
Carolina.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
uncledon 8 hours ago
I
guess I'm a racist as I believe all lives matter! I believe that people have a reason and the
right to peacefully protest. People do not have a right to murder, to plunder, to destroy
properties and businesses, to loot and set fires! If these things are done under the BLM
movement it is lawlessness. If we are to have a peaceful and productive society we need law and
order not total chaos. If the BLM wants to make change, (and change is sorely needed) then sets
some rules in your organized protest that gives it strength and power. Every smashed window,
every fire, every looted business and every intimidation to innocent bystanders is a reason for
people like myself not to support your cause.
KarlthePoet 9 hours ago
It's too bad that the
American consumers haven't started a boycott of the Jewish Banking Cartel, which ultimately
controls the US government and Wall Street. A cheese spread isn't the problem in America.
JG1547 10 hours ago
And the stupidity continues. Sad
CrabbyB 7 hours ago
Avoid social media
other than trying to garner sales. Avoid any chit-chat or opinions, just bare minimum contact
that suits your business purpose and that's it. The mob harmed but using Fakebook as a soapbox
was the big mistake
VillageIdiot34 4 hours ago
Keep it up amerimutts.
With this rate of
acceleration we are talking civil war before Christmas. I can already see it; the corporate
communists, backed by every globalist for-profit corporations against "real capitalism has
never been tried" gang. Less fighting abroad, more fighting domestic. It's a win/win for
everyone else
Jack The Man 3 hours ago
Absolutely right and principled action by
Costco. And BTW, who on earth would like to eat this processed garbage anyway?
rightmove 5
hours ago
And Costco was once a retail store. Bravo! Today transformed into a political party?
I'm in Australia and won't be shopping at Costco. The customer can decide if the BLM impacts
their choice of merchandise, not the damn seller.
Mistermal 6 hours ago
According to Webster's
Dictionary: "The use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political
purposes." Costco CEO simply told the truth. BLM is an openly racist, violent hate group.
Alan
Hart 3 hours ago
Will Costco also ban Israeli goods - because of their criticism of PLM
(Palestinian Lives Matter)...??
Flyingscotsman 3 hours ago
Simple, boycott Costco. I bet all
these so called republican white Supremacist racists spend more there , than all these keyboard
woke warriors!
Augury Unhappy Bird Watcher, State of Grave Doubt
Sept. 20
Oregon's racial demographics White alone, percent 86.7% Black or African American alone,
percent 2.2% Alabama's racial demographics White alone, percent 69.1% Black or African American
alone, percent26.8%
"... The leaders of this new movement are replacing traditional liberal beliefs about tolerance, free inquiry, and even racial harmony with ideas so toxic and unattractive that they eschew debate, moving straight to shaming, threats, and intimidation. They are counting on the guilt-ridden, self-flagellating nature of traditional American progressives, who will not stand up for themselves, and will walk to the Razor voluntarily. ..."
"... They've conned organization after organization into empowering panels to search out thoughtcrime, and it's established now that anything can be an offense ..."
On the other side of the political aisle, among self-described liberals, we're watching an
intellectual revolution. It feels liberating to say after years of tiptoeing around the fact,
but the American left has lost its mind. It's become a cowardly mob of upper-class social
media addicts, Twitter Robespierres who move from discipline to discipline torching
reputations and jobs with breathtaking casualness.
The leaders of this new movement are replacing traditional liberal beliefs about
tolerance, free inquiry, and even racial harmony with ideas so toxic and unattractive that
they eschew debate, moving straight to shaming, threats, and intimidation. They are counting
on the guilt-ridden, self-flagellating nature of traditional American progressives, who will
not stand up for themselves, and will walk to the Razor voluntarily.
They've conned organization after organization into empowering panels to search out
thoughtcrime, and it's established now that anything can be an offense
A "cowardly mob of upper-class social media addicts"? The "guilt-ridden, self-flagellating
nature of traditional American progressives, who will not stand up for themselves"? Geeeeee,
sure does remind me of someone....
Is the US really a land
teeming with 'white supremacists', or are malicious forces working to crowbar the racial divide
for their own ulterior motives? Whatever the case, America needs to get a handle on the issue,
and fast.
Watching the video of George Floyd dying on the street under the knee of Derek Chauvin, a
white police officer, forced many people to ask themselves: is this yet another case of police
brutality that has become so prevalent on the streets of America, or is it symptomatic of
something even worse? Without any debate, the mainstream media had a ready-made answer for mass
consumption: America is racist to the core and deserves whatever it gets. It was a simplistic,
knee-jerk response at a time when America was already suffering under a lockdown due to a
pandemic.
Before continuing, it is necessary to ask: does America really suffer from 'systemic
racism', also known as institutional racism? As a white American who grew up in a multiethnic
neighborhood and was later employed at several racially diverse workplaces, I would have to
disagree. While the proverbial 'melting pot' still has some cooking to do, relations between
black and white people have been stable for many years.
While the nation will never remove the scar of slavery, the creation of a welfare state,
together with numerous government programs such as Affirmative Action, was designed to end the
discrimination of minorities. And as every American will say, the United States is a 'nation of
immigrants', an idea reinforced by the passage of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965,
for example, which opened the door to millions of people of non-European descent. Those sorts
of initiatives indicate that Americans are not the hooded pack of white supremacists that many
now say they are. This does not mean, of course, that the scourge of racism has been stamped
out; there is no shortage of racists and bigots in the US, but to call the problem 'systemic'
seems overblown.
At the same time, however, it cannot be denied that we are now living in radical 'woke'
times, an entirely new animal. Thus, instead of responding to the outbreaks of violence in the
wake of police killings with a unifying message of calm and civility, many politicians, in an
effort to appease the angry social justice warriors that keep them in office, are stoking the
fires of racial dissent with their rhetoric. You don't have to read between the lines to
understand their message – just listen to Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee for the
vice presidency.
" Everyone beware, " Harris remarked in a recent interview with Stephen
Colbert. " They [the protesters] are not going to stop before election day in November, and
they're not going to stop after election day They're not going to let up, and they should not,
and we should not. "
It would be difficult to cite a more irresponsible comment from any individual, and
especially one who has a high chance of becoming – considering Joe Biden's advanced age
– the first female president of the United States. This strange new willingness for
Democratic leaders to court the mob reared its ugly head again this week, when Portland Mayor
Ted Wheeler banned police from using tear gas to quell riots that have plagued the city for
more than three months. Mind you, this is the very same mayor who was forced to vacate his
condominium last week after rioters set fire to the building.
Meanwhile, behind the scenes, a number of influential individuals have declared their
support for Black Lives Matter and Antifa. Few would be surprised to know that the financier
George Soros, for example, donated almost a quarter of a billion dollars to several racial
justice groups, including BLM. He was motivated by " systemic discrimination against blacks
that can be traced back to slavery. "
On the other end of the spectrum, Ben & Jerry's Ice Cream, owned by the global Unilever
Company, announced
it was launching a podcast that prompts listeners to " dismantle systemic racism " and
white supremacy. Shouldn't Americans be entitled to a national conversation on the question of
'systemic racism' first, before an ice cream company (ice cream!) practically declares it a
full-blown fascist regime? After all, the 'race problem' could be a symptom of the deplorable
state of the police forces, which are, arguably, both overworked and undertrained to handle
their assigned tasks. The theory at least deserves much greater attention, but that would
deprive the left of an opportunity to appear holier-than-thou in the most consequential
presidential election in many decades.
In any case, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that if these protest groups
– which, incidentally, have a large number of misguided white
youths among their ranks – believe they can act with impunity, while also receiving
massive injections of cash and ideological support, things are going to spiral out of control
real fast.
Just this week, BLM protesters descended upon my hometown of Pittsburgh, where they harassed
a group of diners enjoying the afternoon on a café patio. One of the female activists
somehow thought it would be a great idea to gulp down one of the beverages on a table where an
elderly couple was seated. Earlier, across the country in Portland, Oregon, BLM showed up in
the middle of the night to inform 'privileged' suburban residents – not all of them
white, by the way – that they were living on "occupied" land. If BLM really wants
sympathy for its cause, those methods are certainly not the way to get it. In fact, they could
trigger an ugly backlash, igniting the very racism that the group declares itself to be
fighting in the first place.
On that note, more white citizens are coming around to the conclusion that they are the ones
being subjected to a 'reverse' form of racism – or, at the very least, are not permitted
to defend themselves from physical harm. That appeared to be the lesson for many after Mark and
Patricia McCloskey, two lawyers from an upscale neighborhood in St. Louis,
brandished firearms after protesters smashed through a gate and trespassed onto their
property. Guess who was charged with a crime? Not the protesters. St. Louis Circuit Attorney
Kim Gardner, who received funds for her campaign from none other than Mr. Soros, filed a felony
count against the McCloskeys for unlawful use of a weapon.
Overnight, it appears that Americans have awakened to a nightmare world turned upside down,
where all of the old rules of law and order have been thrown out the window. It's a place where
political leaders no longer allow the police to perform their duties; citizens are condemned as
criminals for protecting themselves, and all the while, "fiery yet mostly peaceful protests"
are permitted to rage. Before the situation hits the point of no return, America really needs
to have a calm discussion about 'systemic racism' to determine if it even exists in the first
place. In the meantime, find a way to maintain law and order on the streets and, most
importantly, trust the police; the majority are not bad apples. America's future peace and
prosperity depends on it.
Like this story? Share it with a friend!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
"... We are witnessing a political game of chess where the only pieces being moved are the pawns, while the king and queen sit safely on a different board. ..."
@
6:29
""There needs to be unrest in the streets as there is unrest in our lives"" When the elite oligarchy ignore peaceful
protests, you get aggressive uprisings. It's human nature and good ol' fashioned patriotism.
So, it appears the War on Populism is building
toward an exciting climax. All the proper pieces are in place for a Class-A GloboCap color
revolution , and maybe even civil war. You got your unauthorized Putin-Nazi president, your
imaginary apocalyptic pandemic, your violent identitarian civil unrest, your heavily-armed
politically-polarized populace, your ominous rumblings from military quarters you couldn't
really ask for much more.
OK, the plot is pretty obvious by now (as it is in all big-budget action spectacles, which
is essentially what color revolutions are), but that won't spoil our viewing experience. The
fun isn't in guessing what is going to happen. Everybody knows what's going to happen. The fun
is in watching Bruce, or Sigourney, or "the moderate rebels," or the GloboCap "Resistance,"
take down the monster, or the terrorists, or Hitler, and save the world, or democracy, or
whatever.
A Black Lives
Matter activist in Washington has gone into social media hiding after her efforts to dox a CVS
drugstore manager for calling the police on two suspected shoplifters didn't go over as
swimmingly as she planned.
The chain of events began when the woman, Charity Sade, started recording police who were
questioning two black men outside a CVS store. At one point, an officer warns one of the
suspects not to interrupt him while he's talking to the other man, saying "His freedom is
dependent on your actions." Sade then interjects, asking the officer for his name and badge
number.
She then films another video of herself confronting the CVS manager inside the store for
calling the police. The manager explains that it's company policy to contact the police when a
shoplifter exits the store without paying for merchandise. He added that he chose not to press
charges against the men, but asked the police to inform them that they could no longer shop at
his store.
Sade then berates the manager, saying, "It's not your merchandise. It's the store's. So,
you know what happens... You decided to call the police on two black people that stole, that
allegedly took something from the store because you're willing to uphold the policy, and they
could have lost their lives."
When the manager replied that he follows CVS policy, not the woman's policy, Sade said,
"So you're willing to risk someone's lives for what, $30,000 a year?"
The manager told her that he saw no such risk, thanked her and began to walk away, at which
point Sade asked for his name. When he refused to answer, she asked another employee. The
manager shot back: "No one's going to tell you my name when you're in here videotaping us so
that you can try to elicit some sort of violence. It's not going to happen." Sade then
attempted to turn the tables, accusing the manager of trying to elicit violence against the
black men by calling the police.
The woman, who identifies herself as a comedian, activist and teacher, posted the videos to
her Twitter account on Thursday, including a picture of the CVS manager and the policeman's
badge number, along with hashtags #BLM and #PeopleOverProperty. To her surprise, reaction was
overwhelmingly negative and she later made her Twitter account private and deleted her
Instagram account. She also attempted to organize a protest outside the store on Facebook.
Twitter users saved Sade's videos before access to her accounts was blocked, enabling the
discussion of her conduct to continue. Author and media critic Mark Dice called her a BLM
"Karen," while conservative commentator Ben Shapiro said anyone who disagreed with
the CVS manager's explanation "should be institutionalized." Journalist Jessica
O'Donnell of The Blaze said that lowering standards
for black people, suggesting that they should be allowed to shoplift, is "actually the
racist thing in the scenario."
The level of political correctness demonstrated by Vampire squid actually exceed the level
achieved by CPSU in the USSR, which probably contributed to the USSR dissolution as everybody was
tired of this level of primitive hypocrisy and enforced speech standard; including the CPSU
leadership.
Woke racism is a new form of financial oligarchy division and control of prols...
Notable quotes:
"... In Engineering, our colleagues [have] collaborated with others in the financial services industry to address racially insensitive terminology in computer security terms. This work included eliminating the use of "blacklist" and "whitelist," as well as of "master" and "slave," when describing the relationship between hardware components. ..."
In Engineering, our colleagues [have] collaborated with others in the financial
services industry to address racially insensitive terminology in computer security terms.
This work included eliminating the use of "blacklist"
and "whitelist," as well as of "master" and "slave," when describing the relationship
between hardware components.
Another example of a phrase that can have harmful impact is "All Lives Matter." The death
of George Floyd, and, as recently as this week, the shooting of
Jacob Blake multiple times in the back, demonstrate that until the deadly violent acts
against unarmed Black people subside, all lives will not matter until Black Lives Matter.
You didn't think we were going to get through this without a reference to the Holy Blessed
Martyr Floyd, did you?
Although I'll give a smidgen of credit here to Goldman Sachs: They merely wrote "the death of
George Floyd." It's routine in Mainstream media outlets now to see "
the killing of George Floyd ," or even "the murder of George
Floyd." The Economist , for example, has used both in straight reportage. It has of
course not yet been established to any good evidentiary standard that Floyd was killed, let alone
murdered.
It's not accurate to refer to someone's "sexual preference," which would imply a choice
that can be changed, instead we refer to an individual's "sexual orientation."
That's a bit hair-splitty, isn't it? A bit dubious, actually. An orientation may be voluntary,
mayn't it? I can orient myself to the north, south, east, or west, according to my
preference.
Goldman Sachs doesn't just rely on
memos to keep its workforce up-to-date on the Party line. Conversations! -- gotta have
conversations . To give employees the right idea, the firm records the kind of
conversations it wants them to have and puts them on YouTube so they can watch at home.
I'm not sure what the rule is for watching in office hours, but I'd guess it's OK ah, heck,
probably compulsory.
If the US keeps this up, the Chinese are going to eat us for lunch. It's all fun and games,
who gets to teach at Dutchess County Community College, but these morons are starting to spread
their religion to all aspects of life. Will not end well.
Mind-boggling. Diversity zealots have infiltrated practically every elite institution in
America. How long before the counter-revolution? At least Trump got the ball rolling by
exposing Critical Race Theory to the light of day. Maybe some more philosophical types might
have a go at "deconstructing" Cultural Relativism, the Big Mama of all this poisonous
nonsense.
The greatest goyim fought for all of this. As good goyim spawn, you should celebrate the
defeat of the Axis everyday in the name of anal (((democracy))).
Controlling a man with knee pressure to the side of his neck is a humane police
technique for subduing an uncooperative perp. I emphasis "side of the neck" because the
technique used on George Floyd is widely assumed to have consisted of applying pressure to
the front of the neck . I saw and heard that assumption reported by Joe Rogan who you would
be expected to know better as he is said to have been a professional wrestler at some time in
the past. The video of Floyd clearly shows him restrained by pressure on the side of his neck
yet is not remembered that way.
Try this experiment. Apply pressure with your fist to the front of your neck. It will be
obvious that that pressure crushes the airways to the lungs and would likely be fatal in short
order if maintained. Now try the experiment of applying pressure with your fist to the side of
your neck. I expect that you will be very surprised at discovering how strong the tendons and
understructure of the side of the neck are. That technique does not interfere with
breathing. Restraint using that technique is not time bound. Whether 1 minute, 9 minutes or 45
minutes, it simply restrains an uncooperative perp.
The article above faults the evil Israelis for teaching that technique. Presumably the
author believes that Derek Chauvin restrained George Floyd with his knee on the front of his
neck. So to mix metaphors he will seize any stick to fustigate these evil disgusting spawn of
the devil Israeli jew cops.
Conclusion: article is yet another example of the jew hating propaganda that Ron Unz
delights in publishing.
"However this knee restraining technique seems stupid and evil."
Not if it is done without put weight on the knee.
When dealing with people having seizures or 'excited delirium', it's important to
immobilize their head so they don't hurt themselves while thrashing around.
When done correctly, the knee does not crush the neck. In order to stop air, pressure must
be applied to the front, not the back or side. Officer Chauvin's relaxed posture indicates he
was not attempting to injure Floyd, but only to keep a man in medical distress immobile until
medical first responders could take over.
Who within the Deep state is supporting the riots? This is the question. Antifa would not
last a a couple of months, if all repressive power of the state fall on the head of its
brainwashed children of the middles class, who constitute the majority of it members. All members
probably are well known to FBI and the organization was infiltrated long ago.
America went through its own bout of Dionysian intoxication in the days following May 25,
when a Minneapolis cop by the name of Derek Chauvin knelt on the neck of a 46-year-old Black
man by the name of George Floyd, causing his death. Corrupted by 66 years of bad education,
America's Black Lumpenproletariat erupted in an orgy of rioting that brought the rule
of law to an end in many of America's large cities. As of this writing, Antifa, a group which
Donald Trump has designated a domestic terrorist organization, is still in control of a
six-square block section of downtown Seattle, which they have designated the "Capitol Hill
Autonomous Zone." In Minneapolis, the town where the rioting started, their Pentheus, Mayor
Jacob Frey, was denounced by one of the Bacchant women who spoke in the name of Black Lives
Matter after he refused to defund the Minneapolis police department. Frey was not torn limb
from limb, but he was expelled from the crowd and had to take refuge with the police he was
ordered to defund.
The race riots of May and June 2020 were only the latest installment of what might be called
the regime of governance by crisis which began four years ago, when the Deep State decided to
do whatever was necessary to depose Donald Trump. That campaign began with Russiagate, followed
by the impeachment, followed by the hate speech campaign of 2019 which sought to ban "unwanted
content" from the Internet, followed by the Covid-19 pandemic. What united all of these crises
was oligarch unhappiness with the election of Donald Trump as president of the United States
and a desire to replace the institutions of representative government with ad hoc committees of
crisis managers masquerading as scientific experts and/or aggrieved minorities.
By now it should be obvious that the racial narrative writes itself whenever a Black man
dies at the hands of a white cop. Floyd's body was still warm when the mainstream media took up
the story which had already been written and declared him a saint, complete with halo and
wings. In reality, Floyd was a violent felon who died with traces of fentanyl and cocaine in
his system, but the BBC described him as someone who "was simply trying to live life as any
other American, in search of betterment in the face of both personal and societal challenges."
[1] He then
became "the latest totem of the ills that plague the country in 2020." After growing in wisdom,
age, and grace, Floyd's life suddenly "took a different turn, with a string of arrests for
theft and drug possession culminating in an armed robbery charge in 2007, for which he was
sentenced to five years in prison." Missing from the BBC account was any mention of Floyd's
incarceration, drug dealing, violence against pregnant women or his role as a porn star,
[2] but no one
needed to tell a graduate of America's public school system that he was witnessing the latest
installment of the ongoing saga of American racism in action.
... ... ...
Both sides of the racial conflict which George Floyd's death ignited were controlled by
Jews. The ADL has consistently played a double game by condemning the racial violence that
their training seminars have created. According to the Democratic Socialists of America, "The
police violence happening tonight in Minneapolis is straight out of the IDF playbook," adding,
"US cops train in Israel." [20] After
the death of George Floyd, the ADL, eager to avoid any association with the violence their
police seminars wrought among Blacks, tweeted: "As we continue to fight for justice for
#GeorgeFloyd, we also need to fight for justice for #BreonnaTaylor, who was murdered in her own
home by police. We need justice for everyone who has been a victim of racist policing &
violence." [21]
At the same time that the ADL was demanding justice for George Floyd, they made no mention
of the death of Iyad Hallaq, an autistic Palestinian man who was gunned down after pleading for
his life while on the way to his special education class in occupied East Jerusalem. [22] The
Electronic Intifada, which did mention Hallaq's death, then singled out the Anti-Defamation
league as "a major player in the industry of bringing US police junkets to Israel for
'counterterrorism' and other kinds of joint training." [23]
Docile Negroes at traditionally Jewish organizations like the NAACP routinely get praised
for their work against racism, but as soon as Black Lives Matter began its Black solidarity
with Palestine campaign, the Israeli government and its lobbies in America attempted to disrupt
the Black Lives Matter movement in retaliation. In 2018 Al Jazeera's documentary The
Lobby -- USA revealed how The Israel Project "pulled strings behind the scenes to
get a Black Lives Matter fundraiser at a New York City nightclub canceled." [24]
So on the one hand we have American policemen being trained to treat their fellow citizens
in the same way that Israelis treat Palestinians, including the knee holds that will subdue and
sometimes kill them. This explains the white cop side of the equation. But on the other hand,
we have George Soros funding Black Lives Matter and the insurrections which follow incidents of
police brutality as the black side of the equation. Taken together both Jewish-funded groups
perpetuate the cycle of increasing violent racial conflict in America, while remaining all the
while invisible.
Black Lives Matter was a reincarnation of the Black-Jewish Alliance, which began with the
founding of the ADL after the lynching of Leo Frank and has continued to this day, with
time-outs taken for the World Wars of the 20th century. Shortly after World War II, Louis
Wirth, a Jewish sociologist from the University of Chicago began implementing his plan to
"integrate" housing in Chicago. When Chicago's ethnic neighborhoods understood that
"integration" was a euphemism for ethnic cleansing, riots ensued, beginning with the Airport
Park riots of 1947 and culminating in the arrival of Martin Luther King in Marquette Park
almost 20 years later. As one more indication that Black Lives Matter was the reincarnation of
the Black-Jewish Alliance, Alicia Garza, one of the founders of Black Lives Matter, was born in
1981 to a white Jewish father and a Black mother.
Black Lives Matter was funded by George Soros to promote race war in the United States, but
BLM also promoted sexual deviance, another cause dear to the heart of the world's most
prominent Hungarian Jewish philanthropist. In their recently published manifesto, BLM situates
its attempt to be "unapologetically Black in our positioning" within a matrix of sexual
deviance, including attempts "to dismantle cisgender privilege and uplift Black trans folk," by
disrupting "the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure" and putting in its place a
"queer-affirming network." [25]
If that jargon sounds familiar, it's because it stems from the university gender studies
programs which provide the matrix from which groups like BLM and Antifa get both their ideas
and their recruits. The ultimate cause of the uprising which took place in city after city in
the wake of George Floyd's death was bad education. Beginning in the late 1980s, literature
departments had been taken over by "tenured radicals" who have used critical theory, derived
from thinkers like Foucault, Derrida, and Gramsci, to undermine the validity of all structures
of authority. This essentially Nietzschean transvaluation of all values transferred moral
superiority to anyone who could claim oppression according to oligarchic endorsed categories
like race and gender, allowing the tenured radicals to take over one department after another
and, more importantly, allowing the proliferation of new departments, invariably ending in
"studies," as in gender studies, which drove the traditional liberal arts from academe turning
traditional universities into Maoist inspired re-education camps. The takeover of academe
reached its bitter culmination when Antifa led groups of disaffected, badly educated young
people, who were aware of nothing more significant than their grievances, into the streets in
what became an uncanny replication of the Chinese cultural revolution of 1966. One of the most
unlikely leaders of that revolution in China was an American Jew from Charleston, South
Carolina by the name of Sidney Rittenberg.
The academic pedigree of Rittenberg's successors became apparent when Antifa warlord Joseph
Alcoff got apprehended in Philadelphia in 2017 for assaulting a group of Hispanic Marines.
Alcoff's arrest shed light on one of the main figures in a society that remained literally
faceless because of their habit of wearing masks at the protests they disrupted by their
violence. Alcoff, who was known as the leader of Antifa in Washington, DC, was the child of
radical academics and had co-authored an academic paper with his mother Linda Alcoff in Volume
79 of Science and Society in the special issue on "Red and Black: Marxist Encounters
with Anarchism," entitled "Autonomism in Theory and Practice." [26] Radical
theory in the mind of Linda Alcoff led to violent praxis in the life of her son. As with Black
Lives Matter, the ADL has played a double game with Antifa, condemning its tactics while at the
same time defending it against accusations that it was morally equivalent to the "white
supremacists" it attacked in the streets of Charlottesville in 2017.
Continuity between the generations was made possible by the Jewish revolutionary spirit. The
fact that Alcoff was a Jew got suppressed in virtually every mainstream account of his
activity, [27] which
sanitized his communist connections by linking him to the Democratic Party through figures like
Nancy Pelosi and Maxine Waters. Alcoff was more forthright when he spoke in his own voice,
saying on one Youtube video, "I'm a Communist, motherf***er," before spitting into the camera.
[28]
Christians for truth portrayed Alcoff as "a self-styled modern-day Leon Trotsky" and attributed
the suppression of his ethnic identity to the fact that "Antifa's political manifestations are
funded by the billionaire Jew, George Soros." [29]
Andy Ngo, who was severely beaten by Antifa thugs in Portland in the wake of the 2016
presidential election, claims that "prominent media figures and politicians glamorize and even
promote Antifa as a movement for a just cause. CNN's Chris Cuomo and Don Lemon have defended
Antifa on-air. Chuck Todd invited Antifa ideologue Mark Bray onto Meet the Press to
explain why Antifa's political violence is "ethical." [30] Ngo goes
on to mention Joseph Alcoff as one of the most visible figures in what is otherwise a
clandestine organization, and claims that he had access to Democrat Representative Maxine
Waters in 2016. [31] He also
mentions Adam Rothstein, who is associated with the Rose City Antifa group which assaulted him
in 2016. Rothstein conducted a series of "secret lectures" at a Portland bookstore where local
recruits learned how to "heckle" opponents and make them "look ridiculous, make them feel
outnumbered," and convinced that the "Trump thing is gonna go by the wayside." [32]
Armed with political clout of this magnitude, Antifa can easily overwhelm local police
forces, which is what happened in Portland in 2016. The result is that "city government and
police lack the political will to protect citizens." What happened in Seattle in 2020 with the
creation of the "Capital Hill Autonomous Zone" was only the logical conclusion to what began in
Portland in 2016 and spread all over the Pacific Northwest, "where Antifa is especially
active." In its attempt to destabilize and destroy the nation state and its sovereign borders,
Antifa drew support from "mainstream progressive politicians, such as Rep. Alexandria
Ocasio-Cortez, who normalize hatred of border enforcement and sovereignty as such." [33]
Antifa has continued to be successful in disrupting local government and thwarting police
attempts to bring them under control because it is a Jewish organization which can always count
on favorable press from the Jewish-controlled mainstream media, which renders the connection
invisible. The same cannot be said for the Jewish press, which cites Antifa's Jewishness with
thinly-disguised ethnic pride.
When Donald Trump referred to Antifa as a terrorist organization, the Israeli newspaper
Ha'aretz came to their defense, "Trump's Attacks on Antifa Are Attacks on Jews."
[34]
According to an article which appeared in the Forward , Antifa activism "is an
affirmation of Jewish identity, both religious and secular" [35] which
stretches all the way back to 1897 with the founding of Bundism, which "sought to organize the
working-class Jews of Russia, Poland, and Lithuania." [36] After
members of a specifically Jewish Antifa group defaced a plaque in New York City honoring the
president of Vichy France Philippe Petain, they left a note which defended the rationale behind
their act of vandalism:
With Monday's actions, Jewish antifascists and allied forces have served notice that fascist
apologism will not be tolerated in our city in 2019; that anti-Semitic ideology and violence
will be confronted with Jewish solidarity and strength; and that the Holocaust will be
remembered not only with sadness and grief but also with righteous anger and action: 'We will
never forget. We will never forgive.' [37]
In the final analysis, Antifa is a Jewish organization in the same way that Bolshevism and
Neoconservatism were Jewish political movements. Not every member of Antifa is a Jew, but Jews
invariably find their ways into leadership roles in places like Portland, Washington, DC, and
even in China, as was the case during the Cultural Revolution of 1966, because they have an
advantage over non-Jews in embodying the Jewish Revolutionary Spirit which is the hidden
grammar of all revolutionary movements.
Interesting article, not the least surprising the Usual Suspects are playing both sides.
Like WW2?
One picky point is the Yanez shooting, the victim did have a gun, he had a permit for it.
He didn't show his hands and died with his hand near the gun. This was the one his GF put out
on Facebook Live to it incited two police massacres right away, the one everybody knows about
in Dallas (where they killed the shooter with a robot bomb) an another in Louisiana.
I'm a witness the SF Bay Area as a model of the racial obsession/gender bending schemes.
What a mess the place is–the signature of the Left-wing establishment that runs the
place is how the education system fails to fulfill the simple market demands for labor in
their own locale, at the high end Silicon Valley runs on Indian/Pakistani B-1s and at the
other the booming (until now) construction business runs on mostly imported Hispanics.
They spend more per pupil than the rest of the world and the whole system runs on
immigration.
I couldn't finish this article after reading this garbage:
"Floyd was a violent felon who died with traces of fentanyl and cocaine in his system"
It was announced two weeks ago that he had a lethal dose. His toxicology report was
finally made public and shows that he had a lethal dose of the dangerous pain killer fentanyl
in his system. This caused his lungs to fill with fluid, which explains why he told arriving
cops "I Can't Breath" and did not cooperate as he was delusional and dying. The cops wrestled
him to the ground and cuffed him as he died from a fentanyl overdose. Floyd would have died
right there even if the cops had not shown up.
This is why coroners wait for toxicology results before declaring the cause of death, but
in this case he bowed to political pressure and announced his death was caused by the knee to
the neck. This news is so big that our corporate media, which has promoted the riots, refuses
to air the truth. Details can be read here.
https://spectator.org/minnesota-v-derek-chauvin-et-al-the-prosecutions-dirty-little-secret/
In fair and normal world, the accused cops would be immediately freed and rehired with a
bad mark for Chauvin using an improper neck hold. Let's see what happens, but I don't expect
justice.
Floyd said "i can't breathe" several times BEFORE he was put on the ground. The cops did
nothing wrong and were trying to help him. It's all another monstrous media lie like the
mueller report and jussie smollett and rayshard brooks and the covington kids and bubba
wallace and the KY gun range video.
The American Deep State can destroy anti-fa if it wanted. Hunting down all the leaders of
this terrorist organization is not that hard. But of course the American Deep State will not
do so because anti-fa is a branch of the deep state, just like how Hollywood and the media
are (& have been for a long time) arms of the American (Globalist) deep state.
This is one of Jones' many indispensable articles. The opening alone is required reading
of anyone slightly bothered by what is going on. Dionysius sparks sexual revolution, and it
leads to debauched riot and murder and then to either social collapse or else brutal
tyranny.
The American Left and the Neocons both demand tyranny, as brutal as possible. They serve
anti-Christ.
It is either Christ and Christendom or the chaos of anti-Christ.
If Jones would realize that the Novus Ordo Mass and Vatican II are at best impotent before
Dionysius and return to Tradition, he could serve much better.
It cannot be repeated too much: we live in the Anglo-Zionist Empire 2.0. The first phase
of Anglo-Zionist Empire was the British Empire. The Brit WASP Empire spread philoSemitism
across the globe: cultural Zionism that was the inherent fruit of Anglo-Saxon Puritanism,
which was a Judaizing heresy that was the final and most defining part of Modern English, and
Anglophone Protestant, culture.
The reality is that we are in the eyes of the Anglo-Zionist Empire's elites what Irish
Catholic were to archetypal WASP Oliver Cromwell and what Palestinians are to Israelis. They
wish us exterminated or made serfs forever, and the base reason predates Freud, Darwin, Marx
and the French Revolution. It is Judaizing heresy birthing monsters to war against historic
Christianity and peoples who have any legacy in the building and maintenance of Christendom
and therefore do not serve Zionism.
WASP culture serves Zionism and always will.
When Kevin McDonald realizes all of that and the necessary inferences, his work will
become worth the effort.
There's a sure way to curb the influence that certain (((individuals))) have on American
culture and politics; it's called the "wealth tax." It's a tax on the assets of the rich and
also on foundations set up to circumvent the inheritance tax. Both Bernie Sanders and
Elizabeth Warren proposed a wealth tax but it is not included in Biden's platform. Instead,
he's proposed raising the maximum income tax rate to 39.6%. There are lots of loopholes that
individuals can utilize to reduce their income tax obligations. It won't stop their meddling
in social and political affairs. Only a very stiff wealth tax (at least 10% per year) will
curb their meddling.
"... Seeking to impose on others the conformity it enforces in its ranks, articulate only in a boilerplate of ritualized cant, today's lumpen intelligentsia consists of persons for whom a little learning is delightful. They consider themselves educated because they are credentialed, stamped with the approval of institutions of higher education that gave them three things: a smattering of historical information just sufficient to make the past seem depraved; a vocabulary of indignation about the failure of all previous historic actors, from Washington to Lincoln to Churchill , to match the virtues of the lumpen intelligentsia; and the belief that America's grossest injustice is the insufficient obeisance accorded to this intelligentsia. ..."
"... Today's cancel culture -- erasing history, ending careers -- is inflicted by people experiencing an orgy of positive feelings about themselves as they negate others. This culture is a steamy sauna of self-congratulation: "I, an adjunct professor of gender studies, am superior to U.S. Grant, so there." Grant promptly freed the slave he received from his father-in-law, and went on to pulverize the slavocracy. Nevertheless . . . ..."
"... Today's gruesome irony: A significant portion of the intelligentsia that is churned out by higher education does not acknowledge exacting standards of inquiry that could tug them toward tentativeness and constructive dissatisfaction with themselves. Rather, they come from campuses, cloaked in complacency. Instead of elevating, their education produces only expensively schooled versions of what José Ortega y Gasset called the "mass man." ..."
"... A barbarian is someone whose ideas are "nothing more than appetites in words," someone exercising "the right not to be reasonable," who "does not want to give reasons" but simply "to impose his opinions." ..."
"... The barbarians are not at America's gate. There is no gate. ..."
A nation's gravest problems are those it cannot discuss because it dare not state them. This
nation's principal problem, which makes other serious problems intractable, is that much of
today's intelligentsia is not intelligent.
One serious problem is that the political class is terrified of its constituents -- their
infantile refusal to will the means (revenue) for the ends (government benefits) they demand.
Another serious problem is family
disintegration -- e.g., 40 percent of all births, and 69 percent of all African American
births, to unmarried women. Families are the primary transmitters of social capital: the
habits, dispositions and mores necessary for flourishing. Yet the subject of disorganized
families has been entirely absent from current discussions -- actually, less discussions than
virtue-signaling ventings -- about poverty, race and related matters.
Today's most serious problem, which annihilates thoughtfulness about all others, is that a
significant portion of the intelligentsia -- the lumpen intelligentsia -- cannot think. Its
torrent of talk is an ever-intensifying hurricane of hysteria about the endemic sickness of the
nation since its founding in
1619 (don't ask). And the iniquities of historic figures mistakenly admired.
An admirable intelligentsia, inoculated by education against fashions and fads, would make
thoughtful distinctions arising from historically informed empathy. It would be society's
ballast against mob mentalities. Instead, much of America's intelligentsia has become a
mob.
Seeking to impose on others the conformity it enforces in its ranks, articulate only in
a boilerplate of ritualized cant, today's lumpen intelligentsia consists of persons for whom a
little learning is delightful. They consider themselves educated because they are credentialed,
stamped with the approval of institutions of higher education that gave them three things: a
smattering of historical information just sufficient to make the past seem depraved; a
vocabulary of indignation about the failure of all previous historic actors, from Washington to
Lincoln to
Churchill
, to match the virtues of the lumpen intelligentsia; and the belief that America's grossest
injustice is the insufficient obeisance accorded to this intelligentsia.
Its expansion tracks the expansion of colleges and universities -- most have, effectively,
open admissions -- that have become intellectually monochrome purveyors of groupthink. Faculty
are outnumbered by administrators, many of whom exist to administer uniformity concerning
"sustainability," "diversity," "toxic masculinity" and the threat free speech poses to favored
groups' entitlements to serenity.
Today's cancel culture -- erasing history, ending careers -- is inflicted by people
experiencing an orgy of positive feelings about themselves as they negate others. This culture
is a steamy sauna of self-congratulation: "I, an adjunct professor of gender studies, am
superior to U.S. Grant, so there." Grant promptly freed
the slave he received from his father-in-law, and went on to pulverize the slavocracy.
Nevertheless . . .
The cancelers need just enough learning to know, vaguely, that there was a Lincoln who lived
when Americans, sunk in primitivism, thought they were confronted with vexing constitutional
constraints and moral ambiguities. : Too much learning might immobilize the topplers with
doubts about how they would have behaved in the contexts in which the statues' subjects
lived.
The cancelers are reverse Rumpelstiltskins , spinning problems that
merit the gold of complex ideas and nuanced judgments into the straw of slogans. Someone
anticipated something like this.
Today's gruesome irony: A significant portion of the intelligentsia that is churned out
by higher education does not acknowledge exacting standards of inquiry that could tug them
toward tentativeness and constructive dissatisfaction with themselves. Rather, they come from
campuses, cloaked in complacency. Instead of elevating, their education produces only
expensively schooled versions of what José Ortega y Gasset called the "mass
man."
In 1932's "
The Revolt of the Masses ," the Spanish philosopher said this creature does not " appeal
from his own to any authority outside him . He is satisfied with himself exactly as he is.
. . . He will tend to consider and affirm as good everything he finds within himself: opinions,
appetites, preferences, tastes." (Emphasis is Ortega's.)
Much education now spreads the disease that education should cure, the disease of
repudiating, without understanding, the national principles that could pull the nation toward
its noble aspirations. The result is barbarism, as Ortega defined it, "the absence of standards
to which appeal can be made."
A barbarian is someone whose ideas are "nothing more than appetites in words," someone
exercising "the right not to be reasonable," who "does not want to give reasons" but simply "to
impose his opinions."
The barbarians are not at America's gate. There is no gate.
ByTony Cox, a US journalist who has written or edited for Bloomberg and
several major daily newspapers. Black Lives Matter may finally have found its bridge too
far – the point of absurdity and overreaching vileness that finally destroys support for
the "Marxist" political movement in all but the most extreme reaches of the left.
BLM has offered up many self-fails in recent weeks, the sort of anecdotes that stick in the
minds of observers and turn the tide of public opinion against a cause that millions of
Americans were eager to support initially. Even more than the group's nonsensical demands --
such as defunding police departments and "remaking" the US political system – its
tactics are making it impossible for politically independent Americans to support.
Those tactics have included spreading false rumors about an Aug. 10 police shooting in
Chicago, then racing downtown to loot the city's most posh retailers, then defending the theft
as
"reparations." Then there was the mob attack on a white motorist in Portland, who was
pulled from his truck and brutally beaten before
being left motionless in the street, and the torching of black-owned businesses around the
nation.
Other incidents have brought the senselessness closer to home for many Americans, such as
the BLM groups that marched through residential streets of such cities as Seattle and Portland
late at night, threatening homeowners and chanting such messages as, "Wake up, wake up, wake
up motherf***er, wake up." Other BLM mobs have descended on outdoor restaurants from
Washington to Rochester, New York, screaming at diners and demanding displays of obedient
solidarity, such as raising a fist.
But Saturday night's BLM debacle was the
clincher, as protesters blocked the emergency room entrance and exit at a Los Angeles hospital
after two Los Angeles County sheriff's deputies were ambushed and shot repeatedly in their
parked patrol car for no apparent reason. The protesters blocked the ER while yelling "We
hope they die," prompting the Sheriff's Department to send out a tweet saying, "People's
lives are at stake when ambulances can't get through."
As if that wasn't bad enough, as deputies tried to arrest a protester who refused to
disperse, a reporter for government-funded National Public Radio interfered and had to be
arrested, the Sheriff's Department said. The reporter,
Josie Huang , did not identify herself as a journalist and didn't have any press
credentials with her, the department said.
Protesters taunted police outside the hospital, saying such things as, "You're all f***ing
dying one by one ."
A video on social media also showed a celebratory reaction at the scene of the shooting,
where a smiling witness said repeatedly, "They just aired the police out, ni**a."
Evidence of the damage that the anti-racism protest movement is doing to itself is showing
up in polling, including President Donald Trump gaining ground on Democrat challenger Joe Biden
in the presidential race. In Oregon, where violent protests have dragged on for more than 100
straight days, 66 percent of respondents in a DHM
Research poll said they disapprove of the demonstrations. To put that in perspective, a
Republican presidential candidate hasn't won in Oregon since 1984.
Trump has had some success in painting Biden and other Democrats as enablers of rioting. The
shifting political winds prompted CNN host Don Lemon to sound an alarm late last month, saying
Democrats were trying to ignore the problem and risked losing votes in November.
Biden has tried to take a more strident tone against rioting since then and said Sunday that
the Los Angeles shooting was "cold-blooded" and "unconscionable." He said the
shooter "must be brought to justice." Trump took the excoriation further, saying that if
the deputies die, "fast trial, death penalty for the killer – only way to stop
this."
Understanding that they'll need strong voting support from people in the protest movement,
Democrats are trying to walk a fine line between condemning rioters and condoning violence.
Their hope is that the pieces can be picked up after the election.
"I'm voting for the guy who knows how to restore justice and peace, not the guy who
incites more violence," financial adviser Lili Balfour said on Twitter.
"If Trump wins, we'll be in a civil war for the next four years. I'm ready for peace and
reconciliation."
Therefore Biden speaks out against shooting police, but he's quiet about celebration of
shooting police and wishing death upon them.
But actions like what we witnessed Saturday night in Los Angeles are just too repugnant to
look the other way. Americans who are asked to raise a fist in support of BLM or vote for the
demonstrators' chosen candidate can't help but cringe about the conduct of whom they're
standing with.
By Diana Bruk , a Russian-American journalist living in New York, who has written for The
New York Times, The Paris Review, Cosmopolitan, Esquire and Elle, amongst other
publications.
Many people who previously would have never considered voting for Donald
Trump will now do so due to the excesses of the social justice brigade. The Left's failure to
understand basic human psychology could decide the election.
I've always considered myself a soft Liberal. But the last few months have really brought
out my conservative side, and I'm not the only one. I've recently spoken to several working
class people who were told they were being laid off just before getting an email saying the
company was looking to "diversify its staff," and their responses were all the same:
"F**k this, I'm voting for Trump."
One of my issues with social activism has always been that it centers around an idea and
doesn't take basic human psychology into account. I understand that racism in America exists
and should be eradicated. I understand and agree with the fact that there should be more people
of color in white collar positions. I also understand that white, working-class people have
families to feed and bills to pay, and that the only natural response to being fired and
replaced by a person of color is to vote for Trump as a means of revenge.
I'm ashamed to say I've had to fight off the same thoughts in the last few weeks. I'm white
and well-educated, so, by Liberal standards, I'm automatically privileged. But I don't have
family money to fall back on, and need and want to work. I used to get a decent amount of
assignments and opportunities from a Facebook group for female writers, but, lately, every post
says "BIPOC writers only." Theoretically, I'm all for it. If I were lounging around
daddy's pool posting socially aware updates all day, I'd be even more for it. But I'm not and I
also need to eat.
Russian-American immigrants have been more pissed off than I've ever seen them lately, and I
understand why. In addition to all of the usual issues, they have to deal with feeling like
they're black and white at the same time. To be light-skinned means getting fired or otherwise
attacked for not being a person of color. But to have an accent and need to work to make a
living makes you a minority. Social media makes it seem like everyone is either a 'Karen' or
'Straight Outta Compton,' but there's a lot of in between, and those are the people who are
being forgotten. And they're the ones who vote.
When I tell my social justice friends that there are a lot of working class white people who
feel marginalized right now, their response is always the same: "Well, that's how black
people have felt for a long time." I totally get that and I agree. But there's a difference
between justice and revenge. And it's also an election year. The Black Lives Matter movement is
important, but it's so poorly timed that, were I a conspiracy theorist, I would say that the
Republicans were behind it all along.
So this is my message to all of my social justice friends: I know you mean well, but be
smart about this. None of us wants Trump to get re-elected. We're already stuck with Acceptable
Under the Circumstances Joe Biden because of all of the in-fighting between Elizabeth Warren
supporters and Bernie Sanders aficionados.
You have to understand that being antagonistic is just going to make the Other Side feel
defensive and lash out. This is, once again, basic human psychology, and it will not get you
the results you want, and then you're just going to whine and moan about it as usual.
I saw a viral Simpsons clip recently that summed things up nicely. An elephant runs through
the Republican National Convention, which has banners saying "We want what's worst for
everyone" and "We're just plain evil." Then it runs through a Democratic National
Convention, which has banners saying "We can't govern" and "We hate life and
ourselves." I get that you feel guilty for being white and wealthy and having a lot when
others have so little. Recognize that, own it, and stop being so self-righteous about it.
Recognize that posting hateful comments on the walls of people whose opinions differ from
yours is cyber-bullying, which you are purportedly against. Recognize that hating on people who
are having anxiety attacks over wearing masks and the general situation means bullying people
with mental health issues, which you are also purportedly against. And recognize that if you
are going to make large swaths of people feel attacked by Democrats, you are pushing them right
into Trump's stiff, unstable embrace.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
In short black people are used as pawns in the political struggle between two neoliberal
clans fighting for power, using students without perspectives of gaining meaningful employment as
a ram. We saw this picture before in a different country. And riots do reverse gains achieved in
civil right struggle since 1960th, so they are also net losers. Racial tensions in the USA
definitely increased dramatically.
Notable quotes:
"... Bottom line: "Critical Race Theory", "The 1619 Project", and Homeland Security's "White Supremacist" warning represent the ideological foundation upon which the war on America is based. The "anti-white" dogma is the counterpart to the massive riots that have rocked the country. These phenomena are two spokes on the same wheel. They are designed to work together to achieve the same purpose. The goal is create a "racial" smokescreen that conceals the vast and willful destruction of the US economy, the $5 trillion dollar wealth-transfer that was provided to Wall Street, and the ferocious attack on the emerging, mainly-white working class "populist" movement that elected Trump and which rejects the globalist plan to transform the world into a borderless free trade zone ruled by cutthroat monopolists and their NWO allies. ..."
"... This is a class war dolled-up to look like a race war. Americans will have to look beyond the smoke and mirrors to spot the elites lurking in the shadows. There lies the cancer that must be eradicated. ..."
"... The current situation cannot exist without the complicity of the secret services and the police. The heads of the secret services are either part of the cabal or close their eyes in fear ..."
"... There can be no single oligarch. It must be a larger group but very united by fear and a common goal. This can only be achieved if they are all Jews or Masons. Or both under a larger umbrella like some kind of pedo-ritual killing-satan worshiper. Soros can't do it alone. ..."
"... Of course politicians are corrupt and complicit but usually they are not the leaders ..."
Here's your BLM Pop Quiz for the day: What do "Critical Race Theory", "The 1619 Project",
and Homeland Security's "White Supremacist" warning tell us about what's going on in America
today?
They point to deeply-embedded racism that shapes the behavior of white people They
suggest that systemic racism cannot be overcome by merely changing attitudes and laws They
alert us to the fact that unresolved issues are pushing the country towards a destructive race
war They indicate that powerful agents -- operating from within the state– are inciting
racial violence to crush the emerging "populist" majority that elected Trump to office in 2016
and which now represents an existential threat to the globalist plan to transform America into
a tyrannical third-world "shithole".
Which of these four statements best explains what's going on in America today?
If you chose Number 4, you are right. We are not experiencing a sudden and explosive
outbreak of racial violence and mayhem. We are experiencing a thoroughly-planned,
insurgency-type operation that involves myriad logistical components including vast, nationwide
riots, looting and arson, as well as an extremely impressive ideological campaign. "Critical
Race Theory", "The 1619 Project", and Homeland Security's "White Supremacist" warning are as
much a part of the Oligarchic war on America as are the burning of our cities and the toppling
of our statues. All three, fall under the heading of "ideology", and all three are being used
to shape public attitudes on matters related to our collective identity as "Americans".
The plan is to overwhelm the population with a deluge of disinformation about their history,
their founders, and the threats they face, so they will submissively accept a New Order imposed
by technocrats and their political lackeys. This psychological war is perhaps more important
than Operation BLM which merely provides the muscle for implementing the transformative "Reset"
that elites want to impose on the country. The real challenge is to change the hearts and minds
of a population that is unwaveringly patriotic and violently resistant to any subversive
element that threatens to do harm to their country. So, while we can expect this propaganda
saturation campaign to continue for the foreseeable future, we don't expect the strategy will
ultimately succeed. At the end of the day, America will still be America, unbroken, unflagging
and unapologetic.
Let's look more carefully at what is going on.
On September 4, the Department of Homeland Security issued a draft report stating that
"White supremacists present the gravest terror threat to the United States". According to an
article in Politico:
" all three draft (versions of the document) describe the threat from white
supremacists as the deadliest domestic terror threat facing the U.S. , listed above the
immediate danger from foreign terrorist groups . John Cohen, who oversaw DHS's
counterterrorism portfolio from 2011 to 2014, said the drafts' conclusion isn't
surprising.
"This draft document seems to be consistent with earlier intelligence reports from DHS,
the FBI, and other law enforcement sources: that the most significant terror-related
threat facing the US today comes from violent extremists who are motivated by white
supremac y and other far-right ideological causes," he said .
"Lone offenders and small cells of individuals motivated by a diverse array of social,
ideological, and personal factors will pose the primary terrorist threat to the United
States," the draft reads. "Among these groups, we assess that white supremacist extremists
will pose the most persistent and lethal threat."..(" DHS
draft document: White supremacists are greatest terror threat " Politico)
This is nonsense. White supremacists do not pose the greatest danger to the country, that
designation goes to the left-wing groups that have rampaged through more than 2,000 US cities
for the last 100 days. Black Lives Matter and Antifa-generated riots have decimated hundreds of
small businesses, destroyed the lives and livelihoods of thousands of merchants and their
employees, and left entire cities in a shambles. The destruction in Kenosha alone far exceeds
the damage attributable to the activities of all the white supremacist groups combined.
So why has Homeland Security made this ridiculous and unsupportable claim? Why have they
chosen to prioritize white supremacists as "the most persistent and lethal threat" when it is
clearly not true?
There's only one answer: Politics.
The officials who concocted this scam are advancing the agenda of their real bosses, the
oligarch puppet-masters who have their tentacles extended throughout the deep-state and use
them to coerce their lackey bureaucrats to do their bidding. In this case, the honchos are
invoking the race card ("white supremacists") to divert attention from their sinister
destabilization program, their looting of the US Treasury (for their crooked Wall Street
friends), their demonizing of the mostly-white working class "America First" nationalists who
handed Trump the 2016 election, and their scurrilous scheme to establish one-party rule by
installing their addlepated meat-puppet candidate (Biden) as president so he can carry out
their directives from the comfort of the Oval Office. That's what's really going on.
DHS's announcement makes it possible for state agents to target legally-armed Americans who
gather with other gun owners in groups that are protected under the second amendment. Now the
white supremacist label will be applied more haphazardly to these same conservatives who pose
no danger to public safety. The draft document should be seen as a warning to anyone whose
beliefs do not jibe with the New Liberal Orthodoxy that white people are inherently racists who
must ask forgiveness for a system they had no hand in creating (slavery) and which was
abolished more than 150 years ago.
The 1619 Project" is another part of the ideological war that is being waged against the
American people. The objective of the "Project" is to convince readers that America was founded
by heinous white men who subjugated blacks to increase their wealth and power. According to the
World Socialist Web Site:
"The essays featured in the magazine are organized around the central premise that all of
American history is rooted in race hatred -- specifically, the uncontrollable hatred of
"black people" by "white people." Hannah-Jones writes in the series' introduction:
"Anti-black racism runs in the very DNA of this country. "
This is a false and dangerous conception. DNA is a chemical molecule that contains the
genetic code of living organisms and determines their physical characteristics and
development . Hannah-Jones's reference to DNA is part of a growing tendency to derive
racial antagonisms from innate biological processes .where does this racism come from? It
is embedded, claims Hannah-Jones, in the historical DNA of American "white people." Thus, it
must persist independently of any change in political or economic conditions .
. No doubt, the authors of The Project 1619 essays would deny that they are predicting
race war, let alone justifying fascism. But ideas have a logic; and authors bear
responsibility for the political conclusions and consequences of their false and misguided
arguments." ("The New York Times's 1619
Project: A racialist falsification of American and world history", World Socialist Web
Site)
Clearly, Hannah-Jones was enlisted by big money patrons who needed an ideological foundation
to justify the massive BLM riots they had already planned as part of their US color revolution.
The author –perhaps unwittingly– provided the required text for vindicating
widespread destruction and chaos carried out in the name of "social justice."
As Hannah-Jones says, "Anti-black racism runs in the very DNA of this country", which is to
say that it cannot be mitigated or reformed, only eradicated by destroying the symbols of white
patriarchy (Our icons, our customs, our traditions and our history.), toppling the existing
government, and imposing a new system that better reflects the values of the burgeoning
non-Caucasian majority. Simply put, The Project 1619 creates the rationale for sustained civil
unrest, deepening political polarization and violent revolution.
All of these goals conveniently coincide with the aims of the NWO Oligarchs who seek to
replace America's Constitutional government with a corporate Superstate ruled by voracious
Monopolists and their globalist allies. So, while Hannah-Jones treatise does nothing to improve
conditions for black people in America, it does move the country closer to the dystopian dream
of the parasite class; Corporate Valhalla.
Then there is "Critical Race Theory" which provides the ideological icing on the cake. The
theory is part of the broader canon of anti-white dogma which is being used to indoctrinate
workers. White employees are being subjected to "reeducation" programs that require their
participation as a precondition for further employment . The first rebellion against critical
race theory, took place at Sandia Labs which is a federally-funded research agency that designs
America's nuclear weapons. According to journalist Christopher F. Rufo:
"Senator @HawleyMO and
@SecBrouillette have
launched an inspector general investigation, but Sandia executives have only accelerated
their purge against conservatives."
Sandia executives have made it clear: they want to force critical race theory,
race-segregated trainings, and white male reeducation camps on their employees -- and all
dissent will be severely punished. Progressive employees will be rewarded; conservative
employees will be purged." (" There is a civil war erupting
at @SandiaLabs ." Christopher F Rufo)
It all sounds so Bolshevik. Here's more info on how this toxic indoctrination program
works:
"Treasury Department
The Treasury Department held a training session telling employees that "virtually all
White people contribute to racism" and demanding that white staff members "struggle to own
their racism" and accept their "unconscious bias, White privilege, and White
fragility."
The National Credit Union Administration
The NCUA held a session for 8,900 employees arguing that America was "founded on
racism" and "built on the blacks of people who were enslaved. " Twitter thread here and
original source documents
here .
Sandia National Laboratories
Last year, Sandia National Labs -- which produces our nuclear arsenal -- held a
three-day reeducation camp for white males, teaching them how to deconstruct their
"white male culture" and forcing them to write letters of apology to women and people of
color . Whistleblowers from inside the labs tell me that critical race theory is now
endangering our national security. Twitter thread here and original source
documents
here .
Argonne National Laboratories
Argonne National Labs hosts trainings calling on white lab employees to admit that they
"benefit from racism" and atone for the "pain and anguish inflicted upon Black people. "
Twitter thread here .
Department of Homeland Security
The Department of Homeland Security hosted a Training on "microaggressions,
microinequities, and microassaults" where white employees were told that they had been
"socialized into oppressor roles. " Twitter thread here and original source
documents here
." (" Summary of
Critical Race Theory Investigations" , Christopher F Rufo)
On September 4, Donald Trump announced his administration "would prohibit federal
agencies from subjecting government employees to "critical race theory" or "white privilege"
seminar. ..
"It has come to the President's attention that Executive Branch agencies have spent
millions of taxpayer dollars to date 'training' government workers to believe divisive,
anti-American propaganda ," read a Friday memo
from the Office of Budget and Management Director Russ Vought. "These types of 'trainings'
not only run counter to the fundamental beliefs for which our Nation has stood since its
inception, but they also engender division and resentment within the Federal workforce The
President has directed me to ensure that Federal agencies cease and desist from using
taxpayer dollars to fund these divisive, un-American propaganda training sessions."
The next day, September 5, Trump announced that the Department of Education was going to see
whether the New York Times Magazine's 1619 Project was being used in school curricula
and– if it was– then those schools would be ineligible for federal funding.
Conservative pundits applauded Trump's action as a step forward in the "culture wars", but it's
really much more than that. Trump is actually foiling an effort by the domestic saboteurs who
continue look for ways to undermine democracy, reduce the masses of working-class people to
grinding poverty and hopelessness, and turn the country into a despotic military outpost ruled
by bloodsucking tycoons, mercenary autocrats and duplicitous elites. Alot of thought and effort
went into this malign ideological project. Trump derailed it with a wave of the hand. That's no
small achievement.
Bottom line: "Critical Race Theory", "The 1619 Project", and Homeland Security's "White
Supremacist" warning represent the ideological foundation upon which the war on America is
based. The "anti-white" dogma is the counterpart to the massive riots that have rocked the
country. These phenomena are two spokes on the same wheel. They are designed to work
together to achieve the same purpose. The goal is create a "racial" smokescreen that conceals
the vast and willful destruction of the US economy, the $5 trillion dollar wealth-transfer that
was provided to Wall Street, and the ferocious attack on the emerging, mainly-white working
class "populist" movement that elected Trump and which rejects the globalist plan to transform
the world into a borderless free trade zone ruled by cutthroat monopolists and their NWO
allies.
This is a class war dolled-up to look like a race war. Americans will have to look
beyond the smoke and mirrors to spot the elites lurking in the shadows. There lies the cancer
that must be eradicated.
A good article, but no mention of who exactly these oligarchs are. Or why so many of them
are Jewish.
Or why so many Zionist organisations support BLM and other such groups.
Mike, not mentioning these things will not save you. You will still be cancelled by
Progressive Inc.
This seems like a good explanation of what is happening. I wonder whether too many people
will fall for the propaganda, though. It is the classic effort to get the turkeys to support
thanksgiving.
The deserved progress and concessions achieved by the civil rights struggles for the Black
community is in danger of deteriorating because Black leadership will not stand up and
vehemently condemn the rioting and destruction and killing, and declare that the BLM movement
does not represent the majority of the Black American culture and that the overexaggerated
accusations of "racism" do not necessitate the eradication and revision of history, nor does
it require European Americans to feel guilt or shame. There is no need for a cultural
revolution. The ideology and actions of BLM are offensive and inconsistent with American
values, and Black leaders should be saying this every day, and should be admonishing about
the consequences. They should also use foresight to see how this is going to end, because the
BLM and their supporters are being used to fight a war that they can never win. And when it's
over, what perception will the rest of America have of Black people?
@sonofman g to TPTB. Better to have an amorphous slogan to donate money to than an actual
organization with humans, goals and ideas which can be held up to the light and critically
examined.
The whole sudden race thing is a fraud to eliminate the electoral support Trump had
amassed among blacks before Corona and Fentanyl Floyd. In line with what Whitney says, the
globalists need to take down Trump. And the race card has always been the first tool in the
DNC's toolkit. When all else fails, go nuclear with undefined claims of racism.
Almost every big magazine has a black person on the cover this month. Probably will in
October too. Coincidence? Sure it is.
They indicate that powerful agents -- operating from within the state– are
inciting racial violence to crush the emerging "populist" majority that elected Trump to
office in 2016 and which now represents an existential threat to the globalist plan to
transform America into a tyrannical third-world "shithole".
I'm shocked that they're trying to sell this Q-tier bullshit about Trump fighting the deep
state.
The reality about Trump is that he is the release valve, the red herring designed to keep
whitey pacified while massive repossessions and foreclosures take place, permanently
impoverishing a large part of the white population, and shutting down the Talmudic
service-based economy, which is all that is really left. It is Trump's DHS that declared a
large part of his white trashionalist base to be terrorists.
The populist majority never had anyone to vote for. This system will never give them one.
They aren't bright enough to make it happen.
Agree. Barack Obama in particular will go down in history a real disgrace to the legacy of
the US presidency. He is violating the sacred trust that the people of the United States
invested in him. What a fraud!
Good post Mr. Whitney especially about "white supremacy" garbage .which has only been
going on since the 90s! You know, Waco, Ruby Ridge, Elohim City and Okie City, militias,
"patriot groups," etc. This really is nothing new. And, since so many remember the "white
supremacy" crapola was crapola back in the 90s, I'd say everyone pretty much regardless of
race over the age of 40 knows there is, as it says in Ecclesiastes in the Bible, "there is
nothing new under the sun." And, if you home schooled your kids back then, then you kids know
it as well. Fact is this: the DHS as with every other govt. agency is forced to blame "white
supremacy" for every problem in this country because who the heck else can they blame? Jews?
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahh when pigs fly After all, Noahide just might be around the
corner ..
Sheriffs have a lot of legal power. Ultimately, the battle is privatized money power
vs Joe Citizen/Sheriffs.
This sheriff is working a Constitutional angle that says: Local Posse (meaning you.. Joe
citizen) working with the Sheriff department to protect your local community. Richard Mack is
teaching other Sheriffs and (some Police) what their Constitutional power is, and that power
doesn't include doing bidding of Oligarchs.
Sheriffs are elected, and their revenue stream is outside of Oligarchy:
So Donald Trump suddenly discovers that racial Bolshevism is the official policy of
his own executive branch – a mere 3 years and 8 months after assuming the
position
... Looks like the same old flim-flam they pull every four years. No matter who wins, the
Davos folks continue to run the circus and fleece the suckers dry.
Because it is. Substitute "the ethnic Russian middle class are class enemies" for
"Anglo-American are all racists" and there you have it. Permission for a small organized
minority to eliminate a whole class on ideological grounds...
I live in a former communist country in Eastern Europe with corrupt politicians, oligarchs
and organized crime.
America was a country with a minor corruption and in which the oligarchs, although
influential, were not united in a small group with decisive force. Now America is slowly
slipping into the situation of a second-hand shit-hole country.
Is that I can see the situation more clearly than an American citizen who still has the
American perception of his contry the way it was 30 years ago.
Essential thing:
1) The current situation cannot exist without the complicity of the secret services and
the police. The heads of the secret services are either part of the cabal or close their eyes
in fear .
2) There can be no single oligarch. It must be a larger group but very united by fear and
a common goal. This can only be achieved if they are all Jews or Masons. Or both under a
larger umbrella like some kind of pedo-ritual killing-satan worshiper. Soros can't do it
alone.
3) Of course politicians are corrupt and complicit but usually they are not the
leaders
4) BLM are exactly the brown shirts of the new Hitler.
Soon we will se the new Hitler/Stalin/ in plain light.
Thirty black children murdered recently; zero by police / BLM & 'the media' say
nothing: https://www.outkick.com/blm-101-volume-7-the-lives-of-innocent-black-kids-do-not-matter/
BTW:
– Last year, the nationwide total for all US police forces was 47 killings of unarmed
criminals by police during arrest procedures.
– 8 were black, 19 were white.
Though blacks, relative to their numbers, committed a vastly higher number of crimes, hence
their immensely greater arrest rate.
@Justvisiting urally, it is nonsense -- nasty, power-hungry, censorious nonsense.
It is the opposite of scientific or empirical thought -- science can not accept theories
which are not capable of falsification. (Take astrology -- actually, don't ! -- what ever
conclusion it comes to can never be wrong : Dick or Jane didn't find love ? Well, one
of Saturn's moons was retrograde & Mercury declensed Venus (I don't know what it means
either) . or Dick went on a bender & Jane had a whole bad hair week.
Frankly, to play these pre-modern tricks on us is just grotesquely insulting. That some are
falling for it is grotesquely depressing.
Another ringer from Mike Whitney! Keep 'em comin', brother.
We are not experiencing a sudden and explosive outbreak of racial violence and mayhem.
We are experiencing a thoroughly-planned, insurgency-type operation that involves myriad
logistical components including vast, nationwide riots, looting and arson, as well as an
extremely impressive ideological campaign.
Yup. TPTB have been grooming BLM/Antifa for this moment for at least 3-4 years now, if not
longer. Here's a former BLMer who quit speaking out three years ago about the organization's
role in the present 'race war':
It is very clever politics and (war) propaganda. You break down and demoralise your
enemies at the same time as assuring your own side of it's own righteous use of violence.
This is a class war dolled-up to look like a race war. Americans will have to look
beyond the smoke and mirrors to spot the elites lurking in the shadows.
Nailing it.
4. They indicate that powerful agents -- operating from within the state– are
inciting racial violence to crush the emerging "populist" majority that elected Trump to
office in 2016 and which now represents an existential threat to the globalist plan to
transform America into a tyrannical third-world "shithole".
Which of these four statements best explains what's going on in America today?
If you chose Number 4, you are right.
If we believe this – we need to act like it. These are "enemies, foreign and
domestic ". This isn't ordinary politics, it arguably transcends politics.
What hope is there without organization?
And whatever is done – don't give them ammunition. The resistance must not be an
ethno-resistance.
But he is either naive or a bad manager, as his hires are deadly to his aims. And the
management criticism is big, because as a leader that is mostly what he does.
That he gets information to affect US policy for good, from outside of his circle of
trusted personnel, is a sad state of affairs.
@Robert Dolan ds that it would have ended on day one were it not officially sanctioned
and the rioters protected from prosecution. Why hasn't the Janet Rosenberg/Thousand
Currents/Tides Foundation connection with the BLM/DNC/MSM cabal, as well as with Antifa and
social media, been the major investigation on Fox News? Why haven't Zuckerberg, Zucker, et al
been arrested for incitement to commit federal crimes, including capital treason to overthrow
the duly elected president? (Just a few rhetorical questions for the hell of it.) What's so
galling is that the cops and federal agents are being used as just so many patsies who are
deployed, not to protect, but deployed to look like fools and be held up for mockery as
pathetic exemplars of white disempowerment.
The officials who concocted this scam are advancing the agenda of their real bosses, the
oligarch puppet-masters who have their tentacles extended throughout the deep-state and use
them to coerce their lackey bureaucrats to do their bidding.
Agree, but where is President Trump? He was supposed to appoint undersecretaries and
assistant secretaries and deputy undersecretaries and Schedule C whippersnappers on whose
desks such outrages are supposed to die.
I've thought from the beginning that this lack of attention to "personnel as policy" --
with Trump overestimating the ability of the ostensible CEO to overcome such intransigence --
was one of his major failures. I am sympathetic, as there are not many people he could trust
to be loyal to his agenda, much less to him, but this is a disaster in every agency
Few years ago I watch a clip secretly recorded in Ukrainian synagogue where Rabi said
"first we have to fight Catholics and with Muslims it will be an easy job" ...
Thanks to Mr Whitney for being able to cut through the fog and see what's going on behind
it. The term "white supremacist" wasn't much in public use at all until the day Trump was
elected then suddenly it was all over the place. It's like one of those massive ad campaigns
whose jingle is everywhere as if some group decided on it as a theme to be pushed. They're
really afraid that the white working class population will wake up and see how the country is
being sold out from underneath their feet hence the need to keep it divided and intimidated.
Like all the other color revolutions everywhere else they strike at the weak links within the
country to create conflict, in the US case it's so-called diversity. There's billions
available to be spent in this project so plenty of traitors can be found, unwitting or
otherwise, to carry out their assignments. The billionaire class own most of the media and
much else and see the US as their farm. They have no loyalty whatsoever and outsource
everything to China or anywhere else they can squeeze everything out of the workers. They
want a global dictatorship and admire the Chinese government for the way it can order its
citizens around.
You are exactly right. Trump is doing his part (knowingly or unknowingly, but probably
knowingly) to accomplish the NWO objectives. He was not elected in 2016 in spite of NWO
desires, as most Trump supporters think, but rather precisely BECAUSE of NWO desires.
The NWO probably also wants him to win again this year, and if so then he will win. The
reason the NWO wanted him in 2016 (and probably wants him to win again) was primarily to
neutralize the (armed) Right in this country so they wouldn't effectively resist the COVID-19
scamdemic lockdown tyranny and BLM/Antifa riots.
@Trinity While I tend to agree with you that it looks like a race war, the question is
why is it happening now? If it were just a race war promoted by radicals in BLM and Antifa,
it does not explain the nationwide coordination (let's face it the faces of BLM and Antifa
are not that smart or connected), the support and censorship of the violence by the MSM and
the support of Marxist BLM by corporations to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars.
This is a color revolution in the making and may come to a peak after Nov. 3rd. Whitney is on
to something, there is much more going on behind the "smoke and mirrors" and AG Barr (if he's
not part of it) should be investigating it.
They indicate that powerful agents -- operating from within the state– are
inciting racial violence to crush the emerging "populist" majority that elected Trump to
office in 2016 and which now represents an existential threat to the globalist plan to
transform America into a tyrannical third-world "shithole".
I keep reading such nonsense in the comments above. the so-called populist majority does
not get it, Trump is not placed here to stop the Globalist agenda, that is an electioneering
stunt. Look at what he has actually and really done.
How has he stopped the Globalist move forward?? By the Covid plandemic being
allowed to circle the globe and shut down the US economy and social norm? By moving our high
tech companies to Israel? Giving Israel and their Wall Street allies what is left of US
credit wealth? Draining the swamp with even more Zio-Neocon Swamp creatures in the govt than
ever? Moving the embassy to Jerusalem and all requests per Netanyahu's wish list? A real
anti-Globalist stand? Looting the Federal Reserve for the Wall Street high fliers, who
garnered more wealth during the crash test run of March-April and are sure to make out with
even more for the coming big crash?
Phoney stunts of stopping immigration or bashing China. Really? China is still rising
propelled by Wall Street and Banker funds. I have not seen any jobs coming home, lost more
than ever in US history this year. Only lost homes for the working and middle classes.
How is Populist America standing up for their constitutional rights which is being
shredded a little more each day? Standing up for their Real Interests, which are eroded and
stolen on an almost daily basis by Trump's NY Mafia and Wall Street Oligarchs. Jobs gone for
good and government assistance to the needy disappearing, as that is against the phoney
Republic individualism, that you must make it on your own. Right just like the big goverment
assistance always going to the big money players and banks, remember as they are too big
to let fail!
Dreaming that Trump is going to save White America from the Gobalists is just
bull corn . From whom BLM? Proven street theatre that will disappear on command. I
actually have come to learn that some Black leaders are speaking out intelligently for street
calm and distancing themselves from BLM.
Problem with the USA is the general population is so very dumbed down by 60 years of MSM
– TV s and Hollywood mind control programming that the public prefers professional
actors like Reagan and Trump over real politicians, and surely never chose a Statesman or
real Patriotic leader. the public political narrative is still set by Fox , CNN and
MSNBC .
The deep state is so infiltrated and overwhelmed with Zio and Globalist agents, that it is
now almost hopeless to fix. Sorry to point out but Trump is best described as the Dummy
sitting on his Ventriloquist's lap (Jared Kushner).
Situation is near hopeless as even here on Ron Unz Review the comments are so
disappointing, almost 80% are focused on the Race as the prime issue and supportive of Trump
fakery (not that I support Biden and Zio slut Kamil Harris either).
In sum, beyond putting their MAGA hats on, White America is more focused more on
playing Cowboy with their toy guns, AR's and all than really getting involved politically to
sort things out to get American onto a better track. Of course, this is not taken seriously
as it might call for reaching out to other American communities that are even more
disenfranchised: African- Americans and Latinos.
@David Erickson nted him in 2016 (and probably wants him to win again) was primarily to
neutralize the (armed) Right in this country so they wouldn't effectively resist the COVID-19
scamdemic lockdown tyranny and BLM/Antifa riots.
Covid and BLM/ANTIFA are just window dressing for the financial turmoil. "Look over here
whitey, there's a pandemic" and "look over here whitey, there's a riot" is much preferred to
whitey shooting the sheriff who comes to take his stuff.
Wave the flag and bible while spreading love for the cops, and the repossessions and
evictions should go off without a hitch. Yes, Trump is a knowing participant.
"My impression is that BLM, Antifa and other protestors are well aware of this"
Like all good Maoists the cult white kids of antifa rigidly adhere to the mission statement
and stick the inconvenient truth in the back of their mushy minds. BLM ... is a mercenary.
Can you imagine any other groups rioting and destroying American cities for over 3 months?
Imagine if the Hells Angels or some other White biker gang was doing what Antifa and BLM are
doing? Hell, imagine if it were a bunch of Hare Krishnas pulling this shit off? Hell, I think
the local mayors, police, and other law enforcement employees wouldn't even take this much shit
even if the rioters were Girl Scouts. We are talking 3-4 months of lawlessness, assaults,
rapes, murders ( cold blooded premeditated murders at that) and still the people in charge let
this shit go on night and day. IF the POTUS doesn't have the authority or the power to stop
shit like this from going on then what the hell do we even vote for anyhow? Granted, I see the
reason for not being ruled by a dictatorship, but who in the hell can justify letting these
riots go on? One can only assume that both the republicants and the demsheviks are fine with
these riots because no one seems in a hurry to shut them down or arrest the hombres funding
these riots. Who is housing and feeding the rioters? Who is paying their travel expenses? I'm
sure most everyone in Washington knows who the people are behind these riots but don't expect
any action anytime soon.
This is a class war dolled-up to look like a race war. Americans will have to look beyond
the smoke and mirrors to spot the elites lurking in the shadows. There lies the cancer that
must be eradicated.
That's true to a large degree, but
It is indeed an attempt to liquidate the working and lower middle class. Most of the
American working and lower middle class, obviously not all, is White. So predictably we have
these calls for White Genocide. Agreed and good to see the tie-in with the Coronavirus Hoax
lock downs, too, which also spread the devastation into minority communities under the guise of
public safety.
The one question that remains unanswered is why the major cities were targeted for
destruction. Obviously these are the playgrounds of the oligarchs and have been decimated. We
will learn soon enough.
The Reverend William Barber is the only genuine black leader I am aware of.
And he makes a pointn of not speaking only for blacks, but for all disadvantaged communities,
including poor whites. IMO he is the real deal, and I very much hope he takes the lead in
articulating genuine community values of respect and equality for all, including basics such as
decent health care and food access.
The pressure exerted on someone like Barber by the BLM forces in the media and other
institutions is enormous.
I wish Ron Unz would invite him to write something for the UR.
ou remember Ian Buruma, right? He was forced to resign as editor of The New York Review
of Books in 2018 after he published an essay by the Canadian broadcaster Jian Ghomeshi, who
was accused and acquitted of sexual assault. Now, Buruma talks to The Telegraph about his new book (on
Churchill and Britain's "special relationship" with America) and "cancel culture":
Having been toppled himself, he is worried that cancel culture will lead to 'a kind of
timidity and fear and caution on the part of people who edit and write. The whole point of
being a good editor is having the freedom sometimes to do something that might be
provocative, because that helps debate, and debate helps people think. And if you cancel that
out, you get a sort of boring and fearful conformity that is inimical to a lively
intellectual and artistic culture.'
He sees the new 'intolerance and puritanism' as a substitute for religion. 'It is
particularly strong in the New World, in Australia, Canada and the United States, and Britain
to a slightly lesser extent, than in non-English-speaking countries. There is a sort of
puritanical zeal that is very strong in America and the intolerance of unorthodoxy may be a
secular version of it.'
The point of Ghomeshi's article, he says, was to explore the question of how we set the
perimeters of the length and severity of the punishments doled out by the court of public
opinion. 'I deliberately did not want the article to be about what he had done, there was no
way that I wanted to stick up for that or defend it. I was interested in it because it was a
voice that hadn't been heard, somebody who'd actually had that experience.'
Is there not a danger that his viewpoint might be a bit too detached, I ask? Isn't there
an argument that the many abused women who never even get to see their abuser in court and
feel unheard are quite right to be angry that a liberal magazine should give a voice to
somebody like Ghomeshi?
'Well that's probably true, statistically, that most cases of abuse go unreported and
therefore we never hear about them. But it would be false to say that the voices of women, or
men for that matter, who've been abused in one way or another have never been heard –
we've heard quite a few, maybe not enough, but we've heard them. So I don't think that that
is right.'
Has being 'cancelled' affected him much? 'All I will say is that certain publications I
used to write for do not ask me any more because it would upset people – not so much
readers but people who work for those publications.
'I don't miss being in an office, I'm perfectly happy sitting in my own office writing
whatever I want, but I miss the job in the sense that I could have done something interesting
with [the NYRB] and I no longer can. I wanted to have more voices from South America, more on
Africa, Asia. I think the problem with a lot of American publications today is that they look
inward too much.'
In other news: Thomas Homer-Dixon says reading The Lord of the Rings made him a
better parent. He explains why in The
Walrus : "Many Christian commentators and scholars say Tolkien espoused a Christian hope
based on faith in redemption and God's ultimate intervention. (He was a devout Roman Catholic.)
By this view, hope, which in this case would be Estel, can remain secure because we know God
will take care of us in the end. Other Tolkien aficionados have argued that he eschewed hope
entirely: his protagonists keep going because of nothing more than their ardent commitment to
courage and cheer regardless of what the future seems to hold. Neither argument convinces me. I
see little hint of Christian eschatology in the pages of The Lord of the Rings, and the book's
life philosophy is deeply informed by Norse, Germanic, and Celtic myth. Indeed, to my mind,
Tolkien's heroes possess the Finnish virtue sisu , which translates roughly as 'fierce
tenacity' or 'toughness' and indicates inner strength in the face of daunting odds."
Richard Mabey reviews Helen Macdonald's
Vesper Flights : "I longed for a bird that was just itself, not a token of class war or
a sop to emotional neediness."
Richard Reinsch reviews George
Weigel's The Next Pope : "Weigel's book is an attempt to spell out spiritual criteria
for the next pope -- to explain, in his view, how the next pope should act in order to revive
the church's fortunes in the modern world. There are many elephants in the room here, but one
of the biggest, prudently left unnamed by Weigel, is Pope Francis's pontificate. Weigel drops
small vignettes throughout the book of what the next pope must do and not do."
What's wrong with the university today? Many things, but the main problem, Mario Biagioli
argues, is a preoccupation with gaming the
system rather than focusing on its core purpose: teaching and research. "According to
Goodhart's Law, as soon as a measure becomes a target, gaming ensues, which undermines its
function as a measure. Charles Goodhart, an economist, was referring to the gaming of economic
indicators, but his law applies equally well to all sorts of regimes of evaluation, including
the metrics that command so much authority in today's higher education. Universities are
investing ever more heavily in curating and occasionally faking figures that enhance their
national and global rankings, while simultaneously keeping those metrics in mind when deciding
anything from campus development projects to class size. (Architecturally ambitious campuses
attract alumni giving, which is a positive factor in the U.S. News & World Report rankings
of universities, as are classes capped at 19 students.) Now in full swing, this trend started
inconspicuously a few decades ago. Already in 1996, Northeastern University's president,
Richard Freeland, observed that 'schools ranked highly received increased visibility and
prestige, stronger applicants, more alumni giving, and, most important, greater revenue
potential. A low rank left a university scrambling for money. This single list [ ] had the
power to make or break a school.' Freeland quickly figured out which numbers Northeastern
needed to privilege. Ranked 162nd in 1996, Northeastern jumped to 98th in 2006 and, ten years
after his departure, 47th in 2016. This trend goes hand in hand with another distinctive
feature of the modern university: the discourse of excellence. Because 'excellence' is devoid
of a referent that can be either empirically or conceptually defined -- its meaning effectively
boiling down to 'being great at whatever one may be doing' "
Jeremy Seaton reviews a new edition of
Russell Kirk's Old House of Fear : "While the novel itself remains unaltered so far as I
can tell, the current edition features the addition of a wonderful introduction by James Panero
that offers much insight into both Kirk and his works. This edition also restores Kirk's
dedication of the volume: 'This Gothick tale, in unblushing line of direct descent from The
Castle of Otranto , I do inscribe to Abigail Fay.' This inscription, brief as it is, offers
valuable revelations regarding the Old House of Fear and its residents."
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.407.2_en.html#goog_1874787619 Ad ends in 48s
Next Video × Next Video J.d. Vance Remarks On A New Direction For Pro-worker, Pro-family
Conservatism, Tac Gala, 5-2019 Cancel Autoplay is paused
Why time flies when you're old : "Over
a three-minute period, younger people can count down the seconds almost perfectly. Older
people, on the other hand, can be out by as much as forty seconds -- meaning that if they
counted seconds for an hour they'd think the task done with around the 47-minute mark. It
sounds paradoxical, but it's that slowing of the older person's body clock that leads to their
faster counting -- and their feeling that the rest of the world is speeding up."
In search of the English Proust :
"Writing to his publisher Gaston Gallimard, Proust opted for an unusually crisp register: 'I
refuse to let the English destroy my work.' He was protesting at translator C. K. Scott
Moncrieff's use of a pretty Shakespeare quotation ( Remembrance of Things Past ) for his
analytically more precise title ( À la recherche du temps perdu ), not to mention
the now iconic but misleading Swann's Way (for Du côté de chez Swann
). He softened, though his subsequent communications with Scott Moncrieff himself are best
represented as polite rather than cordial. Scott Moncrieff remains nevertheless the true hero
in the story of Proust in English, and any bad feeling on Proust's part is a mere bagatelle
compared to how he would have felt about John Middleton Murry's unintelligible proposition: 'No
English reader will get more out of reading Du côté de chez Swann in French
than he will out of reading Swann's Way in English.' It is, alas, the sort of thing that
also infected Conrad, who came up with the lunatic claim that Moncrieff's Proust was superior
to Proust's Proust."
Receive Prufrock in your inbox every weekday morning. Subscribehere.ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Micah Mattix is the literary editor of The American Conservative and an associate
professor of English at Regent University. His work has appeared in The Wall Street
Journal , National Review , The Weekly Standard , Pleiades , The
Washington Times , and many other publications. His latest book is The Soul Is a
Stranger in this World: Essays on Poets and Poetry (Cascade). Follow him on Twitter .
Ian Buruma highlighted something I've also noticed from the woke mob: Despite their
supposed advocacy of global societies and non-white voices, they completely ignore the
experiences, struggles, and contradictions of global people, especially the Global South. The
persecution of women and girls in Muslim societies is an inconvenient topic for the
intersectional mob, balancing feminism and anti-Christian sentiments. The extremely prominent
colorism of Latin American is inconvenient, balanced between an always uneasy coalition
between Latino and Black Americans.
"And if you cancel that out, you get a sort of boring and fearful conformity that is
inimical to a lively intellectual and artistic culture." In the old country, that was called
"the wooden tongue". You really can't do nothing with such an instrument...
If after reading the headline you thought that is is one of the Russian universities got
financing from NED and is preparing to teach our grant-eaters "the science of color
revolutions", then you are mistaken.
It is the USA Washington and Lee University in Lexington, Virginia, which now offers 101 of
color revolution preparation in a course called "Overthrow the State" for its American students
and the subject of the course is the USA, not the xUSSR space.
According to the course description, it "puts every student at the head of a popular
revolutionary movement that seeks to overthrow the current government and create a better
society." Among questions discussed:
How will you gain power?"
How will you communicate with the masses?
How do you plan to improve people's lives?
How will you deal with the past?
These are the questions that the University course answers. To get a diploma in the course
"how to overthrow the state" you will need to pass 3 tests. It will be necessary to write your
"Manifesto" after studying historical examples and revolutionary thought from Franz Fanon to
Che Guevara, Mahatma Gandhi and representatives of the revolutionary movement. You will also
have to "write a compelling essay about rewriting history" and a "white paper" (white paper is
a kind of business plan, but it is written for an audience that is not related to
business).
Univrsity of Washington and Lee is so
progressive, that in July the faculty voted to remove the name of Robert Li from the name of
the University.
After ample media jaw-jawing over whether the Democratic presidential nominee would loudly
and proudly repudiate some of the present violent protesting in America's streets, Joe Biden
(if briefly) denounced the hard Left on Monday. "Rioting is not protesting. Looting is not
protesting. Setting fires is not protesting," the former vice president said in Pittsburgh, in
a rare day trip from Delaware; he has rarely traveled since the dawn of COVID-19 in the United
States. "None of this is protesting -- it's lawlessness, plain and simple. And those who do it,
should be prosecuted."
"Violence will not bring change," Biden continued. "It will only bring destruction. It's
wrong in every way. It divides, instead of unites. It destroys businesses -- only hurts the
working families that serve the community. It makes things worse across the board, not better."
And, in the signature line of the speech, Joe Biden summed up a lifetime of political appeal:
"You know me. You know my heart. You know my story. Ask yourself, do I look like a radical
socialist with a soft spot for rioters?"
It was effective. Still, Biden's address Monday hardly tied up all loose ends.
After his speech, fresh polling implied additional trouble for his campaign.
Emerson College , respected in the field, released research that found President Trump down
only two percent in the contest, with a double digit performance with African-Americans and
support among Hispanics nearing forty percent, both surprising. It's one poll, but it's
startling stuff. Since Biden declared his candidacy in 2019, his duel with Donald Trump has
been one-sided.
Despite press incentives to couch the race as anybody's game, Trump vs. Biden so far had had
all the makings of a rout, and without a traditional campaign, even a boring one at that (a
shocking statement on anything that involved Donald Trump). From the president's termination of
internal pollsters last year that showed him to the ex-veep losing badly, to Biden's astonishing,
intimidating comeback in the primary to the Democratic nominee's record of utter political
dominance since crisis opened up in America, it had not been a pretty picture for the White
House.
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.406.0_en.html#goog_1525384837 00:06 / 00:59
00:00 Next Video × Next Video J.d. Vance Remarks On A New Direction For Pro-worker,
Pro-family Conservatism, Tac Gala, 5-2019 Cancel Autoplay is paused
But that's now plainly shifted. Some partisans in early summer made the case that
relative administration restraint on violent protests in America's cities (including the
capital of Washington, D.C.) would lay bare the nature of certain left-wing tactics.
Politically, at least, it's beginning to look prescient. While overdone analogies to the mayhem
of 1968 abound -- the Nixon-Humphrey race occurred in a time closer to World War I than the
current year -- it's clear, now, that some devotees of the Democrats are, in fact, undermining
the cause.
Americans are fleeing the
city. Bad news for the donkey: some might argue that's a tacit rejection of liberal
politics. And it's certainly a reality Trump campaign manager Bill Stepien is licking his chops
to exploit. Urban America is almost monolithically controlled by the Democratic Party. And, in
a stunning reversal after decades of urban triumph, the city has become a political albatross.
Biden notoriously made his bones in his early political life as a sensitive ear on the
anxieties, reasonable or not, of white suburbanites. Speculation about senility aside, he would
seem to know what's up.
That's why Biden made a tactical error, in later veering off-message -- after the initial
upbraiding of his own side. He repudiated violence, but then engaged in both-siderism. He
implied the canard that anti-fascist chaos has been met with equal, odious might by the far
Right. It hasn't. The most recent, known victim of political violence was a
Trump-supporting man in Portland, Oregon. Whatever you think of his politics, he was
apparently essentially executed in the streets of a major American city.
Images of burned-out ruins in Kenosha, Wisconsin permeate cyberspace. Add in, for instance,
insane reports (if true) of laser attacks on law enforcement, and it's not hard to see how this
gets dicey in a hurry for the Democrats. The party's monofocus on police killings of
African-Americans, an essential issue, falls flat with the public when there is a failure to
also address the larger toxic brew that is the country's problems right now. So, true to form,
Biden strayed further from his initial path by talking, at bizarre length, about Russian
President Vladimir Putin and the dubious
Russian bounties story, where plenty of regional experts say the dust is far from settled.
"Donald Trump is determined to instill fear in America," Biden closed. "That's what his entire
campaign for the presidency has come down to: fear."
The former vice president then declined to take questions, failing to allay fears that he
only speaks when he absolutely has to.
Senator Harris did not say "riots'. To claim that she did is to promote a clear falsehood.
She said "protests". No American should have a problem with protests.
I don't really like either candidate and was all set to write in another name as a protest
(Andrew Basevich). Here is what changed my mind:
https://cwbchicago.com/2020... Click on the embedded video. This attack was folllowed up
by another vicious attack on a senior a couple of days later:
https://cwbchicago.com/2020...
I am not expecting any miracles in a second Trump term but I am one of many voters who
think Biden is a mere placeholder for the more radical Harris.
Trump's best hope for re-election are a) more examples of urban unrest/local politicians
failing to keep order and b) Biden continuing to show he is losing his marbles, particularly
in a debate. He will probably get both, but he would help himself out by hesitating just a
bit every time he feels like shooting off his mouth, which turns of a lot of people,
particularly wavering voters.
"In moments of despair it had occurred to me that there was something of a medieval Dark Age
about the current mood: Extinction Rebellion with its child saints and the self-flagellating
Woke culture. Being given an apparently sound reason to disable the most notable manifestations
of that historical tradition which we are now being encouraged to denounce: what could be
better suited to the weird, vaguely hysterical, fashion of the times?
Fear may be the most dangerous contagion but I am coming around to the view that this is not
simple fear. It is a mass neurosis of which irrational and prolonged anxiety is a symptom: a
corrosive loss of confidence and understanding of one's role and identity which will, if it
prevails, ultimately undermine the quality of modern life more irrevocably than any virus.
It is not only our official cultural institutions that are at risk here. One of the most
fundamental principles of post-war liberal democracy is on trial – or, at least, coming
up for examination." The Telegraph
--------------
Yes, I know. I am becoming even more boring about this, but Daly has her finger on the
essence of the matter. The call to wokeness is a siren song enlisting neurotic adherence to
a cause that demands rejection of the world as we have known it and the creation of a utopian
cult that does not know its own creed.
That remains to emerge when the putative victors in the struggle for a woke world fall
upon each other for control. What would President Bidoharris do in such a circumstance?
IMO they would cave in and the street fanatics would rule a barren landscape that was once a
prosperous and well run country. pl
IMO, This phenomenon is not organic. Rather, it has been deliberately induced by the
enemies of democracy and of the US - some of these enemies are foreign powers, some are
foreign individuals and some are domestic, and of those, even within our own government.
Allies with a common objective for the time being.
The US govt began systematically developing mind control techniques in the 1950s that
built on the work of Bernays. Some of the programs were for controlling individuals (e.g.
MK-ULTRA) and some for controlling masses. Those programs have come to fruition and are being
applied to the US population. It's easy now with mass media, social media and everyone being
wired into their devices 24/7.
As much as the Democrats have a war room, that war room is taking orders from another one
that is higher up the chain of command, IMO.
The current panic/hysteria could be reversed or morphed into something more positive
within a year if the powers running this operation wanted it to be done, but they don't want
that. They want to wreak havoc and destruction. They make a James Bond villain look like
child's play.
A terrified world was ready to believe in the Zombie Apocalypse. What are the roots of
that predeliction?
"Covid" was not the trigger; only the spark that set off the tinder already gathered. Loss
of religion - substituting drugs for the pain of personal growth - broken families - mass
media - age of disinformation - retreats from the challenges of daily interpersonal
connection to interactions by choice behind the computer screens
Rollo May, in his book "Love and Will" nailed it in the 1960's - the Age of Aquarius will
become the Age of Addiction- life-affirming passion is being replaced by life-sapping
lust.
However, this describes only the malaise and our own choices to this this mainstream.
There are still incredible people out there that reject all of the above. As the 1960's
taught us, if we are not part of the solution, we are part of the problem. And part of the
problem may be tuning into the malaise ourselves and blocking out where the sunshine still
exists.
Mea culpa. Playing one of Eric Berne's Games People Play - "Ain't it Awful?"
What is the creed of the liberals, Colonel? Who are the liberal gods? Do you think the
problems facing western civilisation are a consequence of it turning its back on them? I have
a different thesis: The west didn't turn its back on the liberal gods. It embraced them
wholeheartedly, so much so it has now earned an audience with their prince, in his own abode
no less.
In the case of the ongoing George Fentanyl riots I would suggest that this is a mass
psychotic episode, caused by everything mentioned in the article plus drug use, especially
constant, long-term, vaporized marijuana use.
I don't think it is a coincidence that the worst of the rioting has occurred where
marijuana has either been legalized or effectively decriminalized.
You mean the Obamas and the Clintons? They do look a bit "alien" in the best sense of the
word. Barry rode a fantastic "train" of scholarships all the way to editor of the Harvard Law
Review. Michele and her brother were the beneficiaries of the Daly Machine's gratitude to her
father's role as a ward healer. This seems an amazing sequence of events in an indelibly
racist country.
Regarding the climatic aspects of it at least, there is some evidence in peer-reviewed
journals that there may be a Maunder Minimum beginning in the 2030, resulting in a
significant drop in average temperature. It's related to sunspot cycles. [Note: I'm citing a
popularization of it here:] https://www.livescience.com/51597-maunder-minimum-mini-ice-age.html
.
The detailed peer-reviewed article aboutmit in Nature is quite lengthy and technical.
Post 9-11, Dick Cheney pushed the One Percent Doctrine to justify invading Iraq - if there
is a one percent chance Saddam has nuclear weapons, the US must treat this as a 100%
chance.
This One Percent doctrine became widely discredited, and Ron Suskind wrote a book about it
- how indeed were government decisions made during the War on Terror?
How much of the One Percent Doctrine remains embedded in government decisions today, when
faced with the War on Covid? If it was discredited as the Cheney Doctrine as 100% overkill,
why is it still applied as our model for "covid" decision making?
Shut 100% down if there is a 1% risk -that some will die, and in fact some did die.
Shouldn't we be talking about this?
In the case of George Flloyd (et al) why has there been a pathologic avoidance in
virtually all media, right and left, to even mention resisting arrest and drug use as co
factors in these person's ultimate outcomes?
If one tried to raise these issues all one got back is "he did not deserve to die even if
he was a criminal high on drugs", "he did not deserve to be killed over passing a $20 bill"
......... that a death alone justifies the ongoing string of distortions.
What undergirds this intentional avoidance that prevents even the introduction of personal
responsibility for one's own outcomes? Liberal orthodoxy California-style requires only
blame; and shuns any possible hint that one set their own fate in motion by their own
choices. This bleeding hear overkill is oppressive.
The cult of victimization - is it now found in 99% of our society? Please, November 3,
show me I am wrong. Of course, my mind set is distorted by living in California. Asking for
personal responsibility is thee quickest way to get canceled and censored on any local blog
out here.
I vaguely remember when personal responsibility was a fundamental tenant of American life.
It was certainly the hall mark of my own growing up in the 1950's. In California.: When did
this change so dramatically? Was it LBJ and The Great Society?
Who was it that said fate is what life hands you; destiny is what you do with it. Fate is
being born a certain race, in a certain neighborhood to certain parents, or lack of them.
Destiny is certainly what one chooses to do with that fate. And well evidenced by the recent
RNC testimonies. Bravo.
The gist of this article;
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/schiff-pelosi-livid-after-intel-community-ditches-manipulated-election-briefings-written
Seems to be the marriage of convenience between the democrats and the intelligence community
is starting to fray, as the lightbulb over the head of the intelligence people has turned on,
that sticking to the, "Hillary as the rightful one," narrative for the last four years was
too many eggs in one basket and now they will be throwing the democrats under the bus.
Anyone sensing similar?
Does the 1955 Alan Ginbsurg beat poem "HowL" have any relevance to what is going on today?
Does "Rebel Without a Cause" speak the same message - rage, undefined, diffuse generational
rage .....at something.
Howl
BY ALLEN GINSBERG
For Carl Solomon
I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness, starving hysterical naked,
dragging themselves through the negro streets at dawn looking for an angry fix,
angelheaded hipsters burning for the ancient heavenly connection to the starry dynamo in
the machinery of night,
who poverty and tatters and hollow-eyed and high sat up smoking in the supernatural darkness
of cold-water flats floating across the tops of cities contemplating jazz,
who bared their brains to Heaven under the El and saw Mohammedan angels staggering on
tenement roofs illuminated,
who passed through universities with radiant cool eyes hallucinating Arkansas and Blake-light
tragedy among the scholars of war,
who were expelled from the academies for crazy & publishing obscene odes on the windows
of the skull,
who cowered in unshaven rooms in underwear, burning their money in wastebaskets and
listening to the Terror through the wall,
who got busted in their pubic beards returning through Laredo with a belt of marijuana for
New York,
who ate fire in paint hotels or drank turpentine in Paradise Alley, death, or purgatoried
their torsos night after night
with dreams, with drugs, with waking nightmares, alcohol and cock and endless balls,
incomparable blind streets of shuddering cloud and lightning in the mind leaping toward
poles of Canada & Paterson, illuminating all the motionless world of Time between,
Peyote solidities of halls, backyard green tree cemetery dawns, wine drunkenness over the
rooftops, storefront boroughs of teahead joyride neon blinking traffic light, sun and moon
and tree vibrations in the roaring winter dusks of Brooklyn, ashcan rantings and kind king
light of mind,
who chained themselves to subways for the endless ride from Battery to holy Bronx on
benzedrine until the noise of wheels and children brought them down shuddering mouth-wracked
and battered bleak of brain all drained of brilliance in the drear light of Zoo,..........
(etc, etc, etc)
Pat..come on. Tweaking the Obamas, Clintons and me the Cone Head Family are other
subjects. I was addressing your inference that the Trump family is running the country in a
well and prosperous manner. Hardly. Running the country on an overnight 4 trillion dollar
plus credit card charge and dribbling out dixi cups Less Taxes Kool Aid is pushing the
standard definition of a well run prosperous country.
It is the Democrat congressional party that wants to spend more funny money than Trump and
you know very well that if it had not been for the carefully encouraged CODIV panic and
shutdown the country would be hugely prosperous and Trump would have clear sailing to
re-election. As I have said before, I am quite good at taking a Le Carre style back-azimuth.
There is an ops room somewhere running The Resistance, always has been and at the bottom of
that chamber pot are painted familiar faces.
written by daniel
mcadams wednesday august 26, 2020
It was one of the most notorious cases of 'cancel culture' gone crazy. A young high school
student was relentlessly bullied and character-assassinated by the mainstream media because he
wore a MAGA hat while a bully screamed in his face. Nicholas Sandmann turned the tables and
walked away with millions of dollars after suing the media outlets that slandered him. But is
"cancel culture" going away? Or is it getting more violent? Watch today's Liberty Report:
"... 'Mostly peaceful protests' are like the 'moderate rebels' in Syria - propaganda constructs that do not exist in the real world. The people who owned the burning cars and whose businesses were destroyed will not be relieved by such phrasing. ..."
"... Joe Biden's attempt to swing Republican voters to his side has failed . At the same time he has rejected many of the issues progressives favored. This will hurt the election turn out the Democrats will need. Add to that the unrest which plays into Trump's hands. The Democrats who fear that are right ..."
"... he sole focus on Antifa as the problem Imo just shows the power of the media and politicians to shape the narrative. ..."
Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler said Wednesday he hasn't done enough to focus on damages caused
by some city protests over the last three months and the fallout from coronavirus. He
called on the community to help him come up with better solutions to city issues.
During the last months the Magnificent Mile in Chicago
was looted - twice. Yesterday new riots and looting occurred in Minneapolis after a rumor
of another police killing incited some people :
Police Chief Medaria Arradondo tried to dispel rumors that spread on social media about the
death of the unidentified Black man, who was suspected in a Wednesday afternoon homicide
and fatally shot himself on the Nicollet Mall as officers approached several hours later.
His death, which was captured on city surveillance video and released by police within 90
minutes, nonetheless sparked protests and unrest in the heart of downtown.
The video confirmed the police account of what happened and showed the man glancing over
his shoulder before pulling out the gun and firing, then collapsing to the ground as a
half-dozen witnesses ran away with their hands in the air. The officers, one of whom had
his gun drawn, shooed a remaining witness away and kicked the suspect's gun away before
performing chest compressions.
Last Sunday police in Kenosha, Wisconsin proved to be too incompetent to arrest a man
they had already had under control . They shot him 7 times into the back when he was
trying to get into his car. Nights of rioting followed. Buildings were burned down and businesses
were looted.
Yesterday a white teen with a semi-automatic weapon had the stupid idea to join others in
'protecting the businesses' in Kenosha from further looting. He ended up killing two people
and wounding more after he was attacked by some of
the rioters. The teen was arrested and he is facing charges but I doubt that he is guilty of
more than sheer stupidity and manslaughter in self defense.
The cycle of violence will likely continue. There are too many racist in the police and the level
of U.S. police training seems to be abysmal. There is also too much tolerance for violence
within the general community.
Politically this plays into Trump's law and order campaign. The Democrats have lauded
Black Live Matters and the protests but have hardly spoken out against the rioting and
looting that comes with them.
This CNN chyron from yesterday
evening is an expression of their position:
'Mostly peaceful protests' are like the 'moderate rebels' in Syria - propaganda
constructs that do not exist in the real world. The people who owned the burning cars and
whose businesses were destroyed will not be relieved by such phrasing.
Joe Biden's attempt to swing Republican voters to his side
has failed . At the same time he has rejected many of the issues progressives favored.
This will hurt the election turn out the Democrats will need. Add to that the unrest which
plays into Trump's hands. The Democrats who
fear that are right :
"There's no doubt it's playing into Trump's hands," said Paul Soglin, who served as mayor
of Madison, on and off, for more than two decades. "There's a significant number of
undecided voters who are not ideological, and they can move very easily from Republican to
the Democratic column and back again. They are, in effect, the people who decide elections.
And they are very distraught about both the horrendous carnage created by police officers
in murdering African Americans, and ... for the safety of their communities."
Trump, of course, is positioning himself as the antidote to urban unrest. "So let me be
clear: The violence must stop, whether in Minneapolis, Portland or Kenosha," Vice President
Mike Pence declared in his Republican convention speech Wednesday night, with Trump looking
on. "We will have law and order on the streets of this country for every American of every
race and creed and color."
Republicans had chided Joe Biden and other Democrats for not calling out the violence in
the aftermath of the Blake shooting. Biden immediately addressed the shooting, but didn't
condemn the ensuing violence until Wednesday in a video posted on social media.
Despite Trump's failure to bring the pandemic under control his job approval rating
continues to be high
while Biden's lead in the polls
is shrinking . The United States seem to have a higher tolerance for avoidable death by
guns or viruses than other societies have. It is not the only point that makes it exceptional .
Posted by b on August 27, 2020 at 17:39 UTC |
Permalink
thanks b... it really looks like an empire in fast decline.... i don't believe the usa
constitution took into consideration the idea of corporations... also as you note - the
tolerance for violence or death as with covid is indeed much greater... i guess more people
have to have guns as it is in their constitution, and so much for public medicare... it is
like a dream about public finance and somewhere way off in the distant future... i don't
believe it is going to matter who wins this coming election, as the divisiveness is so
pronounced, it will be hard to build bridges.. it seems like no one is interested in building
bridges between the opposing sides either... all the politicians are mostly looking after
corporations and special interest lobbies - israel and etc. etc... sad kettle of fish...
Very fair analysis, I enjoyed this piece. You are absolutely right, the terrible training
and general ineptitude of the police is at the core of the problem. The protesters recognize
this and there are many salient examples to fuel the outrage. However, the solutions they
call for don't address this root problem and alienate many moderate voters. Defund the
police? This will make the police more responsible? The whole thing is a mess with no real
solutions in sight.
In my opinion, the problem is the hiring and personnel practices in US police departments.
Police officer is a critical job, you must often make snap judgments in tense situations, and
you have the power to do violence to others. But police officers are paid similarly to car
mechanics, not even as much as many private security guards! The most responsible and wise
Americans do not become police officers, they pursue other careers where their talents are
better rewarded. Then, if a great person makes it into the police force, there is no way to
distinguish themselves by excellent performance and rise quickly through the ranks. The red
tape in the personnel system is suffocating. The best officers leave for private
opportunities, leaving the police force to make do with the rest.
Given the US political system, where decisions are made based on which simple slogan can
rally the crowd, I don't see any hope of this improving. It would take a redesign of the org
structure and personnel management of the entire system. Far more likely that leaders make
some symbolic, token changes so they can claim to have "done something." The dysfunction of
the US government is starting to be noticeable in almost every area...
Thanks for this insightful essay and thanks for the last link to the chilling must read
essay by Larry Romanoff on the Unz Review. I simply don't know the answer to the multiple
problems faced by the US but isn't that the job of the professional politicians? It seems
none would even begin to address any of the mind blowing issues raised by Romanoff. In a
previous era many of those crucial issues would be career ending third rail, touch and die.
Times have been forever changed by events. I have the feeling the general populace won't put
up with the present archaic and parasitical structures for long. Hang on for a bumpy
ride.
The conclusion is unfortunately correct, but t he sole focus on Antifa as the problem
Imo just shows the power of the media and politicians to shape the narrative. Who do you
believe is more dangerous, Antifa or White Supremacist militias? The Feds are well aware that
WS groups are using the protests to destroy property and trying to set off a race war, but
the media and politicians are remarkably silent about the role of White Supremacists in the
violence, unless something happens that is too hard to ignore, like 'Umbrella Man.'
... as for antifa, what exactly have they done? who are they? is there an
organization?
My pet theory is that they are an off-shoot of JDL. Ready to turn any legitimate protest into
a riot for the evening news. Because Zionists need to protect the Zionist asshats that run
USA/Empire.
That's why they're (still) so mysterious. That's why the US government can never seem to
understand who they are. Antifa are the domestic "White Helmets" ready to support YOUR
protest. Except not.
the problem is
a. the hiring and personnel practices in US police departments by sabre <= @ 5.
b. the inner economic contradictions arising from secular decline. <= vk @ 7
c. media focus on Antifa <= according to B.
d. events and failures orchestrated to heightened economic oppression <= norecovery @
21
e. Business as usual while the country burns AU1 @ 34
f. repressive authoritarian state militancy and Trump @ 37..
g. All three shooting victims <= self-defense<= white, <= felons. gm 48
h. A JDL offshoot.. Jackrabbit @ 58
I say the problem of "unsatisfied rising discontent" is to be expected When anyone in a
democratic society fails to be heard, by all concerned, little recourse remains to those with
a grievance but to ....XXXXX
A very strong constitutional issue exists in these riots =>. The First Amendment
<=was not in the Federalist construct of Aristocrats and the corporate empires they owned.
The effort to control America is hidden deep inside the words and court interpretations since
the Constitution of the United States of America was imposed on Americans.
The Aristocrats in America wanted a British Colonial government without British
Aristocrats ; they wanted a government with a strong army so it could protect them from
Angry Americans! The Aristocrats and their corporations still in America after Britain was
defeated wanted to control the profits that could be made in America, much in the same
fashion as the British Colonial Government had helped its corporations, investors, and
bankers before the war to control who got the profits that were made in America.
The Federalist wanted a government the Aristocracy could use to exploit America ;
the federalist wanted to govern the behaviors and direct the toils of those in America in
such a way that only one federal government could do. In fact the so called Framers wanted a
royal government, tried to make George Washington, King.
Remember the Declaration of Independence was in 1776 , the America states defeated
the British Government in 1778, the Constitution of the USA did not come into being until
1788. During that 10 years John Hanson was the first President of the United States of
America.. Samuel Huntington, Thomas McKeeny, and others were President of the United States
of America. The British were gone, George Washington was appointed general to remove the
British corporations, Investors, and bankers from America, that was accomplished in 1778. The
American Aristocrats wanted to own America. George Washington was selected to be the general
of the Army because his wealth made him famous enough to attract mercenaries to fight the
British at Valley Forge. At the time the Constitution in Philadelphia was developed, George
was in Mt. Vernon.
The Aristocratic Convention in Philadelphia, was a meeting, designed to terminate
involvement by the newly emancipated American in American politics. The result of the
Convention in Philadelphia was a document which outlined how control of America could be
returned to the American Aristocrats, a document which would make the Aristrocrat powerful
again, the same Aristocrats who had previously used the British Government, to control
Americans. Check it out what were George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, and the
like doing in America while America was a British Colony (before 1776)? The Aristocrats
wanted a government that would allow America Aristocrats to direct and a government they
could use to control Americans.
The anti-federalist tried to refuse ratification of the denial to be against the
peoples involvement in their own government but the best the anti-federalist could do
against, the strong powers behind the Constitution, was to force the Federalist to add to
their regime change Constitution ten basic promises, <=these promises were in the form of
amendments and are known as the Bill Of Rights [BOR]: Anyway the first amendment of the BOR
reads.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting
the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right
of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of
grievances.. But, but but it does not say Congress will make every law necessary to
enforce the protection of the first Amendment.
So why can't those who are protesting be allowed to live so they can be heard? Why can't
their grievances be listed and placed on the national ballot? Let everyone be heard.. explore
every aspect of their concerns and accommodate those with a Grievance to rejoin our
democratic society, ask the nation to settle the issues dissenters have ? When the
Aristocrats use the government to impose their will on risings, they do so by eliminating
bystander awareness and deny everyone but a few to be involved; worse, they allow media to
promote, one side of the issue (no must carry rule).. this narrowing of participants happens
until nothing remains but conflict between bottom up grievance . . and top down power.. and
believe me that is the goal.. to divide and conquer.
"... BLM and Antifa having corporate sponsers makes them a little fascist, too, not to mention ideologically intolerant. The daughtets and sons of the spoiled upper-middle class. ..."
"... he sole focus on Antifa as the problem Imo just shows the power of the media and politicians to shape the narrative. ..."
BLM is not a protest movement, it's not even a civil rights movement. It's a Trojan
Horse funded by sinister globalist troublemakers
BLM is blamed for Antifa violence.
The Democrats and the media have encouraged this madness from the very beginning by
praising the protests while downplaying the magnitude of the damage.
That the rioting helps Trump and that establishment Democrats (Republican-lite)
support Trump is completely overlooked.
But it will change and change won't be pretty. The state will deploy all its assets
to reclaim its monopoly on violence. You can bet on that. Security will be reestablished
with brute force and an iron fist. A Crackdown is coming and the innocent are going to be
crushed along with the guilty.
Just as I said @Aug28 13:47 #199. Antifa+militia violence are a prescription for a
stronger police state.
@102 Karlof...i agree, your analysis is spot on, but where does a leftist put their
political energy when the two options are right-wing fascist and right-wing fascist-lite?
BLM and Antifa having corporate sponsers makes them a little fascist, too, not to
mention ideologically intolerant. The daughtets and sons of the spoiled upper-middle
class.
I would love a more sharing society, don't know how to get there. USA is probably a lost
cause, and as VK states, that is probably a good thing for the rest of the world.
Here is something to chew on. I live in portland and the first time I saw Antifa spring up
was back in 2009. Rose City Antifa organized a boycott of a local cooperatively owned bike
shop. They plastered the town and all the bike racks in the city saying to boycott the worker
owned business. What was it's crime you ask?, to get such treatment. The bike shop hosted a
meeting and speakers forum held by Portlanders for 911 truth. Draw your own conclusions
here.
What many are doing here, in the heat of battle, is forgetting that this is not a "civil
war," it is class war. The ruling class is pursuing its classic tactic of "divide and
conquer." Those divided are under the influence of the propaganda of the ruling class, and
continue to damage each other, rather than their true enemy the ruling class. This must be
made clear, in order to unite the working class, that they may exercise there true power and
crush the ruling class. There is no other way.
The conclusion is unfortunately correct, but t he sole focus on Antifa as the problem
Imo just shows the power of the media and politicians to shape the narrative. Who do you
believe is more dangerous, Antifa or White Supremacist militias? The Feds are well aware that
WS groups are using the protests to destroy property and trying to set off a race war, but
the media and politicians are remarkably silent about the role of White Supremacists in the
violence, unless something happens that is too hard to ignore, like 'Umbrella Man.'
... as for antifa, what exactly have they done? who are they? is there an
organization?
My pet theory is that they are an off-shoot of JDL. Ready to turn any legitimate protest into
a riot for the evening news. Because Zionists need to protect the Zionist asshats that run
USA/Empire.
That's why they're (still) so mysterious. That's why the US government can never seem to
understand who they are. Antifa are the domestic "White Helmets" ready to support YOUR
protest. Except not.
actually, there is NO such thing as "Antifa". Antifa is as made up as ISIS/Ali Queda is.
Antifa is a vague term loosely applied toward a group of people who are fed up with all the
fake "Capitalism" and are willing to fight against it.
Some may even not be "Antifa" but fake "Antifa" created for propaganda purposes. Exactly how
the notorious "red brigade" in Italy who kidnapped Aldo Moro and killed him. And the Red
Brigade was supposed to be Communist also; finny that, since Aldo Moro was about to create a
coalition with the Communists and he is prevented from accomplishing that by
"Communists".
But b is essentially correct, the average American moron™ is now fed up with all the
riots and looting and is siding with trump. But that's only because the Average American
moron™ (I have trademarked it, so dont try to steal it) is so stupid, they cannot even
think about anything, they live in a very simple good vs bad world.
How retarded do you have to be to think killing minorities in the US is acceptable when
each thug committing suicide by cop becomes a national conversation is beyond me, especially
when blacks pretty much slaughter each other and everyone else in crime stats.
It's clear that the Dems anticipate resistance to their plan by the contemptible way
they have branded struggling workers as "white nationalists" and "racists".
Divide and conquer is as old as civilization itself and just as effective as the first
time it was used. Some baby's never learn.
"... "Corbyn was thoroughly delegitimised as a political actor from the moment he became a prominent candidate and even more so after he was elected as party leader, with a strong mandate." ..."
"... "chose not to" ..."
"... Think your friends would be interested? Share this story! ..."
George Orwell's novel
'1984' depicts life within Oceania, a totalitarian society strictly controlled by an omnipresent Party whose three simple yet
contradictory slogans are: war is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength. Citizens of Oceania were forced to accept
that two plus two may equal five if the Party deemed it so.
Akin to the Snake
game
found
on old Nokia mobile phones, woke movements become increasingly illogical and harder to control before eventually tying
themselves in knots or crashing into the walls of logic, sowing the seeds of their own destruction. Modern feminist movements
are having the wind taken out of their sails by other woke factions who argue that children should be taught boys can have
periods
,
so as not to distress transgender students, or that
terms
like
mother and father should be replaced with parent 1 and parent 2. Even the main UK doctors' union sent an internal memo
advising its staff to use the term 'pregnant people' rather than 'expectant
mothers'
to
avoid causing offense.
One could argue that
campaigns designed to remove the concept of male and female is a threat to women and their historical struggles. By
eliminating the 'existence' of women, it not only airbrushes out women's vast contribution to history but also removes the
whole notion of feminism – if womanhood does not exist, then the whole idea of misogyny becomes irrelevant. Perhaps one day
someone will decide that race is simply a construct and can be changed at will, thus making all debates about racism and
oppression irrelevant. Thus future woke cultists might argue themselves into a corner in which racism and thus 'white
privilege' does not exist.
In the West you are free
to choose any gender or sexuality, transition between these at whim, or perhaps create your own, but you are not supposed to
question the foundations of capitalism or liberalism. Likewise, the much lauded concept of human rights and democracy – one of
the key pillars on which Western 'cultural superiority' rests and from which it sneers at 'undemocratic' and 'uncivilised'
countries – is used to justify the destruction, occupation and economic enslavement of other peoples.
Whether it is Libya, Iraq,
Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen or Palestine we see that non-white lives do not matter when there are no political points to score.
Indeed, condemning the slaughter of Palestinians could be enough to get you labeled an anti-Semite by those who remain
suspiciously silent when real anti-Semitism rears its ugly head.
For example, far right and
neo-nazi militias in Ukraine,
some
of
whom take their symbols and ideology from the 1930-1940s
,
have
operated with relative impunity and perpetuated human rights abuses upon the people of the Donbass region. These groups were
part of the Maidan movement, visited by Western politicians and praised by liberals, that violently overthrew elected
Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych. Some of the leaders of this movement included far right elements who had no qualms
being amidst white power logos and neo-nazi flags, or had in the past claimed that a
"Moscow-Jewish
mafia"
controls
Ukraine.
Neither
Western nor Israeli politicians seemed too interested in such developments, despite Israeli newspaper
Haaretz
reporting
that weapons sent by Israel to Ukraine were ending up in the hands of far right militias, such as the Azov battalion.
Paradoxically, copious effort and resources were allocated to make people believe that the UK Labour Party, led by left wing
leader Jeremy Corbyn, had a serious problem with anti-Semitism.
As soon as a party leader
like Jeremy Corbyn began to offer something outside the narrowly defined political bandwidth and stood up for the rights of
Palestinians, he was demonized by politicians as well as their media allies and big business handlers. A study conducted by
the London School of Economics and Political Science examined UK newspaper coverage of Corbyn in the months following his
election as Labour Party leader and found evidence of media
bias
such
that
"Corbyn was thoroughly delegitimised as a political actor from the moment he became
a prominent candidate and even more so after he was elected as party leader, with a strong mandate."
It is welcome that recent
events in the US have highlighted racism faced by African Americans. Yet frequent murders of African Americans by a
militarized police force did not suddenly appear when Trump came to power. Many Democratic Party politicians who nowadays make
sure everyone knows they unquestioningly support the Black Lives Matter movement had few issues with the status quo before the
killing of George Floyd, and will probably regain their apathy if Biden wins the election.
Furthermore, little is
said about the role the Obama administration played only a few years ago in the destruction of Libya, formerly one of Africa's
richest and most stable nations, and its relinquishment to warlords and Al-Qaeda affiliated groups. Some of these groups were
quick to imprison and murder
citizens
from
sub-Saharan Africa who had migrated to Libya in search of a better life.
Slave
markets
selling sub-Saharan Africans now exist in the new post-Gaddafi Libya.
The UK Conservative Party, traditionally not fans of refugees or migrants, were responsible for the
Windrush
scandal
which saw Caribbean immigrants who had arrived in the UK decades earlier being threatened with deportation despite
having lived, worked, and paid taxes in this country for many years. The same party is now thinking of allowing nearly three
million Hong Kong citizens the opportunity to reside in the UK and later apply for
citizenship
.
When it comes to sticking two fingers up to China, we hear no talk about how the NHS and welfare system cannot afford to
absorb refugees and migrants.
These days many people,
especially celebrities, politicians and media figures, are falling over themselves to condemn racism and make sure everyone is
aware of their anti-racist credentials. The only remaining forms of racism deemed acceptable in the West include Russophobia
and Sinophobia. The media devotes endless hours hyping up the threat from Russia and China and in doing so surreptitiously
promotes animosity toward these nations and their peoples. The shadowy hand of the Russian government is deemed to be behind
every calamity or undesired election result. We are frequently reminded that a vague and poorly defined threat from Russia and
China looms large, though hard evidence is often sketchy, open to interpretation or questionable. At the same time NATO troops
encroach upon Russia's borders, yet the latter is deemed the aggressor, whilst the US sails warships through contested seas
near China's
borders
.
Whereas the UK seeks to provoke Russia for no logical reason, the US is determined to pick a fight with China and claims it
"chose
not to"
stop coronavirus from spreading beyond its borders.
The waning US empire and
its allies within the disintegrating EU prefer to attack their rivals Russia and China to deflect their own populations'
attention away from domestic problems with some good old-fashioned xenophobia. The UK, in particular, would do well to try and
improve its relationships with Russia and China as it is on track to have a lonely time post Brexit.
Think your friends would be
interested? Share this story!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those
of RT.
"... Now, what I think is, charging blacks and injuns and all for every white invention they use, one at a time would be a motimgator long job and use more paper than eating a McDonald's hamburger. It could lead to enough of what that Wall Street newspaper calls cross licensing ..."
"... I mean, you could charge a nickel every time Lateesha or Deewan or Lasagna read a book, which might bring in twelve dollars a year, or used a Smith and Wesson, for whole boxcars of dollars. Probably the easy thing would be to rent the whole damn civilization with only one license, like driving a car. ..."
"... I reckon we'd haul in enough money to buy enough rockets to blow up a thousand weddings and little children in Afghanistan and Eye-ran and maybe some kindergartner kids in Venezuela, wherever that is. Then they'd all have American values and love us. ..."
"... I figure when she's yowling into a microphone that probably Abraham Lincoln or Moses or somebody invented, it's that Cultural Appropriation again and she owes money. I mean, without that microphone shed have to go back to smoke signals or drums. ..."
"... Anyway, women are taking over everything, most of them crazy. Along with Rachel Tension and Oprah, we've got that Clinton woman ..."
"... And now we've got Joe Biden, who ain't nothing but a titless Hillary on days when he can remember who he is, and pretty much nothing at all the rest of the time. ..."
If some people can't go as Bugs Bunny, then nobody can't go as anything. Fair is fair. So if
you little sister goes as Aunt Jemima that makes pancakes, the BLM bandits will try to lynch
her.
I reckon black folks ought to be a little quieter. Since they didn't invent writing, or
reading, or 'rithmetic or electricity or clothes or pretty much anything, then any time they
use them things they're doing Cultural Appropriation. It's just common sense. Of course, I
guess a Chinaman could say whites do it too when they use paper and gunpowder, without the
which we couldn't have bombs and rockets and federal forms nine pages long that no one since
Adam can figure out.
Now, what I think is, charging blacks and injuns and all for every white invention they use,
one at a time would be a motimgator long job and use more paper than eating a McDonald's
hamburger. It could lead to enough of what that Wall Street newspaper calls cross licensing,
Mr. McWilliams said, and he knows everything, to keep a whole rat pack of lawyers in business
forever instead of drowning them, that would be better.
I mean, you could charge a nickel every
time Lateesha or Deewan or Lasagna read a book, which might bring in twelve dollars a year, or
used a Smith and Wesson, for whole boxcars of dollars. Probably the easy thing would be to rent
the whole damn civilization with only one license, like driving a car.
I reckon we'd haul in enough money to buy enough rockets to blow up a thousand weddings and
little children in Afghanistan and Eye-ran and maybe some kindergartner kids in Venezuela,
wherever that is. Then they'd all have American values and love us.
But we got other news to gnaw on. I keep reading about this gal Rachel Tension and how she's
causing all kinds of bile along with Oprah. I don't know about Rachel but Oprah's gone all
skinny on us and I reckon it makes her want to make more fuss about whatever she's thinking
about. Oprah used to be all porked up and looked like three hundred pounds of fatback with legs
and if you'd had a oil well you wanted to shut down you could have used her for a plug. I hear
there's less Oprah now, though. Which is about how much I can use.
Anyhow, she's running on these days about how white people is criminals and brutes and they
need to get in touch with what they're feeling, that might mean their girlfriend or I don't
know what, but she don't like them. White people, I mean. Well, I guess. But I figure when
she's yowling into a microphone that probably Abraham Lincoln or Moses or somebody invented,
it's that Cultural Appropriation again and she owes money. I mean, without that microphone shed
have to go back to smoke signals or drums.
Anyway, women are taking over everything, most of them crazy. Along with Rachel Tension and
Oprah, we've got that Clinton woman that's even older than Ann Coulter and probably sleeps all
day in some cave, hanging by her toes, and Elizabeth Warren, that used to be a Injun but cured
it with a shot of DNA. And now we've got Joe Biden, who ain't nothing but a titless Hillary on
days when he can remember who he is, and pretty much nothing at all the rest of the time. Which
might be a good reason to vote for him. We've had a long string of Presidents who did know who
they were, and it ain't been real satisfactory.
Finally the world' s gone soft in the head, like Aunt Minnie that granddad used to keep in the attic. I just saw where Walt
Disney, that I thought was dead but anyway, he's going to make a movie about Peter Pan and he want's Mike Tyson to be Tinker
Belle. She´s kind of like a lightening bug in a little green dress and throws sparks everywhere. Now if I remember right, Tyson
weighs about two-forty buck nekkid and holding a helium balloon so it's hard to imagine him twinkling around in the air and
flashing like a fifty cent flashlight with a loose switch, but I don't know much about movies. Anyway there was this woman, I
think her name was Lupita Marimacha or anyway some Meskin thing, that talked for Mr. Disney, that I thought was dead. She said
these times are progressive, which I think means soft in the head, and we can't be heteronormative or chromapejorative and we
had to be gender fluid. I saw it in the newspaper or I couldn't spell it. I wasn't sure what kind of gender fluid she meant but
I knew I didn't want to think about it. I guess it means we´ll have to watch Mike Tyson flying around in some kind of girly
clothes, which is all right on a girl but I worry about them on Mike, and maybe it worries him too.
... ... ...
Write Fred at [email protected] . Put the letters pdq anywhere in the subject line so
Google don't disappear your letter.
Portland Oregon BLM requested that whites step aside in the George Floyd murder protests.
I seriously wonder how it is that the approximately 95% whit Portland population finds that
the only thing worthy of protesting in America, or white people in other cities. I have been
to my share of protests and none of them ever accomplished anything so I do not recommend
protests as a way to change policy from my own experience. People often infiltrate protests
for nefarious reasons and often to incite violence to seize the narrative back, because if
the protesters are viewed as violent radicals they will not have sympathy and will not get
their message through. They rarely work, particularly with the militarized police state, I
could not in good faith urge people to risk their lives. The days of the original Boston Tea
Party are long gone.
Just raising hell without a clear direction or path forward is not a good idea. Is the
governmemt corrupt? Yes. Will protesters convince the government or police to change for the
better? I do not think so. In fact, the government has used protests as a reason to illegally
revoke rights over the past 100 years. So especially for that reason, I do not encourgae
people to go to protests after seeing that and never gaining anything else from the protests.
Not because oppose protesting but because I oppose wasting my time.
If wokeness is going to survive, the scourge of actors portraying characters that are in any
way different from themselves must end now.
I consider myself a devout crusader for the Church of Wokeness, a brave Knight of the Woke
Table if you will.
... The newest and most heinous of injustices that I unearthed occurred the other day, and
was so horrifying it literally left me shaking.
... The injustice of which I speak is that Netflix just announced that on its hit show
The Crown , Princess Diana – the most iconic of British Royals, will be played
by Elizabeth Debicki who is gasp Australian!
...
I wish there was a woke time machine so we could see who Octavia Spencer would cast instead
of Oscar-winner Daniel Day-Lewis in My Left Foot and Oscar-nominee Leonardo DiCaprio
in What's Eating Gilbert Grape .
Those able-bodied bastards are acting abominations. Their crimes are almost as bad as
cis-gendered actors playing trans characters.
... Of course, even if an actor is the same race or ethnicity as a character, they aren't
safe from the righteous sword of wokeness. ... To avoid this woke backlash and the cancel
culture mob, white actresses Jenny Slate and Kristen Bell quit their roles voicing black
characters on cartoons.
... we could be one step closer to eradicating the art of acting and finally living in the
glorious utopia of talentlessness we woke are obviously so desperate to manifest.
Rudi Rat 48 minutes ago
What ... the new Diana actress is not black? That is pretty unwoke!
Smythe_Mogg 7 minutes ago
A very amusing piece. Of course, in many of the examples offered nobody but the 'woke' would
consider watching finished films based on 'trans' nonsense and militant lesbianism. Thus
'woke' speaks unto 'woke' and everyone else just gets on with life.
rnsglobal 1 hour ago
Writers like you who subscribe to the idea of "woke" are destroying our society. We don't
want or need opinions like yours that only serve to destroy careers, reputations, or the
normals of society. You are not doing the world a favor, rather you and your woke mobs are
trying to destroy history and re-write it the way you see fit instead of keeping our history
and learning from it. You ought to be ashamed of yourself.
Vargus_A_MS rnsglobal 43 minutes ago
Do you understand sarcasm? Or is this sarcasm for sarcasm.
InnocentJekyll 1 hour ago
I am like seriously literally actually offended on behalf of all people of color and
minorities right now. #NotMyArticle
"... Anyone who has ever overcome any obstacle in life knows that if you spend all your time worrying about how insurmountable it is, you will never overcome it. ..."
"... I am not going to spend my time begging the white man to undergo unconscious bias training, it'll distract me from doing what does work, which is getting kids to learn their algebra, turn up on time and deliver. ..."
"... You're some PR guy, you work in town, you earn a nice bit of money, you have a nice flat and car. But you put a black box on Instagram and you're now a cool non-racist. You're a good guy. ..."
"... Actually doing good takes a lifetime. The thing about doing good is that it gets you enemies. You're not part of the group. ..."
"... expected to accept and acknowledge that they've been unavoidably socialised into racism, that they have internalised white supremacies and they need to affirm this in meetings and talk about how they are to dismantle the system of whiteness. ..."
"... expected to testify to a particular kind of racism that they are experiencing in almost every sphere of their lives and if they fail to do this then they either have internalised white supremacy or are callously trying to advantage themselves at the expense of other people of colour. ..."
"... Think your friends would be interested? Share this story! ..."
he toxic ideology of the BLM movement is promoted by its race campaigners at the expense of
any other idea. Unless you agree with its false claims and the underlying belief that Britain
is intrinsically racist, you are the enemy.
Negotiating your way around any conversation centred on race has become a social minefield.
Say the wrong thing and 'boom!' you're treated as a card-carrying member of the Ku Klux Klan
and ostracised from your bien pensant pals for life.
BLM campaigners in the UK push one line: black people are the permanent victims of
oppression, white people are collectively guilty of perpetuating discrimination.
That's it. No ifs, no buts, no grey areas, no dissent. Own it!
In this country, BLM is a secretive, opaque umbrella
organisation of many different groups with no distinct leadership yet, somehow, through
marches, pulling down statues and by seizing hold of the narrative on social media, they have
become the arbiters on race matters.
But maybe some relief is here. The newly-launched Equiano Project , named after the 18th Century former
slave Olaudah Equiano , the British African
community's first political activist, brings a cool breeze of common sense into the stifling
atmosphere created by the UK adherents of the Black Lives Matter movement and their toxic,
imported brand of identity politics.
Founded by 24-year-old Inaya Folarin Iman, a writer, campaigner and former Brexit Party
candidate, the project wasted no time
getting down and dirty on this hot topic, with an online event this week that could have a
lasting effect on the tone and content of the race conversation in Great Britain.
London head teacher Katharine Birbalsingh
tore into the notions of unconscious bias training, decolonising the school curriculum and
making the study of historical black figures compulsory, pointing out that the latter is just
the sort of institutional racism that BLM decries.
She said " Anyone who has ever overcome any obstacle in life knows that if you spend all
your time worrying about how insurmountable it is, you will never overcome it.
" I am not going to spend my time begging the white man to undergo unconscious bias
training, it'll distract me from doing what does work, which is getting kids to learn their
algebra, turn up on time and deliver. "
Miss Birbalsingh, admittedly, does have form on the race debate, as the head of what the BBC
calls 'Britain's
strictest school.'
Speaking in June about Instagram's 'Black Box Day' – where users posted a black box
image on their account – the head teacher unloaded on the woke middle classes posting
messages online.
She said, " You're some PR guy, you work in town, you earn a nice bit of money, you have
a nice flat and car. But you put a black box on Instagram and you're now a cool non-racist.
You're a good guy.
" Actually doing good takes a lifetime. The thing about doing good is that it gets you
enemies. You're not part of the group. "
Ah, Miss Birbalsingh, you are a gem! But I digress...
Back at the Equiano Project event, academic Helen Pluckrose also took aim at BLM, explaining
the effects of their poisonous dogma on both sides of the race divide.
White people are, she said, " expected to accept and acknowledge that they've been
unavoidably socialised into racism, that they have internalised white supremacies and they need
to affirm this in meetings and talk about how they are to dismantle the system of
whiteness. "
Meanwhile, members of the BAME community were " expected to testify to a particular kind
of racism that they are experiencing in almost every sphere of their lives and if they fail to
do this then they either have internalised white supremacy or are callously trying to advantage
themselves at the expense of other people of colour. "
Pluckrose, something of an avid Twitter user, has hit the nail bang on the head. So maybe
the Equiano Project, a broad collection of, let's face it, mainstream liberals and
similar-minded academics, will prove to be the advance guard. Their input into the narrative on
race in Britain is certainly welcome.
Because, as a direct result of the deeply divisive BLM dogma, we saw the emergence of the
FF Force in London at the weekend, with their paramilitary gear, balaclavas, raised fists
and aggressive posturing all pushing the claim that Britain is so racist that the only hope
black people have is to organise their own resistance.
Forgive me for being blunt, but all this is garbage of which it now seems I'm not the only
one disinclined to digest. So thank heavens that the reinforcements for the voices of sanity
have arrived.
And not a moment too soon.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
Hollywood, despite its
reputation as a liberal bastion, has long been a hothouse of vicious reactionary sentiments.
For example, the
anti-communist mania of the late 1940s and '50s was a particularly shameful time in Hollywood's history. It was during this
Red Scare that Hollywood studios created a blacklist where any person thought to be a communist or associated with communists,
regardless of their ability, was barred from working in the industry.
Joseph McCarthy and the
House Un-American Activities Committee used the threat of the Hollywood blacklist to force many artists to become informers on
their colleagues in order to maintain their livelihoods.
Not surprisingly, as the
Black Lives Matter panic now rages, Hollywood is once again succumbing to the hideous siren's call of dehumanization and
discrimination. Except this time the accusation isn't about communism, but rather,
"Are
you now, or have you ever been, a white man?"
The Red Scare is now the White Male Scare. In Hollywood's current climate of rabid, politically correct, social-justice
hysteria, the message is clear: group identity trumps individual talent, skill and artistry, always and every time.
The black die has been
cast, and the end result of adhering to this devout dogma of diversity is that white men need not apply. Any white men who
raise issues with this mandate are racist and will, along with anyone who openly associates with them, be canceled.
A recent
example
of
this was when black filmmaker Ri-Karlo Handy put out a call on a Facebook group of film professionals for
"black
union editors."
When white editors took offense at this rank racialization, they were called racist, and
one
even
lost his job over it.
Black filmmaker Ava
DuVernay responded by
tweeting
"to
the white men if you don't get that job you were up for, kindly remember bias can go both ways. This is 2020 speaking."
This is reminiscent of
black filmmaker Jordan Peele
saying
,
"I
don't see myself casting a white dude as the lead in my movie."
Imagine if someone said either of those things about
black or Jewish people instead of
"white men."
Apparently, DuVernay and
Peele feel the best way to fight past racism is with more racism. How ethically and morally repugnant of them.
Who are the real racists? The woke mob tries to redefine racism to hide their own bigotry
Micah Curtis
is a game and tech
journalist from the US. Aside from writing for RT, he hosts the podcast Micah and The Hatman, and is an independent
comic book writer. Follow Micah at
@MindofMicahC
Racism is an evil thing.
People who are branded with that title are given a massive scarlet letter, and are generally cast out of civil society.
Rightfully so, as no one wants to interact with someone who is so malicious towards someone else's skin color. Individuals
like Jared Taylor or Richard Spencer are not tolerated (unless they're
commentating
for
CNN I suppose).
One of the above words
needs to be stressed: it's 'malicious'. As it has been understood for as far as I can remember, racism requires malice. This
is why the term 'hate group' was first coined. Groups such as the Ku Klux Klan, the Aryan Brotherhood, or other white
nationalists or white supremacists are considered 'hateful' because that is their modus operandi. They outright despise anyone
who isn't like they are.
However, racism isn't
something that is understood to be exclusive to a skin color either. Well, unless you're 'woke'. If you're America's Got
Talent host Nick Cannon, you can call white people and Jews
"
closer
to animals
"
and somehow you're not a racist. You can throw a
"
mute
white people
"
button on your platform and you're somehow totally cool. Bill De Blasio can tell Jewish
people
and
other religious groups that they can't assemble, but a BLM mural is serious business. And, of course, you can be a sitting
senator and brand all Trump supporters
"
white
supremacists
"
with no pushback.
The woke mob doesn't like
the current definition of racism because they fit it to a T. Most people that they are trying to say are racists are more
offended by pineapple on their pizza than anyone's melanin. Meanwhile, BLM supporters like Nick Cannon can spout something
that sounds like it would appear in Der Sturmer and he's fine. You're also going to have to explain to me how the Goya Foods
CEO, a Trump supporter, is a white supremacist when he's a Latino.
Why follow the rules or
adhere to definitions, when you can weaponize the debate to change the rules and definitions to suit your needs?
This is exactly how dopey
the conversation has become. The CDC had over a thousand employees asking the organization to
"declare
racism a public health
crisis
."
So
in the midst of an epidemic, your priority is declaring an irrational emotional response to melanin content in one's skin a
health crisis?! That's not even the CDC's job! Not to mention, acting as if America has anything close to the problems we had
in the 1960s and before is just revisionist. But then again, that's the problem with redefining a term that needs a strong
definition. Everything is becoming racist to the point that the term is becoming worthless.
We're at a point where no one knows who the racists are any more, because we can't even agree on the term. Certain groups are
excluded because they're 'the oppressed groups', as if that has anything to do with evil behavior. Racism is evil. Truly evil.
Evil is not relegated to a specific group or social class. Evil is simply evil. If we redefine something evil as the opposite
at any point, we open the door for tragedy. Many groups of people have been the victim of this behavior at one point in
history or another. If the woke mob gets its way, history will repeat itself.
Think your friends would be
interested? Share this story!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those
of RT.
During the discussion with
former Public Enemy member Richard Griffin (who left the group after saying the
"Jews
are wicked"
in a 1989 interview), Cannon, who hosts the 'Masked Singer,' claimed it is impossible for him to be
antisemitic.
"It's never hate speech, you can't be anti-Semitic when we are the Semitic people,"
he
said.
"When we are the same people who they want to be. That's our birthright."
He
later insisted again that he is not promoting
"hate speech."
Cannon and Griffin also
spoke about various conspiracy theories regarding Jewish power in the global banking industry and there was even praise for
Louis Farrakhan, a political activist and preacher with a long history of statements deemed anti-Semitic.
Raising even more eyebrows
on social media were Cannon's words about white people.
A clip from the interview
shows Cannon discussing how white people are
"a little less"
and
"closer
to animals"
due to the pigment of their skin.
"When you have a person that has the lack of pigment, the lack of melanin, they know
that they will be annihilated, so therefore, however they got the power, they have the lack of compassion,"
he said,
going on to theorize that
"melanin"
-- which is the dark pigmentation of skin, hair,
or even eyes -- gives non-white people more
"compassion"
and
"soul."
"The people that don't have [melanin] are -- I'm going to say this carefully -- a little
less,"
he continued.
White people, according to
Cannon, do not have the
"power of the sun"
and are acting out of a
"deficiency"
in
their
"fear"
of black people.
Cannon has earned plenty
of critics thanks to the resurfaced interview -- which was originally released last summer, but reposted to Cannon's YouTube
page on June 30 -- with him being blasted online as a
"black supremacist."
Cannon responded to the
outrage in an interview with Fast Company, claiming he wants to be
"corrected"
if
he is wrong, but he refuses to apologize.
"You can say sorry in as many different languages as you want to, and it means nothing,"
he
said.
As for his praise of
Farrakhan, Cannon says he refuses to be held responsible for everything the religious leader said and can only take
responsibility for his own words.
"I can't be responsible for however long Minister Farrakhan has been ministering and
things that he said,"
the rapper said.
"That is his voice and his fight. I can only
be held accountable for what I've seen and what I've heard."
If you like this story,
share it with a friend!
851
4698
Can there ever be a true revolt that is led by the spoiled Children of the
Élite? If so, what would such a 'revolt' mean in America? Well, 25-years ago, a
prescient American cultural historian, Christopher Lasch, foresaw just such a revolution. He
wrote a book – Revolt of the Élite – to describe how, already in
1994, he perceived what lay ahead: A social revolution that would be pushed forward by radical
children of the bourgeoisie. Their leaders would have almost nothing to say about poverty or
unemployment. Their demands would be centred on utopian ideals: diversity and racial justice
– ideals pursued with the fervour of an abstract, millenarian ideology.
And their radicalism would be resisted, Lasch predicted, not by the upper reaches of
society, or the leaders of Big Philanthropy or the Corporate Billionaires. These latter,
rather, would be its facilitators and financiers. Yet the revolt would be resisted. Resisted,
paradoxically, by 'the masses' and by traditional upholders of America's 'golden age' virtues:
"It is not just that the masses have lost interest in revolution," Lasch wrote, but "their
political instincts are demonstrably more conservative than those of these self-appointed
spokesmen, and would-be liberators".
Lasch was undoubtedly prescient; but in fact, we have seen this before – in Russia of
the 1860s, where a type of reductive, abstract ideological obsession developed which was
fundamentally divorced from shared physical and political realities, as well as the emotive
qualities which drive humans towards empathy and compassion. Those early Russian
revolutionaries sought action, for
action's sake . And they practiced not just 'action', but also 'destruction' for its own
sake, too.
It is in this context that the emerging generation of 19 th Century Russian
radicals popularised the notion of the complete renunciation of all, and everything, standing
as 'Russia', and its flawed past.
One of Lasch's key insights was how future young American Marxisants would substitute
culture war for class war: "The culture wars that have convulsed America since the sixties are
best understood as a form of class warfare", he wrote, in which an enlightened élite (as
it thinks of itself), do not deign to persuade the majority (Middle America) by means of
rational public debate – but nonetheless, maintains the conceit of it bearing the torch
for human redemption.
It is essentially then, a revolt not against any powerful, socially élite,
classes, but one targeted against American 'deplorables' and 'reactionary' conservatives: "The
new elites are in revolt against 'Middle America,' as they imagine it: A nation technologically
backward, politically reactionary, repressive in its sexual morality, middle-brow in its
tastes, smug and complacent, dull and dowdy", Lasch wrote. They share a belief that humanity is
on a Grand March toward Progress. It is the splendid march on the road to ending institutional
injustices: It goes on and on, obstacles notwithstanding.
The woke attribution of bigotry and backwardness to their non-college educated compatriots
has inculcated in today's radical college graduates a snobbism and contempt (as also happened
in Russia in the 1800s) that forecloses on empathy for, or any iota of co-compatriotism with
fellow American 'reactionaries and dullards': see here for an example, as one bare-breasted, 'bourgeois
socialist' leader sneers and screams at the police for their lack of a college education, their
lack of bookishness, and yells at the back policemen "Traitors".
Lasch suggests that once, it was perceived that it was a 'revolt by the masses' which
threatened the social order, but today, the threat comes from 'the top of the social
hierarchy', and not from the masses. "It is the élites however, those who control the
international flow of money and information, that preside over philanthropic foundations and
institutions of higher learning that have lost faith in the values, or what remains of them, of
the West".
Lasch was prescient too, in predicting that the main threat would come from those who
preside over big institutions – and foreseeing the latter's potential symbiosis with the
woke generation. For these CEOs and college presidents collectively, of course, are their
parents; they are the hedonist Woodstock radicals of the 60s, made good, who now sit at the
apex of the institutional world, and Big Business. No surprise then that Big Philanthropy
shares aspirations and funds todays radicals. Big Philanthropy activities today bear no
relation to what most Americans suppose. The 'revolution' has already taken them. Rather, the
commanding heights of American philanthropy today are occupied by massive, well-heeled
institutions that have nothing but contempt for that traditional idea of philanthropy. Schambra
and Hartmann
write :
"[Foundations in America] have seen the need to shift away from merely coping with the
symptoms of problems -- which is all one could expect from local amateurs inspired by
retrograde morality and religious superstition
"Instead, this philanthropic ideal is manifested in an effort to bring about deep
structural change within society, challenging what are seen to be the fundamental institutional
injustices of the economic and political orders. In the words of Darren Walker, president of
the Ford Foundation -- one of the most towering pillars of liberal establishment philanthropy
in the United States -- it's time to move "from generosity to justice".
This means shifting power once again, away from the detached professional class of
managerial elites prized by the first stage of the philanthropic revolution. Since these elites
were so often white and male, they were, and are, part of society's structural injustice -- so
the story goes. They are now dismissed as "white saviours" in need of "decolonization."
Current thinking therefore, calls for putting foundation wealth directly into the hands
of those who have been systematically victimized. Edgar Villanueva, the progressive author
ofDecolonizing Wealth, recently released astatementsaying "philanthropy must take accountable action and release an
unprecedented amount of unrestricted funds to fuel long-term Black-led movements for racial
justice. This moment requires absolutely nothing less, if we profess to be dedicated to justice
".
Since Villanueva's book was released in October 2018, there's scarcely been a
professional meeting or training in the world of foundations that hasn't featured his
message".
This important ideological shift needs to be absorbed: Big Philanthropy, Big Tech and Big
CEOs are with
the 'woke' and BLM militants , and are ready to release Big Funding (some of these
foundations have resources that eclipse those of states). Big Philanthropy
gives BLM $100m (including $40m
from Ford Foundation for capacity building). And with big funding – inevitably
– comes 'guidance' (apolitical 'naturally'). There is a multiplier effect here too, as
Big Philanthropy, Big Tech and Big Biotechnology act as an interconnected network system. They
foresee a (dehumanised) tech and AI-led future, led by a multicultural aristocracy (i.e.
'them').
Fairly obviously, the deplorables and traditional Christian conservatives don't exactly fit
with this vision.
Lasch wrote: "Those who covet membership in the new aristocracy of brains tend to congregate
on the coasts, turning their back on the heartland and cultivating the international market in
fast-moving money, glamour, fashion, and popular culture Multiculturalism "suits them to
perfection, conjuring up the agreeable image of a global bazaar in which exotic cuisines,
exotic styles of dress, exotic music, exotic tribal customs can be savoured indiscriminately,
with no questions asked and no commitments required they illustrate how the western
élite has burned the candle at both ends – welcoming migration that transforms
society from below, even as the upper class floats up – into a post-national utopia,
which remains an undiscovered [and frightening prospect] for the people left behind".
Let's unpack this a little further: "floating up into a post-national utopia" – isn't
this just the WEF 'Davos'
Great Global Reset' project ? Doesn't this fit exactly with the objective of floating up
into a post-national, climate, bio-health and financial, global governance? A world of fast
moving, money, glamour, and celebrity, as Lasch saw it.
Who was Lasch? By training, Lasch was a historian of nineteenth and twentieth century
American culture. He came from a left-wing intellectual family and married into another. He was
thoroughly on the Left during the 1960s. Indeed, he later moved further in that direction .
Roger Kimball has written of Lasch's
searing retrospective on the Woodstock generation, entitled The Culture of Narcissism :
"What one witnessed in its pages, was the spectacle of an intelligent, politically committed
man of the Left struggling to make sense of a culture in the grip of a radicalism that had
turned out to be almost entirely bogus".
Kimball writes, Lasch "understood that consciousness-raising in the 1960s and 1970s was
mostly a blind for moralistic self-indulgence. Promises of liberation and transcendence, he
saw, often concealed new forms of tyranny and irresponsibility". It was nonetheless exactly
this radicalism of the preceding Woodstock generation, combined with the commitment to
'Progress', that would lead to extremism and division in the succeeding gilded generation, he
believed.
Lasch also saw that the eroding of a common culture, values and standards, which was the
major legacy of 60s cultural radicalism, ended up creating a gulf between social classes. If
there were no common values to hold people together, what was to stop the rich and powerful
trampling over the rest of society, cloaking their self-interest in furious
self-righteousness?
And so it has come to pass.
So, what can we make of all this? The US has suddenly exploded into, on the one hand,
culture cancelation, and on the other, into silent seething at the lawlessness, and at all the
statues toppled. It is a nation
becoming angrier , and edging towards violence.
One segment of the country believes that America is inherently and institutionally racist,
and incapable of self-correcting its flawed founding principles – absent the required
chemotherapy to kill-off the deadly mutated cells of its past history, traditions and
customs.
Another, affirms those principles that underlay America's 'golden age'; which made America
great; and which, in their view, are precisely those qualities which can make it great
again.
A third – more cynically – swims with this woke tide, offering to 'take the
knee', hoping to shape and mould the woke uprising, in ways that serve the end of toppling
Trump, and paving the way to a tech and AI vision of the future.
The woke 20+ and 30+ year-old revolutionaries however, have already invaded and culturally
captured virtually all the principal institutions of Big Media, Big Money and Big Philanthropy.
And even
West Point Military Academy too, it seems. Or, perhaps we should say, the old 'Woodstock
ethos' of sympathy for corporate organisation has (reciprocally) captured them too.
The Culture War has long since been lost at the legal level. Even conservative parents have
had little choice, but to sacrifice their children to the altars of top-tier colleges and
universities. It is just not possible to chart a path into the rarefied world of 'Big Anything'
if you are not part of the élite sorting structures. Smart parents know this. They see
it every day; but nevertheless these colleges and institutions precisely are a part of the
industrial manufactory of woke. And Big Tech has played its part: It has seen to it that young
imaginations are
filtered through Facebook, Instagram and Snapchat – all dominated by the fully
woke.
The US lies in the flood plain of a cultural tsunami – and the question is whether
there is anything on the horizon that will provide a stopper, or a levée that will hold?
Will an appeal to Law and Order traditionalists, or to a newly-formulated nationalist culture,
succeed in stemming the 'Demographic ring' from snapping-shut on white conservatives in
November? (That constituency has been a minority for some years, already).
Once the nature of the woke cultural war is understood, the problems become obvious. Any
defence of traditional sources of American identity will be construed by the woke ideologues as
racially offensive. Traditional American nationalism, in the woke view, is white
nationalism . But the woke coalition (Big Media, Big institutions) will not accept to fight
on a 'nationalism' terrain. They simply will insist that traditional American beliefs amount to
race hatred. How can you have 'cultural nationalism' when the forces of woke believe that the
nation itself is irredeemably racist and bigoted?
Nothing is certain for November: there are too many unknowns. What we might conclude
however, is that today the US is 'rhyming' with (if not repeating) history – 1860 Italy
to be precise. An ambitious rising 'class' intends to displace an old aristocracy, and install
itself in its palaces. Then, it was a rising, increasingly prosperous, middle class that was
intent on becoming the new aristocrats, in place of old aristocracy. Today, however, it is the
old 'Anglo' imperial aristocracy that is being targeted by the cosmopolitan 'thinking
aristocracy' of Silicon Valley, of Wall Street, Big Pharma and Big Philanthropy. The woke
troops are simply their chaff.
America's 'Golden Era' nostalgia may be the strongest player on the board, for now. But to
all other players, the latter is viewed now as so toxic, that the aspirant new 'aristocrats' of
the 'Grand March toward Progress', may push aside old rivalries very quickly, to combine for
the defeat of the 'old'. The old aristocracy ultimately may opt for peace at any price, in
which case the political 'ring' – along with the demographic – will snap shut. It
did in 1860. It was over.
"America's financial and political establishment has always been most terrified of an
inclusive underclass movement. So it evangelizes a bizarre transgressive politics that tells
white conservatives to fuck themselves and embraces a leftist sub-theology that preaches
class as a racist canard." - Matt Taibbi
Frank, according to Taibbi , not only predicted the current culture war we currently find
ourselves in - he's hit the nail on the head once again when it comes to the left's inability
to learn from their mistakes - after the party abandoned blue-collar America for condescending,
coastal intellectuals.
Frank published What's the Matter with Kansas? in 2004, at the height of the George W.
Bush presidency. The Iraq War was already looking like a disaster, but the Democratic Party
was helpless to take advantage, a fact the opinion-shaping class on the coasts found
puzzling. Blue-staters felt sure they'd conquered the electoral failure problem in the
nineties, when a combination of Bill Clinton's Arkansas twang, policy pandering (a
middle-class tax cut!) and a heavy dose of unsubtle race politics (e.g. ending welfare "
as we know it ") appeared to cut the heart out of the Republican "Southern strategy."
Yet Clinton's chosen successor Al Gore flopped, the party's latest Kennedy wannabe, John
Kerry, did worse , and by the mid-2000s, Bushian conservatism was culturally ascendant,
despite obvious failures. Every gathering of self-described liberals back then devolved into
the same sad-faced anthropological speculation about Republicans: "Why do they vote against
their own interests?" -Matt Taibbi
And instead of trying to actually figure out what motivates voters from poor swaths of
America, the left has chalked it up to ' racial animus and Christian superstition. '
Taibbi further notes: "The Kansas title alone spoke to one of Frank's central observations:
while red state voters might frame objections in terms of issues like abortion or busing, in a
broader sense the Republican voter is recoiling from urban liberal condescension ."
That Democrats needed Thomas Frank to tell them what conservatives fifteen miles outside
the cities were thinking was damning in itself. Even worse was the basically unbroken string
of insults emanating from pop culture (including from magazines like Rolling Stone: I was
very guilty of this) describing life between the cities as a prole horror peopled by obese,
Bible-thumping dolts who couldn't navigate a Thai menu and polished gun lockers instead of
reading.
Republicans may have controlled government at the time, but when they turned on TV sets or
looked up at movie screens, their voters felt accused of something just for living in little
towns, raising kids, and visiting church on Sundays . What's the matter , they were asking,
with that ? -Matt Taibbi
And since the 2016 US election, instead of introspection over why Trump resonates with
blue-collar America, the left has learned nothing.
After 2016 it became axiomatic that the Trump voter, or the Leave voter, was –
without exception now – a crazed, racist monster. As detailed here multiple times,
ruminations on Republican voter behaviors became not merely uninteresting to pundits after
November 2016, but actively taboo. By 2020, the official answer to What's the Matter with
Kansas? was Kansas is a White Supremacist Project and Can Go Fuck Itself. -Matt Taibbi
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
"Yesterday, there was a Tzar and there were slaves. Today, there is no Tzar, but the slaves
are still here. We have gone through the epoch when the masses were oppressed. We are now going
through the epoch when the individual is to be oppressed in the name of the masses." ―
Yevgeny Zamyatin, A Soviet Heretic
Legendary British comedian John Cleese has hit out at permanently offended woke people,
insisting that they have no sense of humour and are contributing to the death of comedy.
In an appearance on the Daily Beast's The Last Laugh Podcast, Cleese noted that woke people
simply do not understand the intricacies of comedy.
"There's plenty of people who are PC now who have absolutely zero sense of humour. I would
love to debate, in a friendly way, a couple of 'woke' people in front of an audience. And I
think the first thing I would say is, please tell me a good 'woke' joke," Cleese urged.
"What they don't understand is that there's two types of teasing," Cleese continued, noting
that "There's really nasty teasing, which is horrible, and we shouldn't do it, full stop. But
the other type of teasing is affectionate. You can tease people hugely affectionately and it's
a bonding mechanism."
"All humour is critical. You cannot get laughs out of perfect human beings," Cleese
continued, adding that "If you've got someone up on the screen who is perfect, intelligent and
kind and flexible and a good person, there's nothing funny about that. So we only laugh at
people's frailties, but that's not cruel. You can laugh at people's frailties in very funny and
generous ways."
Cleese was recently at the centre of a 'woke' storm when his
Fawlty Towers show, made some 40 years ago was temporarily canceled after complaints that it
featured a 'racist' character.
Cleese called the BBC "cowardly and gutless" for removing an episode of the show, pointing
out that the racist character in question was the target of ridicule in the show.
Cleese has previously warned that political correctness will lead to the death of comedy,
noting that "If you start to say we mustn't, we mustn't criticize or offend them then humor is
gone. With humor goes a sense of proportion. And then as far as I'm concerned you're living in
1984."
After daring to question the diversity overlords, Cleese also recently found himself being
labeled a 'racist'
Nunyadambizness , 3 hours ago
Cleese is absolutely spot on.
The vast majority of "woke" people have fallen subject to the Cultural Marxism that is
political correctness, and frankly have the intellectual capacity of my shoe. Disagree?
You're a racist/sexist/homophobe/islamophobe/ etc., etc., etc. One cannot debate ideas
because if your idea is different then theirs, they cannot accept the fact that you have a
different idea than the "woke" theology--same as Islam demands submission to their
theology.
WorkingClassMan , 2 hours ago
The man IS a comedic genius. Even when he made fun of 'The Germans," he did it in such a
unique and awesome way it even had this German-American laughing. He can get away with a
Hitler skit--he's THAT good.
EvlTheCat , 2 hours ago
"Woke" in itself is a joke and a oxymoron, which if you know the definition makes it
ironic also. Touches all bases John.
seryanhoj , 2 hours ago
Also a grammatical error. The chosen ones who may not be questioned, are awakened.
Clese is right . The " woke " have less sense of humour than the state dept. or the
Pentagon or the NRA.
Anyone who tskes himself seriously is a threat. Fortunately even he will soon be dead and
forgotten.
EvlTheCat , 1 hour ago
Mr. Fawlty will never be forgotten.
Simple past participle.
Bay Area Guy , 2 hours ago
I wonder what George Carlin would have to say about the situation today. I think he would
say a lot of things similar to what Cleese has said. Carlin was most definitely a staunch
liberal, but he also stood up for true free speech. I recall a skit he did that skewered
feminists. Undoubtedly, they would try to silence him today.
I'm not sure a true wokester could ever tell a joke. They'd be deathly afraid of someone
in their crowd taking it the wrong way and getting canceled. Besides, the concept of humor is
totally foreign to them. When you spend your entire waking life (and probably your dream
state as well) constantly finding things to be offended at and be outraged by, humor is going
to go completely over their heads. My guess is the best joke in the world would be met with
glassy eyes and the need to explain the joke which, of course, totally negates the value of
the joke.
ZenoOfCitium , 2 hours ago
Here is a good woke joke for you: Woke people care about only their woke-selves,
period!
Being "Woke" is being selfish. Being only interested in oneself. Being woke is believing
only minorities can succeed without one's woke self interference.
Being woke is about protesting fascism, while demanding authoritarian and dictatorial
power, forcible suppression of opposition, as well as strong regimentation of society and of
the economy.
El Chapo Read , 2 hours ago
The BBC executive staff transitioned into a chosenite-dominated lineup over the last 20
years.
They ruin everything.
gcjohns1971 , 2 hours ago
I love Cleese's work.
He demonstrated a particular talent for shredding the self-important imbeciles of the
1970s... but somehow became both self important and unwilling to shred crowds with whom he
sympathized in the 1990's, 2000's and today.
Mores the pity. His work could have saved a generation. It is a tragedy.
The wokesters are like the terminator...but with sensitive ears that cannot withstand the
slightest disagreement, much less criticism. Their motto is the reverse of the one we learned
as children, "Words and verbs destroy my world, but sticks can never hurt me".
Cleese, there, could have been a weapon of mass comedy.
You can't really grow up until you can laugh at yourself. But the wokesters are
coffee-shop commando's simmering in malevolent pike while eating soy and sipping coffee...but
only of the poshest and most stylish blend.
GeezerGeek , 1 hour ago
Cleese is a little late to the party; plenty of others have already announced the death of
comedy, particularly on campus. Comedy clubs still exist, but the PC crowd has limited the
subjects about which one can tell jokes.
I wonder how the wokesters would treat Carlin if he was still alive. I doubt he'd be very
kind to them.
simulkra , 3 hours ago
I read a book years ago, the thesis of which was that humour was closely related to
inventiveness. It argued that both involved making connections between the apparently
unrelated.
Ideologues, of the useful idiot variety, often do not have the capacity for humour, as
they do not have the cognitive ability to think in the abstract and make these connections.
Their inferiority drives them to attempt to reduce others to their level, by elevating the
slogan's they have managed to learn by rote, to absolute importance. They are the sheep in
Animal Farm.
Do not grace them with the moniker of 'woke', as they are sleepwalkers in someone else's
dream. What we are seeing here is the media promotion of the idiot horde.
High Vigilante , 3 hours ago
Humour requires intelligence.
Doom88 , 3 hours ago
For the woke crowd comedy is no laughing matter.
Cognitive Dissonance , 2 hours ago
Humour requires intelligence.
Or at the very least perspective and self awareness, something categorically lacking in
the so-called 'woke' crowd.
john doeberg , 3 hours ago
People with mental disorders ... can't be funny.
Their brains are fried.
Saddam Miser , 3 hours ago
Woke people have zero sense of anything because they're all closet schizos. Try talking to
one. You would think you're talking to a completely psychopathic schizo.
Paolo Roberto, 50, a native of Sweden (his father was an Italian), had made a name for
himself: a well-known boxer, he had his own TV show, he appeared in many programmes; Swedish
girls loved to dance with him in Dancing with the Stars ; he also had a profitable
business: he imported Italian olive oil and gastronomic products sold in the large Swedish
supermarket chain CO-OP. All that glory vanished in a moment. Swedish police trapped him as he
visited a girl of dubious character and then paid her for her services. It was a honey-trap.
The policemen appeared from their hiding places and whisked Roberto off to the local precinct
where he was booked and the nation alerted. He didn't deny a thing; he expressed extreme
remorse.
In Sweden, it is perfectly legal to be engaged in prostitution. Today no one in Sweden can
tell a woman what to do with her own body, be it abortion, sex change or prostitution. Yet it
is a crime for a man to pay a woman for sex.
It is not sane; it is as though selling crack were legal while buying crack is the only
crime. Usually it is other way around, a casual user goes free while the pusher is arrested.
But it does not matter; Sweden is not the only country in the world with such a strange law on
her books.
Roberto was charged for this crime. It could be worse: Sweden has some extraordinary crimes
in its law book, one of them is Rape by Misadventure or Careless Rape which is
committed by a man who has sex with a woman who ostensibly agrees to or even solicits sex but
inwardly she is not willing. She may be doing it for money, or boredom, but not for pleasure,
and the man carelessly overlooked her conflicting emotions. It is Swedish Rape. Pity they never
apply the same logic to working people; we often do even less pleasant things for money, to buy
food or pay rent, but the landlord is not punished for raping his tenants.
This new definition of rape deserves Victor Hugo's pen. It is Swedish Rape to have sex
without a condom. It is Swedish Rape if the next day, or a few days later, the woman feels she
may have been raped. Or cheated, or underpaid, or mistreated. For this ill-defined offence,
Julian Assange has already spent ten years in various detention halls. If he would have killed
the girl he would be free by now. Note that you may be guilty of Swedish Rape if you claim to
be infertile and your partner becomes pregnant. Are you guilty of rape if you claim to be a Jew
but aren't? This is an Israeli contribution to the concept of rape. But I digress.
Paolo Roberto is charged with paying a woman for sex, the crime Judah, son of Jacob,
committed with Tamar (Genesis 38). The 25-year-old girl consented, but that does not matter.
She came from a rather poor South European country, so probably her consent doesn't mean much.
Or perhaps she consented just in order to entrap the guy and this is how Swedish justice works.
Swedish prisons would be empty if police weren't allowed to entice and entrap Swedes.
The consequences for Paolo were terrible: he hasn't been tried yet; he hasn't been found
guilty; his likely punishment is little more than a fine; but he was dropped like a hot potato
by Swedish TV, by Swedish sports, by the Swedish chain that marketed his olive oil. His company
was bankrupted overnight. The man was crushed like a bug. It was not Swedish law that crushed
him. In the eyes of Swedish law he is still innocent until proven guilty. Swedish law did not
force the supermarkets to remove his olive oil (actually, a very good one, I used to buy it)
from its shelves. Paolo was lynched by the New Puritan spirit that is part and parcel of the
New Normal.
Once upon a time, Sweden was an extremely liberal and free country. Swedes were known, or
even notorious for free sexual mores. Independent and brave Swedish girls weren't shy, and they
were comfortable with very unorthodox 'family' unions. But, while the US has always espoused
its own brand of politically-correct Puritanism, the global media is now dragging along the
other Western states in its wake. France and even Sweden participated in their own renditions
of the American BLM protests, called for #MeToo, and seem eager to trade in their own cultures
for the New Puritanism.
This rising Puritanism is a contrarian response to the personal freedom we enjoyed since the
1960's, and a jaded weariness with the excessive commercial sexuality of the mass media. The
media sells everything with a lot of sex. You cannot turn a TV on, daytime or night, without
seeing an implied or explicit act of copulation. They sell cars, snacks and sneakers by
displaying naked bodies. This flood of pornography is turning the public mood against sex. Who
should we blame for this blatant exploitation of sex? Men.
The Old Puritanism was hard on women; the witches were burned, and the whores were evicted
from their homes. The New Puritanism is hard on men. Men are being taught that hanky-panky can
have serious consequences. On the site of one of their destroyed statues of Jefferson, the
Americans should erect a statue of Andrea Dworkin, the obese lying feminist who famously
said that every intercourse is rape, and Penetration is Violation . She is an icon
of New Puritan America.
They could not outlaw sex per se, so they invent sordid stories of incestuous sex, of
paedophilia, of abusing priests, each storyteller trying to outdo the last. The vast majority
of these stories are sheer inventions, like the witchcraft stories of the 17 th
century in Old Puritan New England. We are in the midst of a global media campaign, and men are
the targets. The Patriarchy will be diminished by the systematic demonization of boys and
men.
In the current media frenzy I cannot trust any story, any accusation of a man involved in a
sordid sexual crime: these media campaigns are too often employed to unseat a commercial
competitor or destroy the popularity of a political rival. Often the man is not even accused of
any crime, but only of frivolous behaviour: a touch, or an immodest proposal; natural acts
celebrated in the days of my youth. Yes, my young readers, in the 1970's you could touch a
woman's knee and suggest she accompany you on a passionate weekend at a seaside resort, and she
would often agree. This libertine era is over completely. Even to me, it now seems mythical,
like Atlantis. It is gone.
The US is the media's inspirational model of the New Puritanism. Remember the women who
lined up to claim that the future Supreme Court
judge tried to kiss or even rape them when they were kids in college? The most credible of
them would not even allege he behaved criminally; just immorally according to New Puritan
standards. Now every relationship must be re-evaluated in the light of the New Puritanical
historical revisionism. Women who pose for a picture with a presidential candidate now have a
certain amount of power over him. During a media campaign the allegations come fast and
furious, but upon investigation they turn out to be spurious and motivated by self-interest or
politics.
It is good to see that sometimes, quite rarely, a man can still escape a close encounter
with his life intact. Former First Minister of Scotland, Alex Salmond had been accused of all
the usual sexual sins and was fully cleared by the court . No less than
ten women were recruited (apparently with the knowledge of Nicola Sturgeon, Salmond's
successor); they came forward and claimed that they were sexually attacked by Salmond. They
were rather sloppy with their proofs, and it turns out that they claimed they were attacked at
times and places where Salmond could not have been present. The case was dismissed and Salmond
was found not guilty . Scottish prosecutors had spent years of labour trying to condemn
Salmond, and it spectacularly failed.
You might ask, why have these perjurers (who are well-connected women close to the centre of
power of the ruling SNP party) not been prosecuted for their attempt to frame the man? Well,
the very idea of these trials is that the accusing woman can't lose. If she wins, she can
collect millions, and if she loses, even her name remains secret. These ten perjurers are
exempt from legal consequence; nor are they required pay expenses and damages. The women are
protected. Who pays? Our colleague, the excellent writer and former HM Ambassador Craig Murray , that's who. Murray was
reporting on the trial of Alex Salmond for the public's benefit, published onto his own blog,
when he was charged with disclosing the identities of some of the perjuring women. A
conscientious man, Craig wasn't guilty of naming names, but even his vague description of "an
SNP politician, a party worker and several current and former Scottish government civil
servants and officials" was considered by the court to be a monstrous breach of
confidentiality.
The public was well prepared for this onslaught on mankind by the poisonous #MeToo culture,
a massive wave of carefully coordinated media hysteria. Women in communes and nunneries are
known to menstruate at the same time when living in close proximity. #MeToo was a similar mass
event. It was designed to push women's buttons. They even offered up an appropriately grotesque
scapegoat: Harvey Weinstein, a movie producer with 386 Hollywood production credits under his belt.
The actresses that accused Weinstein (over eighty women) would still be unknowns if he had
not given them parts in his movies. And they repaid him with such cruel ingratitude. Actresses
have a certain psychological setup that makes them extremely untrustworthy. They have many
other qualities to offset this deficiency, but you can't just accept the words of a lady who
plays today Lady Macbeth and tomorrow Madam Butterfly as solid truth. They are acting, in life
as well as in their line of work.
Consider the beautiful Angelina Jolie. She is mad as a hatter. Even her own father said that
she had "serious mental problems." Her long history of violent self-abuse culminated with her
choice to cut off her breasts because of a DNA test that indicated risk for breast cancer. She
has had a long line of boyfriends and husbands, and a lot of kids adopted out of Africa, taken
away from their natural parents. Is she a reliable witness? She would say anything that is
fashionable. The woman wants to be adored as the model of an excellent person; this is a
honourable goal, but she is extremely unsuitable for it.
Weinstein's eighty accusers collected millions; the great producer went to a life-long jail
sentence. The public, the great American public was eager to lynch the man who gave them
True Romance and Pulp Fiction . Was he guilty as charged? Even the charges were a
travesty of justice. Men of his generation (and of mine, too) routinely propositioned women. We
are all guilty, though not many of us racked up Weinstein's numbers. Yet every woman was free
to refuse. No
police reports against Weinstein appeared until the #MeToo media campaign was in full
swing. Did he harass them? You and me are harassed daily by offers to take another credit card
or bank loan; we are free to refuse this definitely harassing offer. Every unsolicited proposal
is harassment; and we receive daily hundreds of proposals of various nature. What is so
different about a sexual proposal to a woman? Weinstein may or may not have committed a crime,
but in the poisonous air of #MeToo there is no need to prove any accusation, and the man was
lynched.
Perhaps now I am going to lose your tentative sympathy, but I do not believe the allegations
against Jeffrey Epstein and Ms Ghislaine Maxwell, either. And the attack on Prince Andrew is
similarly unbelievable. Chapeau for Mr Trump who dared to express sympathy to Ms Maxwell. This
was an act of incredible bravery, to step out of line and to say a few kind words to her and
about her. The cowardly Clinton and Obama, who were close friends with Epstein and Maxwell,
were mum. Trump who was not particularly close to the couple, spoke up for them. He really
deserves being re-elected, despite his many faults. Such a man is a master of his own mind, and
this is a very rare quality.
I may mull over a proposal to buy the Brooklyn Bridge, but how possibly can one believe the
stories of the disturbed woman who claims that she had to be forced to have sex with fabulously
wealthy Mr Epstein or to meet glamorous Prince Andrew, let alone that she suffered "extreme
distress, humiliation, fear, psychological trauma, loss of dignity and self esteem and invasion
of her privacy" on his island retreat? The complete absence of evidence and the complete lack
of objectivity could only prevail in the midst of a media campaign. It is believable what Ms
Maxwell said in a deposition, that Ms Giuffre was "totally lying." Indeed all these gold
diggers are totally lying.
Like this one : An
anonymous accuser says she'll testify that 'evil' Ghislaine Maxwell raped her '20-30 times'
starting from when she was 14 and claims she was forced to abort Jeffrey Epstein's baby. Honest
and reputable men like Prince Andrew are forced into the demeaning and impossible position of
having to argue and justify themselves against wild accusations. There are no reasonably
believable accusations of crime against these people. A woman had a photo of her taken with
Prince Andrew. She was at least 17; at this age girls in England are perfectly entitled to have
an affair with a man. Other girls in other photos were apparently of age, too. Young, yes, but
not criminally young. Furthermore, a posed photo does not always indicate a sexual
relationship. Some women claim they were babies and they were raped, but there are no proofs of
anything except their greed.
Mike Robeson who investigated the claims came to conclusion that they were often initiated
by big business to rip off rich Jews. New Puritanism is the Joker card that can trump the
antisemitism ace. He wrote:
I've read Whitney Webb's investigative articles on Epstein, which are often cited by the
alternative and leftist crowd as evidence of his Mossad connections and blackmailing
activities. But Webb's articles are actually full of unsubstantiated rumors, possible immoral
or illegal activities between high level people based on coincidental social or business
connections and potentially damning rumors corroborated mainly by her previous articles and
posts. She has done some fine reporting on other issues. But on the Epstein case, she is part
of what Israel rightly refers to as the New Puritanism.
Supposed evidence of Frau Maxwell's salacious involvement is the famous photo of Prince
Andrew below. This is all the New Puritans need to justify believing the rumors and drawing
their "I told ya' so!" conclusions. But hobnobbing has long been a sport played by the
wannabes with the tacit collusion of the rich and/or famous.
Take a look at the fun couple under Prince Andrew and his alleged squeeze. You may
recognize Rosalynn Carter, then First Lady of the US. Standing next to her is none other than
William Gacy , a
few months before he was arrested as a serial killer and cannibal of those he'd butchered.
Are we to draw certain conclusions from this photo?
Below Rosalynn Carter is another photo, this one showing then President George Bush being
hobnobbed by political has-been George Wallace and by young political wannabe Bill Clinton.
What conclusions can be drawn from this? Was George already then grooming Billy Boy for
higher things in life? Or is it merely more photographic evidence of how wannabes crawl up
the ladder of personal and career advancement? For it is clear that the rich and/or famous,
like Rosalynn Carter and Prince Andrew, have to put up with photo ops, sometimes to their
later discredit.
Very little about the Epstein case makes sense – not his social and financial
connections and especially not his alleged links with the Mossad. Every rich Jew in the US is
sayanim, but that doesn't mean they are running blackmail ops. And the pedo accusations are
ridiculous. His 'victims', none of whom were less than 16 (legal to marry in most European
countries and many American states) were willing, well paid and well taken care of gals who
got lucky to catch a good-looking sugar daddy. Whatever he knew about his rich and famous
clients that may have gotten him killed may have had something to do with what he knew about
them, sure. He probably shared his largesse with his friends and possible donors and
contributors. But if he had been sexually blackmailing them over the years, why did they keep
going back to him?
The blackmail angle doesn't make sense. It makes more sense that a lot of famous people
may have preferred him dead to testifying about his activities. Who, famous or not famous,
would want to get dragged through the mud by the overzealous New Puritan prosecution teams
that had already destroyed the lives of innocent defendants of sexual accusations like Jerry
Sandusky and Larry Nasser, as well as hundreds of others in the past decades of America's
sexual abuse/devil worship hysteria. The Pizzagate fiasco is a demonstration of how mobs can
be raised, aimed and defused by an orchestrated media campaign.
From what I see of Epstein's photos, he was an intelligent, good lucking, confident, fun
loving guy. If he was nailing more hot chicks than I ever did, more power to him.
Another motivation for the liquidation of Epstein's empire is the collaboration between
the media and the unknown figures behind the scenes who are likely to walk away with
Epstein's millions. Are you familiar with the story of Howard Hughes and the destruction of
his Las Vegas empire? It happened to him. Something similar has happened in the past few
years to other wealthy Jews like Donald Sterling , who was first falsely
accused of being a racist and then forced to relinquish his ownership of an NBA team. Other
examples? Richard Fuld of Lehmann Bros. and Bernie Madoff were taken down by their Wall
Street rivals and then used as scapegoats to expiate the sins of corporate raiders. Harvey
Weinstein was the sacrificial schwein to absolve the sick Hollywood culture. Now that
Weinstein has been destroyed, Hollywood can go back to business as usual.
But what about the intimidation faced by hundreds of girls victimized on Epstein's private
island? Why do they claim to be afraid of retribution even after his death? The girls were
treated well. They admit that they cooperated in finding more girls who would massage
Epstein, even supposedly knowing that they too would be 'horribly abused' by the 'monster'.
The reporters and the interviewed women are perfect examples of New Puritans. I feel dirty
after watching them perform. None of their emotional anecdotes reach evidentiary standards
and any court would dismiss their cases out of hand.
As for the source of Epstein's fortune, here is a plausible
investigation . It is interesting that no one can really agree on the amount nor the
source of his millions.
Justice, or what is passing under that name, gets screwed whenever the law is used to
empower a person with a personal grudge, either on his own behalf or to benefit a media
consortium. Emotional appeals could never been considered in the better world of Jefferson,
Lincoln and Washington. Perhaps they had slaves, but they would not have condemned a man, free
or slave, on the basis of empty accusations. Physical evidence is still required in the legal
courts. Only on TV can people be destroyed by edited testimony.
I am very tolerant of anti-Jewish rhetoric. So tolerant that I am often accused of it
myself. Still, the accusations against Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, and let's not forget
poor Mr Harvey Weinstein, are often marked by cliché characters such as the crass
foul-mouthed Jew and the innocent girl he despoils. Meanwhile, the facts of each case are
monotonously repeated: one man's career is destroyed while dozens of girls become famous;
millions of dollars are suddenly difficult to track and soon begin to evaporate; the man is
demonized and the women are sainted.
Can the New Puritanism overturn the Jews and their unstoppable juggernaut cry of
antisemitism? Leo Frank was lynched by the mob and the ADL was formed to make sure it never
happened again, no matter what the crime. Is New Puritanism the new mob violence? Perhaps mob
violence is the only way our rulers can overwhelm the paralyzing effects of being called
antisemitic. Perhaps the New Puritanism is an opening salvo in a larger war between shadow
forces.
But I could never believe that Maxwell and Epstein were connected with the Israeli
Intelligence agency, the Mossad. With all my sympathy to our esteemed colleagues Philip
Giraldi and Whitney
Webb , there is not a single shred of evidence for such connection. Conjecture, yes;
evidence, no. Even the father of Ghislaine, the late Mr Maxwell, who was not a saintly person
by any means, might be with better evidence accused of collaborating with Soviet Intelligence,
the KGB, than with the Israelis. A person of his standing probably connected with Israelis,
too, but he was no Mossad agent.
I can understand my American friends. There never was a time worse for American men, when
the statues and memorials of their great ancestors have been uprooted, when their wives and
daughters are queuing to press their pink lips upon the boots of black ghetto dwellers, when
their manhood is defined as "toxic" and their sons are dreaming of a same-sex union with a
glorious black buck. If the US were occupied by the Communists as Amerika envisaged, it wouldn't be as bad as what
you've got now. You have been humiliated thoroughly. I understand that in such a situation you
might jump at the chance to break the bones of rich Liberal Jews like Epstein and Weinstein. I
wouldn't refuse you this comfort. They are anyway already lynched.
However, if you want ever to walk free, you'd better deal with the New Puritan takeover.
Women are wonderful creatures, but often they can be manipulated and do what they are asked to
do. They are also excellent actors and are not troubled by honour. Men are more independent and
solitary by nature; that is why our Masters want to suppress masculinity. It is easier to
shepherd a flock of cows than so many bulls. Women love to be the victims, to blame men for
their failings; add social distance and fear of viral infection; add the mask (the New Western
Burka); add lockdown, and the problem of how to send the children to school might just solve
itself. No
children. The New Puritans are currently purging Hollywood of the most relentlessly
heterosexual men, but when they run out of rich Jews, they just might come after you.
The New Normal is the New Puritan. The pandemic fit into it tight as a glove. Under millions
of cameras and tracing applications, privacy shrinks and disappears. New Puritanism erases the
gap between public and private realms. In the world we knew, there was a difference between the
twain. A man having an affair with a woman (or with another man) was in a private realm. Do
whatever you wish in privacy of your home; just don't frighten the horses, Victorians once
said. Now there can be no privacy. Sex is already more of a political opinion than a physical
act. You might be lionized as a homosexual or despised as a breeder, your choice. Any affair,
or even the attempt to start an affair could be deadly in the post #MeToo world. In an era of
socialized medicine, sex is seen as a dangerous weakness that might endanger lives and imperil
the global healthcare system.
Much of the severity of New Puritanism can be sourced directly to American culture. America
was founded by the Old Puritans of Mayflower in 1620 and has periodically been subject
to hysterical outbursts, from witches to Red scares. Nowhere has the use of sex for advertising
and commerce been so widely spread as in the US. As the US has become the model for the world,
an epidemic of American hysteria is starting to infect countries all around the world. #MeToo
reached even Russia, but it is still only a minor phenomenon, mainly to be found among only the
most woke of hipsters.
Orwell imagined a future of "state-enforced repression and celibacy" while Huxley predicted
"deliberate, narcotising promiscuity". The New Puritans have chosen Orwell's world. I grew up
in something more akin to Huxley's, and I can tell you which one is better. Communist Russia
was very permissive in the private sphere. People had a lot of sex, with their girl/boy
friends, with spouses, with neighbours, with wives of their friends, with their colleagues,
with their teachers and students. The Soviets had none of the restrictions we have now against
sexual relations in the University between teachers and students; in fact, no restrictions
against sex with coworkers, something that now we would call abusive and then call the police.
As religion had little influence in Soviet society, adultery was frequent, and unless connected
with a public scandal, had no consequences.
Russians as well as the French could not understand why Clinton's affair with Monica
Lewinsky made waves in the US that blew into an impeachment trial and ended with the
bombardment of Belgrade. Bill was unfaithful to Hillary? That's not nice, but it is their
private affair. President Clinton lied? Well, he was not in the confession booth. Traditional
religions, be it Catholic or Eastern Orthodox, are quite tolerant of venial sin. Puritanism,
the Old as well as its New offspring are deadly serious in everything, and are unafraid of
killing or bullying a sinner to death. They may have begun with witches, but they are ending up
targeting ordinary folk.
Currently their targets have a lot of wampum, for it is no fun to bully a person for no
material gain. Us, impecunious men, we have nothing to be afraid of yet. But it might be wise
to save society before the New Puritans bring down disaster onto all of us. In my opinion,
America's influence on the world should be reversed, or at least limited. Let America get
influenced by Europe for a change. Mercifully, Europe is suffering from a very light case of
New Puritanism that may be entirely cured with a healthy dose of Anti-Americanism. I hear the
vaccine is under development.
Picture two is not proof, it's illustration. In fact Cord Meyer recruited Clinton as a
Rhodes scholar at Oxford, feathered his wife's nest with a ridiculous bonanza of commodity
trading top-ticks, then appointed Bill to run the CIA covert ops slush fund at Mena airfield.
That picture is junior secret agent Bill Clinton at the office picnic with his big boss the
DCI.
As for picture number one, I'll be forever grateful for the heartwarming thought that
Rosalyn also puts on a clown costume, handcuffs boys, buttfucks them, strangles them, and
buries them in the crawlspace.
Virtually all you wrote is true but with "Very little about the Epstein case makes sense
– not his social and financial connections and especially not his alleged links with
the Mossad" you seem to have quite deliberately blown your cover as another lying judaizer to
those who think Jews are normally incapable of true conversion and that your role in creation
is to show what bad is compared to good.
Indeed, it appears so: a very incisive first half of the article, describing a real
phenomenon (used to manipulate public opinion and society) seems designed to drop the Epstein
turd into.
Epstein is no Puritan witch hunt: Robert Maxwell gets something akin to a state funeral in
Israel, his daughter pimps for guy who uses lavish Wexner money for beehives of celebrities
into which a steady supply of young female flesh is injected and this guy is telling us we
just need to relax a bit.
" then First Lady of the US. Standing next to her is none other than William Gacy, a few
months before he was arrested as a serial killer and cannibal of those he'd butchered. Are
we to draw certain conclusions from this photo?"
Thanks, Israel. Well reasoned and well presented. Although some or many may not agree with
you, it's refreshing to read a straight forward exposition. At least you're laying it out
there for others to take a crack at it.
"Women are wonderful creatures, but often they can be manipulated and do what they are
asked to do. They are also excellent actors and are not troubled by honour. "
I've never met a woman who wasn't a bald-faced liar about anything that concerned her
personally. (And no, I'm not an Incel. Far from it)
"Much of the severity of New Puritanism can be sourced directly to American culture.
America was founded by the Old Puritans of Mayflower in 1620 and has periodically been
subject to hysterical outbursts, from witches to Red scares."
So true. The country was settled by all manner of religious zealots, each and every one of
them forming some sort of utopian colony here–almost all of which went down in
flames.
The Old Puritanism was hard on women; the witches were burned, and the whores were
evicted from their homes. The New Puritanism is hard on men.
Well, it is particularly hard on "beta" men. Their idea is basically to let "alphas" have
harems but all other men to become incels or worse. Just look at this guy, punished for
visiting a whore (in their view anyone who pays for sex is by definition not an alpha, so it
makes sense to punish johns but allow or even celebrate whores)
Yes, Feminism is a kind of inverted puritanism. But being hard on sluts and whore makes
sense if you want to preserve society's order and families. Feminist rules against men only
help to destroy society.
So there's a very big difference between the Old Puritanism and the New Puritanism.
From what I see of Epstein's photos, he was an intelligent, good lucking, confident, fun
loving guy. If he was nailing more hot chicks than I ever did, more power to him.
Come on. No one knows how this guy made money. For all purposes he was a nobody. Yet he
was seen with Elon Musk, Woody Allen, Trump, Clinton, Bill Gates, Prince Andrew, anyone who
was "someone" dined with him and maybe one of his girls. There's something very fishy about
this. I don't know, maybe he and Maxwell were just the preferred pimp of the elites, or maybe
there's something else. Robert Maxwell (Ghislaine's dad) was an Israeli spy and a media
magnate, just that is very suspicious.
I mean, of course I don't trust the little whore Giuffre (whoever trusts whores or
actresses, but I repeat myself, is an idiot). But there is something very strange and rotten
about Epstein and the fact that he met with almost everybody in the so-called elite.
Much of this article makes sense, though I can't buy the defense of Epstein and Maxwell.
It's absurd to call him a "pedophile" as many journalists do. He was a pimp for the Deep
State's extortion racket.
Thanks for this. I have been criticized by many for observing holes in the narrative and
objecting to trial by media.
I have, since the start of the last Epstein narrative questioned the "intelligence"
connection. Not because it wasn't possible, rather that Virginia Roberts narrative about
escaping was implausible. If Epstein was doing his alleged blackmail routine for Mossad or
any other intelligence service, Roberts would have been suicided long ago. Loose ends like
that are a danger to the operation.
That doesn't mean that Epstein wasn't diddling underage girls nor does it mean that Maxwell
wasn't recruiting girls to massage Epstein. In Maxwell's case, she may, or may not have known
Epstein was diddling them as alleged. I have yet to see a reasonable explanation of how these
underage girls got passports without parental consent, and if they did, who was the
guarantor? Apparently, all of these accusers had parents who were uninterested in their
underage daughters traveling with a male more than twice their age, on his private jet.
As for Weinstein, Shirley Temple's mother complained people in the studio were trying to get
into her daughter's pants and she had to be vigilant. Marilyn Monroe, on marrying Joe
DiMaggio, is reported to have said that she`d never have to suck another cock. The casting
couch stories have been rampant for as long as I have been alive, yet I am supposed to
believe that none of Weinstein`s accusers knew that it was the price of admission. That does
not mean I approve of taking advantage of women, that has always been done in many ways. Post
war turned millions of German and Italian women into prostitutes, for occupying soldiers, in
order to feed themselves and their families. Apparently that was ok, but young actresses
being turned into millionaires is not.
Not true at all, the majority of people who settled the USA were regular Anglos,
especially in the South.
And Anglo DNA is something like 25% of the USA. This country is full of immigrants from
other stocks, and you know what? They are far more likely to be Democrat-voting liberals,
while the Anglo Americans are more likely to be rural Republicans who think things like MeToo
and BLM are crazy.
What a total crock of shit. I have long maintained that Shamir is Mossad and a pretend
convert to Christianity. This is the guy who argued with passion that those who say that
Muslims did not do 9/11 are depriving them of credit for their rare success. It's
nevertheless surprising to see him cashing in his chips in such a stupid and lazy way. It's
in fact so stupid that it brings to mind Gordon Duff, himself an intelligence figure,
alerting me to the hugely disparate quality of Shamir emissions with the explanation that the
persona "Israel Shamir" is the work of a committee. It looks like desperate times for the big
Jews. The big satanic game -- implicating the Rothschilds, the British royals, and a whole
gaggle of Jews and crypto-Jews including Trump and Bill Gates, and all their attendant goys
such as the Clintons -- could all fall apart.
Israel Adam pretend-Christian Shamir, who is Moloch and why was there a temple to him on
Epstein's island?
Anyone who finds Shamir's protestations of Jewish innocence plausible need look no farther
than Maria Farmer's interview with Whitney Webb. Maria doesn't mention Moloch, but she keeps
wondering what happened to all those girls. Thousands seem to have just disappeared.
innocent defendants of sexual accusations like Jerry Sandusky and Larry Nasser,
I agree with most of the article, but do you have any proof that Jerry Sandusky and Larry
Nasser are innocent?
Prince Andrew fooling around with a consenting 17 year old does not compare with what
Jerry Sandusky and Larry Nasser were accused and convicted of doing.
How much have you seen, first hand, of America? The East Coast and Midwest is littered
with former religious communes. Okay, I may have indulged in a little hyperbole, but
nevertheless, there were a lot of them. And I don't know what you're going on about
Democrats, Anglos and such. Seems off topic to me.
I have long maintained that Shamir is Mossad and a pretend convert to Christianity. This
is the guy who argued with passion that those who say that Muslims did not do 9/11 are
depriving them of credit for their rare success. It's nevertheless surprising to see him
cashing in his chips in such a stupid and lazy way.
It's hard to imagine an authentic Christian would defend the deep state and Zionist Hebrew
pedophile operative Epstein. Hebrew-supremacist blood is thicker than any ideology, I guess.
His big Hebrew ego just can't let go of it's delusions of being forged by sacred, primeval
forces. I'm sure a rat would have a huge ego if it could speak, too.
Yes, the anti-Semitic trope of the Jew despoiling the innocent. The only stereotype I can
read here is that of the eternal victim. So Madoff didn't steal millions from elderly
pensioners. And Epstein wasn't linked to the former head of Israeli intelligence or invest in
security companies run by former Unit 8200 types. And Wexner (of Mega Group) didn't gift him
a multimillion dollar surveillance lair. And Maxwell was trolling the parking lot of Groton
School and Philips Andover after the kiddies got released from their chemistry AP test, not
preying on broken girls from broken homes. F#ck you Shamir.
He had murdered the girl, don't forget, and had been convicted by the courts,
despite a protracted and lavishly financed Jewish effort to pin the crime on a Black man who
had not committed it. The mob dragged Frank out of prison and lynched him only after his
death sentence had been commuted by the Governor of Georgia.
All of us regulars at Unz Review know fully well that speaking of Leo Frank being lynched
by the mob as the main story just won't do. Whoever is handling the Israel Shamir persona at
Herzliya these days doesn't have all that much interest in what Ron and others here have been
discussing.
Here is additional support for Shamir's take on Epstein's primary accuser –
"Virginia Roberts . claimed to have met him when she was fifteen and to have been forced to
work as his sex slave. In reality, she was seventeen, which is still below the age of consent
in Florida, but does materially alter her claim that she had sex with Prince Andrew when she
was under age because the age of consent in England is sixteen, something of which she was
almost certainly unaware .
Edward J.Epstein, a long time investigative journalist including on the JFK assassination,
recently published his own angle on the sources of Jeffrey Epstein's riches, and they have
nothing to do with sexual blackmail –
"An extremely savvy financier and philanthropist told me after Epstein's death about a
proposition Epstein had once made him: that he could save more than $40 million in US taxes
if he gave him $100 million to manage.
Epstein claimed the money would be concealed in a maze of offshore non-profits he
controlled so that part of the profits would be transferred to the financier's own
philanthropic foundation, with the balance retained offshore and out of the reach of the
taxman.
When the financier told him that the scheme amounted to illicit tax evasion, Epstein said
it was highly unlikely the Internal Revenue Service would unravel it, and, if it did, he
would protect the financier from any criminal exposure.
The financier asked him how? Epstein said the financier would have to sign over the funds
to him, thus giving him total discretion over where and how the money was invested. This
piece of paper, he said, would provide an alibi to the US tax authorities.
The financier turned down Epstein's proposition, but others – Arab princes, Russian
oligarchs and those interested in hiding some part of their wealth – might have
accepted it.
Indeed, shortly before his arrest last year, Epstein told an associate that he was going
into the business of hiding funds for billionaires who were contemplating divorcing their
wives – for a hefty commission, of course.
He also claimed to be in the final stages of buying a property in Morocco, one of four
countries in the world not to have an extradition treaty with the US.
So perhaps the mystery of Epstein's fortune is not how he made his millions, but to whom
the money ultimately belongs.
Many very powerful people may have had cause to rue Epstein's incarceration on sex charges
– and, given the fact that they were hiding their assets from the authorities, it's
highly unlikely they will ever publicly come forward to try to recover their
investments."
The column seems intended to discomfit and/or discredit as many different people around
here as possible. (I just checked Wikipedia to see how Mr. Multiname is being curated these
days, and noticed that the first of the "RELATED ARTICLES" is Gilad Atzmon.) The oddest yet
from this website's oddest writer.
" Even the father of Ghislaine, the late Mr Maxwell, might be with better evidence accused
of collaborating with Soviet Intelligence, the KGB, than with the Israelis. "
Of course. This makes perfect sense. It explains why the Israeli's gave him a state
funeral attended by Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, Israeli President Chaim Herzog,
and "no less than six serving and former heads of Israeli intelligence" .. because, after
all, he was KGB Right.
@Anonymous in the Nasser
case, a number of public figures have come forward in Sandusky's defence. The most active is
John Ziegler who maintains a website full of articles showing that the case against Sandusky
and Penn State was and is a sham and money grab. ( http://johnziegler.com/ )
There is also the well known author Mark Pendergrast who wrote a book on the case. Here are
links to two video interviews of both –
@Anonymous likely that
Nassar was sacrificed to atone for all the sex abuse that happens in kids sports. Now that he
is destroyed then child sporting can go back to business as usual because the monster was
vanquished. Note that the Nassar story could have been spun to criticize the families who
hand their children over to strangers, or to attack child sports in general. But it wasn't.
It was aimed directly at one man, and when he was gone the story was gone. That makes him the
sacrificial lamb.
On the other hand, the Sandusky story was immediately expanded into the Pedo Rings story,
indicating it was part of this long term project.
This use of "Puritan" as a swear-word looks simplistic, beyond simplistic, to me. Like
brain-washed Americans using "Socialist" as a swear-word in just the same way.
They might have been bible-fundamentalists, they might have been creationists, they might
have thought the world was flat, but was every witch ever burned in Germany burned by
Puritans? Was witchcraft a solely Puritan fantasy? The first ever mention of a witch was by
them?
But thanks for reminding me of the mad hatter. I'll get a copy of Alice In Wonderland and
compare it with what you write.
PS PC has a very different origin, a different so-called religion.
And this excuses Prince Andrew for fucking teenagers how? A man born into royalty with
every advantage but apparently unable to handle actual mature women. So that makes it cool
for him to partake of sleazy Jeff's procured girls?
No decent guy thinks of doing stuff like that. If that's what having money does to men,
I'll happily remain relatively poor.
Thanks Mr Shamir. What you wrote sounds about right. I do not like the fact that rich and
powerful men got their way with young girls. But this has been the way of the world since
time immemorial. It was all done in the open, and for decades, right under the noses of the
NYT. But neither they nor the New Puritans thought it fit to investigate, since their focus
was elsewhere, namely to tame the Catholic Church through grinding it in the pedophile mill
over alleged crimes largely committed in the 70s. Only now that the Pavlovian Dog known as
Public Opinion can't get any further stimulus from allegations concerning the Papists, they
have turned to Epstein and the Jews with a Royal thrown in instead. But at the end of it, it
would make no difference to the men, women and children trafficked for sex, since the New
Puritans would have turned their focus elsewhere. And for what it is worth I don't think this
a Mossad operation either. I mean how good are these guys? And is it not the responsibility
of politicians holding or aspiring to high office to keep themselves clear of such people and
places?
You're right, you lost my sympathy with this robust defense of Jeffrey Epstein. I
appreciate that it's good to be skeptical of what is reported as well as of the mob mentality
but there is no real defense of this guy based on what I've seen and heard over the past two
years.
All of his residences with surveillance cameras covering every room.
The source of his money being very murky.
His willingness to share his paid-for harem with the most powerful and connected. Out of
the goodness of his heart? No.
The 100% implausible jail suicide.
Isn't that enough red flags?
Even swine like Bret Kavanaugh deserve to not be lynched but Jeffrey Epstein and
Ghislaineare in a whole other rarefied class of scum. Why bother to make excuses for them? Do
you really believe that Trump wished Maxwell well out of magnanimity? More like he's hoping
that none of their dirt on him will see daylight.
Xymphora is also having none of it. (It's an indication of Ron Unz's good editorial
judgment that Shamir's article is not listed on the main page.)
Xymphora (from the website) :
"The New Puritans" (Shamir). Besides being completely clueless about #metoo – it's
about power relationships, not flirting – he has a list of completely innocent
people: Jerry Sandusky, Larry Nasser, Donald Sterling, Richard Fuld, Bernie Madoff and, of
course, Harvey Weinstein, goyim. Then he tell us that the Mossad has nothing to do with
Epstein-Maxwell. I'm starting to think Shamir's history of being an 'anti-Semite' was just
producing credibility for this important career-defining moment when the operations of the
Mossad and the MEGA Group required protection.
As clear and intelligent as ever. "It is easier to shepherd a flock of cows than so many
bulls".
I suspect the Epstein ring may be linked to Mossad. It is clearly some sort of Jewish
influencing network so seems like an Israeli soft power operation. Having said that Shamir is
spot on about all the pearl-clutching even by sensible alt-right figures.
President Clinton lied? Well, he was not in the confession booth.
Clinton lied under oath in a deposition submitted in a judicial proceeding. He also
coached other witnesses to support his story. These were crimes more serious than any that
could have been charged against Nixon, who was hounded out of office. Clinton took serious
charges and spun them into a story of a harmless peccadillo. Utter brilliance. And while the
Judge in the case tried to sweep these actual crimes under the rug as immaterial to the case,
it nevertheless cost the President his law licence.
How a society views sexuality has a tremendous influence on it's long-term structure and
stability.
I do not agree that the Epstein/MOSSAD-blackmail angle makes no sense, but I think that
Mr. Shamir makes some good points. Excessively strict public morals is a ripe breeding ground
for sanctimonious hypocrisy, and hidden rot, and can have frigthening consequences, and it
would not surprise me to learn that the damnable Jesuit Order has a hidden yet decisive
influence on this "New Puritanism" that the article traces the tentative outlines of.
On the other hand, too loose sexual morals fosters dissipation – as seen in the
lives of highly promiscuous people, or on a larger scale, societies such as Soviet Russia, or
various empires after they lost their moral vigour – such as much of contemporary
America. Some amount of discipline and self-restraint is needed – this seems to be a
moral law of nature.
These waters call for good personal judgment, fairness and balance, and wisdom.
Today, more of the same in Daily Telegraph:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/07/30/former-tory-mp-charlie-elphicke-guilty-sexually-assaulting-two/
The woman complained that Elphicke sexually assaulted her after inviting her for a drink at
his London home in 2007.
She was in her early 30s and said Elphicke – who had recently become a father for the
second time – proceeded to kiss her, grope her breast and then chase her round his
house trying to slap her bottom, chanting: "I'm a naughty Tory".
The woman came close to selling her story to The Mirror newspaper for £30,000 around a
decade later, but instead went to police.
She broke down as she gave evidence to the court. She cannot be identified for legal reasons.
END QUOTE.
Is not it typical. The guy had a try 14 years ago. Why didn't she report it to police same
day? Why wait for so long? Act now, or forget. She tried to make money of this allegation.
Still she can't be identified for legal reasons. So she can try it again, with another victim
who made a pass at her some time or another during last thirty years. This is incredible!
I haven't read the entire article yet, so this comment applies only to its initial
part.
Shamir is not very persuasive. He has the merit of explaining the situation clearly, but,
by doing so, he makes his criticism of Swedish law somewhat misdirected. As he explains it,
the legal punishment is very mild. The biggest punishment, he tells us, comes from private
entities. But doesn't that imply that, even if that law did not exist, things would happen
almost exactly as they did?
So, the problem, if it exists, is one of societal codes of moral. I, for one, think that
Sweden is autonomous to decide which codes of moral are best to itself. It's not society
which reflects the law, but the other way around. It is the law which reflects the wish of
the majority of Swedes, which is normal in a healthy democracy.
I don't find Shamir persuasive either. He has a point, women are not particularly more
moral or ethical than men, they need to be watched just like anybody, but OTOH regular
witch-hunts for politicians and plutocrats of both genders who cannot resist exploiting their
positions financially or keep their hands off the staff could be a good thing, overall.
He comes across as somebody with skin in the game here too.
This is stated in the quote from Mike Robeson, so it is better he will respond to the
items mentioned in his quote (signposted on the webpage). I have too little knowledge about
these details.
Sure, but Americans especially American Presidents are exempted from international laws
governing war crimes and crimes against humanity. It's why they can sanction entire
populations with impunity.
The irony of America bombing an aspirin factory in another country, however, is that much
of America's asprin needs are met with imports.
I commented on Xymphora: Regarding the New Puritans: " Jerry Sandusky, Larry Nasser,
Donald Sterling, Richard Fuld, Bernie Madoff and, of course, Harvey Weinstein, goyim."
– these are words of Mike Robeson I quote. It is even signposted as the quote. I hardly
know these names (excepting Weinstein). So I think you may correct your post.
Yes. I'm not sure how it is puritanical to not want middle aged rich men to buy the
services of even one minor girl for any sexual purposes. I thought that was just a civilized
notion of protecting the young.
Perhaps now I am going to lose your tentative sympathy, but I do not believe the
allegations against Jeffrey Epstein and Ms Ghislaine Maxwell, either. And the attack on
Prince Andrew is similarly unbelievable. Chapeau for Mr Trump who dared to express sympathy
to Ms Maxwell.
Trump's "sympathy" to Maxmossad was political noncommitment. Being a gentleman.
"It's not society which reflects the law, but the other way around. It is the law which
reflects the wish of the majority of Swedes, which is normal in a healthy democracy.
"
One of us is an idiot.
@Jefferson Temple Unless
you have inside information, his apparent inability to handle actual mature women is
conjecture, and open ended. Some women are mature at 20, others are not mature at 50.
Jeff's procured girls, beyond them having been employed by him, are unproven allegations.
Curious the parents were seemingly disinterested in their daughters traveling with a male
more than twice the age of their daughter.
That does not mean girls were not procured for illicit purposes or that Andrew may be
morally bankrupt, regardless of whatever happened between him and Giuffre.
@Chris Moore That said, I
disagree with the two main points of the article. One, this is not a "new puritanism", it's
something else, the comparison is patently false. How "puritan" is modern society if there's
porn everywhere?
Two, there's no way to defend Epstein and say that he was just a "normal, rich,
intelligent guy". The guy was, at best, a pervert and a well-connected pimp for politicians
(but how did he get there?). At worst , well, there are many theories and I won't dwell into
that. No way to defend that Jewish scum (sorry, but, he was Jewish, and he was scum).
If the US were occupied by the Communists as Amerika envisaged, it wouldn't be as bad
as what you've got now.
And that's the horrifying truth. For non-rich white Americans, Stalinism, as evil as it
was, would not have been as bad as what we now have under Anglo-Zionist Capitalist
Globalism.
In my Catholic family, putting your hands on a female relatives' body in any unwanted way,
would result in a visit from one of her brothers or cousins and a serious beating. It's also
interesting to see that my old parish priests were right when they spoke about the immorality
of the godless communists in that apparently adultery was common and accepted in the Soviet
Union.
The older I get, the more respect I gain for the moral teachings of the Christian Faith,
adhering to it will keep any young man out of the trouble Mr Shamir writes about.
Using Mick Jagger as a yardstick for acceptable behavior? Is that really what you
meant?
I'm thinking that at least some of those girls actually were responsible for their choices
but under the law, I don't think they can be held responsible. No character flaw or selfish
motive changes the fact that they were minors. A full grown man and woman is a different
story. They get the full advantages that society affords to adults as well as the
accountability. I don't care who rich guys want to fuck. If they target my daughter, they're
going to need an ambulance.
You quoted a big passage from Mike Robeson without reservation. So what if it's signposted
as a quote? One assumes from the context that you are endorsing his views. It does make you
look ridiculous, and I can understand your subsequent eagerness to dissociate yourself from
the quote. But there it is.
I don't think you quite understand Catholics if you think we have a healthy and casual
outlook on sex
("We" in my case is cultural and geographic history. I haven't been actually practicing
nor even much of a believer for a long time. But the culture tends to stick with you for
life, no matter what you do)
For one thing, we are probably only second to Jews when it comes to being guilt-ridden
from birth about sex (among most other things). The jury is still out whether this drives
more of us toward sin than away from it. Catholics are infamously indiscriminately
promiscuous (Zappa wrote a song about it) and somewhat less good at learning from their
mistakes as many others
The incidence of priestly abuse may be exaggerated for Puritanical effect, but it's by no
means an unfounded myth; we were joking about altar boys at least as far back as the 70s when
I took First Communion. BTW we had a Father Chester and, whatever the truth was, his nickname
rhymed
@anon a, Arkansas to run
drugs into the USA. Must of have had some local pull.
An early image of William Jefferson Clinton seated next to George Herbert Walker Bush may
shed light on the Intelligence connections of Bill, besides the two spook schools Yale and
Oxford.
Then there is Hillary's lesbianism. Why would a supposed hetero male marry a lesbian? Bill
did not need her political connections, nor her family connections. Chelsea looks like Bill,
not. Possible that Bill's taste was never a Monica, nor a Hillary, nor a 16 year old Lolita.
Bill and Hill, a match made in Langley.
Israel Shamir: "Currently their targets have a lot of wampum, for it is no fun to bully a
person for no material gain. Us, impecunious men, we have nothing to be afraid of yet."
This isn't true at all, at least in America, and I suspect it's the same elsewhere. Here,
so-called sexual harassment has been a cause of action since at least the 1980s. As someone
who was metooed way back then, before it became a thing, I can tell you that poverty is no
guarantee you won't be targeted. People are scum and really get a kick out of victimizing
each other. They'll do it just for the fun of it. Financial incentives aren't the cause of
this; it's just the icing on the cake for the so-called victim. Also, there is an absurd
culture of chivalry toward women in the matriarchal West that has lingered long past its
expiration date, such that a certain type of man enjoys "white knighting" for women who make
such claims. For such men, and they are very numerous, all a woman has to do is turn on the
water works, start crying and acting hysterical, and she'll be believed. Often it won't even
take that. From my point of view, when I see guys at the top, like Weinstein and Epstein,
having now to deal with it too, I have to confess to a certain degree of shadenfreude. During
my own tribulations with this, they were the ones getting away with it, and often even the
enforcers and enablers of it.
I see it as yet another unintended side effect of two fundamental, revolutionary
technological changes. These changes were first thought by almost everyone concerned to be
wonderful, a sign of Progress at last, but nobody was looking down the road far enough.
First, due to the advent and widespread use of scientific birth control and abortion, women
were given for the first time in history complete control over their own fertility. This led
directly to sexual liberation and modern feminism, both of which would be impossible without
this development. Second, a change in the political technology, namely the extension of the
vote to women. Why, you might ask, did an all-male government ever pass such laws, or in
America, empower its enforcement arm, the EEOC? Because of the woman's vote, of course. No
politician today can hope to succeed without it.
But I could never believe that Maxwell and Epstein were connected with the Israeli
Intelligence agency, the Mossad. With all my sympathy to our esteemed colleagues Philip
Giraldi and Whitney Webb, there is not a single shred of evidence for such connection.
Is this one of C.J. Hopkins "I'm a Russian Asset" parodies? Are you serious?
How many Mossad heads attended "Robert Maxwell's" funeral, Shamir?
Weinstein did nothing wrong?
What do they have on you, Izzy? Blink three times fast in your next video appearance to
let us know they got to you.
No one with their head north of their colon believes anything you just said here. So
that's a plus.
Thanks. I didn't take it personally. But it seems that Kavanaugh is dirty, and so is
Trump. Makes me wonder about the operations to take them down. Russia gate for Trump and
Blasey Ford gate for Kavanaugh. Both so ridiculous that it is almost as if their foes
couldn't use the real dirt without self-incriminating.
@Sollipsist l, impossible
for little children to doubt what the big person says, whether Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy,
Easter Rabbit, anything. So easy to indoctrinate. And it's continued to the present day, the
only denomination that has it's own elementary schools everywhere. Everywhere. All about
capturing the children.
But going back to "Puritan", Wikipedia on Savonarola, in 1494 "he instituted an extreme
puritanical campaign "
So, Ha! Ha!, Roman "Catholic" Puritans of the Fifteenth Century! Didn't molest
children back then, but have ever since!
Feel free to check out how these egalitarian English men have in 10 min permanently banned
my 6 year old Wikipedia account over a comment I made three years ago – proclaiming
that marriage is between a man and a woman is considered homophobic now. (It's a self-plug,
but it's also Christian psychology in real-time, you might appreciate it.)
Does this homosexual psychosis stem from technology, too? The most industrialized nations
on the planet are not sodomitic at all. It all seems to me like an American cultural
thing.
Adûnâi: "Are you not confusing the cause and effect?"
Certainly there is an interplay between the two factors I mentioned that magnifies their
societal effects. They strengthen and support each other.
Adûnâi: "But why did women get the vote to begin with? You don't explain.
From what I know, they were first employed in WW1, and it was a "symbol of gratitude"?
Sounds quite cucked and Christian."
Technology develops according to its own internal logic, often with unpredictable and
sometimes even catastrophic effects on human societies. It is deeply hostile to natural
distinctions of race, sex, and culture that impede its efficient operation. Technological
change drives cultural change, and war stimulates technological change.
Adûnâi: "Why then have the Eastern countries not faced it? Neither the USSR nor
modern China?"
I'd say they have, in their own way. There are, for example, plenty of female
professionals in both countries, who function in their jobs as the equivalent of men. This
would be impossible if they were constantly pregnant and caring for children. Then too, there
is the low birth rate, which is only possible with scientific birth control. They also
participate equally with men in politics, AFAIK, and have equal rights as citizens. N.b. too
that in China, at least, this happened without Christianity -- although, as has been said by
Spengler and others, Marxism can itself be regarded as a form of Christianity.
Adûnâi: "Does this homosexual psychosis stem from technology, too?"
Efficiency is the god of technology, and that is unquestionably true all over the world.
To the extent that cultural factors impede the efficient operation of technology, they have
to change, or all that results is inferior technology. Man's increasing dependence on
technology is why a kind of global culture is emerging now, instead of earlier in history.
Cultural distinctions are being destroyed at an accelerating pace, and also races are being
mixed as an unintended and unforeseen consequence of this dependence.
Because of this, I suspect the decadence you notice today in the West will eventually show
up in the East as well. It's just that because they were relative late comers to technology
and industrialization, it may take a little longer, that's all. There's a certain cultural
inertia that needs to be overcome.
Russian method
In a far away Russian village, gals have heard of the Western way to deal with men, and they
brought their rape complaints to local police. Police checked the claims, found them without
merit, and both ladies were fined 5000 ruble ($80) each. How neat! https://pervo.info/v-achite-eshhyo-odno-lozhnoe-iznasilovanie/
Even without technology, give humans enough time, and one race will emerge triumphant.
Whereas the high tide of Islam failed to conquer Anatolia, the Seljuks came to the Aegean,
and the Ottomans reached Vienna. Failures are weeded out, and those remain who are strong,
not who can make money most efficiently.
@Israel Shamir
And yet, the rural folk of Russia is dying out. Natural change (2018): -3 per 1000 rural
vs -1 per 1000 urban.
Adûnâi: "Everything indeed will be shown in due time. What else are we doing
here but trying to predict the future?"
Yes, I agree with most of what you wrote in this comment. All I'm doing is pointing to the
trend, the way the technological system tends to grind away cultural differences. Of course,
some cultural differences may not affect the efficiency of the system, and those might
remain. Western "decadence" might or might not be one of those things. Ted Kaczynski says
something relevant about this in ISAIF:
29. Here is an illustration of the way in which the oversocialized leftist shows his
real attachment to the conventional attitudes of our society while pretending to be in
rebellion against it. Many leftists push for affirmative action, for moving black people into
high-prestige jobs, for improved education in black schools and more money for such schools;
the way of life of the black "underclass" they regard as a social disgrace. They want to
integrate the black man into the system, make him a business executive, a lawyer, a scientist
just like upper-middle-class white people. The leftists will reply that the last thing they
want is to make the black man into a copy of the white man; instead, they want to preserve
African American culture. But in what does this preservation of African American culture
consist? It can hardly consist in anything more than eating black-style food, listening to
black-style music, wearing black-style clothing and going to a black-style church or mosque.
In other words, it can express itself only in superficial matters. In all ESSENTIAL respects
more leftists of the oversocialized type want to make the black man conform to white,
middle-class ideals. They want to make him study technical subjects, become an executive or a
scientist, spend his life climbing the status ladder to prove that black people are as good
as white. They want to make black fathers "responsible." they want black gangs to become
nonviolent, etc. But these are exactly the values of the industrial-technological system. The
system couldn't care less what kind of music a man listens to, what kind of clothes he wears
or what religion he believes in as long as he studies in school, holds a respectable job,
climbs the status ladder, is a "responsible" parent, is nonviolent and so forth. In effect,
however much he may deny it, the oversocialized leftist wants to integrate the black man into
the system and make him adopt its values.
A corollary of this would seem to be that only trivial differences will remain between
cultures as different cultures fully adapt themselves to the global technological system. The
urging of "oversocialized leftists" isn't actually necessary, as the system itself contains
its own rewards for compliance and punishments for failure to comply. There's also nothing
particularly tied to naturally-occurring races in that system of values; at least, not
obviously so. The system is hostile to natural race distinctions precisely because it is
necessarily race-neutral. Might it create its own artificial race of genetically engineered
humans in order to maximize efficiency? That could be. Certainly, genetic changes to man have
been a side effect of civilization itself. E.g., human beings are much less violent than they
used to be. Obedience, non-violence (at least on a personal level), and conformity has been
bred into us modern humans.
Adûnâi: "Are you of the view that collapse is imminent, even without Unabombers?
And if it is, there will be no going back to high technology?"
It's probably a mistake to underestimate the resilience of the system. Anyone interested
in trying to preserve the status quo as to race will have to act fast to bring the system
down, or it will be too late. Whether high tech can be rebuilt after a global collapse would
depend on a lot of factors impossible to know without knowing at least the method used to
cause the collapse, as that would have an effect on how long any ensuing "Dark Age" would
last.
Yes its kind of strange. Kavanaugh is not an ideological conservative in the mould of
Scalia or Thomas. Makes one wonder what the fuss was all about. I must revisit what you wrote
about earlier on his earlier judgements.
I'm not disagreeing, but don't forget it was 19th Century "Great Awakening" Protestants
who were responsible for creating the public school system in the US. Can we question their
motives?
In England, a struggle to dismiss a parliamentarian because of a vague complaint
Chief whip Mark Spencer today stood by his decision not to suspend the senior Tory MP
arrested on suspicion of rape.
The party is under mounting pressure, including from the alleged victim, to strip the
ex-minister of the Conservative whip.
But Mr Spencer said it was right to allow the police to conclude their investigation before
taking any action, while also stressing the need to protect the identity of the accuser.
The former parliamentary researcher in her 20s has alleged she was assaulted and forced to
have sex.
What does "forced to have sex" means?
@Dr.
Robert Morgan , it's "a triumph of the Natural, Racial Order" that confuses the plans of
the globo. The very globohomo is contingent upon the qualities of the Nordic race. It has
evolved to seek efficiency, and now – under the guidance of Christianity – it is
employing it in its own self-destruction. But as they near the end, their efforts become
discordant, muffled, inefficient.
> "Ted Kaczynski"
By the way, why do you prefer calling him his real name instead of "the Unabomber"? "Ted"
is so much more boring, and the in "Kaczynski" is mispronounced as by Americans while it
should be in Polish. The Unabomber has a ring to it.
Shamir now confesses to be a Mossad Psyop who pretended to be a hero of the Goyim. The
choosen ones raping and pimping gentile children and women is nothing to him. Criticism is
New Puretanism. A surrogate for the word Antisemitism as Derschowitz uses it for his accuser?
Calling Robert Maxell a KGB Agent i and other are struggling to understand if you are
trolling or trutly a Mossad apologet. The worst is you are friends with Gilad Atzmon
hopefully he is as bluffed by your (new?) behaviour and views as we are.
Anyway, just noticed more ammo lying on the ground right here at UR. Andy Flick-Chick, his
2020-02-13 article, The Philippines Are Choosing New Allies: Pres. Duterte, hugely
popular there, "sexually molested by a priest when he was a child, he holds a grudge against
Christianity."
@Dr.
Robert Morgan he principle of the pursuit of individual happiness trumps any search for
the efficiency of the collective.
I would concede that the history of technological intelligent life on this planet has been
aimed at the discovery of the correct proportion between efficiency and race. But not more.
Simply put, what I am observing to-day is the death of race-denialists in the Occident and
the triumph of racists in the Orient. The latter are more efficient, too.
A little video celebrating the unity of the Man and the Machine. Those visions are not
Checharian and not bucolic.
Adûnâi: "If it were indeed calculating the most efficient society, it would
probably try to mix and match, and as homosexualism is not exactly important, it would be
discounted as a Western obstacle." I would say, if there is no reason ruling the system, it
turns into idiocracy."
You have to keep in mind that the focus of technique when evaluating efficiency is
necessarily quite narrow. For instance, having a horse is more efficient (in some ways) than
walking, while having an automobile is still more efficient than having a horse. So an
evaluation of efficiency is both relative and contextual. Someone might object, for example,
that automobiles aren't really more efficient than walking, because by using automobiles, you
have to accept that tens of thousands of people are going to die annually in car accidents.
That's true, but still, the judgement of society (i.e., the "group mind" that I've referred
to) has been that using automobiles is worth it, i.e., more "efficient". And there can be
little doubt that, overall, a society that has the technology necessary to produce and use
automobiles would defeat a society at a more primitive technological level in the contest of
survival between them.
But generally, one cannot determine in advance "the most efficient society" any more than
one can determine in advance "the fittest animal". Whatever form of social organization is
most efficient must emerge gradually, as man does his dance of death with technology.
Humanity is like a blind man groping his way down a corridor. Nobody knows where
technological development will lead, and its development cannot be steered. Attempts to allow
ideology to steer technology only result in inferior technology.
As for "homosexualism", thinking about it some more, I'd say it's just another side effect
of female empowerment. Due to the development of scientific birth control methods women are
now participating in work and politics on equal footing with men, and there are social
consequences that weren't foreseen: e.g., more men are raised without a father in the home;
more men who, in their work life, will necessarily have a woman as their "boss"; decoupling
sex from its natural function of reproduction leads to regarding sexuality as a matter of
"lifestyle choice". Given basic human psychology, I'd say these trends favor an increase in
"homosexualism". Certainly they are quite destructive of patriarchy.
Adûnâi: "A lack of will is a lack of life. I emphasise the role of the
individual in history. If the system is so smart, why does it allow the vector to turn
towards disorder* for a period?"
Individual will has nothing to do with technique. It can't control it. Just to stick with
the example of birth control technologies, you cannot "will" away the fact that they empower
women, and at the same time disempower men. To use the technique at all, you just have to
accept this, just as with the use of automobiles, a society accepts that the cost is tens of
thousands of lives every year.
Disorder arises, and empires fall, precisely because all the consequences of a given
technological configuration aren't foreseen; in fact, they're not even foreseeable. Shit
happens, as the saying goes.
Adûnâi: "By the way, why do you prefer calling him his real name instead of "the
Unabomber"? "
Because it's his ideas that are important, not his relatively ineffectual bombs.
Adûnâi: "Simply put, what I am observing to-day is the death of race-denialists
in the Occident and the triumph of racists in the Orient. The latter are more efficient,
too."
This is the question to be decided in the future, by the result. I agree that the West,
precisely because of its Christian worldview, tends to confuse what it regards as moral
superiority with technological superiority. But then, if the prize is survival itself, morals
can change. Also, there's a time honored Christian tradition of hypocrisy that must be taken
into account. Only the event of the matter will show which form of technological organization
is more efficient.
Kinda sad that people are so often especially motivated by childhood trauma; the
simplicity, irrationality and disproportionate responses that are understandable in the
childish mind are unnaturally preserved throughout adulthood. A little girl gets abused by a
pervert uncle, and years later her supposed reason and free will convinces her that men are
evil, old men especially, traditional families and patriarchal society are the enemy, and she
was "born" a lesbian. So pretty much everybody in her sphere of influence ends up paying for
the act of one degenerate.
Up to this article, I took him to be honest, regardless of how muddy his background was.
Maybe he's testing his audience, but this is laughable.
Of course, if you're opposed to a superficially feminized, #metoo, gotcha culture, you may
sympathize at first.
But he's covering up for a zio-criminal entity that hasn't yet been unraveled. He's
actually trying the line that Epstein was some cavalier 70s Don Juan simply born a bit too
late.
Whores will be whores. Don't care about them, as they squirmed around Weinstein and
Epstein. Pretending Epstein is all about whores however, just turned Israel Shamir into a
whore in his own right. Pat yourself on the back, but we still don't know shit about Epstein,
the intelligence angle that is.
Maybe Israel can get his friend Assange on the ball?
"... Like George Carlin once said "political correctness is fascism disguised as politeness" ..."
"... "Almost nobody has any idea what they are talking about." That's the problem with this internet age giving every moron a voice. ..."
"... Social Justice Warriors = political correctness on steroids. ..."
"... "It starts off as a halfway decent idea and then it goes completely wrong" Sums up all this stupidity in the wake of the BLM protests. What started out as legitimate anger about the murder of an unarmed black man by a police officer has denigrated to people trying to cancel comedy shows from 20 years ago and bitching about "inappropriate language" and just ..."
"... Take any ethical position to its extreme and if it holds together it's good. - Kant. Liberalism taken to an extreme fails. Get a clue. ..."
"... I love how Cleese puts it. Fundamentalism does not just have to do with religion, or the far right. It is taking anything to an extreme. The same goes with political correctness. ..."
"... John Cleese outclasses Bill Maher by an absolutely massive margin ..."
"... Political correctness is another way of stating: " I want to make rules of tolerance that only apply to everyone else in society. But only don't apply to everyone on the same side as the group I'm with" ..."
"... Political correctness and Social Justice isn't about protecting minorities, or protecting the LGTBQ community etc, its about control and censoring through bullying. its about telling you how to think, and what you can say. Our Great Grandparents died to protect our right to think and speak freely, and to tell me how to think and speak, you are literally pissing on the graves of the people who died to protect that right, and THAT offends me. ..."
Cleese's huge laugh at the "religion of peace -- a piece of you here, a piece of you there" was wonderful -- he laughed so
hard -- almost as though he'd never heard that before -- and perhaps he hadn't -- but he sure seemed to enjoy it, as did I!
"Almost nobody has any idea what they are talking about." That's the problem with this internet age giving every moron a voice.
Used to be that you had to have some kind of intelligence or talent to get recognition.
"It starts off as a halfway decent idea and then it goes completely wrong" Sums up all this stupidity in the wake of the
BLM protests. What started out as legitimate anger about the murder of an unarmed black man by a police officer has denigrated
to people trying to cancel comedy shows from 20 years ago and bitching about "inappropriate language" and just
I love these guys, the whole "political correctness" is an absurd illusion. In my country we love to make jokes about western
countries and specifically our neighbors, but you will most certainly get arrested if you make joke about other nationalities,
origin or "that" religion.
For John Cleese Fans.. If you've never seen an old 80,s film of his called "Clockwise" Please check it out. Small budget film
By Handmade Fims which was in part George Harrison's company.. and very very funny FYI
"...Stupidity, I've heard you're against it "!!!!! "Australians are so well balanced, because they've a chip on each shoulder"!!!!!!
3:30 "religion of piece - there's a piece of
you over there, there's a piece of you over there, ..."!!!!
Understand the following like you have understood nothing else before: (Maher and Cleese obviously had not at the time of this
interview.)
'Political Correctness' is now a construct utilised almost exclusively to trivialise and dismiss anything that seeks
to redress injustice, unfairness and the unequal distribution of wealth, power, and privilege.
Whatever the issue it will be dismissed
as being only 'political correctness' and even common decency of courtesy are disparaged as 'political correctness gone mad' .
It has also become at the same time a 'weasel' term used by cowards and bullies to avoid having to openly state that the have
no care for the rights, concerns, feelings and well-being of others.
Look for how and by whom 'political correctness' is currently
used and you will see what Maher, Cleese and posters commenting on this clip hve not and be less likely to be misled and duped.
I love how Cleese puts it. Fundamentalism does not just have to do with religion, or the far right. It is taking anything to
an extreme. The same goes with political correctness.
"Political incorrectness... Could we just bitch about that?"... And here I sense feminist hysteria storm coming Bill Maher's
way. I definately prefer the British style. John Cleese was one of those people I looked up to and thought "I want to be like
him when I grow up".
John Cleese outclasses Bill Maher by an absolutely massive margin and Bill Maher is so full of himself he always thinks he's
the smartest, most important person on the show. Bill Maher is embarassing to watch.
Despite loving Mr. Cleese, I want to point out that when you joke about oppressed group it becomes part of oppression. That's
why joking about Mexicans in USA or Britain it is different than joking about Mexicans in Mexico by Mexicans. Context is everything
Cleese's logic here is irrefutable; and really shines a light on the incredible double standards that are prevalent in contemporary
society. It's rewarding to know; watching this when he speaks about Jesus that there are religious academics, and representatives
that see the wise satirical insight of; Life of Brian. If only we had a movie now that lampooned radical Isalm. Oh wait there
is; its called; Four Lions.
Political correctness is another way of stating: "I not only want my piece of the cake to eat for myself, but I also want the
whole cake to eat for myself too." Political correctness is another way of stating: " I want to make rules of tolerance that only
apply to everyone else in society. But only don't apply to everyone on the same side as the group I'm with"
Cleese is so spot-on about the madness of political correctness. Goebbels would have loved it, except this fascism is of the
left, in the heads of "open-minded" liberals (so-called.)
Political correctness and Social Justice isn't about protecting minorities, or protecting the LGTBQ community etc, its about
control and censoring through bullying. its about telling you how to think, and what you can say. Our Great Grandparents died
to protect our right to think and speak freely, and to tell me how to think and speak, you are literally pissing on the graves
of the people who died to protect that right, and THAT offends me.
So annoying watching bill maher. He's so arrogant and conceited. He's always cutting in awkwardly to say some middle-of-the-road
boring hum-drum to get an obligatory clap from his audience. Can't we just listen to the fantastic john cleese and not the wannabe
political spokes-person?
It seems to me thar racial tensions in particular or worse now than they Were before they shoved this whole political correctness
thing down our gullets. And that statement goes back to before the Minneapolis police killed a man for using a counterfeit $20
bill(being black). Forcing political correctness on people doesn't work. You're not changing peoples ideas you're just suppressing
them. When you suppress a persons ideas those ideas fester. When suppressed ideas fester they build up pressure and eventually
explode. Instead of telling people what they can't say or do, we need to re-educate our people to except those that are different.
Humor is a very good way of getting people to see how ignorant their ideas are.
''Political correctness'' is for people who have achieved nothing, done nothing, and ARE nothing. It is their way of pretending
to have power over REAL people. That's why celebrities and Hollywood actors love being PC so much.
Radicals have never had a sense of humor. They are unbalanced. "In jest, there is truth". --
Roman proverb. Radicals has problems with truth. Therefore, they don't like humor.
"... Monty Python was the pinnacle of contemporary comedy precisely because it drew attention to the absurdity of modern society and it pompous hypocrisy ..."
big female BLM supporter wearing a nappy mask that says "i can't breathe" on it
soccer mom says "well take the stupid mask off"
MartinG , 3 hours ago
How many Wokesters does it take to change a light bulb?
One to complain that the light bulb is white.
One to complain that the light is white.
One to blame boomers for wearing out the old bulb.
One who doesn't know how.
And one Wokester who says there must be change as he changes the bulb.
tardpill , 3 hours ago
the only one that can possibly change the bulb with it out being a racist privilege is not
available because they are too busy burning **** down
DaBard51 , 2 hours ago
You forgot:
--One who complains that there isn't enough diversity in light bulbs.
--One who says "Bulb Lives Matter!"
--One who complains that screwing the bulb is sexist.
--One who can't decide whether the bulb is DC or AC.
When nine hundred years old you become, look this good you will not.
<edit> whoever up-voted, my thanks. Shadow-banned, I am not, now, I see...
Roger Casement , 3 hours ago
They are the joke.
philipat , 2 hours ago
Yes, and that is why humor is so important, especially at the margin. Politicians,
especially Democrat politicians, don't like comedy because it draws attention to the
absurdity of most of what they do.
Monty Python was the pinnacle of contemporary comedy precisely because it drew attention
to the absurdity of modern society and it pompous hypocrisy. It gave me more laughs more
consistently than anything I have come across since. 'God speed John, you stay with what you
believe and ***k the humorless wokesters who need to get a life and lighten up for their own
sake and for that of all the rest of us!
45North1 , 2 hours ago
An Antifa member, a BLM'er and a Proud Boy go into a Bar.....
EvlTheCat , 2 hours ago
"Woke" in itself is a joke and a oxymoron, which if you know the definition makes it
ironic also. Touches all bases John.
@valleyshrew He never says that having enemies makes you an extremist. He said being an extremist gives you
justification to make enemies and to blame them for everything.
Moral
reformation by abuse is not going to work. Frankly, the actual irrelevance of this to
ownership of the country is one reason why it is allowed, a way to neuter real opposition. It
prevents solidarity between the lowers, while fostering illusions about select minorities. Wasn't there some guy who actually
wrote about the Obama, who betrayed all communities including black, under the title We
Were Eight Years in Power?
Notable quotes:
"... Defund is a stupid idea......changing the operating rules makes more sense. I blame the MSM for pushing minority headlines. ..."
"... It's not up to blacks on whether police are defunded or not. It's up to "woke" and privileged, liberal white lawmakers who think they know better than their constituents, both white and black on what's best for them. ..."
"... Has anyone else noticed that as the protests have developed, that those protesting and demanding defunding of the police are predominately white people of university enrolement age? Paid to protest by whom? ..."
"... Our guess is most probably George Soros, US Democrats and our friend Bill Gates. All for what the destruction of the society that allowed them to become obscenely wealthy. ..."
"... The state of US domestic insecurity: citizens don't trust the enforcers of the power structure, but don't want to be thrown to the wolves, whether it's black or white. ..."
Despite Black Lives Matter protests raging across the country and moves to defund police departments or cut back their budgets, a
new poll suggests black citizens don't support the efforts to remove cops from the streets.
The Gallup
poll
,
released Wednesday, was conducted throughout July and involved over 36,000 adults across the US.
A whopping 81 percent of
black respondents said they want police to spend the same amount of time in their neighborhoods that they already do or to have
even more of a presence. The results are similar across races, with 88 percent of white Americans, 83 percent of Hispanic
Americans, and 72 percent of Asian-Americans all saying the same thing.
The poll also confirmed that
black Americans are more likely to see police presence in their communities, with 73 percent of respondents answering that they
notice cops in their neighborhoods
"sometimes"
or
"very
often."
That's compared to 65 percent of non-black respondents.
While that gap could be seen as supporting the charge that black communities are overpoliced, it had little impact on whether
citizens wanted more or less police presence.
"The slightly elevated frequency with which
Black Americans see police in their neighborhood has limited impact on their preferences for changing the local police presence,"
Gallup
wrote in their findings.
About a third of black
citizens who responded that they
"often"
see police in their neighborhoods said they
would like there to be less of a presence, but over 50 percent in that category don't want any change.
The poll did also show that
very few black Americans are confident a run-in with a police officer will go well. Only 18 percent said they were very confident
such an encounter would go well, while 43 percent said they were somewhat confident. That distrust of police actually jumps over
to the general public, with 48 percent saying they were very confident an encounter with an officer will go well, while 37
percent were only somewhat confident.
While the results show a
general apprehension to trusting police, especially among black Americans, there is little from the poll that supports the
efforts in cities across the US that are either
slashing
police
department budgets or moving to completely
abolish
them.
"The majority of all other Black Americans, including those who are 'not too confident'
about receiving considerate police treatment, want the police to spend the same amount of time, with additional percentages
favoring more time,"
Gallup concludes.
Since the death of George
Floyd in Minneapolis on May 25, Black Lives Matter protests have taken place in major cities across the country, with some in
places like Portland, Oregon, turning violent and requiring a federal response.
But if Gallop's results are
to be trusted, defunding police is not the answer most citizens support, even black Americans.
Defund is a stupid idea......changing the operating rules makes more sense. I blame the MSM for pushing minority headlines.
Colin
39 minutes ago
It's not up to blacks on whether police are defunded or not. It's up to "woke" and privileged, liberal white lawmakers who
think they know better than their constituents, both white and black on what's best for them. Same old Democratic story that's
been playing for over a century.
Alpoz
42 minutes ago
Has anyone else noticed that as the protests have developed, that those protesting and demanding defunding of the police are
predominately white people of university enrolement age? Paid to protest by whom?
Our guess is most probably George Soros, US
Democrats and our friend Bill Gates. All for what the destruction of the society that allowed them to become obscenely
wealthy.
As i quote from Issac Asimov, The Stars Like Dust. "They don't want equality, they want to rule."
pogohere
2 hours ago
The state of US domestic insecurity: citizens don't trust the enforcers of the power structure, but don't want to be thrown to
the wolves, whether it's black or white.
Guldar Tate
14 minutes ago
Why is this even an issue? A vocal minority of mostly fake leftist caucasians are the main ones pushing this
"defund the police" issue. Just like how nearly half the people you see at BLM rallies are caucasians. The
founder and funder of BLM, George Soros is a caucasian as well. Then someone finally does a poll, that
shouldn't need to be done, to show what should be obvious to a normal human being, that most so called black
people want police.
D Green
2 hours ago
Irrelevant, really. As long as there is a state, there will
be enforcers so
we'd better learn to love them...full stop! Indeed, the reason for our present predicament stems from one
critical edict that we've largely eschewed: as citizens, our primary task is to OBEY.
Obedience
is our raison
d'ętre. In the exceedingly rare event the justice system gets it 'wrong,' wait patiently in your comfortable
jail cell until the state generously offers you a tough-but-fair plea deal, or, if you're really lucky, grants
you the privilege of sorting it out before an impartial judge and a jury of your wise peers. Why is that so
hard for some people?
"... White Fragility is the kind of book that can be written in two months, read in two days, and forgotten in two hours, but Robin DiAngelo's text is also a deeply pernicious piece of work, utterly contemptuous of the "normie" ..."
"... Whites it aims to convert to a more radical form of racial self-abnegation than they currently demonstrate. In fact, the work is so hostile and ideologically loaded that it can't help but present a kind of dialectic, wherein certain truths are revealed in spite of itself. As such, I have to confess that I learned something from White Fragility , even if it isn't what DiAngelo had in mind. ..."
"... In short, White Fragility is a horrifying call for Whites not simply to be paralyzed by White guilt, but to become active participants in their decline, and willing accomplices in their political and demographic destruction. ..."
"... I think this is a beautiful indictment of the demonstrative and showy nature of White anti-racists who simply love to engage in social theatrics in search of kudos, approval, and incentives without really understanding the deeper destructive meaning of anything they're doing. ..."
"... DiAngelo has contempt for people like this because they place all their energies into grandstanding instead of helping in the transfer of real power and wealth. I have contempt for them because they place all their energies into grandstanding for short-term personal benefits while stabbing their ancestors, contemporaries, and progeny in the back. ..."
"... It's important to bear in mind that we're still in the same totalitarian state that whacked JFK ..."
"... The purpose of removing Confederate symbols is to hide the commanding Zionist involvement in the slave trade business. This is the equivalent of using the Russian Collusion to hide the Zionist influence on the Trump election. ..."
"... Why is Critical Race Theory presented as The Absolute Truth? Not only is it not the truth, it isn't even a theory. ..."
Robin DiAngelo White Fragility: Why It's So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism Beacon
Press, 2018.
I first encountered Robin DiAngelo three years ago, during my
investigation of the Jewish origins and intellectual currents of Whiteness Studies.
DiAngelo was then just another relatively minor speaker and academic on the
university/consulting network in Whiteness Studies, and I was undecided then, and remain
undecided, as to whether DiAngelo is wholly, in part, or not at all Jewish. She didn't feature
in my essay at all, and, when I looked over my old notes a few days ago, she appeared only as a
name scribbled in the margins. As it happens, her ancestry is relatively inconsequential in
light of the fact that White Fragility , published in 2018 but reaching bestseller
status in the aftermath of George Floyd's death, is heavily and transparently influenced by
Jewish thought and by Jewish pioneers in the field she now finds so conducive to fame and
fortune. I don't make a habit of buying the texts of the opposition, but when certain of them
reach a significant level of academic or popular attention (look for it in your child's school
curriculum), it's probably necessary for someone among us to carry out some form of
intellectual reconnaissance, and to bring back for wider consideration the most essential of
the gathered information. This was
my approach to Jean-Paul Sartre's widely-read and overly-praised Anti-Semite and Jew
, and so, when I heard DiAngelo had managed to make herself a bestselling author, I headed to
my local bookstore, where dozens of copies had been helpfully stacked on a table devoted to
"in-demand" literature on race and racism.
My first action on picking up a copy of White Fragility was to turn to the
bibliography. I knew what I'd see, and it was a gratifying and familiar feeling to see so many
names from my research on Whiteness Studies. They were almost all there, protruding from the
page like shunned relatives at a family reunion -- Noel Ignatiev, George Lipsitz, Ruth
Frankenberg (described in White Fragility as "a premier white scholar in the field of
whiteness studies"), Michelle Fine, Lois Weis, along with helpful co-ethnics like Thomas
Shapiro, David Wellman, Sander Gilman, Larry Adelman, and Jay Kaufman.
These are DiAngelo's
mentors and intellectual forbears, and I could tell, scanning through this list of names and
works, that White Fragility was sure to boast very many references to "fellow Whites,"
and streams of inducements to abandon White ethnic interests.
These expectations weren't
disappointed. White Fragility is the kind of book that can be written in two months,
read in two days, and forgotten in two hours, but Robin DiAngelo's text is also a deeply
pernicious piece of work, utterly contemptuous of the "normie"
Whites it aims to convert to a
more radical form of racial self-abnegation than they currently demonstrate. In fact, the work
is so hostile and ideologically loaded that it can't help but present a kind of dialectic,
wherein certain truths are revealed in spite of itself. As such, I have to confess that I
learned something from White Fragility , even if it isn't what DiAngelo had in mind.
What is White Fragility?
"White Fragility," as a theory, is confirmation of my belief that inducing guilt in Whites
was never the end goal in itself. It's never simply been about making us feel bad about
ourselves or our ancestors. White Fragility, White guilt, and indeed Whiteness Studies as a
whole, is fundamentally about power. Those of you familiar with the New Testament will recall
the verse from John's third chapter, wherein John the Baptist declares that Christ "must
increase, but I must diminish." Power and influence never simply disappear, but rather
transfer. John (and it is entirely inconsequential whether you regard him as historical or
fictional) was aware that as a popular local mystic or holy man, his mere continued presence
was an obstacle to the local growth in power of Christ, and so he made a conscious decision to
diminish himself. Likewise, we are living in an age where Whites continue to have some social,
political, and economic power, but where large and growing numbers of non-Whites are seeking to
obtain what remains of this power. For them to "increase," it has been declared that we must
diminish. Whiteness Studies is fundamentally about making us willing and enthusiastic
participants in our own decline. When Blacks or Jews demand a reduction of, or end to, White
power or wealth, it means that they want that power or wealth. Despite all sloganeering, there
can be no equality in power among races. Not now, not ever; only ruthless and unceasing
competition.
White guilt, in itself, is certainly an act of psychological diminishment, but the message
of DiAngelo's text is fundamentally that this psychological diminishment has not led to a
desired correlation in material or structural diminishment. Whites merely feeling sorry for
themselves isn't enough for their competitors, if it isn't accompanied by a wholesale transfer
of power, land, and other resources. In this context, "White Fragility" is an indictment and
insult levelled at White progressives merely frozen by fear of racism accusations and White
guilt. In short, White Fragility is a horrifying call for Whites not simply to be
paralyzed by White guilt, but to become active participants in their decline, and willing
accomplices in their political and demographic destruction.
DiAngelo's introduction begins with accusation. America "began with the attempted genocide
of Indigenous people and the theft of their land. American wealth was built on the labor of
kidnapped and enslaved Africans and their descendants." So far, so familiar. But the book very
quickly moves to an outline of the theory of White Fragility. I actually found this, and some
other chapters on the same theme, extremely interesting, because DiAngelo, and presumably other
Whiteness Studies activists, are keenly aware that Whites are peculiarly concerned with
morality and with appearing to be good people (all of which is very much in keeping with
the
arguments and research of Kevin MacDonald ). For example, DiAngelo writes on the fear White
progressives have of being perceived as racist: "We consider a challenge to our racial
worldview as a challenge to our very identities as good, moral people. Thus, we perceive any
attempt to connect us to the system of racism as an unsettling and unfair moral offence. One of
the greatest social fears for a white person is being told that we have said or done something
racially problematic."
Of course, the groundwork for the connections among White ethnocentrism
= Racism = Morally Bad were laid by Jewish academics over many decades. The problem for Jewish
activists and incentivized Whiteness Studies traitors is that this moral terror has resulted in
what they perceive to be paralysis and inaction.
Actual "racists" aren't really discussed in White Fragility , and where they are,
it's clear that they aren't the target of the title of the book. In fact, DiAngelo points out:
"Of course, some whites explicitly avow racism. We might consider these whites actually more
aware of, and honest about, their biases."
In other words, even if we're moral monsters in DiAngelo's eyes, we aren't "fragile." Again, because of the extremes of the some of the
dialectics here, certain truths emerge. DiAngelo remarks early in the book that "race matters,"
something that many of our readers would agree with, even if it's from a slightly different
angle than the author intends. She also argues that:
All humans have prejudice; we cannot avoid it. People who claim not to be prejudiced are
demonstrating a profound lack of self-awareness. Ironically, they are also demonstrating the
power of socialization -- we have all been taught in schools, through movies, and from family
members, teachers, and clergy that it is important not to be prejudiced. Everyone has
prejudice, and everyone discriminates.
I couldn't agree more: Whites have been uniquely affected by mass propaganda designed to
brainwash them into viewing as morally evil something that is natural and instinctive to all
humans.
The real targets of this book are White progressives who profess anti-racism, and because I
also possess many frustrations in relation to this demographic, I couldn't help but agree with
some of DiAngelo's characterizations. Take, for example, this gem:
I believe that white progressives cause the most daily damage to people of color. I define
a white progressive as any white person who thinks he or she is not racist, or is less
racist, or in the "choir," or already "gets it." White progressives can be the most difficult
for people of color because, to the degree that we think we have arrived, we will put our
energy into making sure that others see us having arrived. [emphasis added]
I think this is a beautiful indictment of the demonstrative and showy nature of White
anti-racists who simply love to engage in social theatrics in search of kudos, approval, and
incentives without really understanding the deeper destructive meaning of anything they're
doing.
DiAngelo has contempt for people like this because they place all their energies into
grandstanding instead of helping in the transfer of real power and wealth. I have contempt for
them because they place all their energies into grandstanding for short-term personal benefits
while stabbing their ancestors, contemporaries, and progeny in the back.
The book's first chapter, "The Challenges of Talking to White People About Race," is devoted
to convincing White progressives that they are in fact racist, and that they need to become
better allies in their own racial destruction. The message here is quasi-spiritual; Whites are
told that their quest for racial redemption will be lifelong, lasting until the day they die.
Their existence is an ontological problem, the only solution to which is an endless quest to
compensate for simply existing:
Interrupting the forces of racism is ongoing, lifelong work because the forces
conditioning us into racist frameworks are always at play; our learning will never be
finished.
I really wish more White moral grandstanders would understand that, ultimately, they will
never be given a "pass" by our enemies once they've accrued enough kudos, or groveled enough,
or displayed enough platform sympathy with Blacks, or any other ethnicity that happens to be
Victim of the Month. They will only ever be temporary tools, held in contempt as much for their
weakness as their whiteness.
Another interesting feature of the chapter is its attack on White individualism, presented
here as a myth that prevents Whites from taking collective responsibility for alleged
historical wrongs. For DiAngelo,
Individualism is a story line that creates, communicates, reproduces, and reinforces the
concept that each of us is a unique individual and that our group memberships, such as race,
class, or gender, are irrelevant.
DiAngelo's problem with White individualism is that it's a barrier to White guilt, and also
a barrier to Whites perceiving alleged advantages in employment and social advancement in a
society in which they enjoy a demographic majority. Again, due to the dialectic at play, I
happen to agree that individualism among Whites is a problem in certain contexts. It's just
that in my perspective it's a barrier to the explicit assertion of White ethnic interests and
collective action in pursuit of those interests. In fact, without widespread awareness of an
ethnic threat, it seems almost impossible to convince Whites to see themselves as a group and
to act as one. A further obstacle to White ethnocentrism is decades of social conditioning in
which Jewish propaganda is dominant. Even DiAngelo concedes that "reflecting on our racial
frames is particularly challenging for white people, because we are taught that to have a
racial viewpoint is to be biased." Unfortunately, DiAngelo doesn't ask who did the "teaching"
in this regard, and she certainly doesn't consider the broader implications of what she's
saying.
In the second chapter, "Racism and White Supremacy," DiAngelo trots out the "race is a
social construct" trope, with footnotes for her claims leading invariably to a section of
bibliography that reads like a Bar Mitzvah invitation list. Black academic Ibram Kendi is
quoted as arguing that "if we truly believe that all humans are equal, then disparity in
condition can only be the result of systemic discrimination." I agree, but I think the problem
isn't systemic discrimination but the belief that all humans are equal. Eliminate that belief
and disparity in condition is neither surprising nor subject matter for conspiratorial
conjecture. But alternative theories and beliefs like mine don't feature in DiAngelo's book,
which has the air of a religious text, and issues utterances with an authority that demands
faith rather than reason. There is an interesting section in the chapter denying that there can
be an anti-White racism, with DiAngelo remarking:
People of color may also hold prejudices and discriminate against white people, but they
lack the social and institutional power that transforms their prejudice and discrimination
into racism; the impact of their prejudice on whites is temporary and contextual.
Let's set aside that horrific last statement, and focus for a moment on the unstated premise
underlying the first. Isn't it more or less the stated goal of "Whiteness studies," White
guilt, the theory of "White Fragility," Black Lives Matter, and the massive power of
multicultural propaganda to lead to the further diminishment of White social and institutional
power? As stated at the outset of this review, this power is destined for the hands of ethnic
interlopers. We know full well which of these ethnic groups will take the lion's share of that
power, because they have their hands on most of it already. The question is therefore: why
should Whites hand what remains of their social and institutional power to hostile groups that
will unquestionably ensure that their prejudice is enacted on Whites in a way that is far from
"temporary and contextual"? What possible incentive could adequately convince Whites to sign up
to such a Devil's pact? Isn't the entirety of White guilt built on a psychotic and
media-induced fantasy -- the idea that if Whites would just give up all remaining power in
their hands the world would enter an age of racial peace and harmony? DiAngelo doesn't even
touch on areas like this, preferring instead to subject the reader to a steady stream of
meaningless gibberish, such as a lengthy rumination on the theories of Ruth Frankenberg who, we
are told, gave birth to such dazzling notions as "whiteness is multidimensional." DiAngelo then
caps the chapter by treating us to the heights of Jamaican philosophy, where one Charles W.
Mills advances a conspiracy theory titled "the racial contract" which involves:
A tacit and sometimes explicit agreement among members of the peoples of Europe to assert,
promote, and maintain the ideal of white supremacy in relation to all other people of the
world. It is the unnamed political system that has made the modern world what it is
today.
And there you have it -- this Jamaican genius has discovered the Protocols of the Elders
of Europa .
Charles W. Mills: A Caribbean Socrates
The same themes are repeated in the third chapter, "Racism After the Civil Rights Movement."
DiAngelo again attacks "fragile" Whites who claim to be color-blind, pointing out that they
merely believe that it's racist to acknowledge race and therefore flee into a denial of
reality. The only real novelty in the chapter, and one I found highly entertaining, was
DiAngelo's list of racist behaviors exhibited by fragile Whites. These include "acting nice"
and "being careful not to use racial terms or labels." But such phrasing is all the rage now,
as in the New York Times podcast series " Nice White
Parents " which explores hypocrisy among progressive Whites expressing all manner of
liberal pieties -- but moving heaven and earth to avoid sending their children to schools with
large numbers of POC.
The next chapter, "How Does Race Shape the Lives of White People?," is probably the
strangest of the book because, if DiAngelo is indeed White (and not someone with some Jewish
ancestry), then it represents a very disturbing and irrational detachment from reality and
common sense. For s start, DiAngelo seems to view even the mundane aspects of White ethnic
homogeneity as pathological. She writes:
As I move through my daily life, my race is unremarkable. I belong when I turn on the TV,
read best-selling novels, and watch blockbuster movies. I belong when I walk past the
magazine racks at the grocery store or drive past billboards. I belong when I see the
overwhelming number of white people on lists of the "Most Beautiful." I belong when I look at
my teachers, counsellors, and classmates. I belong when I learn about the history of my
country throughout the year and when I am shown its heroes and heroines -- George Washington,
Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, Robert E. Lee, Amelia Earhart, Susan B. Anthony, John
Glenn, Sally Ride, and Louisa May Alcott
All of this is presented as negative and sinister, to which one can only ask: what is the
alternative? To hand over one's nation and territory to others, so that you can cease to
belong? What then? DiAngelo comments:
It is rare for me to experience a sense of not belonging racially, and these are usually
very temporary, easily avoidable situations. Indeed, throughout my life, I have been warned
that I should avoid situations in which I might be a racial minority. These situations are
often presented as scary, dangerous, or "sketchy."
I can't image why. What I do suggest is that in order to help clarify her theoretical
framework, Robin DiAngelo should, with all reasonable haste, relocate to an area in which she
is most certainly not going to belong racially. Since she views "un-belonging" with great
enthusiasm, while confessing she has no real experience on which to base this view, she should
find the Blackest of Black areas and spend some quality time there -- time that isn't
"temporary, easily avoidable." I think, in the course of such an experiment, she will truly,
honestly, encounter some helpful folks that will be only too glad to show her how fragile she
can be.
By far the most entertaining chapter of the book comes within the last 50 pages. Titled
"White Women's Tears," it's an indictment of that infamous sight -- bawling, wailing, and
normally overweight White women clutching themselves in feverish grief over the death of some
poor Black gangbanger who just happened to get shot while rushing a police officer. DiAngelo is
probably correct in asserting that this is a self-indulgent demonstrative act designed to
heighten status ("I'm moral, good, and empathetic") and get attention from men of all races
("I'm vulnerable right now, and need attention and resources"). Some of the anecdotes in this
regard, from DiAngelo's "Whiteness" seminars are priceless, normally involving some weak-minded
woman breaking down at the revelation she's "racist," and they went some way to compensating me
for the purchase price and hideous ideology of the book. Above all, they confirmed to be that
what we see unfold before us is both tragedy and farce, and that our situation is no less
dangerous for that:
A black man struggling to express a point referred to himself as stupid. My
co-facilitator, a black woman, gently countered that he was not stupid but that society would
have him believe that he was. As she was explaining the power of internalized racism, a white
woman interrupted with, "I think what he was trying to say was " When my co-facilitator
pointed out that the white woman had reinforced the racist idea that she could best speak for
a black man, the woman erupted in tears. The training came to a complete halt as most of the
room rushed to comfort her and angrily accused the black facilitator of unfairness.
Meanwhile, the black man she had spoken for was left alone to watch her receive comfort.
Conclusion
DiAngelo scathingly remarks on incidents like this that "when we are mired in guilt, we are
narcissistic and ineffective." Essentially, the new direction of Whiteness Studies and its
intellectual corollaries will be to wean Whites away from demonstrative habits of virtue
signaling and into active participation in racial decline. We can expect to see in the near
future (and we already to some extent have with the Black Lives Matter riots) a greater
emphasis on Whites becoming active "anti-racists." It will become increasingly difficult for
Whites to appear simply as "not racist." Active, enthusiastic activity on behalf of the ethnic
power-grab will be demanded, and anything less will be portrayed with disdain as "fragility."
DiAngelo concludes her book with the blunt assertion that "a positive white identity is an
impossible goal. White identity is inherently racist; white people do not exist outside the
system of white supremacy." White identity is therefore to be destroyed wholesale, and White
ethnic interests crushed alongside it. DiAngelo proclaims with all the vigor of the subversive
or the brainwashed that she will "strive for a less white identity, for my own liberation and
sense of justice."
Liberation and justice. These words were uttered a long time ago in France. The beheadings
started soon after.
It's important to bear in mind that we're still in the same totalitarian state that
whacked JFK and then published shitloads of wistful essays on what that says about "us," by bignosed perv John Updike, by fudge-packing toff Mick Jagger, after all, "it was you and me,"
and everybody in between. The pressure to take the blame for state predation is a constant of
state-imposed American culture. Fuck that shit.
So of course some apple-polishing Jew or wop academic is going to tell us that it's not
cops and prosecutors and prisons fucking jigs over, it's you and me. The proper response to
this is Go fuck yourself. It's not me shooting jigs, strangling them, torturing them, framing
them, and locking them up to work for ten cents a day. It's this state that fucks them over,
not me. All I'm ever gonna do for blacks is destroy and shitcan this kleptocratic police
state, which fucks me over too, just somewhat less.
The purpose of removing Confederate symbols is to hide the commanding Zionist involvement
in the slave trade business. This is the equivalent of using the Russian Collusion to hide the Zionist influence on the
Trump election.
"I don't make a habit of buying the texts of the opposition, but when certain of them
reach a significant level of academic or popular attention (look for it in your child's
school curriculum), it's probably necessary for someone among us to carry out some form of
intellectual reconnaissance, and to bring back for wider consideration the most essential of
the gathered information."
Thank you for doing so. I myself have occasionally struggled with this same issue, i.e.,
the need to finance such people in order to access their material in full for the purpose of
a crafting a more fully informed critique of their ideas.
Robin DiAngelo has obviously rehearsed in her mind and put in book form the black
ass-kissing she'd launch into if she somehow found herself, say, getting on the wrong subway
in NY and having to get off in Harlem where the blacks mind-read her hatred and smell her
fear. It's her version of Monsters From the Id , or about overcoming–not white
European relations with their fellow black Americans–but her psychotic Jewish paranoia
over blacks one day recognizing how they've been played for fools by Jews like her and, with
eyes darting left and right a mile a minute, wheedling her way out of being given the South
African ritual by a gang of blacks with machetes. What a pathetic and paranoid little woman.
But for the Jewish MSM and publishing monopoly she'd have no more public existence than the
imaginary black boogeymen tormenting her psyche. Oy vey, the book's so clever and shmart that
she and her promoters didn't imagine blacks are intelligent enough to see this outrageous
insult of them not as a reflection on their relations with white Europeans, but as just more
condescending manipulation by the Jews.
My first action on picking up a copy of White Fragility was to turn to the bibliography.
I knew what I'd see, and it was a gratifying and familiar feeling to see so many names from
my research on Whiteness Studies. They were almost all there, protruding from the page like
shunned relatives at a family reunion -- Noel Ignatiev
.. heavily and transparently influenced by Jewish thought and by Jewish pioneers in the
field she now finds so conducive to fame and fortune.
These are DiAngelo's mentors and intellectual forbears ..
The abolitionists of the 19th c. were passionate, energetic people whose relentless
agitation was a huge annoyance to political elites including Lincoln. The abolitionists were
nearly exclusively white, Enlightenment progressives, Christian or post-Christian. They bore
costs and took risks to set up and run the underground railroad. They are the pioneers, and
their efforts had a far more significant bearing on the future of USA race relations than the
1960's and later black and Jewish activists.
The author knows this, and omits it, thereby commiting a vile act of revisionism.
I you have a problem giving money to these people – and I certainly do myself and
wish to discourage others from doing so too – you can simply get the book from a
library, either public, or online via Library Genesis (which should cover most popular new
book needs and more besides – certainly I've found all the recently recommended
anti-white propaganda texts there).
I keep telling you people that White Chad Envy drives this effort to discredit America's
founders, especially the ones who owned slaves. It took a high-testosterone badass to enslave
Negroes and make them productive on his farm, and the white men who pulled this off had no
trouble finding white women who wanted to marry them and bear their children. Young single
and widowed white women in the British Isles and mainland European countries would even cross
the Atlantic on their own initiative to find these men to marry, sight unseen, despite the
notion that women in the era before female emancipation faced restrictions on their agency.
And despite the modern nonsense that white women show "empathy" with the "oppressed," when
they side with and select sexually the ones doing the "oppressing."
Those white men put today's soft, fear-ridden, risk-averse, often women-repelling white
American men to shame. Nothing about their record suggests "fragility" in the least.
Do black women cry as much as white women do? I was thinking about this in regards to the
quote about a white woman being comforted for crying, and I realized that I cannot recall
ever hearing black men complain about how much women cry.
Many of the abolitionists wanted to end slavery as a necessary first step in removing
Negroes from the country. They didn't necessarily want free Negroes hanging around after
their emancipation.
@Anonymous
Thanks for the link, I'd have missed it.
Delighted that this termite died in pain:
What killed Ignatiev, an intestinal blockage, is perfect justice and proves that God
does indeed have a sense of humor.
Interesting coincidence that he worked steel, at least in part, the same time I did. Not
in the same place, but my guess is he found blowing hot air at the Ivy League a lot more
profitable.
Connections! Fellow fragiles, we got to work on that. No way a mere white guy could have
pulled that off, not then, not ever.
Why buy a text and – through this voluntary act – sponsor the author and
his/her (almost certainly) jewish agent and publisher?
If you have the urge to read the poison of the enemy (I don't, since everything they write
is so predictable and thus boring, and new depths of depravity and dishonesty can easily be
noticed, if you are half-aware on sites like these), obtain it through other means.
I have read several good summaries/criticisms of White Fragility lately. Even
though current events led me down a path of exploring some pretty racist ideas, it all just
seems like a taboo more than anything. One of the last taboos in our culture the power to
really rile people up (mostly young white women who seem to be terrified of black men but
don't like to admit it). I am old enough to remember when being "gay" was still a taboo,
where people wouldn't just come out and admit they were gay. And then I have witnessed to
complete transformation of that taboo into a socially accepted, celebrated part of life. I am
also old enough to remember when someone having a black boyfriend would have been hilarious
and weird.
With race, there are a lot of intellectual tricks being played on people. For one thing, I
grew up when almost everyone in America was white. Since almost everyone was white, and
advertising was designed to appeal to people in demographically correct ways, I was subjected
to millions and millions of repetitions of white people in Ads buying things, to the point of
naturally coming to see white people as occupying certain positions in the capitalist
framework. Whiteness wasn't the primary aim of that repetitive advertising but the
expectation to see a white person in a certain way emerged naturally because I am white and
the ads were targeted to influence me. So now when I see ads where everyone is
demographically switched around, where, for example, a black woman is a car mechanic and
white guy is a mom, etc etc it's jarring. It's intentionally jarring. It's like they don't
want me to see the product or service being advertised but rather they want me to have an
experience of cognitive dissonance. But then I realize I am not the target of that ad at
all.
Which brings me to my point
Minimize your engagement with media and you will find that almost all of these topics
evaporate into thin air. News shows especially. With America's demographics changing,
everyone in the media and politics is scrambling to create content that is relevant to new
demographics, i.e. not you. So it all seems weird and jarring. If you just turn it off,
because it's not relevant to you anyway, you will find that you actually couldn't care less
if the hiring committee of some college a thousand miles away is trying to recruit a
wheel-chair bound Hispanic transgendered person for diversity and stuff like that.
We are also seeing the last gasp of these super conservative geezers who used to dominate
America as businessmen and local government Elks Club types where they would never hire a
long-haired guy with tattoos to do any kind of job, let alone a black person. These
last-gaspers still have a lot of money and influence in conservative media because they are
basically just sitting at home watching daytime tv or listening to Sirius XM all day.
So, racism is a taboo. Fine. I enjoy that taboo sometimes. Who really cares? Practically
no one outside of media, where people are hyping up this issue to get clicks and capture
attention. In real life almost no one I know really cares about any of this stuff.
The internet has birthed this ghoul and now it has a life in your mind. Just tune out. You
give it power by continuing to feed the frenzy online.
Yes, Richard B, D'Angelo's manipulation technique is closely related to the "Verbal Judo"
method taught to asshole cops: while coercing a citizen, obtrude random verbal chaff implying
options or choice to make the citizen internalize submission. Asshole cops take these methods
home to abuse their battered wives and fucked-up kids.
And yes, exactly, just like our asshole police awfisser, soon our asshole police state is
going to go home and take some stolen percocets and eat a gun. Good. Fuck the USA. Its
predation on blacks (and browns and whites) has got nothing to do with me.
Her point is well taken that "white supremacy" is not simply about white vs black but "it
is also the small number of rich whites over the much larger number of poor and working class
whites. In return for a guarantee that the latter group of whites will suffer the many
calamities of life afflicting working people in a capitalist society less intensely and less
frequently than do black people and people of color, the poor and working class whites will
not challenge the rule of the rich."
"White Fragility," as a theory, is confirmation of my belief that inducing guilt in
Whites was never the end goal in itself. It's never simply been about making us feel bad
about ourselves or our ancestors. White Fragility, White guilt, and indeed Whiteness
Studies as a whole, is fundamentally about power.
This quote is the heart of yet another great essay from Andrew Joyce.
Regarding The PQ – Power Question, not only does Jewish Supremacy Inc. (JSI) and its
Proxies demand to be,
but they have the power to effectuate those insane demands.
Thereby invalidating their claims about White power.
Worse, since Whites as a race have never once made those same demands, JSI also
invalidates their claims that the exercise of White power has been unjust.
DiAngelo's book isn't a courageous, honest, and intelligent search for the truth.
It's a cowardly, dishonest and unintelligent demand for power.
It's just another deposit of The Slave Revolt In Moralty.
JSI is simply too Hoax Dependent and Scapegoat-Driven to ever be able to exercise the
power they demand, and for the most part have, in a way that demonstrates a responsible
commitment to reality.
In other words, JSI represents the greatest danger, not just to Whites, but to humanity
itself.
That's why they're now declaring self-defense to be an act of terrorism.
For this reason and many others
Treason Against Jewish Supremacy Is Loyalty To Humanity
@advancedatheist
narrowly escaped lynching on Boston Common. For all the noise their leaders made,
Abolitionism was never more than a politically impotent lunatic fringe movement. But its
isolated firebrands provided a convenient imaginary enemy, like today's "terrorists", to
suppress dissent and command obedience in a white southern population that was growing
increasingly restive under the aristocratic rule of the slaveholding elite. It's one of the
great ironies of our history that the radicals so masterfully capitalized on the patriotic
rage that followed the insurgent attack on Old Glory at Sumter to push their agenda through
Congress and into law.
@anon
mention of the grim statistics of Black-on-Black violence. It doesn't fit The Narrative, you
see.
The government exists to truly make everyone equal. Does this man have only one leg? Then
we'll cut the leg off the man who has two. If we can't give a leg to the one-legged man, at
least then both men are equal. Silly, yes. But isn't this, in a nutshell, the ideology of the
current elite? Are some people too stupid to pass various types of qualification tests? Why,
then we'll just lower the bar until anybody, even a snake, can step over it! Or better yet,
just abolish the pretense of objective standards entirely and be done with it.
Andrew Joyce pens another penetrating article. Overrated and privileged snowflakes like
Robin DiAngelo deserve to be downgraded. Odious skunks such as Noel Ignatiev deserve to be
repudiated and disgraced. This article gets us moving in the proper direction. Thank you,
Andrew Joyce!
I learned from countless "I'm OK, You're OK" boomers that there's a wonderful feeling of
liberation and release from acknowledging and accepting your feelings and exorcising the
guilt for being who you are.
And you know, they were right. Countless white folks right now are at the point where they
can (at least privately) say "well, OK, so I am racist" and discover that they are still
perfectly good people. Or even make them realize that being regarded as a "bad person" frees
them to consider a lot of previously forbidden possibilities to reclaim their self-worth and
agency.
Books like this will actually help some people see the choice that is being forced on
them, and choose an alternative to the proffered solution.
After all, we made it through years of Prohibition only to realize that alcohol need not
be either illegal or immoral, if you're not. And drinking is far less natural to humans than
racism.
I would like to explain to Professor West a few things about this dread supremacy:
We have White Supremacy, Professor, because for 2500 years we, whites, have produced the
best minds on the planet, the greatest flourishing of the arts and sciences ever seen, the
most complex and organized societies. We have White Supremacy, whatever exactly it may be,
because we have been the earth's most successful race. No other has come close. Deal with
it.
We put probes on Mars and invented the thousands of technologies needed to do it. We
developed the symphony orchestra, the highest form of musical expression. We invented the
airplane, the computer, the internet, and tennis shoes. Putting it compactly, we invented the
modern world. A degree of privilege, however you may conceive it, goes with the
territory.
Blacks may not have the background to grasp the extent of our achievements. Still, permit
me a brief and very incomplete list of things white people have done or invented:
Euclidean geometry. Parabolic geometry. Hyperbolic geometry. Projective geometry.
Differential geometry. Calculus: Limits, continuity, differentiation, integration. Physical
chemistry. Organic chemistry. Biochemistry. Classical mechanics. The indeterminacy principle.
The wave equation. The Parthenon. The Anabasis. Air conditioning. Number theory. Romanesque
architecture. Gothic architecture. Information theory. Entropy. Enthalpy. Every symphony ever
written. Pierre Auguste Renoir. The twelve-tone scale. The mathematics behind it, twelfth
root of two and all that. S-p hybrid bonding orbitals. The Bohr-Sommerfeld atom. The
purine-pyrimidine structure of the DNA ladder. Single-sideband radio. All other radio.
Dentistry. The internal-combustion engine. Turbojets. Turbofans. Doppler beam-sharpening.
Penicillin. Airplanes. Surgery. The mammogram. The Pill. The condom. Polio vaccine. The
integrated circuit. The computer. Football. Computational fluid dynamics. Tensors. The
Constitution. Euripides, Sophocles, Aristophanes, Aeschylus, Homer, Hesiod. Glass. Rubber.
Nylon. Roads. Buildings. Elvis. Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors. (OK, that's nerve gas, and
maybe we didn't really need it.) Silicone. The automobile. Really weird stuff, like
clathrates, Buckyballs, and rotaxanes. The Bible. Bug spray. Diffie-Hellman, public-key
cryptography, and RSA. Et cetera.
As a race, Cornel, we are happy for you, for anyone, to enjoy the benefits of our
civilization, but that is exactly what it is–our civilization. It has become a global
civilization because others among the competent–again, Chinese, Japanese, Indians,
Koreans–have found it to be in technical matters superior. It came from us. They, I
note, do not complain of White Supremacy or White Privilege. They are too busy making
computers and money.
Now, Cornel, I have often heard blacks demanding reparations for slavery. All right. I
agree. It is only fair. I will pay a half-million dollars to each of my slaves, and free them
immediately. I am not sure how many I have, but will try to give you an estimate in even
dozens. Further, I believe that all blacks are entitled to a similar amount for every year in
which they were slaves.
However, I think you owe us royalties for the use of our civilization, which can be
regarded as a sort of software. There should be a licensing fee. After all, every time you
use a computer, or a door knob, you are using something invented by us. Every time you
sharpen a pencil, or use one, or read or write, you infringe our copyright, so to speak. We
have spent millennia coming up with things–literacy, soap, counting–and it is
only fair that we receive recompense.
@Anon
of blackest cities in the Western World, so your theory is wrong.
But I agree you are submitting to peer pressure to adopt a certain point of view that you
call "anti-racist". Like how people used to go to Church and meet their their girlfriends,
it's pure lip service to the ideology. People conform outwardly and rebel inwardly. That's
always true of totalitarian systems of thought. The idea that everyone is going to keep
putting up with indulging these boring conversations about black people is absurd. Eventually
people get tired of playing along.
Thank you for reminding me to ignore Anon comments.
Amusing to see that the leftists understand it backwards. The poor whites unionise and try
to wrest better conditions from the rich whereas the blacks, the hispanics and other
immigrants sabotage them by accepting to work for worse conditions. Their refusal to join the
white unions or to create their own racialised unions and cooperating with white unions harms
the working class enormously.
I found highly entertaining, was DiAngelo's list of racist behaviors exhibited by
fragile Whites. These include "acting nice" and "being careful not to use racial terms or
labels."
According to the endarkened academic not using racial terms and acting nice is a symptom
of racism. But acting nasty towards coloured people and using slurs is also a symptom of
racism. So whites have no means of not being racist. What can they do then ? Logically they
should embrace the inner racist and establish a form of apartheid
The propaganda spewed by the endarkened academic is nothing new. 15 years ago some French
feminist journalist stated that men who fuck women of a different race are racist because
they assert their domination over that race through the bodies of the women. A few lines
further she stated that men who fuck white women only are racist because they remain closed
to the richness of experience brought by coloured women. Amen. Embrace the inner racist that
the woke believe lurks in you.
"... It is racist to characterize protests as violent or non-violent. It is racist to minimize black pain by trying to make people think about electoral effects. It is racist to be white and try to talk about the issue of black centered protests. It is racist to force black people to go through the emotional labor of trying to be non violent in these circumstances. It is racist to blame black people for the violence. It is racist to think that black people are being violent ..."
"... We should analyze this like we do rape culture: not only by the completed cancelations, but by the culture of protecting and encouraging the bad actors. ..."
Similarly with the Shor case, there doesn't seem to be very many people here willing to
wrestle with the fact that a bunch of people argued that Shor was racist for tweeting out
research about the efficacy of violent vs. non violent protests in the US, and that who got
blamed for starting violence ends up shaping public opinion.
Why did so many people think that was racist? You won't wrestle with that so I have to and
I'm almost certainly going to get yelled at for strawmanning. But the arguments (probably not
all held by the same people at the same time) I've actually seen are along these lines:
It is racist to characterize protests as violent or non-violent.
It is racist to minimize black pain by trying to make people think about electoral
effects.
It is racist to be white and try to talk about the issue of black centered protests.
It is racist to force black people to go through the emotional labor of trying to be non
violent in these circumstances.
It is racist to blame black people for the violence.
It is racist to think that black people are being violent .
So there appears to be a culture in which these arguments are considered coherent/valid
responses to someone pointing to social science literature on the question of the efficacy of
violence and non violence and on the importance of who gets seen as starting the violence.
And that culture appears to be strong enough that an employer will be worried about racism by
association on that basis.
This has essentially all of the tropes identified by Natalie Wynn. We have the quick
presumption of guilt. We have multiple levels of abstraction to get to 'racism'. We have
essentialism about Shor's whiteness (and depending on the argument about other people's
whiteness), we have pseudo-moralism about the timing of the comments, we have the lack of
forgiveness when he tried to apologize (which on some level is the most amazing, because he
went through the ritual apology after doing no real wrong and still got slammed repeatedly),
there is the transitive property of cancelation (with people suggesting his racism tainted
his employer), and a heavy dose of dualism.
We should analyze this like we do rape culture: not only by the completed
cancelations, but by the culture of protecting and encouraging the bad actors.
It also begs a series of increasingly absurd questions: is a person who's only 1/16th black
"allowed" to use the n-word? What if they're another dark-skinned minority, but not technically
black? The arguments over whether white rappers or fans of hip-hop culture are "allowed" to use
the word can be downright farcical, and completely gloss over the real issues - generational
poverty, separate-but-unequal race-based policing tactics, mass incarceration, the
school-to-prison pipeline - that continue to cause immense suffering in black communities, even
as corporations pour millions of dollars into the coffers of Black Lives Matter and other
race-grifters.
Adopting melanin-based double standards only fans the flames of racial animus. It's become
painfully clear that the leaders of the BLM organization do not really want a post-racial
society where all groups live together in harmony - they want division along every "
intersectional " line in existence, and are willing to invent a few to further atomize
the working class while collecting fat checks from corporations terrified of running afoul of
the new thought police.
This aim does not reflect the wishes of the vast majority of black activists, a growing
number of whom are speaking out
against BLM's cooptation of their efforts. But those who profit off racism will do anything to
ensure it continues.
First there was the transcript. I wrote about that on 11 July (see here). Now we have the
video. Floyd was complaining of not being able to breath at least five minutes before the
police were forced by Floyd to put him on the ground. The transcript I posted on the 11th shows
clear evidence that George Floyd was complaining of not being able to breath. This video
provides the visual proof. George Floyd was not killed by police. He was suffering respiratory
distress caused by a Fentanyl overdose. His inability to breath had nothing to do with the neck
restraint applied by the Minneapolis police.
Now we know that the entire premise of the Black Lives Matter riots was based on a false
claim of police abuse. Derek Chauvin did not murder George Floyd. George Floyd, a criminal and
drug addict, killed himself by ingesting a drug that Doctors use to shutdown a patient's
respiratory system.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/YPSwqp5fdIw
As I noted on July 11th, the transcript exonerates the police. This is why the Minnesota
Attorney General tried to keep the public from seeing the video evidence for themselves.
I am re-posting the transcript so that you can compare it with the video. The video starts
with two Minneapolis Police officers approaching Floyd's vehicle from the driver's side. One of
the officers has his pistol drawn and pointed in Floyd's direction. However, per standard
practice, his finger is not, I REPEAT NOT, on the trigger. If the finger is not on the trigger
the gun will not fire itself.
Also worth noting that the police were not physically aggressive with Floyd. They did not
punch him or jerk him around. Floyd, in his drugged state, was not cooperative. It is a shame
that the officers who detained Floyd lacked clairvoyance or the ability to read Floyd's mind or
mentally test the chemical content of his blood. That kind of knowledge might have given them
an early clue that Floyd was a dead man walking because of the toxic brew of illegal drugs he
had shoved into his system. Here's the
link to the full transcript.
The incident starts with a store manager reporting that George Floyd had just given him a
counterfeit bill.
The two officers (Kueng and Thomas Lane) go outside and begin the investigation by trying to
get George Floyd out of his car:
Floyd was not cooperative. He was disoriented and not acting rationally. Floyd was
accompanied by another black man. In contrast to Floyd, the other gentleman followed police
instructions:
George Floyd was not passive nor cooperative despite media claims to the contrary. The video
that fueled outrage across America tells a very misleading story. The words of the transcript
are not lies. In the next relevant bit of conversation, Floyd concedes that he passed a bad
bill to the shop owner who called the police and admits he was not following police
instructions.
On page 12 of the transcript we get the first evidence that Floyd is high on something and
is "foaming" at the mouth. Officer Kueng is very concerned about Floyd's erratic
behavior:
Floyd claims he was "hooping" earlier. According to the Urban Dictionary , "hooping"
refers to smuggling/transporting something that is inserted in one's rectum.
Floyd's erratic behavior escalates as Officer Kueng and Lane try to put him in the police
car:
Pages 15-21 of transcript record the futile effort of the Officers to get Floyd into
the police car and Floyd's drug-induced frenzy and paranoia. On page 22 of the transcript Floyd
starts to claim that he cannot breath. He has not been placed on the ground. In fact, he ASKS
THE POLICE TO PUT HIM ON THE GROUND. Cops are not Docs. They do not have magical powers to
diagnose whether or not someone is actually having a medical emergency or faking it. Up to this
point in their interaction with George Floyd, they had little evidence to trust anything Floyd
said:
The transcript and the video are damning for all arm chair prosecutors who jumped to the
unwarranted and unsupported claim that the police killed George Floyd. The did not. tFloyd's
respiratory crisis was caused by the Fentanyl he had ingested before the police showed up on
the scene. That evidence also is reflected in the autopsy report. Those who have rushed to
judgment in condemning the Minneapolis Police Department will have to do some major mea
culpas.
I don't think Chauvin will be exonerated, but there is no question advocates of the racist
police brutality narrative are ignoring facts.
The conclusion of the private autopsy requested by the family was wrong. They didn't know
the results of the toxicology report. One of the experts hired by the family, who kept making
television appearances (including on Hannity), didn't even look at the body. To the best of
my knowledge, this man only saw the video and ruled it a homicide on that basis alone.
Another expert hired by the family saw the body, but again she didn't see the toxicology
report. The lawyer for the family, Ben Crump, is an ass for calling the toxicology report a
red herring.
The fact is when the store clerks called the cops, they said Floyd appeared drunk. He was
clearly inebriated or intoxicated. The fact he handed off an obviously fake $20 bill suggests
he wasn't all there. There is no denying the toxicology report which does prove he was
intoxicated. And the police were right to apprehend him. This Floyd was inebriated or
intoxicated while sitting behind the wheel of a car, so he clearly represented a danger if he
began to drive.
With all that being said, despite the fact he had trouble breathing beforehand doesn't
exclude that the manner he was being detained had contributed to his death. The second
autopsy (I'm not talking the private one, but the official second autopsy) officially did
rule his death a homicide because the manner he was held down was deemed a contributing
factor in his death.
In my personal opinion, I think there is a case to be made that Chauvin did recognize
Floyd and deliberately kept Floyd on his stomach, with his face pointed downward, so that
Floyd wouldn't recognize Chauvin. Maybe Chauvin was also trying to pass Floyd out or induce
Floyd to vomit something he may have swallowed to hide from the police, who knows, but the
manner Floyd was held down, even if it is considered accepted albeit rare procedure, will not
hold in front of a jury. Procedures aside, there has to be common sense.
There is no question Chauvin's actions were excessive and he should be disciplined for
that. However, unless his actions were the primary cause of death it is not murder. It is all
a moot point though. Everyone on that jury knows if they vote to acquit their life and
livelihood will be at risk as well as those of their close family members. Hopefully there
will be at least one courageous juror with integrity but I doubt it.
So not in this context os it a reference to playing basketball. And do you really think it
likely that this overweight guy with circulatory problems, a long time drug user, and by his
own claim just coming off of a dose of WuFlu was recreating himself playing basketball
earlier on?
If the police officers are acquitted in a state trial, they will be found guilty in a
federal civil rights trial. These four officers are going to spend years in prison, as will
the officer in Atlanta. The politicians, POTUS included, will be happy to ensure this
outcome.
It would be better if the officers were turned over to the mob, shot to death, and then
set afire. The mob can drag their charred remains through the street, chanting slogans, and
then hang their remains from a bridge. There's a great bridge on the outskirts of Fallujah
that served this purpose in the past.
Things are what they are, not what they should be.
According to a poster in another blog comment section, "hooping" can also refer to
ingesting drugs by means of an enema, actually an effective way to absorb them into the body.
Millions of AIDS sufferers (and sufferers from other STDs) can't be wrong! This area is a
weak link in the body's defenses against intruders, whether viral, bacterial, or chemical.
Besides, ingestion via enema avoids problems such as visible track marks (awkward to explain
to LEOs or parole officers), and being found in possession of "works", i.e., syringes, spoons
for "cooking" with a lighter, or hydrating the drugs into an injectable form.
As a long term convict, I am sure George was quite familiar with secreting items in his
rectum, so an enema would be child's play.
fakebot,
"There is no question Chauvin's actions were excessive?" His actions appear to be consistent
with his training and MPD policy, and yet you've figured out that the actions were
excessive?
Every elected official who claimed the police killed Floyd and every media report that
claimed the police killed Floyd, and everyone who republished this claim need to be sued-
slander per se, false accusation of a crime.
I assume there will be no problem claiming damages, and even punitive damages due to
willful intent to defame, by all the wrongly accused police officers.
This lynching of the police officers was media defamation of the Covington Catholic
Kids...... on steroids.
By charging him with murder and not manslaughter, the DA was intentionally putting Chauvin
into a good position to get off. I'm no BLM supporter, but watch the tape and tell me that
Chauvin is not guilty of manslaughter.
fakebot, "homicide" means a person died, and that it did not initially appear to be a
suicide. However OD by drugs could be called a suicide. We also have the cruel phenomenon of
"suicide by cop" where someone sets up a scenario to die at the hands of a police officer, or
a passing train, or motor vehicle.
You are reading way more into this incident than supported by the facts in evidence. Why
is that? Or even supported by the facts in evidence when the toxicology report first came
out. It was not clear from that point forward how in fact Floyd died.
Now that the embers have died down, vicious political lines drawn, the Nation convulsed,
the additional bodies counted, and the damages assessed to the point the Minnesota Gov is now
begging for a federal bailout, it is a strange time to finally officially release this
contemporaneous and potentially exculpatory evidence.
Larry,
I mostly agree. First, the hold that Cauvin used was, as you have noted, is approved by
department policy. It would have been used to keep both Floyd and the cops safe. It might
look terrible to the untrained eye and present as the ultimate archetype in a paranoid ink
blot test, but it is a safe and effective means of controlling someone when used properly. I
demonstrated to some friends recently by having my wife (125 pounds +/-) apply the hold to me
(200 + pounds, mostly muscle). I could not get up or thrash too much. I was a controlled, yet
unharmed. The assumption has been from the beginning that Chauvin was applying his total
weight to Floyd's neck. With one knee on the ground, the amount of pressure applied by the
other knee, to the neck, can be completely regulated and need not be excessive. Anyone can
verify this by simply trying it instead of repeating what they have been told by the media.
If you are worried about hurting a partner, try it on an inanimate object. Everyone is so
into "science", but then unwilling to test a basic hypothesis before virtue signaling
away.
Where I think Chauvin screwed up is in not giving Floyd CPR, etc once he stopped
breathing. However, that is not murder. The excessive charges are a set up for subsequent
riots; probably worse than the first round, when Chauvin is acquitted at trial or on appeal.
Maybe that is intentional.
Terence Gore,
The problem is that people resisting arrest often say things like, "I can't breath". Often
enough that cops see it as crying wolf. Besides, what were the cops supposed to do with
someone who is thrashing and resisting arrest and saying he can't breath? Let him thrash and
hurst himself and/or cops? All they could do was control Floyd for safety while waiting on
the EMTs.
Based on the comments ahead of me, there will be no resolution of this matter that is not
democratic - in other words, a compromise both sides hate.
The 'racism' narrative never did fit; their previous work history together is not spoken
of at any length; their former employer and the background of that establishment is also very
interesting.
Multi-racial myself, this entire BLM things is fueled more by wealth or opportunity
disparity than anything else. It's a game many of us just refuse to play any longer, but
nobody can fix stupid - it has to fix itself.
Understood, I was trying to make the point MSM is not taking a deeper look the is at the
issue.
"Some drugs produce undesirable effects with an oral application. With rectal
administration, a person who typically feels nauseous from taking a certain substance orally
may be able to avoid that feeling. A person may also want to experience the "high" more
quickly in certain situations. For example, a person may seek social competence and emotional
awareness associated with MDMA when at social gatherings, and may want to produce the effects
of it more quickly than usual. Or a person who wants the relaxed and calm feelings associated
with alcohol may want to orally administer it to have the effects of it while not emitting
the smell on his breath.
This is a trend becoming more and more popular with teens as a way to get the desired
effects while hiding (at least for a while) the evidence of abuse. Whatever the reason a
person may rectally abuse substances, there are blatant side effects ranging from mild to
severe."
Floyd was inebriated from his drug ingestion and once apprehended needed to be restrained
due to his impairment. Once on the ground, his suggestion, Chauvin applied a restraint to
Floyd's scapula and repeatedly applied pressure in a throttling manner. Was it the neck and
not the scapula, that's in the eye of the viewer and camera angle. Never believe what you
think you see as there always Is another angle. Oh, yes he did slip it to the neck but for
how long time will tell.
He applied the restraint way to long, he did not allow the body to be turned as suggested and
reacted poorly to the growing crowd. A professional law enforcement trainer of restraint
holds could answer most questions and will in court but with the quick condemnation by law
enforcement agencies answers most questions. Homicide 1st or 2nd degree only in
Minneapolis.
Congratulations to Keith Ellison, former congressman, former vice chair of the DNC, and
current Attorney General of Minnesota. Suppressing this evidence was essential in ensuring
the myth of George Floyd was spread around the world before even a flicker of fact
emerged.
"We found a weed pipe on him, there might be something else with it. Might be like, PCP or
something."
Tomas Lane, Minneapolis PD. That's the "systemicly racist" police department in that city run
by the Democratic Farm Labor party, which, like the Attorney General's office of the State of
Minneapolis, has been in charge for half a century or more.
Congratulations Democrats. You have shown the world that you believe that individual
idenity must be rejected in favor of group identity, guilt for things done in the past is
inheritable, and only one group has lives that matter. History must be replaced with the new
reality, the Democratic party's belief that America was founded on racism, it's institutions,
codes of law, and culture must all be swept asside to be replaced with the ideals of the
"democratic socialist" wing of the party.
Chaz, Chop and CNN couldn't frame a better narrative to run for election on in 2020.
Better get some Covid cover stories going lest people start asking why men and women are
fined or arrested for trying to open barber shops, walk without a face burka in public, or
otherwise excercise freedoms yet looters, arsonists, and destroyers of public monuments walk
free; along with tens of thousands of criminals who were released from prison. Certainly no
one wants to know why FISA abuse has gone unpunished, why DOJ lawyers can make up evidence,
withhold other material from defendants - repeatedly, yet none are arrested or otherwise held
to account. We certainly don't want to know what Joe Biden and his boss were doing those 8
years they were in office; or all the other years Joe spent in the House and Senate.
Fentanyl and other opioids do NOT cause respiratory distress or shortness of breath. They
generally depress all activity of the brain and especially the area that control respiration.
In a large enough dose you first pass out and then stop breathing. That is why most opiate
overdoses are simply found dead. A guy foaming at the mouth, agitated and wanting to lie down
is sick, and should be treated as such. He should not be cuffed with his hands behind his
back (also a stress position which impedes the motion of the chest and hence effective
breathing), made to lie prone (also an impediment to ability to breathe) with a knee on the
back of the neck which will compress the upper airway. This guy may have been a SOB and a
MOFO but did not deserve this for any reason let alone passing a bad $20 bill. It was not
murder in the first, but some blame needs to be allocated.
Out of the way, it's a busy day
I've got things on my mind
For want of the price of tea and a slice
The old man died
First, let me explain that I am a retired Cardiologist (ABIM Certified in both Internal
Medicine and Cardiology). As such, have on thousands of occasions helped in the ER's when
people come in on drugs....and I have seen the panic in their eyes and the physiologic
changes that occur (severe hypertension, Adrenalin release, heart attacks, strokes).
When I read the available reports from Floyd's autopsy I was struck by the fact this
fellow had ingested a large quantity of dangerous drugs; combinations of stimulants and
opioids (fentanyl...one of the most dangerous drugs on the street...we even have to be
careful with it in the hospital). He wasn't able to react appropriately to the circumstances
and those officers aren't doctors. The officers were trapped. The only decision they could
make was to control the subject and try to prevent him from injuring himself or them...or
someone else. From what I read in the Minneapolis PD manual the use of the neck restraint (as
they used it) was trained and approved.
Factually, this probably didn't cause an injury. I think the defense will probably utilize
this; perhaps they will get a 'slap on the hands'...but they did what they were trained to do
with a large, strong, resisting subject. I am worried that it will result in a ' Rodney King'
response with riots and destruction. I don't see a good 'end' here.
I am reminded of a piece by Art Buchwald, in which, he quoted the response of a governor
of Illinois to a prison riot: " we need a better class of prisoners."
I suppose we need a healthier and more responsible-acting class of miscreants, who could
endure incidents of police brutality and not inconviently dying and besmirching the sterling
reputation of the police - causing riots among the feeble-minded population.
Charlie Wilson, why the intentional misinformation campaign when we all have search
engines at our fingertips?
"........According to the Drug Enforcement Administration, this powerful drug is 100 times
more potent than morphine and 50 times more potent than heroin. Along with targeting the
opioid receptors in the brain that control pain, the opioid receptors that control breathing
and heart rate are also affected. This can lead an individual to stop breathing all together
if too much Fentanyl is taken.........
EMT was called, he was being symptomatically treated. He did not die because of a bad $20
bill. He died because from the moment he woke up that day he made one fatal decision after
another, all bad. Including buying cigarette with his bad $20 bill, when he claimed on tape
he had "post-covid breathing" problems. He set his own fate in motion.
Might want to wait for the start of the woke NFL season before doing any more Monday
morning quarterbacking.
Methamphetamine most often causes a general feeling of wellness (euphoria) that is most
often called a "rush." Other symptoms are increased heart rate, increased blood pressure, and
large, wide pupils.
If you take a large amount of the drug, you will be at higher risk for more dangerous side
effects, including:
Agitation
Chest pain
Coma or unresponsiveness (in extreme cases)
Heart attack
Irregular or stopped heartbeat
Difficulty breathing
Very high body temperature
Kidney damage and possibly kidney failure
Paranoia
Seizures
Severe stomach pain
Stroke
Long-term use of methamphetamine can lead to significant psychological problems,
including:
Delusional behavior
Extreme paranoia
Major mood swings
Insomnia (severe inability to sleep)
Other symptoms may include:
Missing and rotted teeth (called "meth mouth")
Repeated infections
Severe weight loss
Skin sores (abscesses or boils)
The length of time methamphetamines stay active can be much longer than for cocaine and other
stimulants. Some paranoid delusions can last for 15 hours."
"Common signs of opiate or stimulant overdose are:
foaming at the mouth or a foam cone
loss of consciousness
seizures
difficulty or stopped breathing
Overdose causes foaming at the mouth because organs like the heart and lungs can't function
properly. Slowed heart or lung movements causes fluids to gather in the lungs, which can mix
with carbon dioxide and come out of the mouth like a foam."
"The excessive charges are a set up for subsequent riots; probably worse than the first
round, when Chauvin is acquitted at trial or on appeal. Maybe that is intentional."
I thought this the moment I heard the charges were bumped up from 3rd to 2nd degree
murder. IMHO, this was also unquestionably a prime motive for the Atlanta DA to rush to
charge that officer with felony 1st degree murder. I don't know how a prosecutor could prove
to an impartial jury that this was first degree, pre-meditated murder, given the indisputable
facts of the case.
I firmly believe both of these cases have been deliberately set up to fail in prosecution
in order to effect a truly cataclysmic round of domestic unrest upon the results of the
trials. The need the system to fail in order to prove their contention that it is inherently
racist. These people want power at all costs. They do not care one bit about the citizenry of
their municipalities who undoubtedly will suffer mightily once these trials play out to
acquittal or at best a hung jury.
"... Among Americans without a high school diploma, for example, 27 percent self-censor. Among Americans who completed high school, this goes up to 34 percent. And among those who have attended college for at least a few years, 45 percent do. This suggests that Americans are socialized into learning to keep their mouth shut: the longer you spend in the educational system, the more you learn that it is appropriate to express some views, but not others. ..."
"... The implicit claim is that the good people, or at least the people with good taste and good manners, will abuse the bad people out of power is the social media version of "The King's advisors are corrupt!" The political "analysis" which reduces everything to the personal malice of your enemies and their conspiracies and all we need to do is the same politics that says all we need is good Christian leaders, except the morally trivial difference of who "we" are deemed to be. ..."
"... using the immoral methods you advocate is actively immoral in itself. Like Heinlein in Starship Troopers arguing that the whipping post was actually fairer, you're arguing the social media equivalent of pillory and stocks are fairer! ..."
"... reducing the whole issue of the current reliance on moral scandals about individuals in lieu of any principled politics to nothing more than the personal pique of the privileged (who alleged power is as likely to be imaginary as real, incidentally,) by waving away the problems, this is exactly what you are endorsing. ..."
I am sure that people restricting what they say because of a fear of ostracism is a thing
that happens, but there's no reason to suppose that this is restricted to liberals, or more
common among liberals
@147; @150: There is, apparently, some
recent data on
this. According to a survey conducted in 2019, a full 40% of Americans "don't feel free to
speak their minds." (The corresponding figures were 48% in 2015, and 13% in 1954, at the height
of McCarthyism. There are no figures for 2020.) Other relevant findings from that study: equal
numbers of R and D voters feel unable to speak their minds; but uneasiness about speaking
freely correlates most strongly with higher levels of education:
Among Americans without a high school diploma, for example, 27 percent self-censor.
Among Americans who completed high school, this goes up to 34 percent. And among those who
have attended college for at least a few years, 45 percent do. This suggests that Americans
are socialized into learning to keep their mouth shut: the longer you spend in the
educational system, the more you learn that it is appropriate to express some views, but not
others.
This finding (if valid) would seem to vindicate the functionalist interpretation of
self-censorship laid out by @150: that its purpose is to control the range of expression
permissible within the college-educated, broadly liberal PMC.
The figure in the Persuasion piece suggests that it's based on a longer paper. If
it's
this one , then it's still a preprint. But, still: at least something to go on.
I see this kind of thing multiple times every day. I suppose because these reviewers
haven't yet been shot and killed, this isn't really "cancel culture," not serious, I'm making
it up.
There is some strenuous gaslighting going on in this thread.
Jerry Vinokurov@143 wrote: "I'm sorry, I genuinely do not understand what you mean to say
here."
How curious Well then, to be blunt, defending "dragged on Twitter" is defending a storm of
abuse as useful political speech, which is ridiculous. It's defending the storm of abuse by
gamers of women, for one thing. Pretending it's not because those kind of people only want to
pretend this kind of rotten politics is only a problem when people they perceive as "left" do
it, doesn't change that. The same tactics used by the right too, for example, demonize Hilary
Clinton for thirty years may not be called PC or cancel culture, but that's what it is.
The implicit claim is that the good people, or at least the people with good taste and
good manners, will abuse the bad people out of power is the social media version of "The
King's advisors are corrupt!" The political "analysis" which reduces everything to the
personal malice of your enemies and their conspiracies and all we need to do is the same
politics that says all we need is good Christian leaders, except the morally trivial
difference of who "we" are deemed to be.
Moral reformation by abuse is not going to work. Frankly, the actual irrelevance of this
to ownership of the country is one reason why it is allowed, a way to neuter real opposition.
It prevents solidarity between the lowers, while fostering illusions about select masters.
Wasn't there some guy who actually wrote about the Obama presidency under the title We Were
Eight Years in Power?
And, by the way, if politics were simply just personal morality, then using the
immoral methods you advocate is actively immoral in itself. Like Heinlein in Starship
Troopers arguing that the whipping post was actually fairer, you're arguing the social media
equivalent of pillory and stocks are fairer!
You think for some reason stuff like some guy pulling a Norwegian flag because somebody
complained about a Confederate flag being displayed isn't a problem? Even worse, you really
think pulling Confederate flags is a real solution to anything? You think a judge who ruled
that Ashley Judd could sue Harvey Weinstein for retaliation and defamation (as in
blacklisting her,) but couldn't sue him for employer harassment when she wasn't his employee
should be purged from the judiciary? And that of course a judge should rule that Judd should
be able to sue him for employer abuse when she wasn't employed by him because that will allow
fishing expeditions into every employee's work history? You think the movie An Office and A
Spy should be canceled but that doesn't make you an anti-Dreyfusard?
Probably the pretense is that none of this was intended. But reducing the whole issue
of the current reliance on moral scandals about individuals in lieu of any principled
politics to nothing more than the personal pique of the privileged (who alleged power is as
likely to be imaginary as real, incidentally,) by waving away the problems, this is exactly
what you are endorsing.
"... You're not allowed to criticise it. And therefore, if you offer even a fairly mild criticism, it really does sound strident, because it violates this expectation that religion is out of bounds. ..."
Parental reports (on social media) of friend clusters exhibiting signs of gender dysphoria [1-4]
and increased exposure to social media/internet preceding a child’s announcement of a trans-
gender identity [1-2,9] raise the possibility of social and peer influences. In developmental psy-
chology research, impacts of peers and other social influences on an individual’s development
are sometimes described using the terms peer contagion and social contagion, respectively. The
use of "contagion" in this context is distinct from the term’s use in the study of infectious dis-
ease, and furthermore its use as an established academic concept throughout this article is not
meant in any way to characterize the developmental process, outcome, or behavior as a disease
or disease-like state, or to convey any value judgement. Social contagion [29] is the spread of
affect or behaviors through a population. Peer contagion, in particular, is the process where an
individual and peer mutually influence each other in a way that promotes emotions and behav-
iors that can potentially have negative effects on their development [30]. Peer contagion has
been associated with depressive symptoms, disordered eating, aggression, bullying, and drug
use [30-31]. Internalizing symptoms such as depression can be spread via the mechanisms of
co-rumination, which entails the repetitive discussion of problems, excessive reassurance seek-
ing (ERS), and negative feedback [30, 32-34]. Deviancy training, which was first described for
rule breaking, delinquency, and aggression, is the process whereby attitudes and behaviors asso-
ciated with problem behaviors are promoted with positive reinforcement by peers [35,36].
Peer contagion has been shown to be a factor in several aspects of eating disorders. There
are examples in the eating disorder and anorexia nervosa literature of how both internalizing
symptoms and behaviors have been shared and spread via peer influences [37-41] which may
have relevance to considerations of a rapid onset of gender dysphoria occurring in AY As.
Friendship cliques can set the norms for preoccupation with one’s body, one’s body image,
I posted the following tweet citing the well-known "social contagion" hypothesis forwarded
by Dr Lisa Littman's work on ROGD. This first person account by @SwipeWright of his academic cancelling is worth paying
attention to.
Reputational smears, job market sabotage, lies, etc. Brutal. Follow him for
thoughtful insights and smart analysis of scientific subjects. Unroll available on Thread
Reader
Directly getting people fired for their heterodox views.
Getting other academics to stay silent &/or avoid certain questions/topics out of
fear.
Causing heterodox students to avoid going into academia altogether.
As the following quote suggests that "woke ideology" is a secular religion"
"Yes, yes, I know," Dawkins interrupts. "I know. People say I'm shrill and
strident."
Dawkins has a theory about this, which is very persuasive.
"We've all been
brought up with the view that religion has some kind of special privileged
status. You're not allowed to criticise it. And therefore, if you offer even a
fairly mild criticism, it really does sound strident, because it violates this
expectation that religion is out of bounds."
I see this kind of thing multiple times every day. I suppose because these reviewers
haven't yet been shot and killed, this isn't really "cancel culture," not serious, I'm making
it up.
There is some strenuous gaslighting going on in this thread.
The Natalie Wynn transcript is very good, and I hadn't seen that before. Thank you.
It's worth wrestling with a bit, because it has the advantage of not framing the
question in terms of Free Speech. I think that the free speech framing often pushes people to
draw bright lines that confuse rather than clarify the debate. For example, various
statements that I've seen by Yascha Monk he tries to make a clear distinction between, "being
dragged on twitter" (which is not a free speech concern, in his opinion) and suffering
employment consequences. But that's a difficult distinction to maintain, and Natalie Wynn is,
correctly, concerned about to problems of being harassed on twitter.
I read her essay as being less about, "see how this suppresses speech" and more about,
"look at the way in which twitter encourages/amplifies/leans towards" bad arguments. That
people are engaging in speech but are doing it badly because they are being lazy or careless,
or just not inclined to see the people they're arguing with as persons.
Take these two passages (which I'm quoting in reverse order from which they appear in the
original).
I recently read a book by Sarah Schulman called Conflict is Not Abuse: Overstating
Harm, Community Responsibility and the Duty of Repair. Basically Schulman's argument is
that, in various contexts from romantic relationships to community infighting to
international politics, the overstatement of harm is used as a justification for cruelty
and for escalating conflict.
"Just look at the case of Denise Young Smith. Young Smith spent almost two decades working
her way up in Apple, becoming one of the few black people to ever reach its executive team.
She was named vice president of diversity and inclusion
Then she uttered the sentence that really got her into trouble: "And I've often told
people a story -- there can be 12 white blue-eyed blond men in a room and they are going to
be diverse too because they're going to bring a different life experience and life
perspective to the conversation," she noted.
Within a week, the uproar over her comments forced Young Smith to write an apology. A few
weeks later, her departure from the company was announced. She was replaced by Christie
Smith, a white woman."
Every day, many times a day. As far as I am concerned. Cancel culture is the overall
environment, the habitus, the totality of 2010+ media and communication. We all can get
ostracized and isolated at any time.
Like PC, the term cancel culture is an effort by right-wingers to re-brand their own
practices as something horrible when they are on the receiving end. As such, if cancel
culture were honestly applied what they do, some of us would agree that it is a bad thing.
Notably, everyone who has indignantly invoked their private property rights to delete
comments, shriek about trolls, ban commenters or even refuse comments, has agreed, whether or
not they concede the point, has agreed there is an active harm from it, even when it isn't
rape/death threats to women.
The real problem is not just that things like presumption of guilt, guilt by association,
etc. aren't moral. The real problem is they can't possibly do the job alleged. Causing mental
agony to people, even "bad" people, isn't political reform. Not only is this kind of thing a
diversion from politics, it is totally amenable to misuse, and everybody knows it. Making
excuses for Biden while harping about Trump is hypocritical gossip, partisanship, not
principle. Bill Cosby's accomplices got away scot free and Harvey Weinstein's stooges still
have their cheating Oscars! I suppose one of the biggest triumphs of cancel culture is
suppressing movies like the Gore Vidal biopic and the movie An Officer and a Spy. But what
kinds of victories is joining the anti-Dreyfusards?
To put it another way, cancel culture is the social media equivalent of the
criticism/self-criticism sessions on campuses in the Cultural Revolution. Except today's
version lacks any changes in party/state personnel, lacks any significant redirection of
resources to the people left behind, lacks any hint of fundamental political differences in
the future of the country. This current iteration of this kind of "politics" is even more apt
to disguise score settling or even puritanism. As near as I can tell, there isn't even a
strong case to be made that "puritanism" as such was helpful even to the Puritan revolution,
not like congregations paying their pastors.
And I don't think the pleasure of getting "our" own back on the reactionaries is enough to
pay for giving up any moral condemnation of the injustice of such methods, any more than
building clinics in the countryside in China was helped by criticism/self-criticism
sessions.
For those who favor cancel culture, here's a defense, in the particular case of
Aristotle: http://moufawad-paul.blogspot.com/2020/07/apparently-aristotle-is-in-danger-of.html
There are a couple of funny things to this, notably the fact that Aristotle is already
canceled as far as popular culture goes. For the SF fans here, consider Neal Stephenson's
abuse of "Aristotle" in Anathem. Or the nearly universal assumption in popular discourse that
Aristotle was an enemy of science. (See The Lagoon.)
Also, despite being a professional, our Maoist friend seems to think Aristotle was a major
philosopher in ancient times, when as near as I can tell from reading Peter Adamson is that
Aristotle's preeminence was a product of Arab/Persian/Central Asian culture, and hence not
really a white thing at all. (And Black Athena, while documenting influence from Egypt, is
incomplete, neglecting the cultural influences on the Greek cities of Ionia, which were more
important originally than Athens.)
I may have missed something after a cursory reading of the thread, but neither Chris B.
nor any of the commenters have attempted to place strict definitional boundaries on "cancel
culture" in order to make the debate more manageable. So not surprisingly we get a bunch of
commenters who object to hypothetical extreme examples of the tendency that "cancel culture"
is only a narrow subset of.
Some examples of the general tendency that I and most civilized people vehemently
oppose:
–Damnatio memoriae (ancient Rome) and un-personhood (communist countries).
–Firing for political opinions held outside of the workplace.
–Hiring blacklisting based on political opinion.
–Death threats and other threats of violence against people with objectionable
opinions. (Of course, if the objectionable individual was the first to issue such threats,
then it is fully justified to issue retaliatory threats, action movie-style).
–Legalized segregation or physical exile targeting people with objectionable
opinions.
–Last, definitely not least and most obviously, the actual genocide of groups
based solely on their political opinions or actions (The legalized killing of individuals
based on their actions is another matter).
These are what the critics of cancel culture such as Sebastian H seem to have in mind. But
either they are projecting their own fears or they are dishonestly using straw men. What
we've seen of "cancel culture" in the U.S. so far is:
–Attempts in public education to re-write false history, the Lost Cause most
prominently.
–Pulling down statues and other memorials of people who should not have been "sainted"
in the first place.
–Renaming of places/institutions named after either people who are very far from
sainthood (e.g. Bragg and Hood of CSA Army infamy) or objectionable nicknames.
–Calls for boycotts of commercial products or franchises whose CEOs voice
anti-democratic cultural or political opinions (e.g. ChickFila and homophobia).
–Along the same lines, the refusal to grant media platforms and public speaking
engagements to individuals with such opinions.
–Refusal to allow blog comments from people with a past history of objectionable
opinions (e.g., Chris B. rightly keeping Ralph Musgrave away from this comment thread).**
–Social ostracism that is either absolute (refusal to be physically near an
objectionable person, especially if such a person has made inflammatory public comments) or
more conditional (same refusal, but with the precondition that said person refused to be
respectful or to consider other opinions in previous debate).
The owner of a Cuban restaurant in Louisville has decried a list of 'diversity demands sent
to him and dozens of other small business owners by Black Lives Matter activists - which
include guaranteeing that at least 23% of staff are black, 23% of the business's supplies are
from black-owned retailers, and 1.5% of their net sales go to black charities. They also need
to publicly display a sign showing their support for the movement.
If they don't comply, the business owners face a series of "repercussions," including social
media shaming, 'invasive reclamation' where black owned businesses would set up competing
'booths and tables' outside the stores, and they would have 'their storefronts fucked with,'
according to the
Daily Mail .
The letter was sent to business owners in the city's 'NuLu' East Market District during a
July 24 protest which forced some area businesses to close. BLM argues that the neighborhood
was only able to flourish after a housing project was demolished in the 2000s, which 'robbed
the black community of opportunities and wiped out their homes,' according to the report.
Beatscape , 20 minutes ago
This is BLM trying to see how far they can push their agenda -- do they have such a
universal mandate that they are now above the law? Per the legal code:
Extortion is a felony offense that is punishable by up to three years in prison. If the
defendant has made extortion demands but the victim never complied or consented, he or she
can be charged with attempted extortion.
In the current environment, anyone that dares to criticize even a fine point of the BLM
movement in public is in danger of losing their job and being ostracized. No wonder BLM wants
to defund and defang the police, they want to engage in various criminal activities with
impunity. And, the 'white guilt' crowd is actually fighting to allow this to happen.
Unreal...
OGAorSAD , 37 minutes ago
Formal extortion that will go unpunished....
Revolver2019 , 24 minutes ago
This guy is capitulating way too much! You cannot have it both ways with Marxists. You
cannot support BLM, but then offer your own terms to them to be negotiated.
He of all people should know that Marxists do not negotiate and there is no limit for what
they demand and what they want from you. You give an inch, they will then demand a mile. If
you draw a line they will steam roll you and take you out . Its all or nothing with
Marxists!
People need to realize this for their own safety. I see too much of it. People want to
appease, but on their terms. WAKE UP!! This guy is doing nothing good for his restaurant or
community because he says he supports BLM, but.... There is no BUT - All or you die! Having
both ways is quick recipe for disaster.
Grow some cajones and take one side - fully! Preferable to be the good side.
jughead , 1 hour ago
Sounds like a RICO case to me. Book em Donald.
LightBeamCowboy , 53 minutes ago
Isn't making threats or committing violence to achieve political ends the legal definition
of terrorism?
aloha-snackbar , 56 minutes ago
And lastly a cash payment due weekly for protection from nefarious and organized thugs who
may due harm to you and establishment... Chicago beer wars 1930... and today...
TheDayAfter , 41 minutes ago
Brilliant Point. Slap the RICO Act on BLM and Antifa, and see them run into Oblivion.
Stu Pedassle , 3 minutes ago
Who are the officers / decision makers? Gotta hand it to the Soros crowd, one thing they
have gotten right is keeping this movement going apparently without a definable structure /
command center to go after by the DOJ
neidermeyer , 1 hour ago
If it were me I'd burn the place down , collect the insurance money and go someplace safe,
the business is effectively worth nothing at this point... The local government is complicit
and you just can't win in that scenario.
LetThemEatRand , 1 hour ago
The worst nightmare of the Blue Team is that BLM splits the party by targeting Hispanic
voters, who will shift Red Team.
Welfarebum , 36 minutes ago
BLM is now a political party. But they are a unique political party, in that nobody is
allowed to criticize or oppose them or their views. Because of this unique status, they have
become extremely dangerous and need to be scrutinized by all critical-thinking,
freedom-loving citizens. I am not a racist in opposing BLM any more than I'm a rapist for
questioning the motives of the me too movement. y_arrow
DaBard51 , 54 minutes ago
BLM demands quotas? Illegal. per US Supreme Court (2009)
Not sure how the Cubans do business, but if the BLM tries this extortion **** with Mexican
restaurants around here, then some headless corpses of BLM activists are going to start
appearing around the place.
Musum , 1 hour ago
He took to Facebook to accuse them of 'mafia tactics'
Neoconservatism is BLM in Jewish face.
"Mafica tactics" is how we conduct ourselves on the geopolitical stage.
Welcome to America.
BaNNeD oN THe RuN , 49 minutes ago
Exactly, this is just a "lite" version of Trump threatening to ban Tik-Tok, then
encouraging Microsoft to buy it for a reduced price. Or demanding that Germany pay more
tribute to their troops occupying the country for 70+ years.
Leading by example, or the Art of the Deal (shakedown).
Natalie Wynn also refers to Jo Freeman's 1976 piece on "Trashing," in which she describes
her experience of being ostracized by fellow feminists for alleged ideological deviation. The
dynamic of cancellation predates the internet.
(I don't know where a young you-tuber probably not born before the millennium encountered
Shulamith Firestone's old partner in crime, but I am delighted that she did! I know it shows my
age, but I think that young activists today could benefit a lot from reading what my
generation's activists wrote. Also, from getting off my lawn.)
This is a shadow of USSR over the USA. Dead are biting from the grave.
Notable quotes:
"... Over the course of the period from the heyday of McCarthyism to the present, the percentage of the American people not feeling free to express their views has tripled. In 2019, fully four in ten Americans engaged in self-censorship. Our analyses of both over-time and cross-sectional variability provide several insights into why people keep their mouths shut. We find that: ..."
"... those possessing more resources (e.g., higher levels of education) report engaging in more self-censorship ..."
"... fully 40% of the American people today reported being less free to speak their minds than they used to. That so many Americans withhold their political views is remarkable -- and portentous. ..."
"... Self-censorship is defined as intentionally and voluntarily withholding information from others in [the] absence of formal obstacles ..."
Over the course of the period from the heyday of McCarthyism to the present, the
percentage of the American people not feeling free to express their views has tripled. In 2019,
fully four in ten Americans engaged in self-censorship. Our analyses of both over-time and
cross-sectional variability provide several insights into why people keep their mouths shut. We
find that:
(1) Levels of self-censorship are related to affective polarization among the mass public,
but not via an "echo chamber" effect because greater polarization is associated with more
self-censorship.
(2) Levels of mass political intolerance bear no relationship to self-censorship, either at
the macro- or micro-levels.
(3) Those who perceive a more repressive government are only slightly more likely to engage
in self-censorship. And
(4) those possessing more resources (e.g., higher levels of education) report engaging
in more self-censorship .
Together, these findings suggest the conclusion that one's larger macro-environment has
little to do with self-censorship. Instead, micro-environment sentiments -- such as worrying
that expressing unpopular views will isolate and alienate people from their friends, family,
and neighbors -- seem to drive self-censorship.
We conclude with a brief discussion of the significance of our findings for larger democracy
theory and practice. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3647099
There can be little doubt that Americans today are deeply divided on their values, many
issue preferences, and their ideological and partisan attachments (e.g., Druckman and
Levendusky 2019). Indeed, these divisions even extend to the question of whom -- or what kind
of person -- their children should marry (Iyengar et al. 2019)!
A concomitant of these divisions is that political discourse has become coarse, abrasive,
divisive, and intense. When it comes to politics today, it is increasingly likely that even an
innocent but misspoken opinion will cause a kerfuffle to break out.
It therefore should not be surprising to find that a large segment of the American people
engages in self-censorship when it comes of expressing their views.1 In a nationally
representative survey we conducted in 2019 (see Appendix A), we asked a question about
self-censorship that Samuel Stouffer (1955) first asked in 1954, with startling results:
fully 40% of the American people today reported being less free to speak their minds than
they used to. That so many Americans withhold their political views is remarkable -- and
portentous.
... ... ...
===
1 Sharvit et al. put forth a useful definition of self-censorship (2018, 331): "
Self-censorship is defined as intentionally and voluntarily withholding information from
others in [the] absence of formal obstacles ." Studies of self-censorship have taken many
forms, ranging from philosophical inquiries (e.g., Festenstein 2018) to studies of those
withholding crucial evidence of human rights abuses (e.g., Bar-Tal 2017) to studies of
self-censorship among racial minorities (e.g., Gibson 2012).
I 1000% recommend that Natalie Wynn link. It is an excellent discussion of the queer
facebook/twitter/social media cancel culture that I see all the time. The discussion of the
step to abstraction plus essentialism is especially good and totally applicable to most of the
real cancelations (the step from 'here is research about violent vs. non-violent protests' to
'Shor is racist' is a classic).
I'm going to provide a lot of examples and I'll use the Wynn tropes. Not all of them have
all of the tropes, but I think it is a true cultural issue, so I'm not sure you need all of
them at the same time. One that I won't mention every time is the Transitive Property of
Cancellation. But you should realize that it exists in every case where someone does something
off the job, and the cancelers try to get them fired, because the logic is "your company is
horribly tainted by have X as a worker". There are a few cases using words that are forbidden.
I'm not going to type them outright only because I don't want to get dragged into the
discussion of the appropriateness of using them directly when discussing them, third hand.
However the appropriateness is important to the context (eg "dont call me a N!gg$%" or black
artists who deliberately use it to be provacative)
Shor. I won't recite the fact but the link (along with some of the names that Quiggin
wanted) is a good discussion of it. It exhibits problematic Presumption of Guilt, Abstraction,
Essentialism
Emmanuel Cafferty: power company worker fired because he allegedly gave the OK symbol which
is allegedly a white power symbol. This very obviously Hispanic man in San Diego says he has no
idea that the OK symbol is a white power symbol and that he was just cracking his knuckles. BTW
the OK symbol thing is it's own area of insanity, where WP groups intentionally troll us to
make us look like overreacting ninnies. It requires so much context to explain to the
non-hyper-woke that it would be way easier to just never take the bait–because if you can
strongly suggest someone is racist without it, just do so. If you can't it is definitely not
worth it. Presumption of Guilt, Abstraction, Essentialism, Dualism
Dominique Moran fired from Chipotle because she insisted on getting payment from a group of
black men who specifically had had their cards declined only 2 days before, and who she had
been warned that those specific men had "dine and dashed". She became an internet exemplar of
racism so much so that her mother found out about it across the country. It wasn't until later
that other internet sleuths demonstrated that Chipotle had been set up for an internet
anti-racist mob. (Note that the company itself never figured that out on their own).
Presumption of Guilt, Essentialism,
Marlon Anderson was a [black] security guard at a Wisconsin high school. He was repeatedly
taunted as being a N!gg$% by students. He told the students that they absolutely could not call
him a N!gg$%. The students accused him of using the word N!gg$%, and he was fired for using
racial slurs. The only good news is that this firing is so ridiculous that it has generated
some serious pushback. (I could not however find out what happened). Presumption of Guilt,
Abstraction, Pseudo-Moralism, No Forgiveness
Sarah Silverman fired from her movie because she appeared in blackface in her show from more
than a decade before . The piece clearly indicates that white people take blackface too
casually and that they are wrong to do so. Abstraction, Essentialism, Pseudo-Moralism, No
Forgiveness, Dualism.
Israel Morales. Jewish restaurant attacked for being Nazi sympathizers because they didn't
overreact to a patron wearing a shirt with the work "Luftwaffe" on it. The owner didn't believe
it was as clear as the accuser said and tried to stop a confrontation in the restaurant. The
most annoying part is the final paragraph "For its part, Kachka's owners says they fear the
rumors could lead racists and neo-Nazis to assume the restaurant is a place that welcomes their
views. "Our fear is that this misinformation could cause discriminatory groups to think Kachka
is a safe haven, which it most certainly is not," Israel Morales wrote in a statement to Eater.
"We would like to reiterate that we never kicked anyone out for speaking up, we had no idea
what the symbol on the shirt meant, and if we had known, we would not have served him."
Presumption of Guilt, Abstraction, Essentialism, Pseudo-Moralism, Dualism, Transitive Property
(serving someone in a restaurant must mean you're a Nazi sympathizer).
Ahmad Daraldik accused of anti-Semitism for his comment "stupid jew thinks he is cool" which
he posted in response to a photo which is now said to be staged of an Israeli soldier stepping
on a child. Daraldik was TWELVE and living in the Palestinian territories at the time. This one
is still very much in process as it was just reported in July of 2020. I presume he will not be
actually removed from FSU. But it exhibits many of the cancel culture tropes. Abstraction,
Essentialism, Pseudo-Moralism, No Forgiveness, Dualism.
Neal Caren. UNC associate professor of sociology. Accused of creating an unsafe environment
for students of color for asking a white student to role-play a black person in order to try to
better understand racial issues. This was reported in early 2020 so it is too soon to tell
where the investigation will go. Presumption of Guilt, Abstraction, Essentialism,
Pseudo-Intellectualism, Dualism.
Gary Garrels. Senior curator of painting and sculpture at the SF Museum of Modern Art.
Museum employees sent a petition saying "Considering his lengthy tenure at this institution, we
ask just how long have his toxic white supremacist beliefs regarding race and equity directed
his position curating the content of the museum?" This apparently was in response to his
statements that he wanted to increase diversity and "Don't worry, we will definitely still
continue to collect white artists".
This may require a new trope of 'gross exaggeration', but I guess that is a Presumption of
Guilt issue, Abstraction, Essentialism, Pseudo-Moralism, Dualism.
Jonathan Friedland. Removed from Netflix for saying in a meeting that certain words were not
OK to broadcast in comedy and specifically saying that the word N!gg$% was one of them (he said
it aloud in the meeting).
This one might not be directly cancel culture in that there was no internet furor, but it
exhibits many of the tropes so I included it. Essentialism, Dualism, No Forgiveness. It also
took place on the job, so I understand that it is more of an edge case.
Gordon Klein. Currently suspended from teaching at UCLA for the following response to an ask
that exams be delayed for black students to allow participation in local BLM rallies (which
continued every day for more than a month). He contributed a rather snarky response which I
will copy here in full so that no one accuses me of hiding it. But not a firing/suspension
offense.
Thanks for your suggestion in your email below that I give black students special
treatment, given the tragedy in Minnesota. Do you know the names of the classmates that are
black? How can I identify them since we've been having online classes only? Are there any
students that may be of mixed parentage, such as half black-half Asian? What do you suggest I
do with respect to them? A full concession or just half? Also, do you have any idea if any
students are from Minneapolis? I assume that they probably are especially devastated as well.
I am thinking that a white student from there might be possibly even more devastated by this,
especially because some might think that they're racist even if they are not. My TA is from
Minneapolis, so if you don't know, I can probably ask her. Can you guide me on how you think
I should achieve a "no-harm" outcome since our sole course grade is from a final exam only?
One last thing strikes me: Remember that MLK famously said that people should not be
evaluated based on the "color of their skin." Do you think that your request would run afoul
of MLK's admonition?
Thanks, G. Klein
He also noted elsewhere that "previously he had received a directive from his supervisor in
the undergraduate Accounting program that instructors should only adjust final exam policies
and protocols based on standard university practices regarding grading[:] {"If students ask for
accommodations such as assignment delays or exam cancellations, I strongly encourage you to
follow the normal procedures (accommodations from the CAE office, death/illness in the family,
religious observance, etc.)."
Gibson's Bakery. Black Oberlin student detained for shoplifting, Oberlin school hierarchy
involved in an attempt to portray the Bakery as racist. The good news is that school's behavior
was terrible enough to cause them to lose a lawsuit over it. The bad news is that it was that
terrible.
Kathleen Lowrey. Forced out of her job in the University of Alberta as undergraduate
programs chair for what she believes are her views on gender. Shockingly the school won't even
tell her who accused her or exactly of what.
Niel Golightly. Boeing communication officer, resigned after pressure centering around a 33
year old article he wrote objecting to women in combat. He said that the dialogue around that
article 33 years ago changed his mind on the issue. This one is interesting because it is in
one of the few kinds of positions that I might believe off the job behavior could be relevant.
But I tend to think that 33 year old articles (of fairly common positions for the time) might
not be enough. Essentialism, No Forgiveness, Dualism.
Iranian-Canadian atheist (raised Muslim) fired for being anti-Islamic in his personal
facebook page rant against honor killings. "In response to these killings, Corey wrote 'F***
Islam. F*** honour killing. And f*** you if you believe in any of these barbaric stone age
ideologies.'" The response after ordering him to take down the post (he complied) "Despite
Corey's compliance, Wray responded "Your anti-Islamic social media post is in direct
contradiction with Mulgrave School's and Canadian values. It is racist and highly offensive. As
a result, I am immediately terminating any further relationship with you. You will no longer be
allowed to [do business with our school] and you should not enter the school building under any
circumstances.""
This report has been anonymized, so I understand if you want to take it as less
demonstrative.
Brian Leach was fired for sharing on Facebook a Billy Connolly sketch which colleagues
complained was anti-Islamic.
It was from Connolly's "Religion is Over" stage act, and if you listen to it is just as hard
on Christians as it is on Islam. It is essentially an atheistic rant. (The link has the
clip)
This discussion is on the bizarre article run by the Washington Post which got a woman of no
public interest fired for wearing blackface to try to make fun of Megan Kelly's stupid comments
about blackface. It has Abstraction, Essentialism, No Forgiveness, Transitive Property (via 3rd
parties! this was apparently newsworthy because the person who threw the party that the
costumed person showed up at also works at a newspaper!) and dualism.
I forgot to include the Vox accusations. They have a bunch of the tropes.
Emily VanDerWerff accuses Matt Yglesias of making her feel less safe at work as a trans
person for signing the Harper's letter which she asserts contains "many dog whistles toward
anti-trans positions".
Her definition of anti trans dog whistles is included at the link. It has huge Presumption
of Guilt and Abstraction problems. She claims to not want any consequences for Yglesias, but
if that is the case she shouldn't have used "feel less safe at work" which is less of a dog
whistle and more of an alarm bell for Human Resources to immediately open an investigation
into the (for cause) firing of someone.
Natalie Wynn also refers to Jo Freeman's 1976 piece on "Trashing," in which she describes
her experience of being ostracized by fellow feminists for alleged ideological deviation. The
dynamic of cancellation predates the internet.
(I don't know where a young you-tuber probably not born before the millennium encountered
Shulamith Firestone's old partner in crime, but I am delighted that she did! I know it shows
my age, but I think that young activists today could benefit a lot from reading what my
generation's activists wrote. Also, from getting off my lawn.)
From @130 oldster's Natalie Wynn link (good find!), I now have a description of "cancel
culture" that satisfies me. YMMV.
I lifted these straight from Natalie's headings – they're mostly self-explanatory. The
whole transcript is well worth reading; the back half has a nightmarish
fractal-hall-of-mirrors quality that's a good illustration of what it describes.
Trope 1: Presumption of Guilt
Trope 2: Abstraction
Trope 3: Essentialism
Trope 4: Pseudo-Moralism or Pseudo-Intellectualism
Trope 5: No Forgiveness
Trope 6: The Transitive Property of Cancellation
Trope 7: Dualism
For people who want data, here is the longest list of real or alleged cancel culture
incidents that I have seen. 156 cases. Have fun analyzing.
I think the list has a mostly rightwing bias, so I didn't see Finkelstein or Salaita
listed ( though maybe I missed it.)
For myself, I would have to look into them before judging, but of the handful that I know
something about, some I agree are genuine cases of people being unfairly cancelled, and
others I might possibly cancel myself. There are also gray areas.
I found the list via a piece by Cathy Young, but am too lazy to go back and link her
piece.
Group can be organized by a sociopath to harm an individual. Especially typical in female grpups.
Notable quotes:
"... Instead, trashing has reached epidemic proportions. Perhaps taking it out of the closet will clear the air. ..."
"... The means vary. Trashing can be done privately or in a group situation; to one's face or behind one's back; through ostracism or open denunciation. The trasher may give you false reports of what (horrible things) others think of you; tell your friends false stories of what you think of them; interpret whatever you say or do in the most negative light; project unrealistic expectations on you so that when you fail to meet them, you become a "legitimate" target for anger; deny your perceptions of reality; or pretend you don't exist at all. Trashing may even be thinly veiled by the newest group techniques of criticism/self-criticism, mediation, and therapy. Whatever methods are used, trashing involves a violation of one's integrity, a declaration of one's worthlessness, and an impugning of one's motives In effect, what is attacked is not one's actions, or one's ideas, but one's self. ..."
"... This attack is accomplished by making you feel that your very existence is inimical to the Movement and that nothing can change this short of ceasing to exist. These feelings are reinforced when you are isolated from your friends as they become convinced that their association with-you is similarly inimical to the Movement and to themselves. Any support of you will taint them. Eventually all your colleagues join in a chorus of condemnation which cannot be silenced, and you are reduced to a mere parody of your previous self. ..."
"... This was communicated so subtly that I never could get anyone to talk about it. There were no big confrontations, just many little slights ..."
"... Each by itself was insignificant; but added one to another they were like a thousand cuts with a whip. Step by step I was ostracized: if a collective article was written, my attempts to contribute were ignored; if I wrote an article, no one would read it; when I spoke in meetings, everyone would listen politely, and then take up the discussion as though I hadn't said anything; meeting dates were changed without my being told; when it was my turn to coordinate a work project, no one would help; when I didn't receive mailings, and discovered that my name was not on the mailing list, I was told I had just looked in the wrong place. My group once decided on joint fund-raising efforts to send people to a conference until I said I wanted to go, and then it was decided that everyone was on her own (in fairness, one member did call me afterward to contribute $5 to my fare, provided that I not tell anyone. She was trashed a few years later). ..."
"... Three months later word drifted back that I had been denounced by the Chicago Women's Liberation Union, founded after I dropped out of the Movement, for allowing myself to be quoted in a recent news article without their permission. That was all. ..."
"... For the first time in my life, I found myself believing all the horrible things people said about me. When I was treated like shit, I interpreted it to mean that I was shit. My reaction unnerved me as much as my experience. Having survived so much unscathed, why should I now succumb? The answer took me years to arrive at. It is a personally painful one because it admits of a vulnerability I thought I had escaped. I had survived my youth because I had never given anyone or any group the right to judge me. That right I had reserved to myself. But the Movement seduced me by its sweet promise of sisterhood. It claimed to provide a haven from the ravages of a sexist society; a place where one would be understood. it was my very need for feminism and feminists that made me vulnerable. I gave the movement the right to judge me because I trusted it. And when it judged me worthless, I accepted that judgment. ..."
This article was written for Ms . magazine and published in the April 1976 issue, pp. 49-51, 92-98.
It evoked more letters from readers
than any article previously published in Ms ., all but a few relating their own experiences of being trashed. Quite a few of these
were published in a subsequent issue of Ms .
It's been a long time since I was trashed. I was one of the first in the country, perhaps the first in Chicago, to have my character,
my commitment, and my very self attacked in such a way by Movement women that it left me torn in little pieces and unable to function.
It took me years to recover, and even today the wounds have not entirely healed. Thus I hang around the fringes of the Movement,
feeding off it because I need it, but too fearful to plunge once more into its midst. I don't even know what I am afraid of. I keep
telling myself there's no reason why it should happen again -- if I am cautious -- yet in the back of my head there is a pervasive,
irrational certainty that says if I stick my neck out, it will once again be a lightning rod for hostility.
For years I have written this spiel in my head, usually as a speech for a variety of imaginary Movement audiences. But I have never
thought to express myself on it publicly because I have been a firm believer in not washing the Movement's dirty linen in public.
I am beginning to change my mind.
First of all, so much dirty linen is being publicly exposed that I doubt that what I have to reveal will add much to the pile.
To those women who have been active in the Movement, it is not even a revelation. Second, I have been watching for years with increasing
dismay as the Movement consciously destroys anyone within it who stands out in any way. I had long hoped that this self-destructive
tendency would wither away with time and experience. Thus I sympathized with, supported, but did not speak out about, the many women
whose talents have been lost to the Movement because their attempts to use them had been met with hostility. Conversations with friends
in Boston, Los Angeles, and Berkeley who have been trashed as recently as 1975 have convinced me that the Movement has not learned
from its unexamined experience Instead, trashing has reached epidemic proportions. Perhaps taking it out of the closet will clear
the air.
What is "trashing," this colloquial term that expresses so much, yet explains so little? It is not disagreement; it is not conflict;
it is not opposition. These are perfectly ordinary phenomena which, when engaged in mutually, honestly, and not excessively, are
necessary to keep an organism or organization healthy and active. Trashing is a particularly vicious form of character assassination
which amounts to psychological rape. It is manipulative, dishonest, and excessive. It is occasionally disguised by the rhetoric of
honest conflict, or covered up by denying that any disapproval exists at all. But it is not done to expose disagreements or resolve
differences. It is done to disparage and destroy.
The means vary. Trashing can be done privately or in a group situation; to one's face or behind one's back; through ostracism
or open denunciation. The trasher may give you false reports of what (horrible things) others think of you; tell your friends false
stories of what you think of them; interpret whatever you say or do in the most negative light; project unrealistic expectations
on you so that when you fail to meet them, you become a "legitimate" target for anger; deny your perceptions of reality; or pretend
you don't exist at all. Trashing may even be thinly veiled by the newest group techniques of criticism/self-criticism, mediation,
and therapy. Whatever methods are used, trashing involves a violation of one's integrity, a declaration of one's worthlessness, and
an impugning of one's motives In effect, what is attacked is not one's actions, or one's ideas,
but one's self.
This attack is accomplished by making you feel that your very existence is inimical to the Movement and that nothing can change
this short of ceasing to exist. These feelings are reinforced when you are isolated from your friends as they become convinced that
their association with-you is similarly inimical to the Movement and to themselves. Any support of you will taint them. Eventually
all your colleagues join in a chorus of condemnation which cannot be silenced, and you are reduced to a mere parody of your previous
self.
It took three trashings to convince me to drop out. Finally, at the end of 1969, I felt psychologically mangled to the point where
I knew I couldn't go on. Until then I interpreted my experiences as due to personality conflicts or political disagreements which
I could rectify with time and effort. But the harder I tried, the worse things got, until I was finally forced to face the incomprehensible
reality that the problem was not what I did, but what I was.
This was communicated so subtly that I never could get anyone to talk about it. There were no big confrontations, just many little
slights.
Each by itself was insignificant; but added one to another they were like a thousand cuts with a whip. Step by step I was
ostracized: if a collective article was written, my attempts to contribute were ignored; if I wrote an article, no one would read
it; when I spoke in meetings, everyone would listen politely, and then take up the discussion as though I hadn't said anything; meeting
dates were changed without my being told; when it was my turn to coordinate a work project, no one would help; when I didn't receive
mailings, and discovered that my name was not on the mailing list, I was told I had just looked in the wrong place. My group once
decided on joint fund-raising efforts to send people to a conference until I said I wanted to go, and then it was decided that everyone
was on her own (in fairness, one member did call me afterward to contribute $5 to my fare, provided that I not tell anyone. She was
trashed a few years later).
My response to this was bewilderment. I felt as though I were wandering blindfolded in a field I full of sharp objects and deep
holes while being reassured that I could see perfectly and was in a smooth, grassy pasture. It was is if I had unwittingly entered
a new society, one operating by rules of which I wasn't aware, and couldn't know. When I tried to get my group(s) to discuss what
I thought was happening to me, they either denied my perception of reality by saying nothing was out of the ordinary, or dismissed
the incidents as trivial (which individually they were). One woman, in private phone conversations, did admit that I was being poorly
treated. But she never supported me publicly, and admitted quite frankly that it was because she feared to lose the group's approval.
She too was trashed in another group.
Month after month the message was pounded in: get out, the Movement was saying: Get Out, Get Out! One day I found myself confessing
to my roommate that I didn't think I existed; that I was a figment of my own imagination. That's when I knew it was time to leave.
My departure was very quiet. I told two people, and stopped going to the Women's Center. The response convinced me that I had read
the message correctly. No one called, no one sent me any mailings, no reaction came back through the grapevine.
Half my life had
been voided, and no one was aware of it but me. Three months later word drifted back that I had been denounced by the Chicago Women's
Liberation Union, founded after I dropped out of the Movement, for allowing myself to be quoted in a recent news article without
their permission. That was all.
The worst of it was that I really didn't know why I was so deeply affected. I had survived growing up in a very conservative,
conformist, sexist suburb where my right to my own identity was constantly under assault. The need to defend my right to be myself
made me tougher, not tattered. My thickening skin was further annealed by my experiences in other political organizations and movements,
where I learned the use of rhetoric and argument as weapons in political struggle, and how to spot personality conflicts masquerading
as political ones. Such conflicts were usually articulated impersonally, as attacks on one's ideas, and while they may not have been
productive, they were not as destructive as those that I later saw in the feminist movement. One can rethink one's ideas as a result
of their being attacked. It's much harder to rethink one's personality. Character assassination was occasionally used, but it was
not considered legitimate, and thus was limited in both extent and effectiveness. As people's actions counted more than their personalities,
such attacks would not so readily result in isolation. When they were employed, they only rarely got under one's skin.
But the feminist movement got under mine. For the first time in my life, I found myself believing all the horrible things people
said about me. When I was treated like shit, I interpreted it to mean that I was shit. My reaction unnerved me as much as my experience.
Having survived so much unscathed, why should I now succumb? The answer took me years to arrive at. It is a personally painful one
because it admits of a vulnerability I thought I had escaped. I had survived my youth because I had never given anyone or any group
the right to judge me. That right I had reserved to myself. But the Movement seduced me by its sweet promise of sisterhood. It claimed
to provide a haven from the ravages of a sexist society; a place where one would be understood. it was my very need for feminism
and feminists that made me vulnerable. I gave the movement the right to judge me because I trusted it. And when it judged me worthless,
I accepted that judgment.
For at least six months I lived in a kind of numb despair, completely internalizing my failure as a personal one. In June, 1970,
I found myself in New York coincidentally with several feminists from four different cities. We gathered one night for a general
discussion on the state of the Movement, and instead found ourselves discussing what had happened to us. We had two things in common;
all of us had Movement-wide reputations, and all had been trashed. Anselma Dell'Olio read us a speech on "Divisiveness and Self-Destruction
in the Women's Movement" she had recently given at the Congress To Unite Women (sic) as a result of her own trashing.
"I learned ... years ago that women had always been divided against one another, self-destructive and filled with impotent rage.
I thought the Movement would change all that. I never dreamed that I would see the day when this rage, masquerading as a pseudo-egalitarian
radicalism [would be used within the Movement to strike down sisters singled out
"I am referring ... to the personal attacks, both overt and insidious, to which women in the Movement who had painfully managed
any degree of achievement have been subjected. These attacks take different forms. The most common and pervasive is character
assassination: the attempt to undermine and destroy belief in the integrity of the individual under attack. Another form is the
'purge.' The ultimate tactic is to isolate her. . . .
"And who do they attack? Generally two categories. . . Achievement or accomplishment of any kind would seem to be the worst
crime: ... do anything . . . that every other woman secretly or otherwise feels she could do just as well -- and ... you're in
for it. If then ... you are assertive, have what is generally described as a 'forceful personality/ if ... you do not fit the
conventional stereotype of a 'feminine' woman, ... it's all over.
"If you are in the first category (an achiever), You are immediately labeled a thrill-seeking opportunist, a ruthless mercenary,
out to make her fame and fortune over the dead bodies of selfless sisters who have buried their abilities and sacrificed their
ambitions for the greater glory of Feminism. Productivity seems to be the major crime -- but if you have the misfortune of being
outspoken and articulate, you are also accused of being power-mad, elitist, fascist, and finally the worst epithet of all: a male-identifier.
Aaaarrrrggg!"
As I listened to her, a great feeling of relief washed over me. It was my experience she was describing. If I was crazy, I wasn't
the only one. Our talk continued late into the evening. When we left, we sardonically dubbed ourselves the "feminist refugees" and
agreed to meet sometime again. We never did. Instead we each slipped back into our own isolation, and dealt with the problem only
on a personal level. The result was that most of the women at that meeting dropped out as I had done. Two ended up in the hospital
with nervous breakdowns. Although all remained dedicated feminists, none have really contributed their talents to the Movement as
they might have. Though we never met again, our numbers grew as the disease of self-destructiveness slowly engulfed the Movement.
Over the years I have talked with many women who have been trashed. Like a cancer, the attacks spread from those who had reputations
to those who were merely strong; from those who were active to those who merely had ideas; from those who stood out as individuals
to those who failed to conform rapidly enough to the twists and turns of the changing line. With each new story, my conviction grew
that trashing was not an individual problem brought on by individual actions; nor was it a result of political conflicts between
those of differing ideas, It was a social disease.
The disease has been ignored so long because it is frequently masked under the rhetoric of sisterhood. In my own case, the ethic
of sisterhood prevented a recognition of my ostracism. The new values of the Movement said that every woman was a sister, every woman
was acceptable. I clearly was not. Yet no one could admit that I was not acceptable without admitting that they were not being sisters.
It was easier to deny the reality of my unacceptability. With other trashings, sisterhood has been used as the knife rather than
the cover-up. A vague standard of sisterly behavior is set up by anonymous judges who then condemn those who do not meet their standards.
As long as the standard is vague and utopian, it can never be met. But it can be shifted with circumstances to exclude those not
desired as sisters. Thus Ti-Grace Atkinson's memorable adage that "sisterhood is powerful: it kills sisters" is reaffirmed again
and again.
Trashing is not only destructive to the individuals involved, but serves as a very powerful tool of social control. The qualities
and styles which are attacked become examples other women learn not to follow -- lest the same fate befall them. This is not a characteristic
peculiar to the Women's Movement, or even to women. The use of social pressures to induce conformity and intolerance for individuality
is endemic to American society. The relevant question is not why the Movement exerts such strong pressures to conform to a narrow
standard, but what standard does it pressure women to conform to.
This standard is clothed in the rhetoric of revolution and feminism. But underneath are some very traditional ideas about women's
proper roles. I have observed that two different types of women are trashed. The first is the one described by Anselma Dell'Olio
-- the achiever and/or the assertive woman, the one to whom the epithet "male-identified" is commonly applied. This kind of woman
has always been put down by our society with epithets ranging from "unladylike" to "castrating bitch." The primary reason there have
been so few "great women ______" is not merely that greatness has been undeveloped or unrecognized, but that women exhibiting potential
for achievement are punished by both women and men. The "fear of success" is quite rational when one knows that the consequence of
achievement is hostility and not praise.
Not only has the Movement failed to overcome this traditional socialization, but some women have taken it to new extremes. To
do something significant, to be recognized, to achieve, is to imply that one is "making it off other women's oppression" or that
one thinks oneself better than other women. Though few women may think this, too many remain silent while the others unsheathe their
claws. The quest for "leaderlessness" that the Movement so prizes has more frequently become an attempt to tear down those women
who show leadership qualities, than to develop such qualities in those who don't. Many women who have tried to share their skills
have been trashed for asserting that they know something others don't. The Movement's worship of egalitarianism is so strong that
it has become confused with sameness. Women who remind us that we are not all the same are trashed because their differentness is
interpreted as meaning we are not all equal.
Consequently the Movement makes the wrong demands from the achievers within it. It asks for guilt and atonement rather than acknowledgment
and responsibility. Women who have benefitted personally from the Movement's existence do owe it more than gratitude. But that debt
is not called in by trashing. Trashing only discourages other women from trying to break free of their traditional shackles.
The other kind of woman commonly trashed is one I would never have suspected. The values of the Movement favor women who are very
supportive and self-effacing; those who are constantly attending to others' personal problems; the women who play the mother role
very well. Yet a surprising number of such women have been trashed. Ironically their very ability to play this role is resented and
creates an image of power which their associates find threatening. Some older women who consciously reject the mother role are expected
to play it because they "look the part" -- and are trashed when they refuse. Other women who willingly play it find they engender
expectations which they eventually cannot meet, No one can be "everything to everybody," so when these women find themselves having
to say no in order to conserve a little of their own time and energy for themselves or to tend to the political business of a group,
they are perceived as rejecting and treated with anger. Real mothers of course can afford some anger from their children because
they maintain a high degree of physical and financial control over them. Even women in the "helping" professions occupying surrogate
mother roles have resources with which to control their clients' anger. But when one is a "mother" to one's peers, this is not a
possibility. If the demands become unrealistic, one either retreats, or is trashed.
The trashing of both these groups has common roots in traditional roles. Among women there are two roles perceived as permissible:
the "helper" and the "helped." Most women are trained to act out one or the other at different times. Despite consciousness-raising
and an intense scrutiny of our own socialization, many of us have not liberated ourselves from playing these roles, nor from our
expectations that others will do so. Those who deviate from these roles -- the achievers -- are punished for doing so, as are those
who fail to meet the group's expectations.
Although only a few women actually engage in trashing, the blame for allowing it to continue rests with us all. Once under attack,
there is little a woman can do to defend herself because she is by definition always wrong. But there is a great deal that those
who are watching can do to prevent her from being isolated and ultimately destroyed. Trashing only works well when its victims are
alone, because the essence of trashing is to isolate a person and attribute a group's problems to her. Support from others cracks
this facade and deprives the trashers of their audience. It turns a rout into a struggle. Many attacks have been forestalled by the
refusal of associates to let themselves be intimidated into silence out of fear that they would be next. Other attackers have been
forced to clarify their complaints to the point where they can be rationally dealt with.
There is, of course, a fine line between trashing and political struggle, between character assassination and legitimate objections
to undesirable behavior. Discerning the difference takes effort. Here are some pointers to follow. Trashing involves heavy use of
the verb "to be" and only a light use of the verb "to do." It is what one is and not what one does that is objected to, and these
objections cannot be easily phrased in terms of specific undesirable behaviors. Trashers also tend to use nouns and adjectives of
a vague and general sort to express their objections to a particular person. These terms carry a negative connotation, but don't
really tell you what's wrong. That is left to your imagination. Those being trashed can do nothing right. Because they are bad, their
motives are bad, and hence their actions are always bad. There is no making up for past mistakes, because these are perceived as
symptoms and not mistakes.
The acid test, however, comes when one tries to defend a person under attack, especially when she's not there, If such a defense
is taken seriously, and some concern expressed for hearing all sides and gathering all evidence, trashing is probably not occurring.
But if your defense is dismissed with an oft-hand "How can you defend her?"; if you become tainted with suspicion by attempting such
a defense; if she is in fact indefensible, you should take a closer look at those making the accusations. There is more going on
than simple disagreement.
As trashing has become more prevalent, I have become more puzzled by the question of why. What is it about the Women's Movement
that supports and even encourages self-destruction? How can we on the one hand talk about encouraging women to develop their own
individual potential and on the other smash those among us who do just that? Why do we damn our sexist society for the damage it
does to women, and then damn those women who do not appear as severely damaged by it? Why has consciousness-raising not raised our
consciousness about trashing?
The obvious answer is to root it in our oppression as women, and the group self-hate which results from our being raised to believe
that women are not worth very much. Yet such an answer is far too facile; it obscures the fact that trashing does not occur randomly.
Not all women or women's organizations trash, at least not to the same extent. It is much more prevalent among those who call themselves
radical than among those who don't; among those who stress personal changes than among those who stress institutional ones; among
those who can see no victories short of revolution than among those who can be satisfied with smaller successes; and among those
in groups with vague goals than those in groups with concrete ones.
I doubt that there is any single explanation to trashing; it is more likely due to varying combinations of circumstances which
are not always apparent even to those experiencing them. But from the stories I've heard, and the groups I've watched, what has impressed
me most is how traditional it is. There is nothing new about discouraging women from stepping out of place by the use of psychological
manipulation. This is one of the things that have kept women down for years; it is one thing that feminism was supposed to liberate
us from. Yet, instead of an alternative culture with alternative values, we have created alternative means of enforcing the traditional
culture and values. Only the name has changed; the results are the same.
While the tactics are traditional, the virulence is not. I have never seen women get as angry at other women as they do in the
Movement. In part this is because our expectations of other feminists and the Movement in general are very high, and thus difficult
to meet. We have not yet learned to be realistic in our demands on our sisters or ourselves. It is also because other feminists are
available as targets for rage.
Rage is a logical result of oppression. It demands an outlet. Because most women are surrounded by men whom they have learned
it is not wise to attack, their rage is often turned inward. The Movement is teaching women to stop this process, but in many instances
it has not provided alternative targets. While the men are distant, and the "system" too big and vague, one's "sisters" are close
at hand. Attacking other feminists is easier and the results can be more quickly seen than by attacking amorphous social institutions.
People are hurt; they leave. One can feel the sense of power that comes from having "done something." Trying to change an entire
society is a very slow, frustrating process in which gains are incremental, rewards diffuse, and setbacks frequent. It is not a coincidence
that trashing occurs most often and most viciously by those feminists who see the least value in small, impersonal changes and thus
often find themselves unable to act against specific institutions.
The Movement's emphasis on "the personal is political" has made it easier for trashing to flourish. We began by deriving some
of our political ideas from our analysis of our personal lives. This legitimated for many the idea that the Movement could tell us
what kind of people we ought to be, and by extension what kind of personalities we ought to have. As no boundaries were drawn to
define the limits of such demands, it was difficult to preclude abuses. Many groups have sought to remold the lives and minds of
their members, and some have trashed those who resisted. Trashing is also a way of acting out the competitiveness that pervades our
society, but in a manner that reflects the feelings of incompetence that trashers exhibit. Instead of trying to prove one is better
than anyone else, one proves someone else is worse. This can provide the same sense of superiority that traditional competition does,
but without the risks involved. At best the object of one's ire is put to public shame, at worst one's own position is safe within
the shrouds of righteous indignation, Frankly, if we are going to have competition in the Movement, I prefer the old-fashioned kind.
Such competitiveness has its costs, but there are also some collective benefits from the achievements the competitors make while
trying to outdo each other. With trashing there are no beneficiaries. Ultimately everyone loses.
To support women charged with subverting the Movement or undermining their group takes courage, as it requires us to stick our
necks out. But the collective cost of allowing trashing to go on as long and as extensively as we have is enormous. We have already
lost some of the most creative minds and dedicated activists in the Movement. More importantly, we have discouraged many feminists
from stepping out, out of fear that they, too, would be trashed. We have not provided a supportive environment for everyone to develop
their individual potential, or in which to gather strength for the battles with the sexist institutions we must meet each day. A
Movement that once burst with energy, enthusiasm, and creativity has become bogged down in basic survival -- survival from each other.
Isn't it time we stopped looking for enemies within and began to attack the real enemy without? The author would like to thank Linda,
Maxine, and Beverly for their helpful suggestions in the revision of this paper.
This is a mopping-up operation that is a product of media-activated mass psychosis that
derives from the already existing witch hunts and purges that have going on for decades.
Moldbug is a Zionist ultra, but he explains it well:
It's actually not hard to explain the Brown Scare. Like all witch hunts, it's built on a
conspiracy theory. The Red Scare was based on a conspiracy theory too, but at least it was
a real conspiracy with real witches -- two of whom were my father's parents. (The nicest
people on earth, as people. I like to think of them not as worshipping Stalin, but
worshipping what they thought Stalin was.) Moreover, the Red Scare was a largely demotic or
peasant phenomenon to which America's governing intellectual classes were, for obvious
reasons, immune. Because power works and culture is downstream from politics -- real
politics, at least -- the Red Scare soon faded into a joke.
As a mainstream conspiracy theory, fully in the institutional saddle, the Brown Scare is
far greater and more terrifying. Unfortunately no central statistics are kept, but I
wouldn't be surprised if every day in America, more racists, fascists and sexists are
detected, purged and destroyed, than all the screenwriters who had to prosper under
pseudonyms in the '50s. Indeed it's not an exaggeration to say that hundreds of thousands
of Americans, perhaps even a million, are employed in one arm or another of this
ideological apparatus. Cleaning it up will require a genuine cultural revolution -- or a
cultural reaction, anyway. Hey, Americans, I'm ready whenever you are.
The logic of the witch hunter is simple. It has hardly changed since Matthew Hopkins'
day. The first requirement is to invert the reality of power. Power at its most basic level
is the power to harm or destroy other human beings. The obvious reality is that witch
hunters gang up and destroy witches. Whereas witches are never, ever seen to gang up and
destroy witch hunters. By this test alone, we can see that the conspiracy is imaginary
(Brown Scare) rather than real (Red Scare).
Think about it. Obviously, if the witches had any power whatsoever, they wouldn't waste
their time gallivanting around on broomsticks, fellating Satan and cursing cows with sour
milk. They're getting burned right and left, for Christ's sake! Priorities! No, they'd turn
the tables and lay some serious voodoo on the witch-hunters. In a country where anyone who
speaks out against the witches is soon found dangling by his heels from an oak at midnight
with his head shrunk to the size of a baseball, we won't see a lot of witch-hunting and we
know there's a serious witch problem. In a country where witch-hunting is a stable and
lucrative career, and also an amateur pastime enjoyed by millions of hobbyists on the
weekend, we know there are no real witches worth a damn.
What stands in the way of conversation between exploited people of different races is the
white noise of liberal nonsense, which, incidentally, seems to be growing exponentially
because it never runs up against reality and its rasping frictions.
The national conversation about race needs to be short and simple: " All colours and
ethnicities are subject to the exploitation of members of a ruling class that knows no
barriers of race, culture, religion or sex. Which has in common only bad behaviour. A ruling
class which owes its continued existence and its impunity, despite its evident criminality,
to the refusal of its victims to unite and act in their own interests."
And these are among the least original thoughts on offer. Humanity has known these things
since the days when it lived in caves and sent Birthday Cards to chimpanzees.
Let us put this Hydroxychloroquine nonsense to bed for the last time.
Whilst any form of fever mitigation is likely to have a place, however small, in the nurses'
quiver of helpful practices, the promotion of this particular drug, which is known to have
often mortal side effects in vulnerable people, is dangerous and dishonest. Chicken soup and
lime juice are other much less dangerous alternatives over which the Pharmaceutical
Protection Racket has no control. The same can be said of a regime of patient care, loving
attention and good accommodation- full time staff in properly equipped facilities working in
an atmosphere in which the loss of any life is recognised as a social tragedy and a
defeat.
"... Does the mass media think they can “hide the ball” while Seattle turns into a war zone? Seriously–in the Internet age? They _can’t_ be that stupid, can they? ..."
Does the mass media think they can “hide the ball” while Seattle turns
into a war zone? Seriously–in the Internet age? They _can’t_ be that
stupid, can they?
(When I put on the tin foil hat it whispers to me “they know, they are lying on
purpose, they want Trump re-elected to improve their ratings, and they want to anger voters
by lying about Seattle”. Then I take off the tin foil hat and I say
“Na–they really are that stupid.”)
"People can have their voices amplified or silenced by their wealth, connections or
prestige but also by other speech which aims to deny them the right to participate on equal
terms with others."
It's unclear if this refers to those at the receiving end of speech the author wants to
prevent or the speaker deserving of canceling.
"As Jeremy Waldron has argued in his book The Harm in Hate Speech, racist speech aims not
just at hurting the feelings of its victims or expressing a view but at reconstituting the
public arena of democratic debate and argument so that some people are not seen as forming a
proper part of it."
It is very dubious that most slurs "aim" to "reconstitute the public arena of democratic
debate and argument so that some people are not seen as forming a proper part of it." Do you
have any support for this theory?
"It says that those people are not a part of "us" and that their opinions and arguments
have no place as we decide where our country should go."
It's not clear how a racial slur "says" any of this. Perhaps the author is reading
subtext?
"Racist speech by some also legitimizes and emboldens racist speech and opinion by others,
telling bigots that they are not alone, that others think as they do, and strengthens an
ideal of exclusive community based on ethnic or racial lines."
On this point it's worth quoting Henry Louis Gates Jr: "Why would you entrust authority
with enlarged powers of regulating the speech of unpopular minorities unless you were
confident that unpopular minorities would be racists, not blacks?"
"Anti-racist speech, has the opposite effect, it affirms a view that those targeted by the
racists, be they black, or Asian, or Muslim, are full members of the democratic political
community in good standing with as good a right to a say as anyone.
"It also reinforces a social norm about what may not be said, telling those who are
tempted to stigmatize migrants or minorities that they will pay a price for doing so."
It also creates a precedent for excluding views by shaming based on current sentiment.
Only someone oblivious to history wouldn't see the danger in that precedent.
"The role that speech plays in defining who is and isn't included in our vision of
democratic community can have powerful real-world consequence."
Who to include as part of your community is an important issue that should be discussed
openly by all of society. What you're trying to do is to elevate advance your position
without having to defend it.
"One way to understand the ease with which the victims of the Windrush scandal could lose
their jobs, their homes, their liberty or be deported to far-away countries, is that in the
public imaginary that is partly constituted by speech, many people did not see them as proper
members with equal standing to others."
Were we to do away with everything that had a downside we would have very little good.
Therefore arguing that something has potential downsides is not sufficient to establish that
it's not good. Can you argue that free expression and debate by citizenry on the most
important issues facing a democratic nation is not good, besides by arguing that there might
be some cost?
"Racist speech is just one example that makes clear how the practice of open discussion
isn't simply a matter of unfettered conversation among people who are already present but
also involves choices about who gets to speak and involves sensitivity to the way that speech
by some has the effect either of depriving others of a voice or of making it impossible for
others to hear what they say. A society which is full of highly sexualized messages about
women is also a society in which it is harder for women to get a hearing about sexual
violence and income inequality. A society where trans people are the objects of constant
ridicule, or are represented as dangerous, is one in which it is also more difficult for them
to argue for their rights and have their interests taken seriously."
This implies that the intolerant are the powerful group capable of suppressing minorities
with their speech alone. This is disproven by the very fact that anti-racist etc speech is so
successful. The success of antiracist codes of social conduct is because the group exercising
them is the powerful group. This very fact implies their obsolesce.
"Much of the pushback against cancel culture has come from prominent journalists and
intellectuals who perceive every negative reaction from ordinary people on social media as an
affront. Ironically, while being quick to take offence themselves they demand that those less
powerful than they are should toughen up and not be such "snowflakes"."
This is an uninformed or dishonest characterization of the pushback against cancel
culture. The pushback is due to intolerant enforcement of ideological conformity and
homogeneity through threat to job and reputation. And no this is not only ideological
conformity in that you can't say overtly racist things; it's ideological conformity in that
you can't criticize BLM or cite scientific literature on biological differences between the
sexes without risk.
"But if we take seriously the idea that speech can silence speech or make it unhearable,
then a concern with whether the heckling of cancel culture makes it harder to say some things
also has to take account of the fact that saying those very things can make it harder for
other voices to be heard."
This piece hasn't given any reason to make us take seriously the idea that speech against
one group can silence another, other then through threat to livelihood or reputation. It's
not clear though how for example referencing scientific but currently unpopular claims,
criticizing a social movement, having a narrower view on who should be considered a citizen
or even using a slur silences people.
An important problem is the conflation of public opprobrium actual sanctions like being
fired. This is mainly a problem in the US because of employment at will. In most countries,
unfair dismissal laws would protect people being sacked because of their political views,
unless they related directly to job performance. https://crookedtimber.org/2018/03/04/free-speech-unfair-dismissal-and-unions/
But the fact that the same example (David Shor) is cited every time the issue is raised
suggests that losing your job for breaching left orthodoxy not a major problem in the US, or
at least that other possible examples are much less sympathetic (racists fired from Fox, for
example).
Mostly, AFAICT, being cancelled means having to read rude things said about you by lots of
unimportant people on Twitter, as opposed to engaging in caustic, but civilised, debate with
your peers in the pages of little magazines.
The question is who decides? Most readers here would agree that "[a] society that refuses
to tolerate speech like David Starkey's recent racist remarks about "damn blacks" and the
slave trade is better for it", but of the world's ~8 bln people, I strongly suspect that most
would believe that a society would be better off for refusing to tolerate speech about
abortions and homosexuality. So do we decide democratically? Through the ethics of
enlightened elites? An ever ongoing fight between the majority and the elite? Some other
method? Perhaps we fracture into mini-societies, each with their own standards of "better
off", which do not talk to one another?
From my perspective, there is thought and thought-like speech (anything without direct
call to action) , which ought to be maximally tolerated for both ethical and practical
reasons. Ethical because it dispenses with the requirement for absolute and inviolable
knowledge (and disempowers people who would otherwise need to select and enforce "allowed"
views. Practical because it encourages transparency (shutting racists up will not stop them
from thinking racist thoughts), intellectual development (new ideas can emerge to challenge
the existing wisdom) and rigor (having to often hear opposing viewpoints hones your
understanding of your own). Not to say that such tolerance has no costs whatsoever (e.g.
making it easier for racists to be racist in the short term, that you mention), but that the
benefits of such tolerance outweigh the costs.
What cannot be limitlessly tolerated are actions and action-like speech. To use my own
nationality as an example, I would have to fight back were a person to decide to try to kill
all Russians. For action-like speech, I would also be against an unlimited freedom for a
person to stand on the corner shouting "pick up a gun and go find a Russian to kill". But
change the phrasing slightly to "all Russians are evil, sub-human scum, I wish none of them
lived" and I would be hurt but okay with that, until and unless the speaker or their listener
decided to try to act on the sentiment. Indeed, it would give me a heads up about which
person (or people) to avoid. In a less extreme example, "shout that stupid Russian dow, how
dare he try to even voice an opinion!" is action-like speech (therefore needs limits), while
"I don't see the need to listen to Russians" is thought-like (and therefore better to be
tolerated). The problem with modern cancel culture is that it often responds to thought-like
speech with action-like speech.
Obviously, no one owes it to anyone else to listen to them. If you hear something you do
not like, you should be free to close the door on that person and never again invite them
into your company. But from my perspective it is an intellectually small and fragile mind
that looks to exercise this freedom at a mass scale or anything other than a last resort.
People who say stupid, hateful or offensive things are not examples to be emulated. This is
exactly the reason not to join a crowd saying rude or offensive things back at them. Surely,
we can form and promote communities of respect and diversity without needing to destroy
communities that are exclusionary and hateful? If we are right about what makes communities
better off, we will simply outcompete the latter, which will wither of their own accord.
Examples given show quite clearly that "cancel mob" is an established form of the political
struggle. And in this case the reasons behind the particular attack of the "cancel mob" is far
from charitable.
Cancel culture my assJustice for Brad HamiltonRoy Edroso Jul 14 38 30
Mendenhall loses endorsement deal over bin Laden tweets
[Steelers running back] Rashard Mendenhall's candid tweets about Osama bin Laden's death
and the 9/11 terror attacks cost him an endorsement deal.
NFL.com senior analyst Vic Carucci says Rashard Mendenhall has become an example of the
risks that social media can present to outspoken pro athletes.
Athletic apparel manufacturer Champion announced Thursday that it had dropped the
Pittsburgh Steelers running back after he questioned the celebrations of bid Laden's death
and expressed his uncertainty over official accounts of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks in New
York, suburban Washington and Pennsylvania.
Things haven't gotten any better. I've already written about
Springfield, Mass. police detective Florissa Fuentes, who got fired this year for
reposting her niece's pro-Black Lives Matter Instagram photo. Fuentes is less like Donohue,
the Chicks, and Mendenhall, though, and more like most of the people who get fired for speech
in this country, in that she is not rich, and getting fired was for her a massive blow.
The controversy began after [Lisa] Durden's appearance [on Tucker Carlson], during which
she defended the Black Lives Matter movement's decision to host a Memorial Day celebration
in New York City to which only black people were invited. On the show, Durden's comments
included, "You white people are angry because you couldn't use your white privilege card to
get invited to the Black Lives Matter's all-black Memorial Day Celebration," and "We want
to celebrate today. We don't want anybody going against us today."
Durden was then an adjunct professor at Essex County College, but not for long because
sure enough, they fired her for what she said on the show. (Bet Carlson, a racist piece
of shit , was delighted!) The college president defended her decision, saying she'd
received "feedback from students, faculty and prospective students and their families
expressing frustration, concern and even fear that the views expressed by a college employee
(with influence over students) would negatively impact their experience on the campus..."
Sounds pretty snowflakey to me. I went looking in the works of the signatories of the
famous
Harper's letter against cancel culture for some sign that any of them had acknowledged
Durden's case. Shockingly, such free speech warriors as Rod Dreher and Bret Stephens never
dropped a word on it.
Dreher does come up in other free-speech-vs-employment cases, though -- for example, from
2017, Chronicle of Higher
Education :
Tommy Curry, an associate professor of philosophy at Texas A&M University at College
Station, about five years ago participated in a YouTube interview in which he discussed
race and violence. Those remarks resurfaced in May in a column titled "When Is It OK to
Kill Whites?" by Rod Dreher in The American Conservative.
Mr. Curry said of that piece that he wasn't advocating for violence and that his remarks
had been taken out of context. He told The Chronicle that online threats had arrived in
force shortly after that. Some were racial in nature.
At the same time the president of the university, Michael K. Young, issued a statement
in which he appeared to rebuke the remarks made by Mr. Curry...
In his column on
Curry , Dreher said, "I wonder what it is like to be a white student studying under Dr.
Curry in his classroom?" Imagine worrying for the safety of white people at Texas
Fucking A&M!
Curry got to keep his job, but only after he "issued a new statement apologizing for how
his remarks had been received," the Chronicle reported:
"For those of you who considered my comments disparaging to certain types of scholarly
work or in any way impinging upon the centrality of academic freedom at this university,"
[Curry] wrote, "I regret any contributions that I may have made to misunderstandings in
this case, including to those whose work is contextualized by understanding the historical
perspectives of events that have often been ignored."
Bottom line: Most of us who work for a living are at-will employees -- basically, the boss
can fire us if they don't like the way we look at them or if they don't like what they
discover we feel about the events of the day. There are some protections -- for example, if
you and your work buddies are talking about work stuff and the boss gets mad, then that may
be considered " concerted
activity " and protected -- but as
Lisa Guerin wrote at the nolo.com legal advice site, "political views aren't covered by
[Civil Rights] laws and the laws of most states. This means employers are free to consider
political views and affiliations in making job decisions."
Basically we employees have no free speech rights at all. But people like Stephens and
Dreher and Megan McArdle who cry
over how "the mob" is coming after them don't care about us. For window dressing, they'll
glom onto rare cases where a non-rich, non-credentialed guy gets in trouble for allegedly
racist behavior that he didn't really do -- Emmanuel Cafferty, it's your time
to shine ! -- but their real concern isn't Cafferty's "free speech" or that of any other
peon, it's their own miserable careers.
Because they know people are starting to talk back to them. It's not like back in the day
when Peggy Noonan and George F. Will mounted their high horses and vomited their wisdom onto
the rabble and maybe some balled-up Letters to the Editor might feebly come back at them but
that was it. Now commoners can go viral! People making fun of Bari Weiss might reach as many
people as Bari Weiss herself! The cancel culture criers may have wingnut welfare sinecures,
cushy pundit gigs, and the respect of all the Right People, but they can't help but notice
that when they glide out onto their balconies and emit their received opinions a lot of
people -- mostly younger, and thoroughly hip that these worthies are apologists for the
austerity debt servitude to which they've been condemned for life -- are not just coughing
"bullshit" into their fists, but shouting it out loud.
This, the cancel culture criers cry, is the mob! It threatens civilization!
Yet they cannot force us to pay attention or buy their shitty opinions. The sound and
smell of mockery disturbs their al fresco luncheons and
weddings at the Arboretum . So they rush to their writing desks and prepare
sternly-worded letters. Their colleagues will read and approve! Also, their editors and
relatives! And maybe also some poor dumb kids who know so little of the world that they'll
actually mistake these overpaid prats for victims and feel sorry for them.
Well, you've already heard what I think about it elsewhere: Protect workers' free speech
rights for real, I say -- let them be as woke, as racist, or as obstreperous they wish off
the clock and the boss can't squawk. The cancel culture criers won't go for that deal; in
fact such a thing has never entered their minds -- free-speech is to protect their delicate
sensibilities, not the livelihoods of people who work with their hands!
And in the new tradition of the working class asking for more rather than less of what
they want, I'll go further: I give not one flaming fuck if these assholes suffocate under a
barrage of rotten tomatoes, and I think Brad inFast Times at Ridgemont
Highgot a raw deal from All-American
Burger and should be reinstated with full back pay: That customer deserved to have
100% of his ass kicked!
Examples given show quite clearly that "cancel mob" is an established, albeit somewhat
dirty, form of the political struggle. Often the reasons behind the particular attack of
the "cancel mob" is far from charitable. Orwell's 1984 describes an extreme form of the
same.
there is a difference between Prudent speech and Free speech.
When punishment for voicing dissenting opinion includes physical assault it doesn't much
matter how rare the actual instances of physical violence are
Notable quotes:
"... Of course, it is not (yet) possible to determine the exact racism quotient of each individual, so exemplary cancellations are the means of influencing individuals to modify their behaviour. I appreciate that "racism quotient" and "exemplary cancellation" make me sound like one of those right-wing Orwell cosplayers, but I can't think of a better way of putting it. ..."
Cancel culture, I suggest, matters most when our ability to access diverse opinion is
curtailed as a result of speech policing, either by algorithms or individuals, especially in
the run-up to an election. Self-censorship in universities is equally important. When Chomsky
signed the Harper's letter, he reported he receive a great many letters of support from
academics terrified of being cancelled.
We're coming out of a certain kind of (neo-)liberal consensus in which politics was viewed
as a mostly technocratic business of setting laws in the abstract. That perspective was
sufficient to get some things right: many blatantly discriminatory laws have been repealed
across the Western world over the last 70 years. But it turns out that racism and sexism
don't require explicitly racist or sexist laws on the books: they can subvert neutral-seeming
laws to their purposes, and can bias the behaviour of individuals and networks of individuals
to the extent that widespread discrimination can continue...
The other strand focuses on the moral reform of white people. It proceeds from the
assumption that the law has only a limited role in moral conduct, and that the evidence of
the last 50 years is that removing explicitly racist legislation, and even legislating
anti-racism (e.g. affirmative action) isn't enough to secure good outcomes. If your
individual acts have the practical outcome of furthering or defending racist interests, then
you are part of the problem. The demands here are much harder to define. Rather than focusing
all attention on a specific reform that can be enacted in a single moment by an executive or
legislature, attention is cast broadly across all actions occurring at all times by all
people. Of course, it is not (yet) possible to determine the exact racism quotient of
each individual, so exemplary cancellations are the means of influencing individuals to
modify their behaviour. I appreciate that "racism quotient" and "exemplary cancellation" make
me sound like one of those right-wing Orwell cosplayers, but I can't think of a better way of
putting it.
All of this intersects with the modern reality of social media: things that "normal"
people might be able to say in a bar or a cafe discussion with friends or colleagues are now
part of the permanent public record, searchable and viewable by millions. Social media
provides excellent tools both for taking things out of context and re-contextualising them.
Secondly, "brands" or organisations are now direct participants, and can be subject to public
pressure in much more visible ways than previously.
I'm a big fan of biological metaphors; they keep one humble about the inevitability of
unintended consequences. The metaphor gets strained when it moves from external viral spread
to internal immune response, though; in the former, we're assuming a team of informed medical
professionals, seeing things from the "outside" with the authority implied by specialized and
objective knowledge. I'm not sure who these people correspond to in the world we inhabit,
where even the real doctors have trouble getting traction.
The internal immune response feels like a closer match, as surface protein markers are
proxies for identity, microbes display "false flags" to avoid detection, and auto-immune and
inflammatory responses often do more damage than the threats they're reacting to.
On both levels of metaphor, it seems clear that the structure of social media is explicitly
designed to create and exploit "virality"; we need to rethink what this means for us.
More:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jun/29/social-distancing-social-media-facebook-misinformation
" No one seems to reflect here that silencing people because of their politics is
historically and usually the preserve of those with the power to silence – that is,
conservatives. Be careful what you wish for."
And here we have the cancel culture "problem" in a nutshell. The complaint isn't that
Musgrave lost a job or is literally forbidden to speak or even lacks reasonable ways to be
heard. The complaint is that blog found him distasteful and doesn't want him commenting
there. This isn't a right to speak issue, it's a demand to be heard issue.
Far worse things are done to BLM protesters. Being denied a blog posting? Try being denied
the right to even assemble, and shot with tear gas and rubber bullets. That didn't stop me
from protesting. Being denied a blog post and hearing some harsh criticism is nothing.
I broadly agree with the points about free speech in the post, and Waldron's arguments,
but I don't think it's right to equate the debate about "cancel culture" with these
issues.
John's understanding of it is even more dismissive (and imo off-target).
being cancelled means having to read rude things said about you by lots of unimportant
people on Twitter, as opposed to engaging in caustic, but civilised, debate with your peers
in the pages of little magazines
It seems to me cancel culture is both an ethos and a tactic. The ethos involves a zero
tolerance approach to certain ethical transgressions (eg overt expressions of racism) and an
absolute devaluation of people who commit them. The tactic is based around achieving cultural
change by exerting collective pressure as consumers on managers of corporations (or
corporation-like entities, like universities) to terminate transgressors, as a way of
incentivising other emplpoyees to fall into line. It seems to me to be heavily shaped by and
dependent on American neoliberalism as the ethos is both punitive and consumerist and the
tactic is dependent on at-will employment and managers' deference to customer sentiment, and
while most of its current "successes" have been broadly of the Left there's no reason to
assume that will be the case in future. I think it does represent a weakening of liberal
norms of freedom of discussion and I think Chomsky's right to be concerned.
There's nothing new about speech codes. Puritans and others refused to employ the Book of
Common prayer demanded by the Act of Uniformity of 1662. Scolds and speech police can be
found among agnostics, people of faith, and across the political spectrum. Nor is the common
sense exercise of good judgement regarding when, or if, to suggest to a friend he, she, or
they might like to lose a little weight, or to refrain from pointing out the questionable
personal grooming habits of a colleague, client, superior, or family member.
Do I need to declare my beliefs and opinions on every topic freely in every forum. In my
own case, no. And there's a big difference between being shunned and being imprisoned, or
executed, for mocking the wrong text or monarch.
As I courtesy, I might well avoid broaching topics I'm aware may distress another. But
that's a far cry from what's happening in modern old media. Bari Weiss evidently had her
privileges to write and edit others freely severely curtailed. And, yes, I'm aware that she
had cancellation issues of her own. But forcing James Bennett to resign, who put Ta-Nehisi
Coates on the cover of the Atlantic, for permitting a US senator to publish an op-ed in the
NYT?
We need a diverse set of values and beliefs, argues Henry, J. S. Mill, and others. The
head of Google is just now trying to explain why "Washington Free Beacon, The Blaze,
Townhall, The Daily Wire, PragerU, LifeNews, Project Veritas, Judicial Watch, The Resurgent,
Breitbart, the Media Research Center, and CNSNews" somehow disappeared from the Google search
engine.
https://thefederalist.com/2020/07/29/google-ceo-dodges-question-on-blacklisting-of-conservative-websites/
Cancel culture, I suggest, matters most when our ability to access diverse opinion is
curtailed as a result of speech policing, either by algorithms or individuals, especially in
the run-up to an election. Self-censorship in universities is equally important. When Chomsky
signed the Harper's letter, he reported he receive a great many letters of support from
academics terrified of being cancelled.
When punishment for voicing dissenting opinion includes physical assault it doesn't much
matter how rare the actual instances of physical violence are. I spoke with an American
colleague employed this week who stated that any dating which is going on among staff and
adults of one kind or another on campus is done in secrecy, if at all. Do Democrats feel that
they're better off having thrown Al Franken under the bus?
Adhering to speech codes and surrendering to a tiny, highly vocal mob seems a very bad
idea to me, and I suspect, many, many others. We don't quite know what to do with the
screaming adolescents of varying ages, but we wish they'd stop yelling.
The good news is that we live in societies, for the most part, which permit the upset to
act out freely. I wonder whether the folks currently trying to burn down the US federal
courthouse in Portland believe their rights to privacy must be respected? The
double-standards on display roil what should be reasonable debate. It should be possible to
disagree civilly with anyone.
Trying to get someone fired, or shunned, for any reason, is about the saddest waste of
energy and time I can imagine – I mean, talk about a poverty of imagination. It's
happened to me here on occasion. When the pitchforks come out, I know my opponents 'got
nothing.' That's small solace, however, when watching those I'd prefer to respect do their
best to stifle debate.
Relative to other nations, we enjoy liberties others can only dream of. These liberties
are worth protecting. I'm not sure we're doing such a good job.
With all due respect, you – like the great majority of people – fail to
understand the dynamics involved. 'Cultural Marxism' isn't political Marxism. It is a method
– a tool if you wish – used by the oligarchs who wield true power to 'divide and
rule' (not least by deflecting attention from the yawning gulf that lies between their own
excesses and monstrous wealth on the one hand, and the increasing indigence of the great mass
of people on the other). It is called 'Cultural Marxism' purely because it uses Marx's
technique of dividing society into a small clique of 'oppressors' and 'the masses' who are
'oppressed'. Marx, of course, had the capitalists in mind when he wrote of the oppressors,
and the proletariat naturally were the oppressed.
Today, the last thing the oligarchs desire is a unified and organised proletariat with
'agency': that would constitute a serious threat to their existence. Instead, they divide the
sacred role of 'the oppressed' into a multitude of more or less fissiparous groups, whom we
are all aware of, but of which those comprising 'BAME' are perhaps the most useful. Others
include feminists (more or less all young women in today's world), homos, those suffering
from sexual dysphoria (that's 'trannies' in today's 'Newspeak') and the disabled.
These groups will never discover any common ground between themselves, and thus will fight
among themselves for the scraps thrown from the oligarchs' table. No danger there, and that's
just how they planned it. As for the 'oppressors', there are no prizes for guessing that they
are White, heterosexual (i.e. normal) males.
So much for your fear of actual Marxism. As for 'the government', it is important to
understand that no government in today's West is invested with any meaningful power. Not only
are they not 'sovereign' but they are little more than puppets, dancing to their masters'
dismal tunes.
Who are these oligarchs – these Masters of the Universe? That's a story for another
day. But you won't go far wrong if you place the word 'oligarchs' in triple parentheses
@71 psychohistorian - "Do they understand the West is top/bottom and not
left/right?"
That's an excellent formulation. One almost suspects that asking anyone, within a bit of
context, if "the banker" is a left/right entity or a top/down entity would get the same
answer. How to explore and expand this potential common ground?
I have no answers, but it would be instructive to devise the way to ask this group, or any
group - and every group - that question, and then to offer the formulation as you put it, in
a way that makes sense to them, so that they understand where the true enemy is.
In other words, what you're asking seems to be the key to abandoning lateral struggles
within the oppressed class and healing all rifts to create solidarity against the oppressor -
switching from a horizontal struggle to a vertical one.
Such a simple thing, and the source of all revolutionary success, but could it be simply
conveyed?
How this can be done, and who can move such things forward, I don't know but I do know
that the effort to make things ever more clear is never wasted effort, and this is one key
part of the puzzle.
@71 psychohistorian - "Do they understand the West is top/bottom and not left/right?"
I'd say intuitively they do have some understanding of that, but in general aren't
economically/politically savvy/educated enough to frame it that way.
There seems to be a basic belief that the contradictions in our crony and corrupt
capitalist system are what is driving the inevitable collapse, and least amongst a
segment...it is a pretty diverse group.
The "Kulak Operation" and the targeting of national minorities were the
main components of the Great Terror. Together these two actions accounted for nine-tenths of
the death sentences and three-fourths of Gulag prison camp sentences. Of the operations
against national minorities, the Polish Operation of the NKVD
was the largest one, second only to the "Kulak Operation" in terms of number of victims.
According to historian Timothy Snyder , ethnic Poles constituted
the largest group of victims in the Great Terror, comprising less than 0.5% of the country's
population but comprising 12.5% of those executed. [9]
In the Western world, Robert Conquest 's 1968 book The Great Terror
popularized the phrase. Conquest's title itself was an allusion to the period from the French Revolution known as the
Reign of Terror
(French: la Terreur , 'the Terror'; from June to July 1794: la Grande Terreur ,
'the Great Terror'). [10] While
Norman Naimark
deemed Stalin's 1930s Polish policy " genocidal ," he did not consider the entire Great
Purge genocidal because it also targeted political opponents. [11]
An important problem is the conflation of public opprobrium actual sanctions like being
fired. This is mainly a problem in the US because of employment at will
No. The cancel culture is just a new incarnation of the old idea of religious and
pseudo-religious (aka Marxist or Maoist) "purges". A new flavor of inquisition so to speak.
The key idea here is the elimination of opposition for a particular Messianic movement, and
securing all the positions that can influence public opinion. As well as protection of own
(often dominant) position in the structure of political power (this was the idea behind Mao
"cultural revolution")
You probably can benefit from studying the mechanic of Stalin purges. Mechanisms are the
pretty similar ("History repeats ", etc) .
If opposition to the new brand of Messianism is suppressed under the smoke screen of
political correctness, the question arise how this is different from Stalinist ideas of
"Intensification of the class struggle under socialism" and Mao Red Guards excesses (see
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intensification_of_the_class_struggle_under_socialism
)
You can probably start with "Policing Stalin's Socialism: Repression and Social Order in the
Soviet Union, 1924-1953 (Yale-Hoover Series on Authoritarian Regimes)"
A new book which waits for its author can be similarly titled "Policing US neoliberalism :
Repression and Social Order in the USA 1980-2020") ;-)
Here is one thought-provoking comment from the Web:
GeeBee, August 1, 2020 at 7:42 am GMT
The government will eventually be Marxist
With all due respect, you – like the great majority of people – fail to
understand the dynamics involved. 'Cultural Marxism' isn't political Marxism. It is a method
– a tool if you wish – used by the oligarchs who wield true power to 'divide and
rule' (not least by deflecting attention from the yawning gulf that lies between their own
excesses and monstrous wealth on the one hand, and the increasing indigence of the great mass
of people on the other).
It is called 'Cultural Marxism' purely because it uses Marx's technique of dividing
society into a small clique of 'oppressors' and 'the masses' who are 'oppressed'. Marx, of
course, had the capitalists in mind when he wrote of the oppressors, and the proletariat
naturally were the oppressed.
Today, the last thing the oligarchs desire is a unified and organised proletariat with
'agency': that would constitute a serious threat to their existence. Instead, they divide the
sacred role of 'the oppressed' into a multitude of more or less fissiparous groups, whom we
are all aware of, but of which those comprising 'BAME' are perhaps the most useful. Others
include feminists (more or less all young women in today's world), homos, those suffering
from sexual dysphoria (that's 'trannies' in today's 'Newspeak') and the disabled.
These groups will never discover any common ground between themselves, and thus will fight
among themselves for the scraps thrown from the oligarchs' table. No danger there, and that's
just how they planned it. As for the 'oppressors', there are no prizes for guessing that they
are White, heterosexual (i.e. normal) males.
So much for your fear of actual Marxism. As for 'the government', it is important to
understand that no government in today's West is invested with any meaningful power.
Not only are they not 'sovereign' but they are little more than puppets, dancing to their
masters' dismal tunes.
Who are these oligarchs – these Masters of the Universe? That's a story for another
day. But you won't go far wrong if you place the word 'oligarchs' in triple parentheses
Where will America's productivity miracle come from?
Public education is not teaching students what they need to know to compete in the global
economy.
According to the National Center for Education Statistics, math scores of U.S. students rank
30th in the world. The East Asian peers of today's American students will eat their lunch in
the growth industries of tomorrow.
Here's where Black Lives Matter has a real opportunity.
The protests. The riots. The calls for reparation payments. Social justice wealth transfers.
White privilege taxes. All the nonsense. Where's the strategy? Where's the long-range
'strategery'?
No doubt, those selling BLM T-shirts in Walmart parking lots are exercising gumption. But
it's not gonna cut it. Moreover, like bingo winnings, reparation payments will be quickly
squandered while the unhappiness remains.
And as far as we can tell the BLM movement is empty of ideas and without
direction.
lay_arrow
chubbar , 14 minutes ago
"If BLM was strategic"?????? Holy ****, if they were strategic they'd be making damn sure
that testing, like SAT scores, were no longer accepted as proof of accomplishment or
learning. Oh, wait?.......
Let's all agree, blacks don't want a "head to head" test, EVER.
I don't give a crap what they say, they don't want to be judged on MERIT, they love the
skin color test. That way they can always claim racism instead of ability.
libtears , 40 minutes ago
The BLM Movement is definitely empty of ideas and clear leadership. Their supposed goals
are all over the map from day to day. They are rudderless mobs of filthy vagrants and
criminal elements make up most of their movement.
What's going on which is credited to BLM has nothing to do with black people for the most
part. Commies have co-opted this movement and are engaging in anarchy to take down the system
of government. They will do whatever they want at all costs because they believe they have
the moral high ground. They are radicals just like people call them.
The best thing that could happen is for these loser mayors and governors to enforce the
law against these mobs of filthy scum.
How can you even reason with a mob of idiots that don't even have one, if not a hierarchy
of leadership and clear goals that they agree upon?
These people are taking a page out of the Bolshevik book on revolution. And they're much
weaker than the Bolsheviks, mentally and physically. One good thump on the head and these
b!tches are crying.
The longer the public allows teaching institutions to promote BLM the worse this sh!t is
going to get.
...
JaxPavan , 42 minutes ago
The Ford Foundation gave BLM $100 million to engage in terrorism. Who do you think bought
all those ultra high end looting vehicles?
quanttech , 39 minutes ago
Indeed, the BLM organization is primarily funded by mostly white-run corporations and
foundations. The money rules.
HopefulCynical , 22 minutes ago
And WHO is in control of the Ford Foundtion? WHO?!
Board of Trustees - Ford
Foundation -- most are Wall Street types. So participation in color revolutions including
Russiagate (of which American Maidan is the third stage) and high level of influence of
intelligence agencies on decisions and financing is a natural thing. The board includes such
interesting figures as Chief Investment Officer and Vice President for Investments, The
Rockefeller University and Chairman and CEO, Cisco Systems. Foundation is a strong supporter of
LGBT+
Summary of eRumor:
The Ford Foundation has pledged $100 million in support to Black Lives Matter, leading to calls
for a boycott of Ford.
The Truth:
It's true that the Ford Foundation has pledged $100 million to the Black-Led Movement Fund
(BLMF), a coalition of social justice organizations endorsed by Black Lives Matter.
But the Ford Foundation hasn't been connected to the Ford Motor Company for more than 40
years.
First, we'll start out by providing some background about Black Lives Matter, BLMF and the
Movement for Black Lives since the connections between these organizing and fundraising
networks can be confusing.
In July 2016, the Ford Foundation
announced that it would partner with Borealis Philanthropy, Movement Strategy Center and
Benedict Consulting to found BLMF. In turn, BLMF will serve as a donor network supporting the
Movement for Black Lives
, a social justice movement endorsed by Black Lives Matter, according to a foundation blog
post:
The Movement for Black Lives has created an opportunity for philanthropy to see and learn
from new and dynamic forms of social justice leadership and infrastructure. To support and fund
this thriving movement, philanthropy itself has had to adapt. Meanwhile, leaders have kept
donors' good intentions in check with candid reminders of how philanthropy can hurt a movement,
as well as how it can help. Listening and learning is central to Ford's approach, as we strive
to be a thoughtful, effective social justice funder at this critical time.By partnering with
Borealis Philanthropy, Movement Strategy Center, and Benedict Consulting to found the Black-Led
Movement Fund, Ford has made six-year investments in the organizations and networks that
compose the Movement for Black Lives.
The Black-Led Movement Fund (BLMF), led by Borealis Philanthropy, is a collaborative and
pooled donor fund established by the Ford Foundation and Anonymous Donors. In partnership with
donors and activists, the BLMF aims to support philanthropic and field-building activities that
strengthen the next generation of social justice leaders. Specifically, the collaborative
effort supports the infrastructure, innovation and dynamism of intersectional Black-led
organizing that have become integral components of what many call the Movement for Black Lives
(M4BL).
Rumors about the Ford Foundation pledging more than $100 million to Black Lives Matter went
viral after the announcement. The Washington Times
reported that Black Lives matter had cashed in with the Ford Foundation's donation -- and,
aside from (falsely) implying that Black Lives Matter would receive the entire $100 million
donation, the report was factually correct. But, as similar reports spread across social media
and conservative news sites, details started getting fuzzy. Freedom Daily, a right-wing
website, demonstrates how that happened in a post
calling for a Ford boycott that was shared nearly 30,000 times on social media within a
week that begins:
Ford just donated $100 million dollars to Black Lives Matter.
The Washington Post reported: street uprising, Black Lives Matter is increasingly
awash in cash, raking in pledges of more than $100 million from liberal foundations and others
eager to contribute to what has become the grant-making cause du jour.
This story (and calls for Ford boycotts that followed it) made three critical errors: it
confused the Washington Post with the Washington Times , it confused the Ford
Motor Company with the Ford Foundation, and it confused the Black-Led Movement Fund with Black
Lives Matter.
In reality, the Ford Motor Company and the Ford Foundation are completely separate
organizations since the 1970s. Henry Ford's son, Edsel, started the Ford Foundation in 1936 with
an initial gift of $25,000. The foundation took in huge bequests from Henry and Edsel's estates
upon their deaths in the 1940s and grew to become the biggest philanthropy in the world at the
time.
Edsel's son, Henry Ford II, was involved in the Ford Foundation up until 1976, but the
foundation began selling off Ford stocks in the 1950s and moved its headquarters from Dearborn,
Michigan, to New York City in the 1960s. Ford II resigned over the foundation's " march to the
left " in 1976, and no Ford family member has served on the board of trustees since. Today,
the Ford Motor Company has a separate nonprofit arm, the Ford Fund , and is in no
way connected to the Ford Foundation.
In the end, the Ford Foundation and the Ford Motor Company are completely separate
organizations. And the Ford Foundation pledged $100 million to the Black-Led Movement Fund,
which is not the same thing as Black Lives Matter. That's why we're calling this one truth and
fiction.
"Cancel culture" has recently been in the news as a threat to free speech and open debate,
most notably with the publication the other week of that open letter in Harpers. Cancelling is
essentially a kind of crowdsourced attempt to boycott and ostracise individuals for their words
or actions, sometimes including calls for them they be fired from their jobs or denied
contracts and opportunities by media organisations.
In the democratic space of social media this can sometimes tip over into unpleasant mobbing
and sometimes bullying. But is "cancelling" people always wrong? Is the practice always an
attack on the norms of free speech and open debate? Might cancelling some people be necessary
to ensure others get the voice and platform to which they are entitled?
One objection to "cancellation" is that it chills open debate and makes people
self-censor.
casmilus 07.30.20 at 7:19 am (no link)
Discrediting and marginalisation already occurred – just look at how David Irving's
status changed over the decades (notoriously, the early book about Dresden is cited in
"Slaughterhouse 5"). So we've simply accelerated the process in the digital age.
My contrarian take is that "the campus Left" actually had more power in the
70s/80s. In a world with no internet and limited independent publishing and distribution,
public meetings were the route to disseminate new ideas, so no-platforming and picketing
could have an effect. Look at "The History Man" (the 1981 BBC TV adaptation) for a portrayal
of what it was like; all that "soft power" is forgotten because of course Thatcher and Reagan
won the grown-up elections. Also note that that was a world where the university as an
institution had much less to fear from individual students who might feel discriminated
against. In comparison, no one can actually suppress ideas nowadays and even banning books
from the libraries leaves them available in the virtual library of websites.
The reality also is that "cancelled" authors acquire new readerships and can move into
different circles. Ex-lefties have been doing that since the 1930s: Freida Utley, Eugebe
Lyons, James Burnham and of course Whittaker Chambers fell-out and immediately fell-in to
bigger audiences.
chrisare 07.30.20 at 9:20 am (no link)
I found this piece unconvincing.
"People can have their voices amplified or silenced by their wealth, connections or
prestige but also by other speech which aims to deny them the right to participate on equal
terms with others."
It's unclear if this refers to those at the receiving end of speech the author wants to
prevent or the speaker deserving of canceling.
"As Jeremy Waldron has argued in his book The Harm in Hate Speech, racist speech aims not
just at hurting the feelings of its victims or expressing a view but at reconstituting the
public arena of democratic debate and argument so that some people are not seen as forming a
proper part of it."
It is very dubious that most slurs "aim" to "reconstitute the public arena of democratic
debate and argument so that some people are not seen as forming a proper part of it." Do you
have any support for this theory?
"It says that those people are not a part of "us" and that their opinions and arguments
have no place as we decide where our country should go."
It's not clear how a racial slur "says" any of this. Perhaps the author is reading
subtext?
"Racist speech by some also legitimizes and emboldens racist speech and opinion by others,
telling bigots that they are not alone, that others think as they do, and strengthens an
ideal of exclusive community based on ethnic or racial lines."
On this point it's worth quoting Henry Louis Gates Jr: "Why would you entrust authority
with enlarged powers of regulating the speech of unpopular minorities unless you were
confident that unpopular minorities would be racists, not blacks?"
"Anti-racist speech, has the opposite effect, it affirms a view that those targeted by the
racists, be they black, or Asian, or Muslim, are full members of the democratic political
community in good standing with as good a right to a say as anyone.
"It also reinforces a social norm about what may not be said, telling those who are
tempted to stigmatize migrants or minorities that they will pay a price for doing so."
It also creates a precedent for excluding views by shaming based on current sentiment.
Only someone oblivious to history wouldn't see the danger in that precedent.
"The role that speech plays in defining who is and isn't included in our vision of
democratic community can have powerful real-world consequence."
Who to include as part of your community is an important issue that should be discussed
openly by all of society. What you're trying to do is to elevate advance your position
without having to defend it.
"One way to understand the ease with which the victims of the Windrush scandal could lose
their jobs, their homes, their liberty or be deported to far-away countries, is that in the
public imaginary that is partly constituted by speech, many people did not see them as proper
members with equal standing to others."
Were we to do away with everything that had a downside we would have very little good.
Therefore arguing that something has potential downsides is not sufficient to establish that
it's not good. Can you argue that free expression and debate by citizenry on the most
important issues facing a democratic nation is not good, besides by arguing that there might
be some cost?
"Racist speech is just one example that makes clear how the practice of open discussion
isn't simply a matter of unfettered conversation among people who are already present but
also involves choices about who gets to speak and involves sensitivity to the way that speech
by some has the effect either of depriving others of a voice or of making it impossible for
others to hear what they say. A society which is full of highly sexualized messages about
women is also a society in which it is harder for women to get a hearing about sexual
violence and income inequality. A society where trans people are the objects of constant
ridicule, or are represented as dangerous, is one in which it is also more difficult for them
to argue for their rights and have their interests taken seriously."
This implies that the intolerant are the powerful group capable of suppressing minorities
with their speech alone. This is disproven by the very fact that anti-racist etc speech is so
successful. The success of antiracist codes of social conduct is because the group exercising
them is the powerful group. This very fact implies their obsolesce.
"Much of the pushback against cancel culture has come from prominent journalists and
intellectuals who perceive every negative reaction from ordinary people on social media as an
affront. Ironically, while being quick to take offence themselves they demand that those less
powerful than they are should toughen up and not be such "snowflakes"."
This is an uninformed or dishonest characterization of the pushback against cancel
culture. The pushback is due to intolerant enforcement of ideological conformity and
homogeneity through threat to job and reputation. And no this is not only ideological
conformity in that you can't say overtly racist things; it's ideological conformity in that
you can't criticize BLM or cite scientific literature on biological differences between the
sexes without risk.
"But if we take seriously the idea that speech can silence speech or make it unhearable,
then a concern with whether the heckling of cancel culture makes it harder to say some things
also has to take account of the fact that saying those very things can make it harder for
other voices to be heard."
This piece hasn't given any reason to make us take seriously the idea that speech against
one group can silence another, other then through threat to livelihood or reputation. It's
not clear though how for example referencing scientific but currently unpopular claims,
criticizing a social movement, having a narrower view on who should be considered a citizen
or even using a slur silences people.
An important problem is the conflation of public opprobrium actual sanctions like being
fired. This is mainly a problem in the US because of employment at will. In most countries,
unfair dismissal laws would protect people being sacked because of their political views,
unless they related directly to job performance. https://crookedtimber.org/2018/03/04/free-speech-unfair-dismissal-and-unions/
But the fact that the same example (David Shor) is cited every time the issue is raised
suggests that losing your job for breaching left orthodoxy not a major problem in the US, or
at least that other possible examples are much less sympathetic (racists fired from Fox, for
example).
Mostly, AFAICT, being cancelled means having to read rude things said about you by lots of
unimportant people on Twitter, as opposed to engaging in caustic, but civilised, debate with
your peers in the pages of little magazines.
Feelings don't care about facts. The mass hysteria that's gripped
the Western world after the death of George Floyd can't be explained in rational terms. Police
are shooting fewer
unarmed black men each year, and most of the shootings are justified. Police are more likely to
shoot a
non-threatening white than a non-threatening black. In the Floyd case specifically, there's
nothing
that shows racial bias by police officers, and Floyd was on drugs and resisting
arrest . Minneapolis police procedure
allowed neck pressure in some circumstances. Former police officer Derek Chauvin's conduct
wasn't extraordinary. But the facts are almost irrelevant. We're dealing with faith ,
religious ecstasy. We're in the midst of BLMania.
Collective frenzies aren't new. Almost every American knows about the Salem witch trials,
during which Christians claimed they saw demons and devils. Evil had to be rooted out, whatever
the cost. Arthur Miller's fictional re-telling in The Crucible , originally meant to
criticize McCarthyism, now reads like a satire of SJWs .
In 1536, Anabaptists took over Münster, Germany, and tried to establish a divine
kingdom. Would-be prophet Jan Matthys cannot have been a charlatan; he must have believed he
was chosen by God, because he rode out almost by himself to attack a besieging army. He was
instantly killed, but that didn't shake the faith of his followers. In 1917, hundreds of people
in Fátima, Portugal, claimed they saw the sun dance in the sky. The Catholic Church,
which often debunks alleged visions and miracles, declared this "worthy of belief."
Still, because of the doctrine of Original Sin and man's fallen nature, Christians are
reminded not to " immanentize the eschaton " and
seek heaven on earth. If Christians are delusional, can go only so far. "Secular" movements
have no such restraints. During the last century, tens of millions were butchered in Russia,
China, Cambodia, and other places in the name of the Brotherhood of Man, with the
revolutionaries often creating cults of personality to replace older faiths and heroes. The
Revolutionary Communist Party, which can be found
burning American flags around the country, has its own cult of personality
around leader Bob Avakian .
During the French Revolution, a "Cult of Reason" was established, with Robespierre as high
priest. Busts of the assassinated revolutionary Jean-Paul Marat replaced crucifixes in some
churches. During the Spanish Civil War, anarchists burned churches, shot at statues of Jesus,
murdered clergy, and desecrated the dead to pave the way for a new order. The Communards
executed Archbishop Georges Darboy during the Paris Commune and destroyed the original
Vendôme Column because it glorified empire. The famous French protests of May 1968, which
strongly influenced the current intellectual climate, had a utopian, religious flavor. Would-be
revolutionaries destroyed property as they spray-painted the following slogans:
Ann Coulter analyzed mobs in her 2011 book Demonic . She heavily cited Gustave Le
Bon's famous 1895 book The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind . Miss Coulter said a
mob is "an irrational, childlike, often violent organism that derives its energy from the
group" and is "intoxicated by messianic goals." One chapter is called "Imaginary Violence From
the Right Vs. Actual Violence From The Left." This is especially prescient. CHAZ/CHOP
"security" in Seattle
murdered a black teenager and wounded another because they thought right-wing
paramilitaries would attack any second (no one has been arrested for these shootings). As
cities burn, NBC
reports that "an expert" thinks the real threat is "far right" violence.
The "messianic goal" Miss Coulter wrote of is human equality. The premise is that if
existing social institutions are removed, a natural and authentic human equality will emerge.
Even the past must be destroyed to make this possible. The French Revolution remade the
calendar, with 1792 as Year Zero. All culture and history from the past was irrelevant because
everything was to be built anew. Rousseau famously wrote that "man is born free and everywhere
is in chains." This comes from assuming that man is a blank slate and that people are born
equal. If there is inequality, it can only be because of unjust institutions or exploitative
social forces.
Who is the boogeyman? Many once believed it was the Church: Voltaire's "
infâme ." Some blamed kings; Jefferson's post-revolutionary writings show
paranoia about "monarchial" tendencies. Many believe capitalism is the enemy, but I'd argue
that most progressives today believe the fundamental problem is "whiteness."
What is whiteness? Psychology Today says
it's "an unfairly privileged exclusionary category, based on physical features, most notably a
lack of melanin." Many others who study "whiteness" say something similar. Whiteness is a
social construct used to justify domination, slavery, and economic exploitation today.
There are three obvious objections to this.
This
is clearly not true . Third, it assumes that those with power use white racism to
exercise privilege. However, almost every powerful corporation openly supports Black Lives
Matter and opposes white racial consciousness. Though "whiteness as property" is a common
theme in "whiteness studies," there are benefits
to being labeled non-white, which is why some whites fake their racial identity and some
groups
organize politically so the government won't call them white.
"Whiteness" has become the explanation for all "the evils of the modern world."
Critical race theorists are right to say that "whiteness" is socially constructed; what they
fail to understand is that they created its modern meaning.
Most race realists, Identitarians, and white advocates know Susan Sontag's quote that the
"white race is the cancer of human history." She also said America, which is "the culmination
of Western white civilization," is guilty of causing global suffering. The full context is even
more revealing: "The truth is that Mozart, Pascal, Boolean algebra, Shakespeare, parliamentary
government, baroque churches, Newton, the emancipation of women, Kant, Marx, Balanchine
ballets, et al., don't redeem what this particular civilization has wrought upon the
world."
In this sentence, she concedes three things that would be politically incorrect today.
First, Western
civilization is white civilization . Second, despite the pathetic claims of
some
journalists and academics , Sontag recognized that white civilization isn't simply built on
domination of non-whites, and that it has produced things of great value. Third, Sontag admits
that some (if not all) progressive accomplishments such as "the emancipation of women" are
products of "this particular civilization." "Morgoth's Review" made this same point , noting that when
progressives try to destroy "whiteness," they are dynamiting the foundations of their own
liberal, universal worldview.
However, Sontag still thought white civilization was irredeemable because it "eradicates
autonomous civilizations wherever it spreads" and threatens the planet. Whiteness wasn't cancer
just because it was bad. Sontag meant that whiteness, like cancer, grows, metastasizes, and
consumes. It never seemed to occur to Sontag that this universalizing, homogenizing force
"eradicated" authentic European cultures too. If "Western culture" is Netflix, Amazon, and
Hollywood, I'm with the Third World anti-imperialists.
Still, at least Sontag recognized that whites had a real culture, at least in the past. Her
intellectual successors are worse. They accepted her view the whiteness is cancer while denying
any value to our culture and our standards. Instead, " Whiteness
Studies " and "Critical Race Theory" criticize "white" civilization because of its
standards. The National Museum of African American History and Culture identifies objective,
rational linear thinking, cause and effect relationships, and hard work to be "whiteness" and
therefore "racist." Everything can therefore be "racist" or in need of
"decolonization," including math ,
grammar ,
grades , SAT and
ACT tests ,
bar exams , and
artificial intelligence .
This ends in denying truth itself. Claire Lehmann found a slide at an education
conference in Washington that said that "if you conclude that outcomes differences [sic] by
demographic subgroup are a result of anything other than a broken system, that is, by
definition, bigotry." Actually, bigotry is "obstinate or intolerant
devotion to one's own opinions and prejudices." We've now come full circle, and define bigotry
as not being bound by opinions and prejudices. The way many academics and journalists
talk about whiteness is worse than anything Susan Sontag said.
This is the thinking of a fanatic religious sect, like the one Jim Jones
led . "We were too good for this world," Jones said before the infamous mass suicide. While
progressives haven't yet gone that far, they clearly enjoy the feeling of "woke" moral
righteousness, which has replaced the sense of being "elect" that some Protestant sects once provided .
Much as the French revolutionaries replaced saints with Jacobins during the Terror, today's
woke disciples are creating their own saints, with "Big George" Floyd taking the place of
Christ. Insufficient adulation for Floyd cost
one priest his job. BLMania is even consuming the churches themselves.
Black Lives Matter is more sacred than the American flag or Christ.
Federal agents , police , military ,
athletes , politicians , and many others
all genuflect before BLM. Many would never bow before God. This new, powerful faith even has a
liturgical
calendar and a hymn built on a sacred myth.
Worse, because this creed is impervious to truth, it must always seek new scapegoats (or
devils) for egalitarianism's continuing failure. Despite the constant funding, programs, and
repression, equality never arrives. The late Lawrence Auster's " First Law of Majority/Minority Relations In
Liberal Society " holds that "the more egregiously any non-Western or non-white group
behaves, the more evil whites are made to appear for noticing and drawing rational conclusions
about that group's bad behavior." Likewise, the more blacks fail, the more fictional portrayals
of black superiority must be created, from Black
Panther to
Black Is King . And the more whites give, the more fiercely they must be accused of
bigotry for wanting good
schools ,
classical music , or even
video games left alone.
The egalitarian revolution is a Permanent Revolution. BLMania will constantly devour its
children . It will continue until it is stopped by superior power. Even Robin DiAngelo,
author of White Fragility and high priestess of the Anti-Racist
Church of the Damned , is no longer pure enough.
The late Noel Ignatiev , editor of
Race Traitor , famously said that "treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity."
However, he said that this wasn't a call to violence against whites. "When we say we want to
abolish the white race, we do not mean we want to exterminate people with fair skin," he
said . "We
mean that we want to do away with the social meaning of skin color, thereby abolishing the
white race as a social category." I question this. If I cited Shlomo Sand's
The Invention of the Jewish People to deconstruct Jewish identity, religious claims,
and Israel, one might rightly suspect I had an anti-Jewish motive.
Still, let's assume Ignatiev was sincere. Could we "abolish the social meaning of skin
color" today? Skin color is more important as a social category than at any other time in
decades. Those with power may say whites are just a "social construct," but they have no
trouble telling who is white and who is not when it comes to affirmative action. The media view
almost all economic, political, and cultural issues through a racial lens. Indeed, with a
separate black
"national anthem ," graduation
ceremonies , and
separate events for non-whites , we're seeing the return of segregation. It may even be the
beginning of America's breakup along racial lines.
"Wokeness" holds that whites are racist no matter what we do. "White racism" is the new
original sin. Fighting one's own racism is a lifelong struggle -- one that ultimately can't be
won. "Whiteness" is also responsible for great evil. If all whites are racist and "whiteness"
is evil, isn't it best just to eliminate whites? Some whites may even want to join this racial
death drive, exhausted, ashamed, and despairing after decades of relentless anti-white propaganda . Even
those whites who don't want to surrender psychologically may see no hope, and become a "
defeated and despairing
race ," in Steve Sailer's words.
What can we call this death-cult? Some leftists, including Ignatiev, called for "abolishing"
the white race. It's tempting to call it " Abolitionism ." However, this word is
forever linked with (whites) ending slavery. Some leftists may eventually use the term,
but it will never catch on. Still, it is useful because of its vivid history. Many 19th century
abolitionists were not peaceful idealists but blood-crazed fanatics , who
cloaked their dreams of war and slaughter in apocalyptic, Biblical language. John Brown, whose
band began its infamous raid on Harpers Ferry by killing a free black man, is the primary
example.
The creed's violence, militancy, and destructiveness lead me to call it
Eradicationism. Like some Christian sects, whites who embrace it want collectively to abandon
the world, if not through suicide then by failing to reproduce. Instead of making the world
better "for ourselves and our posterity," they will expunge their blood guilt by ending their
line. White Saviors share a curious mix of self-hatred and self-exaltation, something we see
when white protesters post themselves indulging in BLMania online.
Eradicationism will be with us for some time. Regardless, our course is clear. Facts are
important, but statistics don't move mountains. Faith does. We must act with faith in victory , in
service to a great ideal. Our Western tradition tells us to do our duty to uphold
the cosmic order . This chaotic time will be an opportunity for racial rebirth. Steel
yourself against this death cult that has hijacked our civilization. Reject BLMania. We were
meant for something great. We shouldn't fear this time of struggle, which is demonstrating what
we've been warning of all along. We should welcome it. The American experiment in equality
couldn't have ended any other way.
Good summary of the points we are all familiar with by now.
"Whiteness" has become the explanation for all "the evils of the modern world."
If black people weren't so bad at practically everything, we wouldn't have to play this
game where everyone goes overboard to avoid talking about race realism, or scientific racism.
India encountered White Western Civilization, basically absorbed parts of it, and came out
the other side as the people they always were. Same with China. Same with Japan. Same with
Mexico. Etc. The Western World has also encountered other civilizations as the weaker party
to an extent, and likewise absorbed or fought back, and came out the other side still being
themselves. The Mongols and the Ottoman Turks, just to name a couple of examples, both
enslaved white people. We are not all sitting around moaning about it centuries later and
saying that's why we can read or do math. That realization forces people down a path where
they have to believe against all the evidence that there was something extremely different
about the way white people treated black people for them to turn out this way. And as a
corollary that there is something very different about white people that makes them uniquely
evil.
Or, alternatively, you could just think about your own actual experiences with real black
people you have met in life and notice that you generally have to talk to them like they are
special needs children and they are really really dumb and aggressive. And then it all makes
sense.
We are witnessing something extraordinary, the death of what some call 'liberal
progressivism' or what I prefer to call 'American atheistic humanism.' It's a hell of a thing
to watch. What's next is anybody's guess. It's going to get much worse before it gets better.
I'd like to share some of the things I do to maintain strength and sanity.
1 exercise and work out.
2 do not watch television.
3 associate with non-cucked Catholics and practice the Faith
4 read voraciously, especially the classics and lives of the saints.
5 flirt with women regularly (not the fat ones)
6 set aside resources for 'fallout.' If and when shit hits the fan I'm prepared for a long
winter.
This list could be a expanded. These are the big things I've integrated into my daily
life.
1. Exercise
2. Never watch television
3. Read books written before the "Woke" era and never any book written by a Jew, not even Ben
Shapiro. I always google the authors before I read anything.
4. Use bookmarks instead of search for the vast majority of the content you look at online.
Search is a tool Silicon Valley uses to "recommend" woke content.
Of course, these rules only apply in the current times of information warfare where
everyone is trying to demoralize you and subvert anything you think is valuable.
That civilization lasted for approximately 280 years, and disappeared without a trace
around 1400 AD.
As you walk around the ruins of an obviously civilized people, there is one question that
goes through everyone's mind.
What happened?
This was before there were settlers from Europe, and the land is empty for many miles
around so there are no obvious enemies anywhere to be found.
It is unlikely that an earthquake or flood or other natural event destroyed the
city–there seems to be no physical evidence to support that. Perhaps there was a long
dry period (since this is Arizona) but long enough to destroy the entire civilization?
Then there is the little voice in your head that says the most likely
explanation–"They must have destroyed themselves, probably based on some horrible
ideology or religious fervor."
Bottom line–insanity is toxic, and can destroy a civilization.
There is no arguing with insanity, there is no negotiating with insanity, there is no
solution for insanity.
Civilizations must have the will to remove the insane people from the territory before
they destroy it–or they will become just another forgotten ruin on the landscape.
The hatred for whiteness in America comes from 70 years of massive number of Jews who in
many parts of the country dominated public schools and universities in teaching and
leadership positions in academia.
Black person to white person: "your ancestors enslaved my ancestors"
White person to black person: "your ancestors along with the Arabs enslaved my ancestors
in the Ottoman Empire for over 400 years up until the 1800s"
White person to black person: "you have never been a slave and neither have I"
White person to black person: "all white majority nations have outlawed slavery, have
outlawed segregation, have enshrined equal rights into law, and have outlawed the taking of
land by force"
White person to black person: "many black majority nations have not outlawed slavery, have
not outlawed segregation, have not enshrined equal rights into law, and still take land by
force"
White person to black person: "man up like my ancestors did and go to Africa and free the
slaves, put your blood, sweat, and tears on the land and get it done like my ancestors
did"
White person to black person: "you can't blame white people for black criminality and for
black underperformance in society, most black people are not criminals and many black people
perform and overperform in society, so stop being racist towards white people and take
responsibility and build something"
The unemployed. Without hope and nothing to show for, members will do anything to proof
thy can. In history famous for doing the ting attacking the unarmed, on orders. Controlling
is their hidden desire. Makes them the ideal public servant. Handicapped only by lack of the
brain part called working IQ. In war of times of change, needed badly by ones who own a
little of that stuff wile steering the ship named state..
It seems some people(such as this author) are viewing the current situation through one
prism, and I think it has multiple causations.
1.Militarized police abuse of the general population is real – especially the
poor(soft targets). As incidents pile up, resistance grows.
2.Funding by various political entities are responsible for the political strengthening of
BLM and other groups as controlled opposition and used as divide and conquer tactics.
3.The progressive left is low hanging ripe fruit for the former, especially after the
election of Donald Trump.
4.An education system pumping out SJW's at an exponential rate.
5.Now just add poverty and depravity from a lockdown.
George Floyd or no George Floyd the current situation(or new religion) was just a matter
of time.
This anti-whiteness among Liberal whites reminds me of old Gnostic cults. They sought to
overcome the flesh to achieve heaven on earth. Some took it so far as to avoid reproduction.
I don't think any took it so far as to adopt the children of other races.
It is a privilege to read UNZ everyday. It is important for everyone who is kind at heart,
reading this article and others who are concerned about this actual insanity made sane, is
nothing more than a movement to draw foolish people, black, white and everyone else, to drink
just another flavor of Koolaid, into self-selecting their genetic discontinuation in the New
World. It is a sublime process supported by the powers that be – to thin the hierd.
Don't be alarmed by this. All shall pass. BLM is a part of the culling process – and
you may or may not be aware of it: opioids & legal & illegal drugs, obesity,
dumberism, political extremism on either side, China/Russia bashing, J bashing, and so on.
Stay sure-footed. Understand the motivations of the PTB, and truly understand WHY they must
take action for the good of the human race. It is only thru these operations, the wiser among
us can & must understand why the human herd must be culled. And if you have a problem
with that, please do stand first in line with the many lines & flavors of protesters,
refuseniks & freedom fighters. The New World will truly be a better place for better
human beings. Anyone who wants to get in to the New World & must first qualify with
kind-heartedness, a strong obligation responsibility to better oneself & the community in
which we live in. Forget all the political terms of democracy, freedom, liberty, capitalism,
& such. It will simply be a New World where people are healthy in mind, body & soul.
The crazies, psychopaths & criminals will not survive. It will be a much better world.
And, the Powers that be are creating every sort of selection process to sift thru humanity's
strata. If you are possibly fit for the New World, this comment will ring bells – and
all will be clear to you. If not, go ahead and disagree with me . G*d bless you – for
we will in time bow (or made to bow) to our Master(s). If you can't accept that, well, you're
not likely to make it, and neither will your progeny . Please discern.
@American
Citizen 2.0 rey.
BLM handlers know this and that is why it encourages ANTIFA and BLM to group together and at
the same time discourages for decades any attempt by whites to associate in leagues,
groupings, unions, sindicats etc. Look what hapenned to Proud Boys.
The second in which 100 whites joined together the ruling elite put the leaders in prison and
dismembered the white group.
United we surely stand, divided guaranteed to fall.
We must learn from the Jews – tribalism, fight for our kind no matter what.
They do not give a shit if you exercise, don't watch tv, read books etc. You are not a threat
to them.
A threat is 1000 sheep + one lion.
In the last year of his Presidency (2015) Barack Obama in an interview made the following
observation:
Obama: "What is also true is that the legacy of slavery, Jim Crow, discrimination in
almost every institution of our lives -- you know, that casts a long shadow. And that's still
part of our DNA that's passed on. We're not cured of it."
Interviewer: "Racism"
Obama: "Racism. We're not cured of it."
Few, if any of the cognoscenti who constantly lecture Americans 24×7 on the ubiquity
of "racism" and daily pounce on yet another politician or celebrity who breaks the strict
rules of "Diversity-Speak," bothered to decode the President's remarks so that the average
American might get a sense of what he was in for. They can be boiled down to: "Racism has
always been the defining feature of American life and will be far into the future." What
then, we might wonder, is the "cure," and who gets to say that it has been successful and the
patient is whole and released from treatment?
Obama chose the wrong metaphor. His view of race is better expressed in theological terms.
"Racism" is America's "original sin." It was, and still is, committed exclusively by white
people, and no matter what metaphor you care to use, consider it a permanent fixture of
American society. "We shall overcome someday." But, sorry Pal, not today. With sin comes
guilt, and white America now finds itself confronted with guilt, virtually unlimited
guilt.
@Miro23
motherland. Imperialism has been a long term disaster for the West.
Stupid white people – Yes, yes, people here blame the Jews but let's be honest here,
if it was the Jews who helped contribute, who happily lapsed it up and performed the dance?
The stupid white people! Had the stupid white people been more intelligent, they would have
put two and two together and stopped the madness along time ago. Instead they are worshipping
George Floyd.
Look, I'm no leftie liberal. I want white people to survive and prosper. But honestly, I
see alot of sins and ultimately stupidity at the white man's feet. I blame him more then
anyone else.
PS likbez@46 reminded me of a line from the movie Reds. Warren Beatty's John Reed spoke of
people who "though Karl Marx wrote a good antitrust law." This was not a favorable comment.
The confusion of socialism and what might be called populism is quite, quite old. Jack
London's The Iron Heel has its hero pointing out even before the Great (Class) War that the
normal operations of capitalism, concentration and centralization, destroyed the middle class
paradise of equal competition. It wasn't conspiracies.
likbez 07.29.20 at 3:30 pm
@steven t johnson 07.29.20 at 3:14 pm (51)
Jack London's The Iron Heel has its hero pointing out even before the Great (Class) War
that the normal operations of capitalism, concentration and centralization, destroyed the
middle class paradise of equal competition.
I think the size of the USA military budget by itself means the doom for the middle class,
even without referring to famous Jack London book (The Iron Heel is cited by George Orwell 's
biographer Michael Shelden as having influenced Orwell's most famous novel Nineteen
Eighty-Four.).
Wall Street and MIC (especially intelligence agencies ; Allen Dulles was a Wall Street
lawyer) are joined at the hip. And they both fully control MSM. As Jack London aptly said:
"The press of the United States? It is a parasitic growth that battens on the capitalist
class. Its function is to serve the established by moulding public opinion, and right well it
serves it." ― Jack London, The Iron Heel
Financial capitalism is bloodthirstily by definition as it needs new markets. It fuels wars.
In a sense, Bolton is the symbol of financial capitalism foreign policy.
It is important to understand that finance capitalism creates positive feedback loop in the
economy increasing instability of the system. So bubbles are immanent feature of finance
capitalism, not some exception or the result of excessive greed.
"... Color Revolution is the term used to describe a series of remarkably effective CIA-led regime change operations using techniques developed by the RAND Corporation, "democracy" NGOs and other groups since the 1980's. They were used in crude form to bring down the Polish communist regime in the late 1980s. From there the techniques were refined and used, along with heavy bribes, to topple the Gorbachev regime in the Soviet Union. For anyone who has studied those models closely, it is clear that the protests against police violence led by amorphous organizations with names like Black Lives Matter or Antifa are more than purely spontaneous moral outrage. Hundreds of thousands of young Americans are being used as a battering ram to not only topple a US President, but in the process, the very structures of the US Constitutional order. ..."
"... Alicia Garza of BLM is also a board member or executive of five different Freedom Road front groups including 2011 Board chair of Right to the City Alliance, Board member of School of Unity and Liberation (SOUL), of People Organized to Win Employment Rights (POWER), Forward Together and Special Projects director of National Domestic Workers Alliance. ..."
"... The Right to the City Alliance got $6.5 million between 2011 and 2014 from a number of very established tax-exempt foundations including the Ford Foundation ($1.9 million), from both of George Soros's major tax-exempts–Open Society Foundations, and the Foundation to Promote Open Society for $1.3 million. Also the cornflake-tied Kellogg Foundation $250,000, and curiously , Ben & Jerry's Foundation (ice cream) for $30,000. ..."
"... That front since 2009 received $1.3 million from the Ford Foundation, as well as $600,000 from the Soros foundations and again, Ben & Jerry's ($50,000). ..."
"... And Garza's SOUL, which claimed to have trained 712 "organizers" in 2014, when she co-founded Black Lives Matter, got $210,000 from the Rockefeller Foundation and another $255,000 from the Heinz Foundation (ketchup and John Kerry family) among others. ..."
"... Nigeria-born BLM co-founder Opal Tometi likewise comes from the network of FRSO. Tometi headed the FRSO's Black Alliance for Just Immigration. Curiously with a "staff" of two it got money from major foundations including the Kellogg Foundation for $75,000 and Soros foundations for $100,000, and, again, Ben & Jerry's ($10,000). Tometi got $60,000 in 2014 to direct the group . ..."
"... The BLMF identified itself as being created by top foundations including in addition to the Ford Foundation, the Kellogg Foundation and the Soros Open Society Foundations. They described their role: "The BLMF provides grants, movement building resources, and technical assistance to organizations working advance the leadership and vision of young, Black, queer, feminists and immigrant leaders who are shaping and leading a national conversation about criminalization, policing and race in America." ..."
"... Notably, when we click on the website of M4BL, under their donate button we learn that the donations will go to something called ActBlue Charities. ActBlue facilitates donations to "democrats and progressives." As of May 21, ActBlue had given $119 million to the campaign of Joe Biden. ..."
"... What is clear from only this account of the crucial role of big money foundations behind protest groups such as Black lives Matter is that there is a far more complex agenda driving the protests now destabilizing cities across America. ..."
"... The role of tax-exempt foundations tied to the fortunes of the greatest industrial and financial companies such as Rockefeller, Ford, Kellogg, Hewlett and Soros says that there is a far deeper and far more sinister agenda to current disturbances than spontaneous outrage would suggest. ..."
Color Revolution is the term used to describe a series of remarkably effective CIA-led
regime change operations using techniques developed by the RAND Corporation, "democracy" NGOs
and other groups since the 1980's. They were used in crude form to bring down the Polish
communist regime in the late 1980s. From there the techniques were refined and used, along with
heavy bribes, to topple the Gorbachev regime in the Soviet Union. For anyone who has studied
those models closely, it is clear that the protests against police violence led by amorphous
organizations with names like Black Lives Matter or Antifa are more than purely spontaneous
moral outrage. Hundreds of thousands of young Americans are being used as a battering ram to
not only topple a US President, but in the process, the very structures of the US
Constitutional order.
If we step back from the immediate issue of videos showing a white Minneapolis policeman
pressing his knee on the neck of a black man, George Floyd , and look at what has taken place
across the nation since then, it is clear that certain organizations or groups were
well-prepared to instrumentalize the horrific event for their own agenda.
The protests since May 25 have often begun peacefully only to be taken over by well-trained
violent actors. Two organizations have appeared regularly in connection with the violent
protests -- Black Lives Matter and Antifa (USA). Videos show well-equipped protesters dressed
uniformly in black and masked (not for coronavirus to be sure), vandalizing police cars,
burning police stations, smashing store windows with pipes or baseball bats. Use of Twitter and
other social media to coordinate "hit-and-run" swarming strikes of protest mobs is evident.
What has unfolded since the Minneapolis trigger event has been compared to the wave of
primarily black ghetto protest riots in 1968. I lived through those events in 1968 and what is
unfolding today is far different. It is better likened to the Yugoslav color revolution that
toppled Milosevic in 2000.
Gene Sharp: Template for Regime Overthrow
In the year 2000 the US State Department, aided by its National Endowment for Democracy
(NED) and select CIA operatives, began secretly training a group of Belgrade university
students led by a student group that was called Otpor! (Resistance!). The NED and its various
offshoots was created in the 1980's by CIA head Bill Casey as a covert CIA tool to overthrow
specific regimes around the world under the cover of a human rights NGO. In fact, they get
their money from Congress and from USAID.
In the Serb Otpor! destabilization of 2000, the NED and US Ambassador Richard Miles in
Belgrade selected and trained a group of several dozen students, led by Srđa Popović,
using the handbook, From Dictatorship to Democracy, translated to Serbian, of
the late Gene Sharp and his Albert Einstein Institution. In a post mortem on the Serb events,
the Washington Post wrote, "US-funded consultants played a crucial role behind the scenes in
virtually every facet of the anti-drive, running tracking polls, training thousands of
opposition activists and helping to organize a vitally important parallel vote count. US
taxpayers paid for 5,000 cans of spray paint
used by student activists to scrawl anti-Milošević graffiti on walls across
Serbia."
Trained squads of activists were deployed in protests to take over city blocks with the aid
of 'intelligence helmet' video screens that give them an instantaneous overview of their
environment. Bands of youth converging on targeted intersections in constant dialogue on cell
phones, would then overwhelm police. The US government spent some $41 million on the operation.
Student groups were secretly trained in the Sharp handbook techniques of staging protests that
mocked the authority of the ruling police, showing them to be clumsy and impotent against the
youthful protesters. Professionals from the CIA and US State Department guided them behind the
scenes.
The Color Revolution Otpor! model was refined and deployed in 2004 as the Ukraine Orange
Revolution with logo and color theme scarves, and in 2003 in Georgia as the Rose Revolution.
Later Secretary of State Hillary Clinton used the template to launch the Arab Spring. In all
cases the NED was involved
with other NGOs including the Soros Foundations.
After defeating Milosevic, Popovic went on to establish a global color revolution training
center, CANVAS, a kind of for-profit business consultancy for revolution, and was personally
present in New York working reportedly with Antifa during the Occupy Wall Street where also
Soros money was reported.
Antifa and BLM
The protests, riots, violent and non-violent actions sweeping across the United States since
May 25, including an assault on the gates of the White House, begin to make sense when we
understand the CIA's Color Revolution playbook.
The impact of the protests would not be possible were it not for a network of local and
state political officials inside the Democratic Party lending support to the protesters, even
to the point the Democrat Mayor of Seattle ordered police to abandon several blocks in the
heart of downtown to occupation by protesters.
In recent years major portions of the Democratic Party across the US have been quietly taken
over by what one could call radical left candidates. Often they win with active backing of
organizations such as Democratic Socialists of America or Freedom Road Socialist Organizations.
In the US House of Representatives the vocal quarter of new representatives around Alexandria
Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Rashida Tlaib and Minneapolis Representative Ilhan Omar are
all members or close to Democratic Socialists of America. Clearly without sympathetic
Democrat local officials in key cities, the street protests of organizations such as Black
Lives Matter and Antifa would not have such a dramatic impact.
To get a better grasp how serious the present protest movement is we should look at who has
been pouring millions into BLM. The Antifa is more difficult owing to its explicit anonymous
organization form. However, their online Handbook openly recommends that local Antifa "cells"
join up with BLM chapters.
FRSO: Follow the Money
BLM began in 2013 when three activist friends created the #BlackLivesMatter hashtag to
protest the allegations of shooting of an unarmed black teenager, Trayvon Martin by a white
Hispanic block watchman, George Zimmermann. Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors, and Opal Tometi
were all were connected with and financed by front groups tied to something called Freedom Road
Socialist Organization, one of the four largest radical left organizations in the United States
formed out of something called New Communist Movement that dissolved in the 1980s.
On June 12, 2020 the Freedom Road Socialist Organization webpage states, "The time is now to
join a revolutionary organization! Join Freedom Road Socialist Organization If you have been
out in the streets this past few weeks, the odds are good that you've been thinking about the
difference between the kind of change this system has to offer, and the kind of change this
country needs. Capitalism is a failed system that thrives on exploitation, inequality and
oppression. The reactionary and racist Trump administration has made the pandemic worse. The
unfolding economic crisis we are experiencing is the worst since the 1930s. Monopoly capitalism
is a dying system and we need to help finish it off. And that is exactly what Freedom Road
Socialist Organization is
working for ."
In short the protests over the alleged police killing of a black man in Minnesota are now
being used to call for a revolution against capitalism. FRSO is an umbrella for dozens of
amorphous groups including Black Lives Matter or BLM. What is interesting about the
self-described Marxist-Leninist roots of the Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO) is not
so much their left politics as much as their very establishment funding by a group of
well-endowed tax-exempt foundations.
Alicia Garza of BLM is also a board member or executive of five different Freedom Road front
groups including 2011 Board chair of Right to the City Alliance, Board member of School of
Unity and Liberation (SOUL), of People Organized to Win Employment Rights (POWER), Forward
Together and Special Projects director of National Domestic Workers Alliance.
The Right to the City Alliance got $6.5 million between 2011 and 2014 from a number of very
established tax-exempt foundations including the Ford Foundation ($1.9 million), from both of
George Soros's major tax-exempts–Open Society Foundations, and the Foundation to Promote
Open Society for $1.3 million. Also the cornflake-tied Kellogg Foundation $250,000, and
curiously , Ben
& Jerry's Foundation (ice cream) for $30,000.
Garza also got major foundation money as Executive Director of the FRSO front, POWER, where
Obama former "green jobs czar" Van Jones, a self-described "communist" and "rowdy black
nationalist," now with CNN, was on the board. Alicia Garza also chaired the Right to the City
Alliance, a network of activist groups opposing urban gentrification. That front since 2009
received $1.3 million from the Ford Foundation, as well as $600,000 from the Soros foundations
and again, Ben & Jerry's ($50,000).
And Garza's SOUL, which claimed to have trained 712
"organizers" in 2014, when she co-founded Black Lives Matter, got $210,000 from the Rockefeller
Foundation and another $255,000 from the Heinz Foundation (ketchup and John Kerry family) among
others. With the Forward Together of FRSO, Garza sat on the board of a "multi-racial
organization that works with community leaders and organizations to transform culture and
policy to catalyze social change." It officially got $4 million in 2014 revenues and from 2012
and 2014, the organization received a total of $2.9 million from Ford Foundation ($655,000) and
other major
foundations .
Nigeria-born BLM co-founder Opal Tometi likewise comes from the network of FRSO. Tometi
headed the FRSO's Black Alliance for Just Immigration. Curiously with a "staff" of two it got
money from major foundations including the Kellogg Foundation for $75,000 and Soros foundations
for $100,000, and, again, Ben & Jerry's ($10,000). Tometi got $60,000 in 2014 to direct the group .
The Freedom Road Socialist Organization that is now openly calling for a revolution against
capitalism in the wake of the Floyd George killing has another arm, The Advancement Project,
which describes itself as "a next generation, multi-racial civil rights organization." Its
board includes a former Obama US Department of Education Director of Community Outreach and a
former Bill Clinton Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights. The FRSO Advancement Project
in 2013 got millions from major US tax-exempt foundations including Ford
($8.5 million), Kellogg ($3 million), Hewlett Foundation of HP defense industry founder ($2.5
million), Rockefeller Foundation ($2.5 million), and Soros foundations ($8.6 million).
Major Money and ActBlue
By 2016, the presidential election year where Hillary Clinton was challenging Donald Trump,
Black Lives Matter had established itself as a well-organized network. That year the Ford
Foundation and Borealis Philanthropy announced the formation of the Black-Led Movement Fund
(BLMF), "a six-year pooled donor campaign aimed at raising $100 million for the Movement for
Black Lives coalition" in which BLM was a central part. By then Soros foundations had already
given some $33 million in
grants to the Black Lives Matter movement . This was serious foundation money.
The BLMF identified itself as being created by top foundations including in addition to the
Ford Foundation, the Kellogg Foundation and the Soros Open Society Foundations. They described
their role: "The BLMF provides grants, movement building resources, and technical assistance to
organizations working advance the leadership and vision of young, Black, queer, feminists and
immigrant leaders who are shaping and leading a national
conversation about criminalization, policing and race in America."
The Movement for Black Lives Coalition (M4BL) which includes Black Lives Matter, already in
2016 called for "defunding police departments, race-based reparations, voting rights for
illegal immigrants, fossil-fuel divestment, an end to private education and charter schools, a
universal basic income, and
free college for blacks ."
Notably, when we click on the website of M4BL, under their donate button we learn that the
donations will go to something called ActBlue Charities. ActBlue facilitates donations to
"democrats and progressives." As of May 21, ActBlue had given $119 million to the campaign
of Joe Biden.
That was before the May 25 BLM worldwide protests. Now major corporations such as Apple,
Disney, Nike and hundreds others may be pouring untold and unaccounted millions into ActBlue
under the name of Black Lives Matter, funds that in fact can go to fund the election of a
Democrat President Biden. Perhaps this is the real reason the Biden campaign has been so
confident of support from black voters.
What is clear from only this account of the crucial
role of big money foundations behind protest groups such as Black lives Matter is that there is
a far more complex agenda driving the protests now destabilizing cities across America.
The
role of tax-exempt foundations tied to the fortunes of the greatest industrial and financial
companies such as Rockefeller, Ford, Kellogg, Hewlett and Soros says that there is a far deeper
and far more sinister agenda to current disturbances than spontaneous outrage would
suggest.
***
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your
email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in
politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics,
exclusively for the online magazine "New
Eastern Outlook" where this article was originally published. He is a Research Associate of
the Centre for Research on Globalization.
Home / Articles / Culture
/ How LGBT Nonprofits And Their Billionaire Patrons Are Reshaping The World CULTUREHow LGBT
Nonprofits And Their Billionaire Patrons Are Reshaping The World
Transgender ideology is being pushed on us by corporate interests through their
philanthropic arms. (By
Ink Drop/Shutterstock)
In an August 2018
New Yorker article, Elizabeth Kolbert asks, "Are today's donor classes solving problems or
creating new ones?" Kolbert describes a form of charity that aims to not just help people but
to improve them. This "improvement" aligns with the giver's particular vision of what
constitutes improvement, of course. And the people who need to be improved are treated as
children -- for whom the donor, naturally, gets to decide what is best.
Kolbert describes how this form of giving becomes exploitation. We might add: not just
exploitation, but elite-driven, highly self-interested social engineering. We see these
characteristics on brilliant display in the philanthropy behind the modern LGBT movement.
The gay-rights movements and organizations that emerged during America's sexual revolution
in the 1960s bear little resemblance to the behemoth LGBT NGO juggernauts operating today. What
started out as grassroots support for the legal and social acceptance of same-sex relations has
turned into an effort at full-blown social transformation, with the addition of a fetish of
adult men, known as transsexualism, to the LGB human-rights rainbow banner. Along with the
rebranding of transsexualism as transgenderism, this movement has also successfully normalized
disorders of sexual development, otherwise known as intersex conditions. We have come a long
way from Stonewall.
Perhaps the most insidious idea to be advanced under the LGBT banner today is the amorphous
concept of "gender identity." Gender identity refers to the way people see themselves with
respect to socially constructed sex-role stereotypes. But is not just a descriptive
term; it is also prescriptive -- one has the right, according to advocates, to force
others to recognize one's chosen identity. And one has the right to change one's body medically
so that it better maps on to one's gender identity. Given that the pharmaceutical lobby is the
largest in Congress, and given that some of the most important philanthropists behind the
modern LGBT movement have close ties to Big Pharma, this medical component is important to
note.
"Gender identity" and "transgender" ideology emerged on the Western cultural landscape not
more than a decade ago, but they have spread across the globe with the speed and ferocity of
the SARS COVID pandemic -- and they have created nearly as much havoc. Yet the massive
concomitant changes we have already seen in language, law, medical and crime statistics,
women's safety
zones , sports
, accomplishments and
educational
opportunities , the medicalization of healthy children's bodies ,
and K–12
curricula have not been driven by grassroots enthusiasm. Quite the contrary. They have been
driven by the philanthropic funding provided by billionaires who are themselves invested in
this radical ideology's greatest beneficiaries: Big Pharma. Many of the most important
philanthropists behind the transgender and gender-identity movements stand to make huge profits
from body dissociation and the commoditization of human sex into medical identities.
Take
Martine Rothblatt , a self-described transsexual and transhumanist who was the first
individual to create a legal document supporting the idea that feelings of dissociation from
our sexed bodies is normal. This legal document, later to become the International Gender Bill of
Rights , legally normalizes body dissociation. Rothblatt later went on to become the top
earning CEO in the biopharmaceutical industry, using his money and influence to promote the
ideology and normalization of transgenderism. He believes that sexual dimorphism is morally
equivalent to South African apartheid and must be dismantled.
00:09 / 00:59 00:00 Next Video × Next Video
J.d. Vance Remarks On A New Direction For Pro-worker, Pro-family Conservatism, Tac Gala, 5-2019
Cancel Autoplay is paused
Jennifer Pritzker, along with his family, one of the wealthiest in the United States, has
poured huge sums of money into American institutions in order to advance the concept of body
dissociation under the euphemism of "gender identity." The Pritzker family has
made vast investments in the medical industrial complex.
In 2000, another billionaire, Jon Stryker, heir to a multi-billion-dollar medical
corporation, created another mammoth LGBT NGO, the Arcus Foundation. Stryker created such a
global goliath of philanthropic funding with the stocks from his medical corporation that he
had to create another organization to keep track of it all. In 2006 Arcus funded the creation
of MAP
, or Movement Advancement Project, to track the complex system of advocacy and funding that had
already developed as a way of insinuating gender identity and transgender ideology into the
culture.
Translation: A medical corporation with a vested interest in encouraging people to identify
as transgender is directly funneling money and assets to its philanthropic foundation so that
the foundation will do that encouraging on its behalf, thereby bringing more money and more
clients (for life) to that corporation.
Arcus has funneled millions into other philanthropy organizations, such as
Tides ,
Proteus and
Borealis . There is no way to track whether these organizations are using Arcus money for
the purpose of normalizing transgenderism, but one might surmise that the cause so dear to
Arcus's heart is not entirely ignored.
In 2015, together with the Novo Foundation, a philanthropic NGO run by Peter Buffet (son of
Warren, who helped launch the project with a
$90 million gift), Arcus
earmarked $20 million for transgender causes specifically. In 2018 Arcus funded the
Council For Global Equality , a
coalition of 30 U.S. groups advocating for inclusion of LGBT issues in foreign affairs and
development policies.
Whew. This is no small operation! And every Arcus grant is contingent upon the recipient's
affirmation of "diversity and inclusion policies" -- policies that, of course, very much
include the affirmation of gender-identity ideology and transgenderism.
Many more philanthropic actors are working to prop up the transgender and gender-identity
movements, including Tim Gill and his Gill Foundation and George Soros and his Open Society
Foundation. Like Martine Rothblatt, Jennifer Pritzker, and Jon Stryker, Gill, who is heavily
invested in artificial intelligence, and Soros, who has broad investments in Big Pharma, stand
to benefit financially from the demand for altered bodies and brains that they hope is the
fruit of their philanthropic activity.
It is striking that this conflict of interest has been so little discussed. Even the
American
Psychological Association (APA), the leading scientific and professional organization
representing psychology in the United States, with more than 118,000 members, is funded by
Arcus philanthropy. In 2005 the APA created INET, to help member psychological organizations
improve the well-being of sexual orientation and "gender diverse people." Prior to the addition
of gender identity and the arrival of Arcus money, the APA INET was solely focused on
LGB issues. In 2008 the
APA created the Task Force On
Gender Identity and Gender Variance , and in 2015 it developed guidelines to assist
psychologists in the provision of culturally competent, developmentally appropriate, and
trans-affirmative psychological practice with "transgender" and "gender non-conforming" people.
Psychologists were "encouraged" to modify their understanding of gender, broadening the range
of variation viewed as healthy and normative.
Can democracy withstand such philanthropy-driven "encouragement"? Can there be genuine
democracy when, via the taxpayer-subsidized fig leaf of philanthropy, billionaires can so
quickly and easily dismantle the reality of biological sex by suborning charities, politicians,
researchers, and professional associations? We are in the midst of finding out.
Jennifer Bilek is an investigative journalist, artist, and concerned citizen. She has
been following the money behind the transgender agenda for six years. She blogs atthe 11th Hour.
The Sex Reassignment Surgery market is worth USD $316.1 Million worldwide each year.
Stryker makes most of their money in cardiovascular, spines, orthotics etc. Arcus has donated
a lot of money to support a small market they are not a major play in.
But if we dig a little deeper, we find out that Stryker is *GASP* gay. Perhaps he gives
money to the LGBT community because it is his community?
My first thought was how much profit are we talking about. If the total world market is as
you say, then the profits are diminimus. The article then falls apart from a profit motive.
And we get back to the age old arguement based on personal animus.
My understanding of intersex anomalies is that it is in fact biologically based. Not
psychology based. But there are a lot of articles which challenge that understanding. So we
should still be open to finding out the underlying etimology. Because there is no question
that enough children are asserting that they are transgenders that those affected need
scientifically based answers.
And it is important to continue the search for the science involved. However to condem
everyone is not helpful. And it exacerbates the the divide between the us.
One other point. Other ancient cultures had members who would today be considered part of
the LGBTQ community. Native americans had a special term for someone who identified as a
different sex from their genitalia. A few of these cultures honored these individuals placing
them in high regard.
This is not a new phenomenon. And this community exists. Best we try to show some sympathy
and understanding. If there is wide spread abuse then parents and their children, should have
available all the fact based information and help that is possible.
Is the author contending that these foundations are spreading disinformation? If so that
should be the target of her investigation. It is clear from this and other articles that she
has disgust for the LGBTQ community. And thus is not an honest broker. This article appears
to be an answer in search for a question.
"Because there is no question that enough children are asserting that they are
transgenders that those affected need scientifically based answers."
Children asserting that they are transgenders before they have even experienced puberty
only means they have been influenced by others. Keep in mind that sexual urges are not even
experienced until puberty. So how would they even know? Steering a child towards
transgenderism is child abuse.
Let me get personal. My father who is now 102 is as right wing as one can get. And all his
life. When his nephew transgendered to a women he was surprisingly empathetic. In talking to
him he told me the account of a family in his small town when he was young.
The family had two boys, twins. They both at a very young age exhibited great interest in
dressing up with their sister's clothes. And other displays that were feminine in nature.
The father was directed by his minister , the school principal, and local neighbors to
correct this terrible set of circumstances. The boys were of course bullied. Being unable
himself to make strides, one night he put a bullet in the boys' heads , the sister's head,
the mother's head and finally his head. This was something that stayed with my father for 80
years or more.
So when he saw his nephew dressed as a girl he was very kind to her. And both the twins
and his nephew began to exhibit the traits at a very young age.
I likewise in my profession I represented many men who transitioned to women. One question
came up. Why do men have nipples?The answer is interesting.
So personally I have seen very young children with this issue. I do agree that parents
should seek guidance from reliable experts. It is for sure you are not one of those
experts.
I would never be disrespectful to any gay or transgender. But there are many pre-puberty
boys that play with dolls who are normal and are not gay. They will know one way or the other
once they go through puberty. I believe people are either born gay or there is something that
occurs physiologically after birth that causes them to be gay. People who want to transition
to the other sex are gay or bi-sexual. People who are not gay or bi-sexual would not want to
transition to the other sex. To heterosexuals, the very thought sexual relations with someone
of their sex is repulsive. Its the very definition of heterosexual. The very thought of
transitioning to the other sex and then having sex relations with those of their current sex
would also be repulsive.
People who try to steer children to transition to the other sex are child abusers. Let the
children grow up and decide for themselves.
Ohhh stop. Entirely false. Those who manage to navigate their psycho-emotional issues to a
normal status just don't get the press. Like any intrapersonal struggle -- it's hard work and
then after that it is hard work.
The real issue here is that the state has no business interfering in the rearing of
children. Parents decide the nature of child rearing. And that includes the peculiar notion
of children who think they are cat when in fact they are dogs.
Look what one chooses for a life as an adult is their choice. But until then -- as long as
mom and dad are footing the bill --- minus some abuse and i reject the caterwauling that
therapy to challenge some aberrant behavior is abusive -- ten parents manage their families
as they desire said family to be.
Then no doubt you can document many hundreds of stories of children and teens who were
entirely comfortable in their birth gender and yet were forced by their parents to
transition.
if under ideological influences that do not emulate the child's 'best interests'
if ethically unsound for the medical team to participate in
if there are financial conflicts of interest
SO, be sharp about all this. AC - if they want to harp on this issue - needs to research
and publish a guide to
understanding coercion (including developmental issues of childhood that inform how they
can be SO EASILY coerced); understanding 'best interests' (for the child) of importance to
social services, court proceedings, etc; understanding health professional codes of ethics
and hospital/health system codes; understanding how to assess possible COI.
AC should GET SERIOUS about this - in these specific ways - or stop harping and harping
and harping on it!
Jeepers honey poo poo! Get serious and stop being stupid.
That's not true. There are many heterosexual men who are aroused by thinking of themselves
as *pubescent" girls. There are entire genres of porn and Subreddits devoted to it. They want
women (and girls) to validate them as women. We see evidence of this every day. In fact, a
group of gender critical feminists keep track of this at "itsafetish" on said.it
. They had several thousand examples on the Reddit group, but that was banned because talking
about autogynephilia in an attempt to defend little girls from you-know-who's tampon advice
in the bathroom was considered "hate speech." Apparently, taking your photo in the women's
bathroom and talking to 12-year-old girls about tampon use is just fine, but reporting it is
bigoted.
The question I have is, why is the mind or will supreme here? Why is the body deemed to be
of so little importance that it can be sliced up and chemically altered? Aside from a very
small number of people whose bodies are truly ambiguous, why is the body held to be of less
value than the mind? We all know that the human mind can get pretty messed up, for a variety
of reasons.
Well, when the go through puberty, whatever they were thinking before will becomes
irrelevant. If they turn out to be gay, they may want to transition to the opposite sex. If
they are not gay, they will not want to do that unless they become brainwashed.
Blanchard's work is far from universally accepted, and in any case you might not want to
make him a hero figure for the anti-trans movement. He is on record as supporting
reassignment surgery as a treatment option, and publicly funding it.
Yeah.
When I was seven, I wanted to be Godzilla.
I LOVED Godzilla.
I used to make little buildings out of cardboard boxes, and smash 'em up while trying to
imitate the Godzilla roar.
But I think I'd be kinda pissed if someone had surgically attached Godzilla spines to my back
and grafted a tail to my coccyx and sharpened my teeth.
Childhood imagination never justifies surgical mutilation.
Transgender is an adjective, not a noun. Gender dysphoria is not contagious and not
subject to the influence of others. Moreover, sexual attractions are irrelevant to the issue
of gender.
Gender identity is formed by about age two. When gender and natal sex are incongruent
children will insist that they are their gender. It affects about 2% of all children. It will
resolve in 75% of that 2%. Only the most acute cases will ever transition (those who are in
severe distress).
Other than aggressive pediatric cancers, there is no condition that is more life
threatening for a child than acute gender dysphoria.
Gender dysphoria is most definitely subject to the influence of others. That's what Lisa
Littman's work on Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria is about. Hundreds of transactivists sent her
rape and death threats to try to silence her.
More "life threatening for a child?" Go to Transgender Trend, which debunks the weak,
highly flawed study that made this claim. I see children being made infertile for the rest of
their lives and being mutilated a la Jazz Jennings so a bunch of adult heterosexual males
with autogynephilia can get their paraphilia affirmed.
This is the most dangerous movement in my lifetime.
Littman's study resulted in the publisher, PLOS-ONE, issuing a formal correction, an
apology and a revised article (which they felt would be more effective than a retraction).
All of the links are here:
https://croak.us/301phQy
The reason this was done is because Littman did not study any transgender kids. Her
subjects were anonymous parents culled from equally anti-trans websites.
Furthermore, the quality of life of transitioned youth with non-transitioned youth have
been studied at great length. The leading researcher is Kristina Olson at U/Washington. In
2018 she won the NIH's Waterman Prize and received a substantial MacArthur "genius"
grant.
It's the same sort of junk science trotted out a few years ago which purported to "prove"
that same sex marriage was bad for kids and which was also used to make six day creationism
look like a scientific controversy.
If you suspect any child abuse report it! Simple! It is not a political issue if possible
abuse is in front of you. If you think a licensed medical provider or hospital is practicing
abuse file complaints with the licensing board of the provider and against the hospital's
accreditation. Stop whining about it: make complaints if you believe what you say you
believe.
Intersex conditions are - generally - genetically impelled: genetic information translated
through physiological building of the person's anatomy. Everyone has different anatomy. E.g a
doctor told me that 'i have unusual ear canals'. You might have a very different nose (in
appearance, and in actual anatomy. And as any man - or many women - knows all penises look
different: long, short, fat, thin, veiny, smooth, hairy up the shaft, or not, etc. And
similar labia features, clitoris features, breast features are different, etc.
All women are 'this way' and all men are 'this way' is bogus BS. No two penises are alike
(unless you are identical twins, and then maybe not, too). Etc.
Similarly, genetic information is translated in many different ways into the building of
the anatomy and intersex persons are anomalies that fit in the clinical category 'intersex'.
There are, obviously, psychological, social, emotional sequelae of having 'un-unusual'
anatomy: fear, loathing, shock, disgust, etc. But any doctor, or any parent, who makes their
child feel or experience fear, loathing, shock and disgust for their bodies is not decent
parent! And any priest, pastor, preacher, imam, etc who makes any person feel fear, loathing,
shock, disgust, with their body is no one who should have such a spiritually important role
in the community. Similarly no one should be made to feel or experience fear, loathing,
shock, disgust, etc if they express that they may be gay or lesbian or bisexual. Of course a
parent - or priest, pastor, preacher, imam, etc - can - AND SHOULD say what the family or
faith community values and beliefs are about that. But then let the child decide that they
believe.
What about a child who is intersex who is pressured to decide about something (typically a
surgical procedure to 'clarify' anatomy)? What about a child who may or may not be gay or
lesbian or transgender but are 'told' that they are by adults who may or may not be well
informed or who may or may not be overly influenced by some ideology? There could be 'child
abuse': if you believe that a parent, of religious leader, or doctor, or hospital is coercing
a child to make a choice that they don't want to make, or are developmentally poorly able to
make - too young, emotionally disturbed, adversely influenced by others, etc - make
complaints, file complaints with social services, with the doctor's licensing board, against
the hospital's accreditations.
For the record, gender confirmation surgery is difficult to obtain in the US. To qualify
an individual requires two behavior health referrals; one from a regular therapist and
another from a therapist not previously seen by the surgical candidate.
The individual must have at least one year of Real Life Experience, living as their
gender. Both the hospital and the surgeon must approve the procedure as well. I am reliably
informed that some hospitals require an interview before a decision board.
Then, of course, the cost is prohibitive for most transgender people who might otherwise
qualify unless they work for a large company that includes gender-affirmation in their health
insurance.
There are only a couple of states that make funds available through Medicaid.
The market value of these surgeries is irrelevant.
"It is striking that this conflict of interest has been so little discussed. Even the
American Psychological Association (APA), the leading scientific and professional
organization representing psychology in the United States, with more than 118,000 members, is
funded by Arcus philanthropy."
Coming in a lose second, millions of wealthy whites sitting siting in therapists offices
search for meaning and solution for the psychological and intellectual struggle that plague
us all ------ it ever amazes how the right to avoid being beaten up by police, equal access
to housing, employment, financial system, etc. ha taken a back set to the people.
973 APA Conference a day that should live in infamy.
America needs an examination and reformation of tax-exempt organizations across the board.
Too often these groups are simply attempting to force their views on the unwilling. While
individuals are losing their rights to all manner of activities once taken for granted in any
free society, these billionaire-funded boondoggles exist to coerce, brainwash and usurp the
power of individuals, including parenting and forcing individuals to pay for that which
violates their creed.
If these people want to "help" society so much, why the lynch pin of tax exemption? Huh?
True charity does not stop to consider the tax advantages, but chalk that up to my cynicism
towards these power mad, narcissistic perverts parading as humans. Pay up or shut up.
"America needs an examination and reformation of tax-exempt organizations across the
board. Too often these groups are simply attempting to force their views on the
unwilling."
Churches being foremost among them. I wouldn't be opposed to removing or reducing their
tax exemptions.
I'm more interested in the angle that big money is behind this than the angle that somehow
there's a profit motive behind it. If they were trying to push trans to make money, that
would be cynical but understandable. I don't think that's it, though.
Stryker at least is a son and grandson of enormous privilege with no achievements of his
own and who is intrinsically disordered sexually, He needs to do something, in his mind, that
counts as a achievement. Unfortunately, he chose poorly.
God have mercy on him. I couldn't have handled that kind of money and pressure to live up
either.
"Like Martine Rothblatt, Jennifer Pritzker, and Jon Stryker, Gill, who is heavily invested
in artificial intelligence, and Soros, who has broad investments in Big Pharma, stand to
benefit financially from the demand for altered bodies and brains that they hope is the fruit
of their philanthropic activity."
Yeah. All of the big money people are scrambling and scheming to get in on the medical
market for a condition which affects 0.6% of the population.
It affects a much larger percentage of the population now, and once you start mutilating
and drugging teenagers, you've got patients for life.
Lisa Littman, MD, found that the rate of "transition" was 70 TIMES HIGHER than chance
among girls whose friend groups had members who were identifying as transgender. This is
accounting for changes that would occur because it's now acceptable--she controlled for that
variable and found a rate that high.
And these girls start on drugs that may cause permanent infertility and get on wait lists
to have their breasts removed. You should read the stories of "detransitioners" from 4th Wave
Now. These poor young adults have so much regret, and then of course they're shunned and
harassed by the transgender cult--and silenced.
If this is not an argument for wealth distribution, I do not know what is. Here are people
with too much money and the right to spend it as they wish. Welcome to the Libertarian
paradise.
afer reading this article, I am not at all sure it matters at all. Seems the writer has a
thing about the'big bad' lgtb+ whatever community. The same arguments could be applied to
sports teams or churches, so who cares?
You don't care about men who get moved to women's prisons and then assault them? Go to
"Women are Human" for the latest tally of men abusing women in shelters, prisons, and yes,
bathrooms--HUNDREDS of stories in local media that the mainstream won't pick up because
they're afraid of being mobbed by transactivists.
Guess what? The parts AREN'T removed? Did you not know that? Holy crap.
These days you can have a beard and penis and be a heterosexual guy, and you can put on
some makeup (or not) and dress (or not) and call yourself a "trans woman." And make rape and
death threats to any woman (they don't care about the men) who challenges you. There are
THOUSANDS of examples of this. Do you really think women just go around making this up?
Somebody put together a compendium of just a day or so of rape threats against JK Rowling.
Sure, these are just nice gay men who want to present as women and want to be left
alone.....NO. That's the point. These are heterosexual predatory men who have hijacked the
language of civil rights, grossly insulting the sacrifice of millions of Americans who
actually fought and died for real civil rights, to enable their paraphilia. Full stop.
See above. Also go to "Women are Human," "Feminist Current," and "Transgender Trend," the
latter of which enlists scientists and clinicians in debunking many false claims of the
transactivist movement.
A few years ago on Rod Dreher's blog someone made this same point (that FTM is now
predominant) and I expressed skepticism. The person replied with links showing that they were
correct. My apologies that I don't have these to give you now.
Blanchard's argument was that transsexualism among men is based on the target of their
sexual attraction. Transsexualism among females was rare until the advent of Rapid Onset
Gender Dysphoria (see Dr. Lisa Littman's work, out of Brown University). Now it's rampant,
due to social contagion. Fortunately, there's been an upsurge in "detransitioning" because
teen girls have been staying at home and aren't as susceptible to the social contagion at
schools.
"... This book is like a bad date where the other person is accusing you of all of your failures, and when you try to make up, to do better, to understand more, to be fully engaged as an ally, you are continually pushed away. ..."
"... 99% of the problem is created by 1% of whites who other whites don't see. ..."
"... The same would be true for misogyny. 99% of rapes are caused by 1% of perps, and the 99% of innocent men don't see it because the perps aren't harassing them. ..."
"... This book is riddled with historical inaccuracies, such as black women being denied the vote until 1964, poor arguments, and a lack of any decent citations. This book did inspire me though. If something this bad can be published, anyone can write a book. ..."
"... According to this author, those that are identified as white (not necessarily those who identify AS white) are guilty of racism and must be prepared to be tongue-lashed by her. It is curious that somehow denigrating a person by their skin color is not racist when done by a person of the same appearance. It is a popular book for those that need more of a reason to feel bad about themselves. ..."
"... If you're seeking insight on how to understand and fight against escalating exploitation and oppression by the US ruling class, look elsewhere. This book is a polemic, a work of guilt-tripping ideology, given to sweeping and unsubstantiated statements about "white supremacy" and "racism". If this book were to use the religious language of the Puritans, "whiteness" would be the "original sin". ..."
"... DiAngelo, like Tim Wise, Cheryl Matias and others, is a professional race-baiting huckster. She makes a living traveling the country telling white people how awful they are, how morally superior she is, and how if white people pay ridiculously expensive fees to attend her lectures, they too can be a "good" white person like her. ..."
I am very reluctant to give
a negative review, especially when the author is trying to be helpful. In places the author has correctly diagnosed a number of
genuine problems.
Merely being non-racist isn't good enough, because you end up as a bystander when a bully is beating up on a victim; both covering
your eyes and ears and refusing to acknowledge what the victim (of racism) is telling you is happening to them.
If you haven't been a victim you cannot fully understand being a victim. If you haven't experienced the pervasiveness and constancy
of negative bias both coming from other groups and even influencing your own view of yourself – then you will never completely
comprehend. So in one respect a white person cannot truly say, "I get it."
Neither can you ever do enough to win a gold star and say you've done "enough" as long as racism exists.
It's like the Talmudic maxim: "you will never finish perfecting the world, but you are never free to stop trying."
If the book stopped there, it would be fine. Perhaps even excellent.
But I give this book one star because it makes the problem worse.
This book is like a bad date where the other person is accusing you of all of your failures, and when you try to make up, to
do better, to understand more, to be fully engaged as an ally, you are continually pushed away.
And then you are told to "breathe" and calm down. Surely you are getting upset and proving the thesis!
Except that's not what's happening.
Yes, whites don't see racism because they aren't a target of it. If you aren't a racist, then you don't hang around racists.
And if you aren't black then you don't have it hurled in your face. 99% of the problem is created by 1% of whites who other whites
don't see.
The same would be true for misogyny. 99% of rapes are caused by 1% of perps, and the 99% of innocent men don't see it because
the perps aren't harassing them.
So men need to listen without being defensive. Whites need to listen without being defensive. It's wrong to say, "But I'm not
doing it" as if that will make it go away.
But it's also wrong to say that the non-harassing men or the non-harassing whites are guilty BECAUSE of their innocence.
No, they aren't being bad. They are being clueless. And instead of being accused they need to be engaged.
Especially when they WANT to listen and be helpful.
In short, if someone wants to be your friend – let them.
This book doesn't invite engagement and doesn't let the non-involved to become involved in affirmatively fighting racism. It
turns a lot of would be allies away.
Ultimately, it's self defeating.
We need more people aware of racism. We need more people fighting racism. We need the majority engaged in helping the minority,
rather than being turned away.
I'd give this book five stars if it were half as long. But it's the flawed existentialism that makes this book a hindrance
to people who should be friends, and would be friends, if they were allowed to be. >
This book is riddled with historical inaccuracies, such as black women being denied the vote until 1964, poor arguments,
and a lack of any decent citations. This book did inspire me though. If something this bad can be published, anyone can write
a book.
According to this author, those that are identified as white (not necessarily those who identify AS white)
are guilty of racism and must be prepared to be tongue-lashed by her. It is curious that somehow denigrating a person by their
skin color is not racist when done by a person of the same appearance. It is a popular book for those that need more of a reason
to feel bad about themselves.
Ironically, the subject is timely and through reading other sources of information on institutionalized racism, I have noticed
many examples of this. The articles were well written and effective in that I was not made to feel that anything I did or said
was automatically suspect and therefore invalid. A state of paralysis is not one from which change can occur.
If you're seeking insight on how to understand and fight against escalating exploitation and oppression
by the US ruling class, look elsewhere. This book is a polemic, a work of guilt-tripping ideology, given to sweeping and unsubstantiated
statements about "white supremacy" and "racism". If this book were to use the religious language of the Puritans, "whiteness"
would be the "original sin".
As a Unitarian-Universalist I am appalled by such ideology because I am dedicated to our first principle -"the inherent worth
and dignity of every person", regardless of social status or category. This includes not just "people of color" but the legions
of "whites" who have suffered terribly despite the supposed safety net of "whiteness". Unfortunately, ruling class whites are
often condescending toward working class whites, and this book is no exception. When they are not ignored or treated rudely (DiAngelo)
they may be called names like "deplorables" (Hillary Clinton) or even then unbelievably insulting "white trash" (the title of
a book by Nancy Isenberg). And just think of all the derogatory names that are used for the homeless, who again are mostly white.
Here's an example of DiAngelo's rude disrespect: An Italian American explained "that once Italians were once considered black
and discriminated against, so didn't I think white people experience racism too?" (p. 12). Instead of acknowledging and honoring
the truth he spoke from his own lived experience, she changes the topic, accusing him of "refusing to examine his own whiteness
today". This is typical of the mental gymnastics that DiAngelo employs to evade the truths she hears that are "inconvenient" for
her ideology of "whiteness". In an earlier era Irish Americans could have said the same thing, and this has always been a felt-in-the-gut
truth for poor whites.
Although DiAngelo has an academic background, she unapologetically violates the canons of good scholarship, See, for example,
the third essay of Todd Eklof in "The Gadfly Papers", or the work of Johnathan Church, such as his article in Areo magazine on
how "white-fragility-theory-mistakes-correlation-for-causation". Instead she conveys an attitude of self-assured superiority,
a provocateur who declares herself to be proud of her "identity politics", dismissing criticism from "whites" as a product of
their "white supremacy" or "racism" and labeling it "white fragility". Brain-washed by such ideology, she is oblivious to how
insulting terms the like "white supremacy" fuel the cultural wars, hence political gridlock, hence giving a free reign to predatory
capitalism and escalating inequality.
DiAngelo never acknowledges how her ideology "whiteness" serves two unsavory political purposes. The most obvious one is to
divert attention from the color-blind nature of today's predatory capitalism – how vulnerable whites are targeted far more than
blacks simply because the whites have so much more to lose. The second becomes obvious once we reflect on the time-tested strategy
of ruling classes to stay in power by "divide and conquer" tactics aimed at the populace. In the US, "racism" itself was born
as such a construct in the aftermath of Bacon's Rebellion in 1676, serving to divide white and black workers and turning the latter
into dehumanized slaves. Today the cultural wars comprise a similar divide and conquer strategy, but this time dividing the white
ruling class from its working class to create political gridlock. Here I use the term "ruling class" in its broadest sense, as
roughly the top 10% to 20% of the population in income or wealth who have a college education, while using the rough definition
of "working class" as those without a college degree, or about 2/3 of the population. As we learned in 2016, the political consequences
can be dire indeed when progressives abandon their fundamental principles and the working class to embrace the self-serving strategies
of the ruling class. >
DiAngelo, like Tim Wise, Cheryl Matias and others, is a professional race-baiting huckster. She makes a living traveling the country
telling white people how awful they are, how morally superior she is, and how if white people pay ridiculously expensive fees
to attend her lectures, they too can be a "good" white person like her.
Why is it so hard to talk about race? Because any discussion where you are cast immediately as the villain likely isn't going
to be a very productive conversation.
What is white fragility? White fragility is standing up for yourself against unsubstantiated charges of racism. If a black
or brown person makes an ignorant statement regarding you, your family, your life's experiences or whatever, and you defend yourself
as any normal person would....well, that's white fragility. What you should be doing is to just take it. Admit you are born evil
as a member of a race of pale face demons and accept the charges that are being leveled against you. That's being woke!
You see, anti-racism activism used to be directed towards people who were......you know, racist? However, that changed over
the last couple decades as more virulent strains of post-modernism and cultural Marxism infected the movement. Now, the idea of
all white people being racist is championed and supported within the annals of academia. You don't have to nurse a hatred of black
or brown people to be racist. All you have to be is white. You have a plethora of extremely vague terms regarding supposed "systems"
and "structures" that are poorly defined and not nearly as well illustrated as intended. Indeed, the definition of racism was
surreptitiously changed to a "correct" redefinition of a whites-only enterprise of power plus privilege while other ideologies
such as feminism curiously maintained their original dictionary description.
Critical race theorists have insisted that white privilege, whiteness studies, etc. are not meant to foster a sense of a guilt
and shame amongst white people. It's blatantly clear when you peel back the layers that that is precisely the end goal. They tell
you that you - the individual white person - are part of the problem. You have to admit your original sin, and then you'll come
into the light. They don't do a very good job hiding their true intentions.
And what's up with so-called "allyship"? Allies are supposed to be members of a mutual pact, not a one-sided arrangement of
praise and apologies.
On the subject of fragility, I find it very amusing and ironic when you consider that if DiAngelo or Wise were to speak at
a college campus or university, they won't have to worry about a horde of angry white students disrupting their lectures, storming
the lecture halls, pulling fire alarms, drowning out the speakers with chants, etc. Fragility is rife on campus life these days.
Safe spaces, protests over racist incidents that turn out to be hoaxes perpetrated by the "victims", and so on. Who are the real
fragile ones here?
At the end of the day, DiAngelo's end goal won't be realized. Sure, coastal white liberals who are down with the cause might
think that people like her are creating change, but it's simply not working. Far too many white people whose lives aren't full
of ease and privilege will not take kindly to such dumb bigotry wrapped up in fancy academic terms. Critical race theory, like
so many related "isms" in the social justice lexicon, is simply building up its own funeral pyre. >
1.0 out of 5 stars
mostly worthless Reviewed in the United States on October 21, 2018 Awful. The author deludes herself, thinking her white and
black readers have no idea how to relate, live on different planets, and, that DiAngelo is required to be their guide. She acts
like African-Americans speak a different language. She doesn't understand the concept of individuality very well, either, gneralizing
about everyone. "African-Americans are sensitive about their hair." IF this book represents "progress," we're in bad shape. 839
people found this helpful
Helpful
7 comments Report abuse >
1.0 out of 5 stars
Nonsense Reviewed in the United States on October 24, 2018 This book is for guilty feeling white folks and blacks who need
to gravitate to oppression. There is no white fragility. What leads people out of the left is commercial trash like this. There
is no fear in white or anyone else about anything. There is no open forum and there is no out let for an open discussion anyway.
The generalization is what allows whites to leave the left. There should be a book about racial healing and not foster disorder
by identity politics. >
1.0 out of 5 stars
Counterproductive to overcoming racism Reviewed in the United States on March 4, 2019 The author of this book inadvertently
does a great job of showing the inherent racism, absence of logic and fact, insanity, self-righteousness, arrogance, and hypocrisy
of the viewpoint she is trying to sell.
First, I will give praise where it is due. I found the author's call to hear people out when they talk about how it feels to
be a minority in our country helpful and necessary. I also think her advice to really examine each of our own hearts when we are
confronted with another person offering criticism where our personal behavior toward people of color is insensitive, or revealing
of a feeling of superiority was very good.
The rest of the book, however, was bewildering. The author opens with an attack on all white people. She redefines racism as
something only white people can do. Whites are racist, not because of their thoughts or actions, but because of their very existence.
She says whites ordered their civilization primarily to place themselves in positions of power for the purpose of keeping people
of color down all over the globe. The author hates the two core beliefs that western civilization is built on – individualism
(the inherent value of the individual), and meritocracy (the idea that people should succeed based on talent and effort). She
says we will never be free of racism as she defined it, until we abolish these two core beliefs.
Naturally, not everyone is going to agree with a blanket application of guilt to all whites, or the author's view of history
(which is scantly substantiated), or view of western civilization (which many would view as having offered at least some good
things to the world). But if you disagree with any of this, you are said to be displaying your "white fragility."
The author lists many arguments that people have posed to her to demonstrate that they aren't racist, but are not acceptable
in her view. One of these is "I'm not racist because I'm married to a person of color." Unfortunately, the author says, that even
if you chose a person of color to be your life partner and have brought forth children of color into the world with them, you
are still a racist. As a white mother in a blended family, I would argue that many people view interracial marriage as one of
the best evidences of an integrated society that has got over its racism. The accusation that by my existence, I oppress my husband
and children is completely bizarre and hurtful. This is perhaps the most self-righteous, dictatorial, contradictory, blind, and
illogical thing in this book.
The author also talks a lot about how whites treat blacks like children who can't think for themselves. She references portrayal
of black characters in movies and TV as evidence. There is some justification for this, especially decades ago, but sensitivity
on this issue has improved a whole lot. Given her disdain for whites treating blacks like they can't think for themselves, I was
shocked when she chose to criticize Martin Luther King's famous quote: "I have a dream that my children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but the content of their character." She said that the vision
of that great black leader is actually not the correct view. She explains that it only reinforces the core beliefs of western
society of individualism and meritocracy, which it turn keeps blacks down, and whites in power. It is absolutely arrogant and
hypocritical for this white author to say that Martin Luther King, who gave his life fighting for his vision, didn't really mean
what he said.
There are many other things in this book that are problematic, but those were the worst for me. I can only hope that most people
who read this book will see the hatred, racism, and self-righteousness that echo through every page. From the author's account
of her mission to share the message of collective white guilt and hatred of western society with others, it's not being well received.
And that's very, very encouraging. 516 people found this helpful
Helpful
9 comments Report abuse >
1.0 out of 5 stars
Shallow, repetitive and condescending Reviewed in the United States on November 2, 2019
Verified Purchase DiAngelo spends much of this book re-defining both racist and white supremacist in broader non-standard
ways, then arguing that we live in a thoroughly racist and white supremacist world based on her definitions. She defines White
Fragility as anything short of enthusiastic agreement with all of her arguments, as if her understanding of things is objectively
true. She makes many assertions repeatedly, but she doesn't back them up with detailed supporting arguments. Question her, remain
silent, or leave the conversation and you're exhibiting your white fragility It's a neat rhetorical trick. Check out How to Be
an Anti-Racist by Ibrham Kendi for a much more thoughtful treatment of race issues. >
1.0 out of 5 stars
Perfect for the avarage whiny college liberal Reviewed in the United States on December 22, 2019
Verified Purchase Probably has some important message, but I couldn't bear reading more than 70 pages, which, to be fair,
is more than half the book, but that's all I needed for my college class. Maybe more people would be interested in reading it
if the author used another title, and realized that insulting the people she was trying to help probably isn't the best course
of action. 283 people found this helpful
Helpful
2 comments Report abuse >
1.0 out of 5 stars
Nauseating Reviewed in the United States on May 28, 2019 If you love looking at everything in the world through the lens of
race and racism, if you find race and racism endlessly fascinating, then you'll love this book. If you're one of the many who've
realized that there are more healthy ways of looking at life and more constructive ways to talk about how to get along, you'll
likely find this one of the most nauseating books ever written.
Robin DiAngelo is drunk on her own power as a "diversity trainer," and she won't rest until every last white person has admitted
their guilt and submitted to her authority. If you resist, if you show signs that you think her whole obsession is unseemly or
downright disgusting, it will only confirm that she is right about you and that your only hope is to admit your own hopelessness
and follow her down, down, down. For there is no uplift in this religion she and her fellow fanatics have created, there is only
an ever-growing awareness of guilt, and how our "white fragility" in the face of this guilt is our deepest sin.
Just take a look at some quotes from the book's first pages:
"(W)hiteness is at once the means of dominance, the end to which dominance points, and the point of dominance, too, which,
in its purest form, in its greatest fantasy, never ends" (ix).
Is this true? Well, you'll just have to take her word for it, she's the expert, unless your "white fragility" still won't let
you.
"(A)ny gains we have made so far have come through identity politics" (xiii).
Really? Tell that to Martin Luther King Jr, who spoke the language of common humanity and united decent people across the country
to demand equal rights for black people in America, well before the language of "identity politics" (which is purely group-based)
came into vogue.
Ironically, as an example of how great "identity politics" has been, she writes, "a key issue in the 2016 presidential election
was the white working class" (xiv), without noting that the left's promotion of "identity politics" is what caused these "white
working class" Americans, most of whom voted for Obama, twice, to finally start identifying with their own "white identity" and
vote for Trump.
She speaks of "white identity" and "the white voice" as if these are factual things that unite all "white" people, but, to
promote herself and the dire need of her book, says her own white voice is "one of the many voices needed to solve the overall
puzzle" (xv), because "racism is deeply complex and nuanced, and given this, we can never consider our learning to be complete
or finished" (xv) -- lucky for those like her who make a career out of promoting these toxic ideas, eh?
If you can still stomach it, I'll leave you with a few more choice nuggets from the Introduction, but I recommend you imagine
her reading them at you accompanied by a laugh track, which can actually make it kind of fun:
Ours is "a society in which racial categories have profound meaning" (xvi); North America is "deeply separate and unequal by
race" (1); "Socialized into a deeply internalized sense of superiority, that we [white people] either are unaware of or can never
admit to ourselves, we become highly fragile in conversations about race," resulting in "behaviors such as argumentation, silence,
and withdrawal from the stress-inducing situation" (2); "If, however, I understand racism as a system into which I was socialized,
I can receive feedback on my problematic racial patterns as a helpful way to support my learning and growth .Such moments can
be experienced as something valuable, even if temporarily painful, only after we accept that racism is unavoidable and that it
is impossible to completely escape having developed problematic racial assumptions and behaviors" (5); "I believe that white progressives
cause the most daily damage to people of color" because "our defensiveness and certitude make it virtually impossible to explain
to us how we do so" (5); "This book does not attempt to provide the solution to racism .My goal is to make visible how one aspect
of white sensibility continues to hold racism in place: white fragility" (5).
I think she takes the easy way out by telling stories of white people pounding their fist or getting upset when talking about
racism. I don't know if that happened but you can't take one individuals reaction and make it seem like it is how white people
react if the mention of racism comes up.
I can understand that she needs to sell books. I was just hoping for something different. 210 people found this helpful
Helpful
Comment Report abuse >
Pseudo intellectual book that is obviously flawed.
1.0 out of 5 stars
Pseudo intellectual book that is obviously flawed. Reviewed in the United States on June 23, 2020
Verified Purchase It only takes a few pages in this book to recognize that Ms. DiAngelo does not really understand what she
is talking about. I took detailed notes as I read about her logical fallacies, misunderstandings, etc. and every page is littered
with notes. This book is shockingly poorly reasoned and it is terrifying that enough Americans think this is a good book to move
it to the NYT best seller list. I wish I hadn't purchased the book as I hate to give credibility to the authors incompetence.
The author starts by demonstrating that she has no idea what the concept of "individualism" is. She argues that individualism
means thinking that racial groups and other groups do not matter. However, individualism is quite the opposite. Individualism
arose due to discrimination against people based on their religion, race, etc. and was the idea that we should not discriminate
against people based on their group category. Ms. Diangelo shockingly completely misunderstands this. Thus, every time she talks
about "individualism" I cannot help but facepalm because she sounds so foolish.
She also does not understand the fallacy of equivocation. She often throws out the word "racism" or "racist." However, the
power of the word "racism" comes from the definition where we define it as someone who dislikes another race. We rightfully judge
someone who dislikes another race to be evil. Ms. Diangelo seems to want to pull the power from this definition and then redefine
racism to be merely existing as a white person in our society. But, this does not work. In fact, her equivocation is in fact racist
(aka evil). She is trying to imply that merely existing as a white person means you are racist and thereby demean white people.
I could go page by page explaining her logical missteps, but that would take a whole book. Instead, I would suggest if you
do decide to read this book, turn on your critical thinking skills and really analyze what she is saying. You will be shocked
by how poorly reasoned this book is. 188 people found this helpful
Helpful
Comment Report abuse >
1.0 out of 5 stars
The worst book on race relations ever written. Reviewed in the United States on December 2, 2018 When I read about how Blacks
oppress their own people and it benefits Whites, my stomach turned. Excuse me, as a White woman it is not to my benefit, to societies
benefit, and I'm not responsibility for the decisions of others. The book would have people believe Blacks are oppressed and it
is the fault of Whites. We have many successful Blacks in this country. A Black man was POTUS and the entire family is successful,
they are not alone. This book is inflammatory towards race relations. 308 people found this helpful
Helpful
3 comments Report abuse >
It's repetitive and redundant, repetitive and redundant
1.0 out of 5 stars
It's repetitive and redundant, repetitive and redundant Reviewed in the United States on October 14, 2019
Verified Purchase I'm going to forge on and try to finish this book. I'm in the second chapter and it is very repetitive and
redundant. Like another reviewer said, she paints a picture of damned if you do and damned if you don't. It's hard for me to keep
going because of her repetitiveness. 219 people found this helpful
Helpful
Comment Report abuse >
1.0 out of 5 stars
Is there even a conversation? Reviewed in the United States on April 24, 2020
Verified Purchase This book comes off as being enlightened, and I will admit that it draws attention to important matters
regarding race. My issue is that the author comes off as incredibly arrogant and the book sounds very self-congratulatory. For
example, she states "Because I am seen as somewhat more racially aware from other whites...." this comes off as both arrogant
and presumptuous. Even though she acknowledges her whiteness, it seems somewhat ironic that a white woman is writing an authoritative
text on race- talk about the white savior! I am interested in race studies, and I have encountered many texts that address the
issue of race and racism, which is an undeniably difficult topic, but those sources did not come off as arrogant and pedantic
as this. 183 people found this helpful
Helpful
Comment Report abuse >
1.0 out of 5 stars
Oh look, more division Reviewed in the United States on March 24, 2019 Probably shouldn't insult those you wish to share common
ground. Racism is wrong. Period. But the idea of insulting whites as "fragile" I get that's a spicy title to raise eyebrows but
in 2019, in a country where people of any race or ethnicity or sex can do basically anything in this country, why push this narrative
further?! We need to all unite. My dad did when he married a Hispanic immigrant and made me. Is my dad fragile? He's white. Is
he racist by default? The preconceived stereotypes here are egregious and inforgiveable. More click bait social media sensical,
identity political, trash. 261 people found this helpful
Helpful
4 comments Report abuse >
How come she is a consultant and trainer on racial issues???
1.0 out of 5 stars
How come she is a consultant and trainer on racial issues??? Reviewed in the United States on June 23, 2020
Verified Purchase As an Asian immigrant who grew up in Europe and who have recently relocated to the USA, I find the racial
division of "white" and "people of color" ridiculous and discriminatory. This kind of division invalidates people's personal experiences.
I find it WRONG to be put in the same category as African Americans, Asian Americans or Latin Americans who were born and raised
in the US!
Mrs. Robin DiAngelo and her points of view only consolidate this wrong categorization. At the beginning of the book, she states
that "white" people get their "white supremacist" ideas from mainstream media. And then, in the end, she advises them to seek
out information on the racial topic "from books, websites, films, and other available sources."
Moreover, she continuously proved herself as an ignorant, racist person. How come she is a consultant and trainer on racial issues???
173 people found this helpful
Helpful
Comment Report abuse >
Cult indoctrination for those unwilling think forbidden thoughts
1.0 out of 5 stars
Cult indoctrination for those unwilling think forbidden thoughts Reviewed in the United States on November 28, 2018 The racial
gap narrative takes a new low. The ever evolving progressive conspiracy theory to explain the black v. white attainment gap changes
again. It's no longer lack of access, it's no longer basic prejudice, instead it is now a cultural milieu that you can't ever
escape. Beg for forgiveness and flog yourself at the new church without salvation. A nation that benefits it's founding stocks'
values, the idea behind most all nation states, is now castigated. Well, who is this nation supposed to serve? The traditional
gate keepers don't hold weight anymore, the forbidden secrets why the world is the way it is are out there and these silly narratives
aren't going to last much longer. 274 people found this helpful
Helpful
Comment Report abuse >
The topic is one that we must be willing to explore, to engage in conversation about and to strive to be better, but what does
better mean? Diangelo argues that we as human beings all have prejudices, which is unavoidable. Also, that their effect on how
we consume and process information is also unavoidable. So then is better simply about outward behavior and our ability to actually
change how we think limited?
There are important points in this book that should be contemplated and drive understanding and awareness. Most notably, if
you grew up as part of the group that was in power (race, gender, religion, etc.) then you were conditioned to think of your group
as the norm and every other group as the exception. It is just like when you think everyone else has an accent, but you do not.
Likewise, those messages were reinforced in literature, art, movies, television and advertising. If you grew up not a member of
the group in power, those messages were relentless that you were not the norm or not the ideal. Think about what that does to
your psyche on either side of the equation.
The definition used in this book are that prejudice is at the individual level in the mind of a single person, which may or
may not be accompanied by an outward act driven by that prejudiced mindset called discrimination. Racism is when those prejudiced
thoughts, decisions and acts are committed overtly or tacitly by the racial group holding the power and form a systemic set of
challenges to anyone not in that group. This is all fine and a very logical definition set to explore the topic.
The shortcoming in the analysis of Diangelo is that she fails to articulate that by her own premise that everyone has inescapable
prejudiced thoughts by virtue of being a human being, that any racial group who happens to be in a position of power is therefore
inescapably going to be racist. She says that any group other than whites cannot be racist because they do not have the power.
However, in doing so she disregards the work of Pierre Bourdieu's, which she leverages in chapter 7 as he asserts that "field",
the social context including who has power and who does not, is not a universal homogenous force, but rather has macro and micro
fields in which different groups have the power in different settings. Therefore, by her own definitions, there would be macro
and micro fields of racism benefitting whichever race is in power in that field setting.
By failing to hold true to her own premises, she relegates racism to a white problem rather than to human problem. In doing
so her writing style is often accusatory, argumentative, pandering and self-fulfilling in that if you want to explore her assumptions,
premises and context, then you are labeled a racist. This is very much in the style of the cable news network echo chamber where
a real dialogue cannot exist because you are shouted down at the slightest sign of anything less than 100% agreement. Further,
rather than exploring deeper into these topics, Diangelo stretches about 20 pages of content into 154 pages through exponential
repetition of the same few points and lists of examples of racism, results of racism and assumptions underlying racism, which
are also bloated with repetitive remarks.
The issue isn't white fragility, it is human fragility in that we as humans are predisposed to attribute success to our own
efforts and failures to outside forces and likewise the failures of others to their efforts, yet their successes to outside forces.
Anything that challenges this way of thinking strikes at human fragility regardless of your race. 163 people found this helpful
Helpful
2 comments Report abuse >
1.0 out of 5 stars
Not worth reading Reviewed in the United States on August 12, 2019
Verified Purchase This book was poorly reasoned, without any references or factual backup for what are essentially her personal
opinions. 188 people found this helpful
A growing number of Americans feel that the political
climate is preventing them from sharing their views, according to a new
survey
by the Cato Institute.
The institute surveyed 2,000 Americans and found that 62 percent are reluctant to share their views due to the political climate.
In 2017, 58 percent of people surveyed expressed the same opinion.
Republicans are much more likely to be afraid to share their opinions than Democrats and independents, the survey found. More
than 3 in 4 Republicans -- 77 percent -- said they are afraid to share their views compared to 52 percent of the Democrats and 59
percent of the independents.
The reluctance to share one's views appears to grow as respondents shift right on the political spectrum, the survey found.
Compared to 2017, the reluctance to share one's views increased across the political spectrum. Liberals, moderates, and conservatives
were all 7 percent more likely to be afraid to express their opinions.
The increase in reluctance was more pronounced among strong liberals, rising 12 points to 42 percent, compared to 2017. Reluctance
to share their views among strong conservatives notched up 1 point to 77 percent.
"This suggests that it's not necessarily just one particular set of views that has moved outside of acceptable public discourse,"
Emily Ekins, research fellow and director of polling at the Cato Institute, wrote about the survey.
"Instead these results are more consistent with a 'walking on eggshells' thesis that people increasingly fear a wide range
of political views could offend others or negatively impact themselves."
The self censorship cut across demographic groups as well, with roughly 2 in 3 Latino Americans and white Americans and nearly
half of African Americans holding views they are afraid to share. More men (65 percent) than women (59 percent) said the political
climate prevents them from speaking their mind.
The Cato Institute also polled respondents on whether they would support firing someone if they had donated to President Donald
Trump or presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden.
The cancel culture manifested stronger among staunch
liberals than staunch conservatives. Half of all the people who identified as staunch liberals said they would support firing Trump
donors, compared to 36 percent of staunch conservatives who would support firing someone who donated to Biden.
Nearly a third of Americans said they are afraid that their political views may cost them their jobs or career opportunities.
In line with the results on cancel culture, the fear was slightly stronger among conservatives (34 percent) than liberals (31 percent).
Facts matter. According to the FBI, in 2019, only 49 police were killed in the line of
duty while dealing with felonious suspects. Forty nine. Nearly as many cops were killed that
year in accidents. On the other hand, nearly 1000 suspects/criminals were killed by police in
2019.
It is also true that only 9 unarmed Blacks were killed by police in 2019. On the other
hand, 20 unarmed Whites were killed by police that year.
Last year, Black perps killed over 8,000 Americans. The vast majority of the victims were
other Blacks. However, when interracial murders do occur, Blacks lead all other racial/ethnic
groups in this category. Blacks in America–who comprise about 13% of our nation's
population–commit over half of all the homicides. This racial pattern of violence in
America has been true for as long as crime records have been kept.
Conclusion: Blacks are apparently the most dangerous race. Even WEB Dubois complained
about the problem of Black violence a century ago. It persists.
Rioters will be no threat to America. Civil war takes millions of participants.
On the news you see maybe at a max, some 500-1000 people in various cities across America
rioting at 2am in the morning..burning shit. Even if Rioting is happening in 100 cities and a
thousand participants in each riot that is still only 100 X 1000 = 100,000 anarchist making
the news each night?????
America has 328,000,000.00 Citizens. Where is the Civil War??? The Media spins this shit
to epic proportions and scares and terrorizes everyone.
If the guns actually do come out and people start shooting the police and national guard,
trust me the return fire would put a stop to it very quickly.
What we are seeing now is the Police completely restrained and bunch of snowflakes
throwing temper tantrums. If the Police were actually activated and told to crack heads these
snowflakes would flee back to their Mom's basement and resume playing x-box.
A real civil war would mean the immediate arrest and detention of anarchist groups like
BLM. The Department of HomeLand Security would take over and these shit heads would simply
start disappearing arrested and offshored to some interrogation gulag under the Patriot Act
rules of engagement for fighting Terrorism.
The Washington Post has settled a $250 million defamation lawsuit filed by Covington
Catholic High School student Nick Sandmann for an undisclosed amount, after the teen claimed
the left-leaning news outlet 'led the hate campaign' against him following a racially charged
January, 2019 incident at the March for Life Rally at the Lincoln Memorial.
Sandmann was viciously attacked by left-leaning news outlets over a deceptively edited video
clip from the incident, in which the teenager, seen wearing a MAGA hat, appeared to be mocking
a Native American man beating a drum (a known political grifter who
lied about the incident , and
stole valor ).
The following day, a longer version of the video revealed that Sandmann did absolutely
nothing wrong - as the Native American, Nathan Phillips, aggressively approached Sandmann and
beat a drum in his face.
In a tweet on his 18th birthday, Sandmann wrote "On 2/19/19, I filed $250M defamation
lawsuit against Washington Post. Today, I turned 18 & WaPo settled my lawsuit."
https://lockerdome.com/lad/13084989113709670?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13084989113709670-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com&rid=www.zerohedge.com&width=890
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
Sandmann is also suing ABC, CBS, The Guardian, The Hill and NBC Universal.
The kid needs to add NPR to his hit list. Their reporting of it made me permanently
stop listening to that channel (in a vain attempt to hear both sides of the narrative,
you know give the MSM a chance to be honest etc). Good on him for suing and winning
because that's the only way we'll be able to get rid of the drivel that calls itself news
these days.
ay_arrow
VideoEng_NC , 9 minutes ago
Every one of these news sources is screwed, it's going to be euphoric knowing each
judgment means their accounting dept has to cut a fat check. Nick, don't forget the
individuals on the list like Sen Warren & Ellen. Redistribute their wealth to your
account young man, tell em' it's for a cause they should be supporting.
y_arrow
Mzhen , 22 minutes ago
A Washington Post reporter was retweeting the viral video clip by 8:00 a.m. the next
morning. The first Washington Post story was being published online that day (Saturday)
at the same time a group of about 60 Indians was descending on the Bascilica of the
National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception with the intention of disrupting the mass
and reading their list of "demands," which included college educations being denied to
Nick and his classmates.
The Post really played up the anti-Catholic angle in ensuing stories. So if there was
email coordination between the Indian march organizers and the Post , they couldn't
afford to have it come out in discovery.
play_arrow
nsurf9 , 30 minutes ago
His lawyers should have required WaPo publish an apology and name those on its staff
that were responsible for their intentional libel - in bold, headline font - right on its
figging FRONT PAGE - FOR A SOLID MONTH !
I am not Black, and I have never been a professional sports fan. I did enjoy high school
sports when I was in high school. It wasn't tainted by money, just home-town pride. I can still
feel the pride I felt when my home-town team took a state baskeball chanpionship my senior yar.
We had no star players. We had a group of boys who were good friends of us and of their
teammates. We could honelstly say we won that chanpionship becaue of TEAMWORK. No player was
paid or recruited. They were just good friends of each other. No one tried to be the star
player.
As for the taking the knee to the national anthem, I'm going to blame that on school
districs all across the country. I was teaching when it became the norm for public schools
either to stop asking students to stand and say the "Pledge of Allegiance" or to allow those
who did not want to stand and say it to remain seated.
I can't tell you how much that angered me. I always stood and said it and stared at each one
who did not stand and say it--looking at each one of them one at a time.
I am the proud grandchild of Germans from Russia immigrants. They were called "Dirty
Russians" and were often paid less than the law required for their stoop work thinning beets in
the fields becaue they could not read English to learn how much they were supposed to be paid.
They had escaped the Bolsheviks who stole their farms for the failed communist experiements in
factory farming and communal farming. They endured the prejudice with dignity and with a
determination that they would work hard so their children and grandchildren could enjoy the
freedoms of the USA. I have the photos of my grandparents on my mom's and my dad's side as they
obtained their citizenshp.
I know my ethnic group or racial heritage did not come out of slavery, but neither did my
families' ethnic groups have many thousands of white young men fighting and dying to abolish
slavery and thus allow expslaves and their descendants to obtain citizenship.
I know that the Blacks did have to fight hard to grasp those freedoms. But I also know that
many caucasian people fought alongside them to do that.
Why aren't the Blacks in the cities like Chicago and Milwauki and New York, for example,
working hard to get rid of the leadership in those cities that do nothing really to improve
conditions for the Black minorities in those cities. And why aren't their Black leaders giving
them examples or setting up good systems for them to do that rather than just encouraging them
as they riot and complain?
I do know it's not a simple thing to acieve, but I have seen little progress since the
powerful "I have a Dream" speech except, perhaps, in reagard to many Black families who have
taken the leap to leave the cities and move to smaller towns and cities and beccome part of the
middle class.
I worked once in Indianapolis as a humane educator for the city's Humane Society. The state
had mandated that every child in public schools in that state had to have one lesson in humane
education each year. We were always at some public school giving one of oour prepared programs.
What surprised me were the many Black children in the majority Black schools who would scream
with fright when I brought our mascot bassett hound to a program. He was the least frightening
example of a dangerous dog one could find. I learned from the teachers it was because the Black
parents kept alive in their children the stories of Black runaway slaves being shased down by
whites with tracking dogs.
This was in the mid-seventies and in Indianapolis. I don't know what that experience says in
regard to today's topic. But maybe it's part of the lesson that at some time, people of all
colors need to leave the past in the past.
Off topic: LJ, I watched Pulp Fiction when it came out in our local theater surrouned by
some evil looking bikers. I had been the designated mother to take three teenaged boys to that
movie who were not quite old enough to be let in without an adult. Those boys did not want to
be embarrassed by having a mommie there, so the sent me back to a row further back in the
theater. Some late coming bikers came in and sat all around me. It was quite an experience.
They were taking it very seriously, not seeing the dark "humor" I was seeing.
Corporations that provide generous donations and free propaganda to keep all the social
justice warriors in business have one goal in mind---keeping the supply of cheap foreign labor
freely available to them whether those foreign workers are in China or are here in the USA
legally or illegally.
2.0 out of 5 stars
A
most dangerous book
Reviewed in the United States on March 9, 2019
Verified Purchase
I'm on a school board and recently two fifth grade African-American students caused an
uproar in their classroom when they claimed that, because they were black, they could not be racist. Only the white kids could
be, and in fact were, racist. Suffice to say that the other students (White, Brown, and Asian) in the class were a bit
confrontational to these statements from these two students. Fast forward to their parents demanding a meeting with board
members, the Executive Director of the schools, the principal, the teacher, etc. This book was the source of their information.
As outlandish as such a claim could be, sure enough, page 20 spells this out. "When a racial group's collective prejudice is
backed by the power of legal authority and institutional control, it is transformed into racism." I am a Latinx and never have
seen such a dangerous statement of propaganda to Western society. For this, I cannot recommend this book because it gives a get
out of jail free card concerning racism for all non-whites in Western societies.
Secondly, it pretends to be a scholarly document but is in fact, a short treatise, full of jargon, and out right plain gibberish.
Essentially, this book is pseudo social science. I'll provide a single sentence, as an example, from page 22; "Racism differs
from individual racial prejudice and racial discrimination in the historical accumulation and ongoing use of institutional power
and authority to support the prejudice and to systematically enforce discriminatory behaviors with far-reaching effects."
I believe this white female author means well, but the book is truly full of dangerous ideas. Please do not purchase this book
and, more importantly, please do not read such awful propaganda.
One of the premises of the book is that minorities can't be racist; only whites.
>
2.0 out of 5 stars
Semi-Marxist
drivel
Reviewed in the United States on April 30, 2019
Verified Purchase
This author is consumed with Marxist doctrine and packages it in a racist cloak. Best
example I can give is the assertion that there two fundamental racist flaws in Western civilization, those being the principles
of individualism and meritocracy. One is supposed to treasure group-think and total equality of reward, regardless of achievement
or innovation. I bought this to discover the source of left-leanings of my Millenial grandson and his girlfriend. I feel sorry
that they could swallow such an egregious false logic diatribe. I've suggested they spend a year in Syria, Venezuela, or Turkey
to find out about the real world. Sadly, they won't, but will continue to regurgitate this vomitous stuff.
>
A
Landmark Book. Yes, a shipwreck can be an important landmark.
2.0 out of 5 stars
A
Landmark Book. Yes, a shipwreck can be an important landmark.
Reviewed in the United States on January 23, 2019
If you want to understand the zeitgeist behind the assertions that you, as a white person,
are single handedly responsible for correcting all of the race related ills in America, you should read this book. If you're not
into extreme self flagellation, you may need to prepare yourself, first.
The book is a collection of anecdotes concerning the authors experience teaching others of her kind how to sit down and shut up
and take responsitbity for all of the race-based transgressions committed by society past, present, and future; regardless of how
little relation, control, or personal responsibility you as an individual may have had related to those transgressions. Racism,
in the authors view, has nothing to do with individual intentions and actions. It's baked into the system, and you are a key part
of that.
To advance her thesis without clutter, the author neatly defines racism as something only a white person can exhibit. And
something white people engage in as a matter of their very existence - regardless of their actions or intentions. If you are
white and breathing, you are racist. In case I'm not making myself clear: All white peoples are by-definition racist, and only
white people are capable of racism. An African American cannot, by the authors definition, be racist - no matter what they do or
say. Even if they engage in the exact same behavior as a racist white person. This makes it much easier to to clearly assign
blame, and the book is thankfully short, as a result.
There are factual errors, as one would expect from a book based primarily on recollection and secondhand sources not carefully
vetted. One that comes to mind is around p92 where the author asserts that affirmative action programs are misunderstood by the
general public, that no one has ever been hired preferentially even though they were not qualified, and that these programs only
applied to government positions. Having mentored new hires who were brought on 1-2 levels above me in a technical private sector
job until they were capable of doing what I had yet to be promoted to do, I know her facts to be in error on that score. Maybe
that doesn't happen now, but it did happen in the past. No doubt, there are other errors in areas for which I don't have ground
truth and total recall. The reader should do their homework if they don't want to internalize innacurate data as axiomatic.
I give this book two stars because I think it is important. This book is important because, as a NYT Bestseller, it clearly
illustrates the rabbit-hole we as a society are speeding down into full throttle. If you want to better understand how we ended
up with the government we currently have, and what the inevitable crash will be like at the end of this bizarre exercise in
deconstructing a successful society, it should be a useful read.
>
This book is written as if by an abusive, gaslighting partner - you are just wrong, she knows you better than you know yourself,
and you're a liar if you disagree with her. You are automatically delusional and lecherous and subtly hateful simply because of
the color of your skin. At best, you are unenlightened. Either way, because you have a specific skin color, she argues, again and
again, you are (morally) inferior in this country. And that is literally the definition of racism.
She redefines the term early on, but her definition is way too convenient - and not what the word actually means. Unfortunately,
in this book she becomes everything she's writing against.
We need to understand one another. White people like me want to better understand the racial dynamic in this country so we can
avoid or change the inherent prejudices that we know exist in our culture and in ourselves. Sharing the black experience with us
helps. Pretending to be an expert on how white people think ... is just a misguided, horrible idea - and as offensive (for being
so wrong) as it is when white people pretend to understand the black experience.
But books like this are like signs at a rally - written in hard strokes with a clenched fist - and this one has about the same
subtlety and precision. I give it two stars because it has the quality - like one of those signs - of stirring up emotions and
conversations, which is valuable.
Perhaps the author wouldn't have to use the term "fragile" if she were better at taking to and about white people as if they were
... actually people, and not white devils. How could any result but defensiveness be possible with such an approach?
When people are deaf, I understand that you have to shout. But you don't have to shout insults. That really just makes things
worse.
>
2.0 out of 5 stars
Exploiting
the White Liberal Guilt Complex
Reviewed in the United States on June 23, 2020
Verified Purchase
In "White Fragility: Why It's So Hard For White People To Talk About Racism," Robin Diangelo
claims that we whites do not want to talk about our racism because we do not want to admit that we are racists. Robin Diangelo
expects whites to be forever saying the secular equivalent of "Forgive me Father for I have sinned." The civil rights legislation
that we passed and the anti poverty programs designed specifically to help blacks that we finance with our tax money were not
nearly enough to absolve us of our guilt. The fact that blacks still tend to be less prosperous than we are is proof of our
sinful nature. Black problems are my fault, my own fault, my own most grievous fault. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.
Robin Diangelo is a professional diversity consultant. She earns a good living telling groups of whites how racist they are.
In her Introduction Robin Diangelo writes, "I am a white woman. I am standing beside a black woman. We are facing a group of
white people in front of us. We are in their workplace and have been hired by their employer to lead them in a dialogue about
race." When she discovers that many of them are angry at her she responds with hurt innocence, saying, "I have after all, only
articulated a definition of racism."
I suspect they were angry because their employer required them to sit through the scolding of two well paid Social Justice
Warriors, and they knew that it would be dangerous for them to discuss their opinions. In an environment like this, blacks are
encouraged to talk about how whites have hurt their feelings. This is not the dialogue on race the United States needs to have.
This is totalitarian re education. In a real dialogue, whites will be able to safely talk about how we feel about blacks and why.
Without endangering their careers geneticists will be able to discuss their discoveries of genes that determine intelligence and
influence criminal and sexual behavior, and how these genes are found in different proportions among the races.
When a white school teacher makes a comment about her experience with a black person that Robin Diangelo condemns as "racially
problematic," she tells the school teacher, "I am going to ask you to consider not telling that story in that way again I am only
asking you to try to listen with openness." After making it clear that she will not listen to the white school teacher, Robin
Diangelo expects the white school teacher to listen to her. This is a monologue on race that she is forcing white employees to
endure in order to safeguard their jobs.
When she dismisses the right of whites who participated in civil rights demonstrations to claim to be innocent of racism, Robin
Diangelo asks, "Might many [white civil rights activists] have dominated discussions, not listen to others, and assumed to know
what was best?" She has described herself.
Robin Deangelo writes, we "see stereotypical depictions of black people in the media we live in a culture that circulates
relentless messages of white superiority."
What culture is she writing about? The message we currently get from Hollywood movies and television programs is that blacks
perform and behave at least as well as whites. If a white person kills a black man, even in self defense, that is reported
nationally. The media takes the side of the black man, even when, as is nearly always the case, he was breaking a law. When a
black man kills a white person to rob him or her, the local newspaper frequently does not report the event, or refuses to report
the race of the criminal.
In the "Shaft" movie, the protagonist John Shaft is described as "a sex machine with all the chicks" (rather than as a
responsible husband and father, which John Shaft definitely is not). This description is presented as a complement.
Robin Deangelo writes, "Today we depict blacks as dangerous, a portrayal that perverts the true direction of violence between
whites and blacks since the founding of this country." She does not seem to realize it, but times have changed. In the America
that has resulted from the civil rights movement, whites are far more likely to be victims of black violence than the other way
around.
She claims, "Affirmative action is a tool to ensure that qualified minority applicants are given the same employment
opportunities as white people." Again she lives in a world of her imagination. Affirmative action discriminates against whites
and Orientals, lowers standards for blacks, and advances many blacks to positions where they are unable to perform adequately.
She writes, "A 2015 study by the American Sociological Foundation found that the the highest level of segregation is between
blacks and whites, the lowest is between [East] Asians and whites, and the level between Latinx and whites occupies an
intermediate position."
I feel almost embarrassed to have to explain why this is true: East Asians have a crime rate that is slightly lower than the
white crime rate; Hispanics have a crime rate that is somewhat higher than the white crime rate; blacks have a crime rate that is
eight times the white crime rate.
Robin Diangelo writes, "George Zimmerman would not have stopped me as I walked through a gated suburban neighborhood." That is
because middle aged white women have an incomparably lower crime rate than young black men. If George Zimmerman had followed a
young white man, the young white man would probably have walked over to George Zimmerman, keeping his hands in sight, and
apologized for creating suspicion. Then he would have explained who he was and why he was there. That is what I did in a similar
situation. It is the way civilized people behave.
Robin Diangelo claims that the worst racists are the whites who deny that they are racist. She dislikes the line in Martin Luther
King's "I have a dream" speech, where he says, "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where
they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."
She writes, "Anti-blackness is rooted in misinformation, fables, perversions, projections and lies." What misinformation? What
lies? What she writes is true of the anti racism Robin Diangelo expresses in White Fragility. Again and again in this book she
makes statements that are either misleading, or not true. She is used to getting away with this because she is used to speaking
before captive audiences of white employees who have been ordered to attend her scolding lectures, with the understanding that if
they express their opinions they will be risking their jobs.
When I am told that I am a racist, I do not say that I have had black friends, although I have. I do not say that I have a high
opinion of East Asians, although I do. I ask two questions: "What did I say that is not true? How do you define racism?"
I do not use the n word. I do not tell racist jokes. I readily acknowledge that there are some blacks who perform and behave
better than most whites. I voted for Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012. The fear of being called a "racist" interferes with the
dialogue on race people like Robin Diangelo claim to be leading, while doing everything they can to suppress.
>
Important
topic, absolutely wrong conceptually and factually
2.0 out of 5 stars
Important
topic, absolutely wrong conceptually and factually
Reviewed in the United States on October 16, 2019
Verified Purchase
White racism, and racism in general, is an important issue and the author is
well-intentioned. However, she also ignores almost all of the empirical research evidence on racism/ethnocentrism in the US, and
consequently creates a highly inaccurate racial binary in which white people are always racist and clueless, and black people are
always virtuous and aware. In her scheme, other racial and ethnic groups apparently don't exist, or don't matter (although she
does mention others occasionally and vaguely). This odd concept of white fragility ignores the overwhelming evidence that racist
whites--whether overt or covert racists--are not fragile, but quite solid in their sense of racial superiority. They do not react
defensively because they feel insecure, but because they will not tolerate (in their minds) an uppity whatever kind of non-white
person to challenge white hegemony. While she is correct that white racism has more institutional power than other forms of
discrimination, her own concept of "fragility" undermines her larger argument that white racism is encoded in the dominant
culture and institutions that reinforces white racism. Which one is it? Whites are insecure and fragile, or socially dominant and
in charge? Her answer seems to be both (see for example her discussion on page 90 and following the paperback version). The
reality is that not all white people are racist, not all black people are virtuous, and the intersection of race, class, gender,
sexuality, age, religion, and many other social groups opens the door to all kinds of discrimination in a society based on power
and domination in general. Consequently, racism and ethnocentrism occur more or less equally across all demographic groups,
although the target varies. For example, almost all groups in the US hold strongly negative ethnocentric attitudes toward
Muslims, and many American-born Latinix condemn impoverished refugees fleeing oppression and war in Central America when they
look for sanctuary in the US. DiAngelo treats race and ethnicity as the same thing, which perhaps explains why she can't see
cultural discrimination. Instead, I recommend Racism without Racists: Color-Blind Racism and the Persistence of Racial Inequality
in America by Eduardo Bonilla-Silva (a book that DiAngelo cites inaccurately).
>
There's
a Difference Between 'Many Preconceived Notions' and 'Racism' that the Author...
2.0 out of 5 stars
There's
a Difference Between 'Many Preconceived Notions' and 'Racism' that the Author...
Reviewed in the United States on February 9, 2020
Verified Purchase
It's one thing to have Pre-Conceived Notions but be willing to change one's mind based on
new info, and people who are 'Racist' and won't budge on their views for anything. The author doesn't distinguish between this,
which is sad. That says it all there, about this book. Good points are made, but one has to wade through the repeated assertion
that we are all 'racist' to get to them. No, we all have Pre-Conceived Notions (at a minimum.) I really feel we need some
different terms to describe the differing degrees of what's going on.
I spent 15 years living in a very mixed neighborhood in Tampa, where no ethnic group was larger than 45% (not 'White'. They were
never more than 30%, tops,) and I don't think I heard one racist joke while I was there. When a person knows 3 people who belong
to any group having the joke told about them, those 'jokes' lose all relevancy. I really feel Integration would do worlds of good
for coming to see everyone for the human being that they are, and would single-handedly do away with a lot of the problems that
revolve around ethnicity.
I did hear ethnic references, but they were almost on a level of everyday Cultural Anthropology, not prejudice. "...She's from
Puerto Rico, so 'x' mannerism means..." Things like that. It's just a default until we know better, and know for sure.
Yes, we do need to talk about race. Different mannerisms and statistics ~do~ apply to different groups. If we're ever going to
address it, then we need to talk about it. Otherwise, it gets suppressed and simply festers, leading to no progress, and even
things getting worse.
I don't miss the poverty of that neighborhood, but I do miss the way people tended to default to seeing each other as people, and
bothered to get to know one another first. I had a lot of good experiences, learning to overcome my own Pre-Conceived Notions
there, and more. Now, in a much higher income bracket, I feel the walls going up again as a lot of people (but not all,) in
'minority' groups look at me and assume, "Oh, she's White. She can't possibly empathize." Well, yes and no. Hopefully I'm at
least somewhat aware, and always trying to be more aware, though I can never live in someone else's shoes.
1.0 out of 5 stars
A
new false religion of white guilt
Reviewed in the United States on June 17, 2020
Verified Purchase
Robin DiAngelo asserts that there has been no racial progress in the US since
the 1960s. Indeed, racism might even be worse now since white people less readily admit to being racist. In that one
respect, self-described white nationalists are more progressive than white liberals -- at least the former admit
their racism! But if that's the true, then why should we hope that this new crusade against racism is likely to be
any more successful than the last one? Oddly, she suggests some people want to return to the past, and she means this
as a criticism. But if there's been no genuine progress, then why shouldn't we return to the past? This is one of
many examples of the inconsistencies that plague this absurd book.
Her account is simplistic and essentializing in the extreme. She explicitly says that it's impossible for a non-white
person in the U.S. to be a racist. So if a black person goes into a mostly white church and shoots it up out of
hatred for white people nothing even a little bit racist has occurred, according to DiAngelo. Since only white people
occupy positions of power, only they can be racist. She presents this as a sophisticated account of racism, though it
is in fact a redefinition. A redefinition, however, that is only rhetorically effective if we continue to associate
racism with things like lynching and forced segregation. This becomes clear when we consider what rhetorical impact
the book would have had if DiAngelo had just used a completely different term.
She also seems committed to the view that all white people in the US are racists, though she doesn't say that
explicitly, as far as I recall. But if only some white people were racists, then she should believe people's denials.
The whole point of the book is to say that any denial, an especially an indignant denial, of white racism is itself a
tool in the service of white supremacy. Your denial is further evidence of your guilt. So confess and be a good ally
and... then what? Can we ever get beyond racism, personally and collectively? It's hard to see how DiAngelo's picture
leaves any room for this. DiAngelo envisions nothing beyond identity politics. She thinks there never has been
anything but identity politics, and that there never will be. Oddly, that empowers the very white racists she
opposes, who can now say "See, everyone else is engaging in racial politics, so why can't we?"
Although DiAngelo says racism is structural, it's quite clear that she thinks all white people including herself are
guilty since they are all to varying degrees complicit -- note the moral significance of the word -- with that
structure. It's like original sin in Christianity except that there is no savior, no hope for ultimate redemption and
only some people have original sin. DiAngelo is correct that no one is completely unbiased, but she uses this
psychological fact about human foibles exclusively as a weapon with which to silence anyone who reacts negatively to
the religion of white guilt she is promoting. DiAngelo considers her own racism, in fairness, but she doesn't ever
say anything to suggest that she has the slightest doubts about the sweeping and simplistic framework through which
she interprets essentially all human interactions. She also doesn't tell us how much money she is making on the
corporate anti-racism gravy train, but as a member of the Diversity Industrial Complex she is assuredly well
compensated for her labors.
At one point, she describes a woman who is so disturbed by being confronted with the supposedly racist impact of her
words, that her friends worry she is having a heart attack. DiAngelo takes this to show the lengths white people will
go to in order to avoid confronting their racism. At no point does she show any compassion for that woman, say she
might need to reconsider the impact of her own words, or even tell us whether she was ok. Clearly DiAngelo doesn't
care and doesn't want her readers to care.
That this book is being taken so seriously by so many people should be deeply alarming. It's sloppy argued and
appears to be motivated by a kind of pathological guilt bordering on masochism.
112 people found this helpful
Helpful
1 comment
Report
abuse
>
Warning:
This book was written by a racist who hates you for your skin color. Let that sink in.
1.0 out of 5 stars
Warning:
This book was written by a racist who hates you for your skin color. Let that sink in.
Reviewed in the United States on June 15, 2020
Verified Purchase
I can't believe how powerful subversion can be. We had all but eradicated racism
in our country, only for it to come back in full force by the very people who wanted to eradicate it in the first
place. Since the 1990s to now, we've gone from teaching our kids that 'skin color doesn't matter' to 'skin color is
all that matters'. That's why we're seeing books like this. We're living in scary times, folks. If you leave a 5-star
reviews for propaganda like this, you're part of the problem. You don't solve racism with more racism. Don't give
money to people who hate you.
111 people found this helpful
Helpful
Comment
Report
abuse
>
1.0 out of 5 stars
Subversive,
Race-Baiting Garbage
Reviewed in the United States on June 1, 2020
There are so many historical and factual inaccuracies in this book it should be
considered embarrassing to the author. However, when you are writing a White Guilt propaganda manual, I suppose facts
don't matter much.
The title of the book alone makes a racist, presumptuous case that White people are "fragile" because of their skin
color. Would this author dare to discuss Black Fragility? Asian Fragility? Jewish Fragility? How about the high rate
of Black criminality per capita, or the number of fatherless homes that lead to Black crime and incarceration? How
about the growing trend of liberal academic race-blaming that has led to street attacks in the USA and throughout the
West? She could even have looked at the amount of money spent by mostly Democrat politicians in the US to combat
poverty... trillions of dollars that never seems to make a dent in Black and Hispanic communities or help with
community cohesion? She could have written about any of those things to help offer solutions of racism and "feelings
of inequality". But no, White Fragility it is. Because Whiteness, the existence of White people, is the greatest
problem in the highly indoctrinated minds of the "well-meaning" liberal academics. THAT is what is holding Brown
folks down in her view.
She Wouldn't Dare criticize any other group the way she does with "fragile Whites", because she knows full well that
the outrage mob would come for her and burn her at the stake. This book isn't about having an honest conversation
about issues propping up racial conflict in Western countries. It isn't about easing Black misgivings toward Whites,
and it certainly isn't about helping White people in any fashion.
It is about pinning blame on a group she deems guilty by default.
The text makes the argument that Whites should make special concessions for people outside their own ingroup
interests, telling them to put aside their own life experiences as less valuable than people of other race's
experiences. This is allegedly to so Whites can have "better conversations about race", and better "understand" (aka
give priority consideration to) other groups who openly blame them for their own unhappiness, grievances, failures,
and insecurities.
She presumes to know where all White people are coming from in terms of understanding, perception and outlook, and
she has ZERO basis for that. Her "academic" assumption is in itself racist. But hey, White people, you should still
give up your "fragile world view" to lend a compassionate ear (aka, you must accept some one else's view of you, your
less important experiences, and your race as the gospel), because the current trending belief is that only your group
can be a racist...you know, because of the "power and privilege" you receive from having lesser melanin.
In other words, she wants you to understand that the people calling you racist for not "listening" to them have a
problem with YOUR skin color. But that's entirely your fault.
The fact is, just like other races, White people vary culturally, religiously, and socio-economically. Whites are not
autonomous. They don't all think the same and should never be taught to believe their experiences are lesser, or
invalid, because someone else says so, or because their experience is more important.
Skin color is NOT the cause of world's problems. You can lay the grand majority of the world's social problems right
now squarely on the shoulders of deeply disingenuous, fact-denying academics who are trying to use a shame and blame
strategy to shape the world into their utopian view of what it should be. White Fragility indeed. The author might as
well take the Van Jones or Obama eugenics approach and say Whites are racist because of their DNA.
Books like this are utter subversive garbage that do nothing but dredge up hostility between groups that would
otherwise get along with each other f people like the author didn't constantly make it a point to tell one group that
the other group owes them something because of the color of their skin.
Authors like this aren't out to solve issues of racism, their goal is ultimately to indoctrinate gullible people into
believing that Whites deserve to "answer" to other groups. It is using the unquantifiable rhetoric of White Fragility
to foster White Guilt in people who really do want to ease tensions between the races.
Books like this do more harm than good. White Fragility isn't why its so hard for people to talk about racism. Lies
from left-leaning academics with an agenda to push are why honest conversations about race cannot and do not take
place in our society today.
127 people found this helpful
>
White privilege exists and white people benefit from it from birth whether they want to or intend to.
Had she only stopped after these points were made, this book (with a different title) could have been so helpful.
These are good and necessary points and open discussion regarding same would have been a great starting place; however, Ms.
DiAngelo closes the door to any open discussion about racism, and does so in a way that seems self-hating of her own
whiteness.
Take the name of the book "White Fragility" and think of one example where you could call someone fragile and not have it be
an insult. There isn't one. So before the cover is opened she's given you a hint of how she will proceed, i.e., "you're bad
(weak and fragile) and there's nothing you can do about it." She then goes on to generalize that ALL white people suffer from
fragility and that ANY reaction to her narrative - including not responding to it at all - is evidence and proof of you being
a fragile person and unable to handle racism. She has now closed any door to discussing racism because white people are not
allowed to respond to her discussion, other than to meekly say "yes ma'am, I'm bad because I exist".
Having made her point that all white people are bad, fragile, and racist, (even if they don't mean to be - at least she gives
them that), Ms. DiAngelo devolves into following the Jane Elliott prescription of attempting to fix this racism by belittling
white people rather than by restoring equality to people of color. She states that the racial status quo is hostile and that
to interrupt the hostility (a hostility she's further stirring), white people should have to discuss their inner feelings in
her workshops WITHOUT their being trust established first. She then goes further to explain that the need for white people to
build trust prior to sharing confirms how fragile they (white people) are. Basically, she has created her own type of
"conversion therapy" where she attempts to trigger white people on purpose so she can belittle them so they'll know how it
feels to be discriminated against (again, an exact replica of Jane Elliott's methods). I found that sort of psychology to be
at best unhelpful, and at worst, to have the danger of creating a hostility where none existed.
This book had such an opportunity to be a light in the dark at a time when the country most needs it, but instead it turned
out to be a self-hating "white" woman belittling ALL people (a racial generalization) who look like her, and slamming the door
on any hope of real and much needed discussion of racial inequality.
>
1.0 out of 5 stars
Not
helpful
Reviewed in the United States on June 19, 2020
Verified Purchase
Honestly this book is not helpful. If you want white people to acknowledge their
privilege or their biases in a constructive manor to move people forward, then starting with the notion that all white people
are racists is at best alienating and At worst it does the job for alt right groups for them.. This book if anything make
white supremacy more mainstream by telling most well meaning but ignorant white people that instead of working toward a future
or a more justice and equal society they most accept that they have to acknowledge they are white supremacist.
Additionally, this book is guilty of what it preaches against. One of the sin it preaches is white media presentation of
people of color. The book rails against the movie the blind side. The author critized that the movie glorified that only white
people could life the black man out of poverty and this was feeding into a racist trope. However, her whole book premise is
that only white people have the power to fix racism due to them having the power, which completely negates the role people of
color can play in moving society forward.
>
1.0 out of 5 stars
Errors
from page one
Reviewed in the United States on August 25, 2019
It's hard to take an author seriously when there are assertions on the first page that
are highly debatable if not outright wrong. In the "Author's Note", we read:
"American wealth was built on the labor of kidnapped African slaves and their descendants."
This sentence jumped out at me for several reasons. First, a minority of Americans owned slaves. On Quora, I found an answer
from Mary Mac Ogden, a 2011 history PhD with an emphasis on the American south. She estimates that 1.4% of the overall US
population owned slaves in 1860, and 4.8% of the southern US population owned slaves, roughly 25% of southern households --
even in the slave states, most people did not own slaves. Second, there has been debate about exactly how profitable slavery
was. A 2014 Economist article "Did slavery make economic sense?" quotes several experts on the subject. Some propose that
slavery was profitable for large plantations but not for the south generally; others say that slavery initially gave the south
an economic edge, which they gradually lost as the north developed more advanced technology that the south was slower to
adapt. Third, it's very well established that most inherited wealth is squandered, so even if a certain family did profit from
slavery there's a low likelihood of that wealth passing down more than one or two generations (see "70% of Rich Families Lose
Their Wealth by the Second Generation" on CNN dot com.) So clearly, it's highly debatable that "American wealth" generally
stems from slavery.
I flipped to the back of the book to see if DiAngelo had some evidence to support her claim that American wealth stems from
slavery. Maybe I was wrong. But there were no citations or notes for the author's introduction. So: she made a bold, sweeping
claim that does not stand up to the slightest bit of scrutiny and for which she offers not a whit of evidence.
Why should I read the rest of the book when the author blew her credibility in the first paragraph?
>
1.0 out of 5 stars
Errors
from page one
Reviewed in the United States on August 25, 2019
It's hard to take an author seriously when there are assertions on the first page that
are highly debatable if not outright wrong. In the "Author's Note", we read:
"American wealth was built on the labor of kidnapped African slaves and their descendants."
This sentence jumped out at me for several reasons. First, a minority of Americans owned slaves. On Quora, I found an answer
from Mary Mac Ogden, a 2011 history PhD with an emphasis on the American south. She estimates that 1.4% of the overall US
population owned slaves in 1860, and 4.8% of the southern US population owned slaves, roughly 25% of southern households --
even in the slave states, most people did not own slaves. Second, there has been debate about exactly how profitable slavery
was. A 2014 Economist article "Did slavery make economic sense?" quotes several experts on the subject. Some propose that
slavery was profitable for large plantations but not for the south generally; others say that slavery initially gave the south
an economic edge, which they gradually lost as the north developed more advanced technology that the south was slower to
adapt. Third, it's very well established that most inherited wealth is squandered, so even if a certain family did profit from
slavery there's a low likelihood of that wealth passing down more than one or two generations (see "70% of Rich Families Lose
Their Wealth by the Second Generation" on CNN dot com.) So clearly, it's highly debatable that "American wealth" generally
stems from slavery.
I flipped to the back of the book to see if DiAngelo had some evidence to support her claim that American wealth stems from
slavery. Maybe I was wrong. But there were no citations or notes for the author's introduction. So: she made a bold, sweeping
claim that does not stand up to the slightest bit of scrutiny and for which she offers not a whit of evidence.
Why should I read the rest of the book when the author blew her credibility in the first paragraph?
>
Most people have a gut orientation around their views on race that are difficult to articulate, but they generally fall into
one of two camps. Coleman Hughes lays out the elements of both of the camps clearly in a Youtube video titled "Coleman Hughes
@ Lafayette, "Anti Racism and Humanism, Two Competing Visions"". Published 3/9/2019 IT IS A MUST WATCH if you want to
understand this issue more fully.
It is obvious that Robin Diangelo's book is strictly about JUST ONE of the two possible "competing visions" described by
Coleman Hughes.
Ms. Diangelo presents an unbalanced viewpoint, glossing over and discounting the vision and messaging of Martin Luther King
Jr.. By looking at the situation ONLY from her side, despite the fact that there is more reasoned alternate opinion, she
broadly dismisses white people disagreeing with her wrongheaded opinions as being defensive, argumentative, or simply
exhibiting "white fragility."
It is an understatement to say the Ms. Diangelo is overconfident in her opinions.
There are other major problems in the book. She cavalierly redefines the hot button words "racist", "racism", and "white
supremacy" in ways that are not the commonly held definitions in the general population. However, she then asserts that all of
those terms be applied in one degree or another to all white people and only white people because "whites hold social and
institutional power over people of color." People of color CANNOT be racist with her "new definitions", but all white people
ARE in fact either racist or contribute to racism.
She writes "I believe white progressives cause the most deadly damage to people of color."
and "I define white progressive as any white person who thinks he or she is not racist, or is less racist...."
How this book gets 4.5 stars is beyond me. She must be preaching to some choir that is in dire need of taking a more balanced
look at the issue of race. Her formula for addressing race, and placing such ongoing emphasis on the racial group you are in,
will surely not ever allow us to get to a "post racial society" where one is judged by the content of their character rather
than the color of their skin.
Please watch the following YOUTUBE video for a much better presentation on the issue of race: "Coleman Hughes @ Lafayette,
"Anti Racism and Humanism, Two Competing Visions""
>
Fails
to Address Systemic Racism and Dangerously Mischaracterizes Social Interactions
1.0 out of 5 stars
Fails
to Address Systemic Racism and Dangerously Mischaracterizes Social Interactions
Reviewed in the United States on June 3, 2020
Erving Goffman spoke a great deal about the masks that we put on each day - and how each
day is a performance on stage - what identity do we choose to select during different parts of our day, our workplace, our
lives, etc. But even more than that he spoke about the challenges of navigating identity and our place in the world as human
beings, our necessity to be present in relationships with others, and in 'Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled
Identity,' the challenge of maintaining our selves in the face of the judgments of others.
Robin here is plying her own misconceptions in a way to promulgate conspicuous consumption of ignorance. The systemic
injustices created by racial division and the identities, the masks-if you will-that those with more melanin than a 'white
person' as she describes them-have to wear on a daily basis to navigate this world are not in any way dependent upon 'white
fragility,' or the 'moral condition of white people's soul.' This isn't about 'white supremacy,' 'white fragility,' 'whiteness
studies,' or 'white rage,' and its never been about that. It's about the lived African-American experience and how they
navigate this world and their identities in spite of being discriminated against in the past and currently.
The 'other' in majority societies, whether black or brown in majority white or a korean in majority Japanese, or an
African-American in rural China, has to navigate the world and change their performance based upon the majority culture of
experience they live in. Gaijin, foreigner, immigrant, 'those people,' poor people, gang members - these are all terms used by
majority societies to describe the 'other.'
By jumping on the neologism 'White Fragility' to sell a book and continuing to misuse this term as a blanket application all
across America, the author dangerously mischaracterizes the lived experiences of whites and blacks in America and promulgates
a chilling expression of ignorance and hatred during a time when we must come together and bridge divides. The performances we
each undertake during our daily lives to navigate the complexities of majority societies are not dependent upon monolithic,
unchanging fiats of social interactions that are subsumed under the term 'White Fragility' as the author claims.
Goffman, Malcolm X, and other authors are more appropriate to read here and will give you a better picture of how to
characterize these interactions-they are not predicated on this denial of the self of white individuals and the blanket
assumption of original sin for all white people. By promoting the culture of 'J'Accuse!' of the French Revolution and sending
all white people off to the guillotine before there is a chance to object, to actively work to address racism and stand
together with their fellow Americans who may be African-American or other minorities, the author is being intellectually
dishonest and terribly insults the intelligence of her readers.
This is neither the time, nor the place to promote these juvenile neologisms to sell books. Thorstein Veblen highlighted this
impulse and Ms. Diangelo is happy to jump on the bandwagon.
>
This
book is about closing your mind because you have all the answers. It's autobiographical.
1.0 out of 5 stars
This
book is about closing your mind because you have all the answers. It's autobiographical.
Reviewed in the United States on June 18, 2020
Verified Purchase
White Fragility - a newly discovered white people's universal mental illness.
Robin, It's hard for you to talk to white people about racism because you start by accusing them of being perpetrators of
systemic racism, and you refuse to open your mind to their objections. Here's what you should do. Take over the government,
set up re-education camps like they do in enlightened countries, and preach to a captive audience. Good luck with that.
The Definition of Racism in short is the idea, that one race is superior to another. This is a kind of nationalism applied to
rase instead of nationality.
Amazon Customer
4
days ago
In
reply to
an
earlier post
Report abuse
The Definition of Racism in short is the idea, that one race is
better than another for one reason or another. I am married, A US Navy Veteran, and a Florida Officer. I have been the victim of
racial discrimination, I was once told I don't like your kind of people in my class. I was the only White person in the room. I
called this person out for having made this statement and was told she can't be racist, She's black. The reason we have issues
today is nobody really listened to Dr. King when he stated," I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. I have a dream today!"
The keywords of this statement are "NOT JUDGED BY THE COLOR OF THEIR SKIN." Until we quit using race and or sex as a defining
part of applications, for loan grants or anything, and simply write our names. We will never realise Dr. Kings Dream!
yggdcvhjniuhjmkmnb
4
days ago
In
reply to
an
earlier post
Report abuse
Thank you for this comment. I, as a white female, has been in
this same situation. I don't think people realize the one sidedness to what they say.
Leave a
reply
Heather Lyons
6
days ago
Report abuse
To say that a white person hasn't experienced racism is
incorrect. I have been around people of color my whole life. I have been the victim of several unprovoked attacks both
physical and verbal from black people and even Hispanics. A black person once started choking me for no reason. I wasn't even
talking to him. I wasn't speaking at all! I mind my own business and don't start confrontations with these people. I believe
they target me because I am white. If you don't believe that blacks and Hispanics can be racist toward whites, maybe you
haven't been around them very much.
>
2.0 out of 5 stars
Worth
Reading But Profoundly Illogical
Reviewed in the United States on June 27, 2020
Verified Purchase
I read this book, along with "White Guilt" by by Shelby Steele (https://www.amazon.com/White-Guilt-Together-Destroyed-Promise/dp/0060578637/),
to see "both sides" of this important issues. Steele's book is by far a better book, but I expected them to be in contradiction.
They are not. Steele, for example, argues that "White Guilt" and the white identity have morphed from overt oppression into a New
Paternalism. Blacks can't "save themselves," goes the idea because of "systemic racism." Thus they need "white allies" to help
them. Steele's thesis is that the New Racism is White Guilt and White Paternalism. Ironically, that idea is the essence of "White
Fragility." "White guilt" as defined by Mr. Steele lurks on every page of "White Fragility." Ending racial oppression against
black people is a white person problem; that's the core idea of "White Fragility." Think about what that means. Because black
people are allegedly enmeshed in oppression, they must have white "rescuers." They can't "save themselves" because the "systems
of oppression" are too powerful. Really? As Steele points out, we have had a black President. We have had black Senators and
still do. We have incredible and well-deserved black success in the media, in entertainment, and in sports. In those areas, no
one tells black people that "systemic racism" holds them back. And black people succeed. Black people prove again and again that
they are very capable of success. Look at sports. Look at entertainment. Look at politics. That's point No 1 about the illogic
and unsubstantiated allegations in "White Fragility." There are clear and falsifiable examples of where black people succeed.
Point #2 is the illogic of the argument on a personal level. If you love the book, you're "racist" because you are acknowledging
your participation in the racist system. If you hate the book, you're "racist," too, because you are "in denial." So heads you're
a racist, tails you're a racist, and your only course of action is to take courses in overcoming your "racism," from highly paid
consultants and others in the "racism" industry. Follow the money. This book is the #1 book on Amazon as I write this and it (and
books, protests, speeches, nonprofits, etc.) enrich an entire industry that is heavily, heavily invested in "white guilt." That's
problem #2. As for problem #3, evidence. Where is the statistical, proven evidence of not only the outcomes of "racism" but the
"causes?" Scant evidence is provided, and where it is it is anecdotal. Yes, of course, there are racial oppressions in the USA.
Yes, of course, the terrible weight of history and the United States' terrible "original sin" of racism weighs on black people.
The historical legacy of racism definitely has denied black people of the kind of accumulated capital that helps many white
people. But where is a discussion of the collapse of the black family? Of the attitudes towards work? Of the collapse of
education in our inner cities? Of individual responsibility? Of comparisons between native-born and immigrant black communities?
Of statistics and not just self-confirming anecdotes? (And this is allegedly a "social science" book?) Nowhere to be found.
That's too "hot" of a topic to really be addressed. And, finally, the fourth problem. What is to be done? What specifically
should we do as a society and as individuals? Beyond just wallowing in our "white guilt," we are not given any specific courses
of action. "Defund the police," for example, is a nice slogan, but what specifically is our new vision of policing? How are we
specifically going to improve the black family and out-of-wedlock births, given that the highest correlation to poverty is not
the color of one's skin but the lack of a father in the home? No specifics are given. Most importantly, how are black people
supposed to help themselves after us white folk finally (and thankfully) get out of their way? And that's the whole point. Sell
more books. Make more white people feel guilty. Virtue-signal ad infinitum and, at the end of the day, do next to nothing to
really help our society be colorblind, next to nothing to help our society allow black people to rise to their full potential.
"White Fragility," at its core, is a fraud. It is but the illusion of an argument, the illusion of evidence and nothing, nothing
to its argument except a money-making machine that sells you on your "white guilt" with no agenda and no actionable to-dos.
>
2.0 out of 5 stars
Ultimately
Divisive
Reviewed in the United States on June 21, 2020
Verified Purchase
I believe passionately about this subject, but I did not like this book. I don't
agree that we live in a society that is institutionally established to support the white race and for whites to
implicitly benefit from white privilege. I also don't like the author's broadened definitions of "white supremacy" and
"racist" - I find these divisive. I don't think our issues today are as much about "race" as they are about a denial of
the trauma we have caused different minority groups, and specifically African
-Americans, and work we need to do as a country, across our institutions, to support and create opportunities to bridge
the gaps we have created with our trauma. We've seen how change can evolve with the leaps we've had in women's rights
over the past generation, which didn't involve asking all men to identify as chauvinists and denounce our
establishments, but involved progressive policy, support mechanisms within our institutions, and mentorship programs.
I do agree with DiAngelo's statement that "nothing in mainstream US culture gives us the information we need to have the
nuanced understanding of arguably the most complex and enduring social dynamic of the last several hundred years". I
have recently read several books, Ron Chernow's Grant, Isabel Wilkerson's Warmth of Other Suns, and Thomas Jefferson:
The Art of Power by Jon Meacham. Each of these books exposed a legacy of trauma, both nuanced and explicit - violence,
sexual assault, separation of families, murder, terrorism, theft, false imprisonment, oppression of Constitutional
rights - that African Americans endured for which we are responsible for the fall out. While I learned about slavery,
Jim Crowe, and the civil rights in school and in mainstream culture, I had no idea how deep and broad our wrongs were,
especially post-slavery. As a country, the South lost the Civil War, and yet we refused to hold their continued
rebellion to account and allowed "slavery" to continue for another 100+ plus years without the label.
This was not many generations ago and it is no wonder that many still struggle with this legacy. It is also not
unrelated to disproportionate levels of poverty, addiction, domestic violence, desperation, and petty crime we see in
certain neighborhoods which furthers a cycle of false and destructive stereotypes and police brutality that current
generations are unable to escape. We need to pour support, policy change, and resources into these communities, but I
believe that we should look beyond labels and focus more broadly about righting a long-standing wrong.
I will continue to respectfully ponder ideas put forward in this book, but as a whole, I feel that it misses the
well-spring of positive change that so many Americans today want to be part of, and puts forward a fatalistic ethos that
holds us back from a more perfect union.
11 people found this helpful
Helpful
Comment
Report
abuse
>
2.0 out of 5 stars
Freudian
account of racism
Reviewed in the United States on June 18, 2020
Verified Purchase
Wow, Freud would love this book. Racism reduced to a fragility complex, like Sex
being reduced to an Oedipus complex. Not agreeing with it becomes proof of it. It's all about understanding our white
racist unconscious repressions. There is no proof of whites having white fragility. More like I'm correct because I'm
not not correct. But, you know, get on the gravy train. Make money while you can.
If the author wasn't so sincere about her efforts to help people I would think she was just being mean to people who are
fragile to begin with.
'White Fragility: Why It's
So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism' has recently ensconced itself in the global zeitgeist. Despite being written in
2018, its popularity has soared this year in the wake of the killing of George Floyd and global Black Lives Matter
protests-cum-riots. It is currently on both the New York Times and Amazon bestseller lists, no doubt making its author, Robin
DiAngelo, a very wealthy woman.
I didn't want to read this
book; Scandinavian detective novels are more my bag to be honest, but given the prominence of it, I thought it best to see
what all the fuss was about. Thus I subjected myself to thisexhausting, boring read, so you don't have to put yourself through
it – or further line the pockets of Professor DiAngelo.
The book's argument is
simple: if you are white, you are a racist. There is no way out of this fact as DiAngelo says that white people denying they
are racist is simply further proof that they are racist. This, she argues, is the eponymous 'white fragility' which is a
product of white people growing up in a society which is steeped in 'white supremacy'.
You may well have thought
that white supremacy was confined to meetings of skinheads with swastika tattoos and rallies full of hooded lunatics setting
fire to crosses. However, DiAngelo argues that Western society is built on white supremacy and as a result it pervades
everything. Again, denying that our society is inherently racist only serves to compound and protect that white supremacy on
which it is built.
Even if people of colour
gain positions of power in society, such as Barack Obama, Colin Powell, or Clarence Thomas, this does nothing to make the
system less racist as they
"support the status quo."
DiAngelo's claims are
completely unfalsifiable and effectively make racism in the West something akin to 'The Force' in Star Wars.
Perplexingly, along with
being unfalsifiable, they are also contradictory. For example, DiAngelo argues that white people don't see themselves in
racial terms, while simultaneously arguing that their actions preserve "white solidarity." How can a group that doesn't see
themselves as a group express solidarity? It is also argued that white people should both not avoid talking about race and not
expect black people to "educate" them about it. This again makes no sense.
However, while white
people can never not be racist – DiAngelo herself says she is still racist – they can do "work" to make themselves more aware.
Coincidentally, this "work" happens to be DiAngelo, who along with being a professor in "multicultural education" specialising
in "whiteness studies" is also a diversity "facilitator." This means that
for
a fee of between $30,000-$40,000
she will lecture you for around 90 minutes, at the end of which, if you listen very
closely, you will still be racist, but more aware of it. That doesn't exactly seem like money well spent.
The purpose of these
lectures is not only to make whites aware that they are inherently racist, but also to build up their "racial stamina." You
see, racial stamina is the way to combat white fragility and, from the sounds of it, building up this stamina is a deeply
unpleasant process. The book is littered with anecdotes from these lectures and seminars, all of which appear to end with
someone either in tears or storming out in a rage. Although this is obviously no indication of the lectures themselves being
bad or insulting, just indicative of white fragility.
The crying is a particular
problem for Professor DiAngelo, particularly white women crying in front of black people. Indeed, she considers this so much
of a problem that there is an entire chapter of the book titled 'White Women's Tears'. Her reasoning behind this is that there
is a history of black men being tortured and murdered because of white women's distress. As a white woman herself, she
writes,
"our tears trigger the terrorism of this history,"
before citing the case
of Emmett Till, a 14-year-old boy who was lynched in Mississippi in 1955 after allegedly flirting with a white woman.
This example is a perfect
illustration of how DiAngelo's warped view of the world manages to simultaneously be insulting to both white and black people.
She argues not only that black men will immediately think of lynching when they see a white woman cry, but also that if they
comfort the woman they are doing so not out of sympathy or concern, but because they have been conditioned by sexism and the
patriarchy.
Her argument constantly
seems to rob people of colour of their own agency, while impugning the motive of racism into any action by a white person. If
a white person is nice to a black person, it is racist. If they are nasty to a black person, that is also racist. Saying that
you were taught to treat everyone equally is not only racist but also ignorant as it shows you are unaware of your socialised
racism.
To illustrate this
socialised racism, the book is peppered with anecdotes designed to show that all white people are racist, but really just
display DiAngelo's own prejudices. She argues that white people come away from the story of Jackie Robinson believing he was
the first black baseball player good enough to play with whites rather than the first who was allowed to. But no one with even
a passing interest in the sport believes that he was simply the first black man capable of competing with whites, making her
argument a total fallacy.
Elsewhere she says that
white people use coded language such as "sketchy," "urban," or "bad neighbourhood" when what they really mean is a lot of
black people live there. To demonstrate this, DiAngelo writes about a conversation she was having with a white friend who was
telling her about a white couple she knew that had moved to New Orleans for $25,000. Her friend then told her that the couple
had also bought a gun, at which point DiAngelo says, "I immediately knew they had bought a home in a black neighbourhood."
DiAngelo will presumably assert that all white people would make that assumption, but she cannot be sure of that. This
statement is indicative her own prejudices, not a universal one.
DiAngelo's argument is a
perfect circular one, you are racist because you are white, only white people can be racist, so being racist makes you white.
It is then impossible to argue against because denial is simply further proof of your racism. You can't even argue that you
just treat people as individuals because that ignores their experience as a member of a group in an inescapable intersectional
power structure. Ironically, she shares the exact same view of race as the white nationalists she presumably despises.
The best example of the
unfalsifiability of her argument comes when DiAngelo lists a series of phrases used by white people to claim they are not
racist. This includes phrases like: "I know people of colour," "I marched in the sixties," "the real oppression is class,"
"you don't know me," but the most telling one of all is, "I disagree."
In Robin DiAngelo's view,
disagreeing with her is just proof that you are a racist. There is no room for nuance or debate, no shades of grey – to
Professor DiAngelo the world is, in every sense of the phrase, black and white.
Think your friends would be
interested? Share this story!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those
of RT.
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.398.1_en.html#goog_1009389376 00:33 / 00:59
00:00 Next Video × Next Video J.d. Vance Remarks On A New Direction For Pro-worker,
Pro-family Conservatism, Tac Gala, 5-2019 Cancel Autoplay is paused
Why was the person holding the toddler down not arrested also?
As bad as that was, Isaiah Jackson is a criminal with a long record. You can imagine that he
is a depraved young man. But look at what a middle-aged special ed teacher in DeKalb County
(Atlanta) said about Jackson's stunt:
I don't suppose The New York Times , the Washington Post , NPR, or any of the
other mainstream media outlets will trouble themselves to notice this egregious act of racial
hatred a grown black man visited upon a crying white toddler -- all for the cause of Black
Lives Matter. Racial hatred and violence doesn't just go one way. Can you imagine having your
child (white, black, and otherwise) in Brian Papin's class? That man -- both these men -- have
so much race hatred in their hearts.
Whatever the sentiment behind the [BLM] signs and murals, they're triggering racists and
Trump supporters. In a nation built on devaluing and endangering Black people, even a
suggestion of compassion is more than some thin-skinned bigots can abide.
More:
White America needs every possible reminder of its culpability in pushing this nation to
the brink of disaster. Deface every Black Lives Matter mural, and it won't change the urgency
of a movement far bigger and more resilient than a single moment or slogan.
Besides, if politicians, business owners, and ordinary white people are serious about
change, they should replace those Black Lives Matter murals and billboards with another three
words that acknowledge and proclaim the only path toward eradicating systemic racism and
making this nation whole: "End White Supremacy."
Every possible reminder.
UPDATE.3: Another, less onerous case of child abuse on behalf of the BLM cause:
UPDATE.4: Seems to me that Isaiah Jackson might be exploring ways of instantiating
the thoughts and
theories of Prof. Tommy Curry, who has written that all whites are evil and cannot be
counted on to change, and that the only way to achieve black liberation from their malign
influence might be through violence. Would Tommy Curry approve of what this monster Jackson has
done to that child? I'm sure he would not. But this is where his hateful racist rhetoric leads.
If you hold people to be evil by virtue of their race, then in what sense is a child innocent?
Curry wrote in one of his academic papers that there are no innocents when it comes to racism
and colonialism. ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Rod Dreher is a senior editor at The American Conservative . He has written and
edited for the New York Post , The Dallas Morning News , National Review ,
the South Florida Sun-Sentinel , the Washington Times , and the Baton Rouge
Advocate . Rod's commentary has been published in The Wall Street Journal ,
Commentary , the Weekly Standard , Beliefnet, and Real Simple, among other
publications, and he has appeared on NPR, ABC News, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, and the BBC. He lives
in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, with his wife Julie and their three children. He has also written
four books, The Little Way of Ruthie Leming , Crunchy Cons , How Dante Can
Save Your Life , and The Benedict Option .
BLM is mostly about black narcissism. Opportunities for blacks in the USA are not that bad.
And partially the fact that they are unable to use them and lift themselves from poverty like
immigrants from the USSR, who started here without money and knowledge of the language, did tell
us something important.
To a certain extent the live of the part of population in the USSR was as close to slavery
as we can get. And I am not talking only about prisoners of Gulag. Volga Germans (who actually
were invited to the country by Peter the Great) were definitely another such a group,
especially after the start of WWII.
So in some ways the current and previous generations of USA blacks are a privileged part of
the USA population who never experienced this level of hardships, persecution and lived
uneventful but free from severe deprivations life in comparison with the immigrants from the
USSR during this period.
I am the proud grandchild of Germans from Russia immigrants. They were called "Dirty
Russians" and were often paid less than the law required for their stoop work thinning beets
in the fields becaue they could not read English to learn how much they were supposed to be
paid. They had escaped the Bolsheviks who stole their farms for the failed communist
experiments in factory farming and communal farming.
They endured the prejudice with dignity and with a determination that they would work hard
so their children and grandchildren could enjoy the freedoms of the USA. I have the photos of
my grandparents on my mom's and my dad's side as they obtained their citizenship.
Thank you. I think a lot of emigrants from Russia/USSR during the period of 2017-1980 can
relate to this experience.
Cutting the defense budget by a modest 10 percent could provide billions to combat the pandemic, provide health
care and take care of neglected communities.
Capitol Souvenir Company, Inc. via Boston Public Library
Sen. Bernie Sanders is an independent from Vermont.
▶ Click here for the
conservative
case
for reducing defense spending.
Fifty-three years ago Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. challenged all of us to fight against three major evils: "the
evil of racism, the evil of poverty and the evil of war." If there was ever a moment in American history when we
needed to respond to Dr. King's clarion call for justice and demand a "radical revolution of values," now is that
time.
Whether it is fighting against systemic racism and police brutality, defeating the deadliest pandemic in more than
a hundred years, or putting an end to the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, now is the time to
fundamentally change our national priorities.
Sadly, instead of responding to any of these unprecedented crises, the Republican Senate is on a two-week
vacation. When it comes back, its first order of business will be to pass a military spending authorization that
would give the bloated Pentagon $740 billion -- an increase of more than $100 billion since Donald Trump became
president.
Let's be clear: As coronavirus
infections
,
hospitalizations
and
deaths
are
surging to record levels in states across America, and the lifeline of unemployment benefits keeping 30 million
people afloat expires at the end of the month, the Republican Senate has decided to provide more funding for the
Pentagon than the next 11 nations' military budgets combined.
Under this legislation, over half of our discretionary budget would go to the Department of Defense at a time when
tens of millions of Americans are food insecure and over a half-million Americans are sleeping out on the street.
After adjusting for inflation, this bill would spend more money on the Pentagon than we did during the height of
the Vietnam War even as up to 22 million Americans are in danger of being evicted from their homes and
health
workers
are still forced to reuse masks, gloves and gowns.
Moreover, this extraordinary level of military spending comes at a time when the Department of Defense is the only
agency of our federal government that has not been able to pass an independent audit, when defense contractors are
making enormous profits while paying their CEOs outrageous compensation packages, and when the so-called War on
Terror will cost some $6 trillion.
Let us never forget what Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower, a former four-star general, said in 1953:
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from
those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed."
What Eisenhower said was true 67 years ago, and it is true today.
If the horrific pandemic we are now experiencing has taught us anything it is that national security means a lot
more than building bombs, missiles, nuclear warheads and other weapons of mass destruction. National security also
means doing everything we can to improve the lives of tens of millions of people living in desperation who have
been abandoned by our government decade after decade.
That is why I have introduced an amendment to the Defense Authorization Act that the Senate will be voting on
during the week of July 20th, and the House will follow suit with a companion effort led by Representatives Mark
Pocan (D-Wis.) and Barbara Lee (D-Calif.). Our amendment would reduce the military budget by 10 percent and use
that $74 billion in savings to invest in communities that have been ravaged by extreme poverty, mass
incarceration, decades of neglect and the Covid-19 pandemic.
Under this amendment, distressed cities and towns in every state in the country would be able to use these funds
to create jobs by building affordable housing, schools, childcare facilities, community health centers, public
hospitals, libraries and clean drinking water facilities. These communities would also receive federal funding to
hire more public school teachers, provide nutritious meals to children and parents and offer free tuition at
public colleges, universities or trade schools.
This amendment gives my Senate colleagues a fundamental choice to make. They can vote to spend more money on
endless wars in the Middle East while failing to provide economic security to millions of people in the United
States. Or they can vote to spend less money on nuclear weapons and cost overruns, and more to rebuild struggling
communities in their home states.
In Dr. King's 1967 speech, he warned that "a nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military
defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death."
He was right. At a time when half of our people are struggling paycheck to paycheck, when over 40 million
Americans are living in poverty, and when 87 million lack health insurance or are underinsured, we are approaching
spiritual death.
At a time when we have the highest rate of childhood poverty of almost any major country on Earth, and when
millions of Americans are in danger of going hungry, we are approaching spiritual death.
At a time when we have no national testing program, no adequate production of protective gear and no commitment to
a free vaccine, while remaining the only major country where infections spiral out of control, we are approaching
spiritual death.
At a time when over 60,000 Americans die each year because they can't afford to get to a doctor on time, and one
out of five Americans can't afford the prescription drugs their doctors prescribe, we are approaching spiritual
death.
Now, at this unprecedented moment in American history, it is time to rethink what we value as a society and to
fundamentally transform our national priorities. Cutting the military budget by 10 percent and investing that
money in human needs is a modest way to begin that process. Let's get it done.
MOST READ
Melanin comes with compassion. Melanin comes with soul. We call it soul, we soul brothers
and sisters. That's the melanin that connects us. So the people that don't have it are, and
I'm going to say this carefully [laughs], are a little less, and where the term comes from,
and bringing it all the way back around to Minister Farrakhan, to where they may not have the
compassion . . . . So therefore, the only way they can act is evil . [emphasis added]
They have to rob, steal, rape, kill and fight in order to survive. So these people who didn't
have what we had, and when I say we I speak of the melanated people, they had to be savages.
They had to be barbaric. . . . so they're acting as animals. So they're the ones that are
closer to animals.
Mr. Cannon also
claimed blacks are "descendants from God himself," and discussed "the idea of having to
define myself as a god." He bragged about the power of melanin. I must lack soul, or, since I'm
closer to an animal, I don't have the intelligence to understand melanated wisdom. Still, Mr.
Cannon's claims are implicit in the way media talk about race. The very phrase "people of
color" implies that whites lack something.
LINK
BOOKMARK Media sometimes call white advocates or race realists
"white supremacists," "Nazis," or something close to terrorists
. Still, I've never met a white advocate who believes his skin color gives him magic powers.
I've never even heard of any anyone who believes white people are "gods" or who thinks blacks
only do evil.
When it comes to who robs, rapes, kills, and fights, the evidence shows blacks do these things more
often than whites. They are doing it especially
enthusiastically right now because Black Lives Matter undermines police.
Though whites are often
victims , the melanin "soul" connection is certainly not strong enough to prevent black
viciousness towards other blacks.
Mr. Cannon said that whites are "closer to animals" because of our race. If a white person
said this about blacks, his podcast would be banned and he would be deplatformed.
This hasn't happened. You can still find Mr. Cannon's podcast on Spotify . Mr. Cannon did pay a price
-- CBS dropped him and his talk show was put on hold -- though not because he said bad things
about whites. It's because of what he said about Jews.
"The Semitic people are black people," he said, arguing that blacks could therefore not be
anti-Semitic without being self-hating. He said this while discussing the music industry with
Richard "Professor Griff" Griffin, who left the rap group Public Enemy after he criticized
Jews. The two discussed whether Jews control the music industry and whether some are "scared of
the truth." There was nothing about their being closer to animals or always doing evil. And
yet, almost all the media coverage about Mr. Cannon's interview was about his "anti-Semitic"
comments.
This must have helped, but Mr. Cannon hasn't been "canceled." He didn't apologize to whites,
nor was there pressure for him to do so. Fox is
keeping him on the television program "Masked Singer." His upcoming daytime program hasn't
been canceled, just delayed .
Sean "Diddy" Combs offered him a job. "
Charlamagne Tha God "
defended him and spoke frankly about collective racial interests.
No one should be surprised by this. Fifty percent of black voters have
a favorable opinion of Louis Farrakhan. Mr. Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam are a black
racial vanguard for their people. Blacks appreciate this. The mainstream media doesn't, but
mostly because Mr. Farrakhan keeps insulting Jews.
If he didn't, he would probably get the same welcome Al Sharpton does today. Mr. Sharpton began
his career with crazed rants about "Greek homos" stealing the secrets of "astrology" from
blacks, and defending
a notorious hate-crime hoax . Now, he
stands next to Bill de Blasio painting "Black Lives Matter" on the street outside Trump
Tower.
It's OK to hate whites. Anyone can insult us and get away with it. That is because most
whites are not racially
conscious and do not defend those who speak for them . At the
same time, whites suffer far greater penalties if they speak in defense of their race,
sometimes
especially at the hands of conservatives.
White advocates face unprecedented deplatforming, legal persecution, and even physical
attack. The mask is off. Whatever his successes or failures, President Donald Trump frightened oligarchs and
journalists into showing their true colors. It's far harder now to pretend that America is a
free country.
What holds whites back is our collective fear. Our opponents' power seems great, but it's
brittle. Censorship, economic blackmail, and force are their last remaining weapons. We have
the truth, and if we survive these conditions, we will win.
(Republished from American
Renaissance by permission of author or representative)
I don't think we are held back per se. The "intersectionality" agenda says we are at the top
of the mountain socially and politically and everyone else is bearing the burden of our
existence, so they have the freedom to attack whereas we have the obligation to not respond in
kind to those attacks. So it's a weird kind of supremacy that we have that has to be manifested
in virtue as kindness and being long-suffering and being willing to let them voice their
(uninformed, offensive) opinions. Ultimately what Nick Cannon said is a lot like how an
unattractive, overweight girl who did not get picked for the cheer leading team might talk
about the girls on the team who are dating the coolest jocks in high school. That he is talking
that way is evidence that he is trying to mask his feelings of inferiority. I was raised to
tell a fat girl she looks cute in jeans just to make her feel good about herself. Putting up
with Nick Cannon calling white people animals when we have obviously been the products of and
participated in the development of the most awesome civilization ever is basically just a way
of telling him he looks cute in those jeans even though we all know he is a complete moron. Who
derives their self-esteem from insulting others? Crazy.
So let it slide Gregory. They are just trying to trigger you into making bad decisions.
Don't fall for it.
Er, only (genetically defective) pure albinos lack melanin. Only a coddled Black celebrity
would make a fuss about this pigment without understanding that.
Unfortunately, most Blacks these days are frauds. The "Black Fraud" is more than a "Cottage
Industry" in America. It's actually part of the college and university "Afrocentrism" degrees
and programs. With fake Anthropology, Archaeology, History and variety of other domains they
steal and appropriate for themselves the best of everyone else's worth. They believe the
Egyptians, King Tut, and Pharaohs were black. It doesn't matter that DNA studies have shown
that their wrong. If you read carefully the BLM agenda is against all science, truth, and
objectivism.
Just read some of their forums and you will realize just how crazy these idiots are. You
thought they only wanted to steal your television ..no .they want everything that you made
because they can't build modern civilizations.
The enemies of White people enjoy distinct privileges. This grievance-driven transformation
has been trending for years. Take speech. There are simply no words which, apparently, can
offend Whites. It's all a big laugh! (Right, gringo ?)
That goes for you rednecks, gwai, crackers, haole, hillbillies, neo-Nazis, and goyim. These
words might be offensive to some 'deplorables', but they're certainly not hate speech, which is
very serious. So the rules are this: Whites must accept race-oriented, verbal abuse–but
never dish it out. That's when it becomes hate !
The beneficiaries of these uneven rules of discourse include all POC as well as all Jews.
Why the different standards? Well, it's complicated.
America's new, post-George-Floyd normal now revolves around the most egregious
social offense: the 'slur'–which has come to mean a disparaging word or sentence that
emanates from an entitled White person and is directed towards an oppressed out-group. This
transgression can carry very serious penalties. So watch your step! Never utter the N-word, you
Nazi!
Remember: one N-word is hurtful, while the other N-word helpful.
The moral difference between these two terms depends on one thing: what group is giving the
offense, and what group is receiving it.
The claim that melanin imbues blacks with special powers and qualities is just afrocentrism
101 and isn't new. Blacks are so desperate to find something to boost their fragile self esteem
and assuage their racial inferiority complex that they have to invent wacky stuff.
But if one subjects the melanin claim to a little "white supremacist" objective analysis
you'll see that blacks are some of the most violent and cruel people in America if not the
entire world. Blacks kill and terrorize each other like no other people. Melanin is no match
for systemic racism which is alleged to be the cause of all black character defects.
The fact that Nick Cannon's mea culpa was directed at Jews while he seemingly could care
less about apologizing to whites just proves once again who wields the power in America. Just
ask (or axe) whom am I not permitted to criticize?
And so, Mr. Cannon met with a rabbi from the Simon Wiesenthal center, and did what was
required.
"First and foremost I extend my deepest and most sincere apologies to my Jewish sisters
and brothers for the hurtful and divisive words that came out of my mouth during my interview
with Richard Griffin
"They reinforced the worst stereotypes of a proud and magnificent people and I feel
ashamed of the uninformed and naïve place that these words came from. The video of this
interview has since been removed
"While the Jewish experience encompasses more than 5,000 years and there is so much I have
yet to learn, I have had at least a minor history lesson over the past few days and to say
that it is eye-opening would be a vast understatement."
-- Nick Cannon (@NickCannon) July 16, 2020
Seriously, do Blacks really talk like that?
Imagine what transpired as Nick met the rabbi:
"Nick, we've got a statement here for you to read."
This is the difference all right -- but it's not a "moral" difference. It's pure political
correctness, otherwise known as Cultural Marxism. This asymmetry is intrinsic to Marxism. Lenin
described it as "Who?Whom?"
I find Cannon's views highly amusing as it struck me that this is just one more example of
what I call typical negro "logic." And, to people of color, how about referring to us wypipo as
People of Light. Thanks.
The "cancel culture" proponents who actually do the most damage (as opposed to twitter
spats and maybe blocking speakers from a college campus here and there) are the pro-israel
types. frum's presence alone brings up that question and i'm sure greenwald's positions on
palestine were a major factor. chomsky is ostensibly anti-imperialist and anti-racist but
let's not forget he lived on a kibbutz for a while and still thinks the two state solution is
a good idea whereas BDS supposedly isn't. greenwald has also backed taibbi to some degree in
his anti-cancel stance so that didn't help.
"The forces of illiberalism are gaining strength throughout the world and have a powerful
ally in Donald Trump, who represents a real threat to democracy."
This sacred cow of illusion is being threatened from all directions it seems. Democracy is
great for whoever owns it, and whoever owns the media owns democracy. A cow well worth
milking.
@the pair:
"the "cancel culture" proponents who actually do the most damage (as opposed to twitter spats
and maybe blocking speakers from a college campus here and there) are the pro-israel types.
frum's presence alone brings up that question and i'm sure greenwald's positions on palestine
were a major factor"
Exactly this! Greenwald has been a major irritant to many of the letters signatories. You
mentioned Frum, but also it would include the hyper hypocritical "cancel culture" queen
herslf: Ms. Bari Weiss - who recently 'resigned' from her last pro Zionist platform: the
NYT's.
Jonathan Cook has one of the most cogent, nuanced and accurate critiques of this Harpers
letter at than anyone I've read. Very long and well reasoned, with three additional updates
too. He takes many of the signers to task, especially in their noted over-whelming support
for Israel, for which many of them are now 'suffering' criticism
....It is easy to agree with the letter's generalised argument for tolerance and free and
fair debate. But the reality is that many of those who signed are utter hypocrites, who have
shown precisely zero commitment to free speech, either in their words or in their
deeds...
....The array of signatories is actually more troubling than reassuring. If we lived in a
more just world, some of those signing – like Frum, a former speechwriter for President
George W Bush, and Anne-Marie Slaughter, a former US State Department official – would
be facing a reckoning before a Hague war crimes tribunal for their roles in promoting
"interventions" in Iraq and Libya respectively, not being held up as champions of free
speech.
....Chomsky signed because he has been a lifelong and consistent defender of the right to
free speech, even for those with appalling opinions such as Holocaust denial.
...Chomsky, importantly, is defending free speech for all, because he correctly
understands that the powerful are only too keen to find justifications to silence those who
challenge their power. Elites protect free speech only in so far as it serves their interests
in dominating the public space..."
And then Cook says, most importantly:
...By contrast, most of the rest of those who signed – the rightwingers and the
centrists – are interested in free speech for themselves and those like them. They care
about protecting free speech only in so far as it allows them to continue dominating the
public space with their views – something they were only too used to until a few years
ago, before social media started to level the playing field a little...."
While Sullivan does not share the Likudnik politics of Weiss, he enjoys some notable
institutional and personal links to her political network. As the former editor of The New
Republic , Sullivan worked under the direction of the magazine's fanatically pro-Israel
former publisher, Marty Peretz, who has since relocated to Tel Aviv .
Peretz's daughter, Evgenia, published a fawning
profile of Weiss in Vanity Fair in April 2019, portraying her as an inspiring new
talent who was "genuinely fueled by curiosity, the desire to connect, to cross boundaries and
try out new things."
During the time Sullivan and Peretz ran The New Republic , the magazine was
funded by the
pro-Israel businessman Roger Hertog. Hertog also plowed his fortune
into the Shalem Center to launch a training institute for young pro-Israel pundits in 2002.
Among the first interns to pass through the Shalem training school was a Columbia University
student named Bari Weiss. (Weiss' editor at the Times , Rubenstein, had also been
involved in the Hertog Foundation) .
Whether or not Weiss plans to join Sullivan at a new outlet for disgruntled anti-SJW [social
justice warrior] centrists, the circumstances surrounding her self-expulsion reveal her
resignation letter as an insincere whitewash.
Besides the possibility that Weiss' departure was a PR stunt, there is the fact that she has
spent a large portion of her adult life working to cancel Palestinian academics and left-wing
politicians while howling about the rise of a totalitarian "cancel culture."
Self-Styled Free Thinker Campaigns to Silence Left-Wing Dissenters
Before Bari Weiss branded herself as an avatar of free thought, she established herself as
the queen of a particular kind of cancel culture. The 36-year-old pundit has dedicated a
significant portion of her adult life to destroying the careers of critics of Israel, tarring
them as anti-Semites, and carrying out the kind of defamation campaigns that would result in
her targets losing their jobs.
The pundit has
shown a particular obsession with Palestinian-American scholar Joseph Massad and the New
York City-based Palestinian-American activist Linda Sarsour. Other targets have included Keith
Ellison, the Minnesota Attorney General who was the first Muslim elected to Congress, and Rep.
Tulsi Gabbard, an ardent opponent of U.S. regime change wars.
There is also ample evidence that while at Columbia University, Weiss helped bring down
the dean of Columbia's School of International and Public Affairs, Lisa Anderson, for inviting
Iran's then-President Mahmoud Ahmadenijad to speak on campus. Anderson's son has pointed to
Weiss as a key factor in her resignation:
In her resignation letter, Weiss found space to castigate the Times for publishing
an interview with renowned African-American author Alice Walker , whom she casually defamed as "a proud
anti-Semite who believes in lizard Illuminati."
Weiss also flexed her bona fides as a proud neoconservative activist, saying she was
"honored" to have given the world's most prestigious media platform to a slew of regime-change
activists from countries targeted by the U.S. national security for overthrow, including
Venezuela, Iran, and Hong Kong, along with notorious Islamophobe Ayaan
Hirsi Ali and Chloe Valdary – a fellow Israel lobby product who previously
worked as an intern for Bret Stephens .
In her three-year career as an editor of the opinion section of the newspaper of record,
Weiss devoted a significant chunk of her columns to attacking her left-wing critics, while
complaining endlessly of the haters in her Twitter mentions (which is risible given her
lamentation in her resignation letter that "Twitter has become [the Times '] ultimate
editor").
In her 2019 book, Weiss condemned the pro-Palestine left as a whole. She insisted the idea
that Zionism is a colonialist and racist movement is an anti-Semitic "Soviet conspiracy;" that
the UK Labour Party under leader Jeremy Corbyn was a "hub of Jew hatred," and that "leftist
anti-Semites" are "more insidious and perhaps existentially dangerous" than far-right
"Hitlerian anti-Semites."
It is worth reviewing this historical record to show how Cancel Queen Bari Weiss' apparent
change of heart on cancel culture might more appropriately be described as an opportunist
career choice.
Campaigns to Cancel Massad, Sarsour & Ellison
In her 2019 book "How to Fight Anti-Semitism," Weiss revived her condemnations of Massad,
whom she first targeted at Columbia University after interning at the Hertog-funded Shalem
Center.
Weiss also argued that New York University (NYU) was
rife with anti-Semitism . Her proof? An individual student was told some stupid
anti-Semitic comments, and -- much more disconcertingly for Weiss – "In December 2018,
the student government successfully passed a BDS resolution," and "NYU gave the President's
Service Award, the school's highest honor, to Students for Justice in Palestine."
Massad was hardly the only victim of Bari Weiss' compulsive cancel culture campaigns. The
neoconservative pundit wrote an entire New York Times column in 2017 dedicated to
trying to cancel
Palestinian-American activist Linda Sarsour .
Rapping progressives over the knuckles for purportedly "embracing hate," Weiss characterized
Sarsour as an unhinged anti-Semite because of her criticism of the colonialist Zionist
movement, and worked to disrupt the Women's March, which Sarsour helped to found.
Then in a tag-team cancel campaign with feverishly pro-war CNN host Jake Tapper (who
has his own questionable
history with
racial issues ), they portrayed Sarsour as an extremist for expressing support for former
Black Panther leader Assata Shakur, whom they jointly demonized as a "cop-killer fugitive in
Cuba."
Next, Weiss turned her sights on the Democratic Attorney General of Minnesota Keith Ellison,
claiming in a 2017
column that he had a "long history of defending and working with anti-Semites."
Attempts to Cancel Tulsi Gabbard
Bari Weiss' cancelation rampage continued without a moment of self-reflection.
In an interview with podcaster Joe Rogan in January 2019, the
pundit tried to cancel Hawaii Representative Tulsi Gabbard because of her work advocating
against the international proxy war on Syria.
When Rogan mentioned Gabbard's name, Weiss scoffed that the congresswoman is "monstrous,"
smearing her an "Assad toady," in reference to the Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad. Confused,
Rogan asked Weiss what exactly that meant. The bumbling New York Times pundit could
not answer, unable to define or even spell the insult.
Claims 'Leftist Anti-Semitism' Worse Than 'Hitlerian Anti-Semitism'
Bari Weiss' most extreme views on Israel-Palestine and the left can be seen in her 2019 book
How to Fight Anti-Semitism . In this tome, the neoconservative writer set out to
cancel the pro-Palestinian anti-racist left as a whole by arguing that supposed "leftist
anti-Semitism" is more dangerous than "Hitlerian anti-Semitism."
Weiss wrote:
"Hitlerian anti-Semitism announces its intentions unequivocally. But leftist
anti-Semitism, like communism itself, pretends to be the opposition of what it actually
is.
Because of the easy way it can be smuggled into the mainstream and manipulate us –
who doesn't seek justice and progress? who doesn't want a universal brotherhood of man?
– anti-Semitism that originates on the political left is more insidious and perhaps
existentially dangerous [than on the right]."
When she says "leftist anti-Semitism," Weiss almost invariably means progressive criticism
of Israeli apartheid, racism, and brutality against the indigenous Palestinian population.
If that wasn't already obvious, Weiss spelled it out:
"If you want to see the stakes, just look across the pond, where Jeremy Corbyn, an
anti-Semite, has successfully transformed one of the country's great parties into a hub of
Jew hatred.
Corbynism is not confined to the U.K. Right now in America, leftists who share Corbyn's
worldview are building grassroots movements and establishing factions with the Democratic
Party that are suspiciously unskeptical of genocidal terrorist groups like Hamas and actively
hostile to Jewish power and the state of Israel."
In her book, Weiss insisted the idea that Zionism is a colonialist and racist movement is
the product of a
"Soviet conspiracy" spread by USSR in order to destroy Israel. She expressly ignored the
words of the father of Zionism himself, Theodor Herzl, who wrote that Zionism "is a colonial idea"
and requested help from British colonialists, including colonial master Cecil Rhodes.
"Progressives have, knowingly or unknowingly, embraced the Soviet lie that Israel is a
colonialist outpost that should be opposed," Weiss lamented.
"In the most elite spaces across the country, people declare, unthinkingly, that Israel is a
racist state and that Zionism is racism, without realizing that they are participating in a
Soviet conspiracy, without realizing that they are aligning themselves with the greatest mass
murderers in modern history," she bemoaned.
Not mincing her words, Weiss concluded, "When anti-Zionism becomes a normative political
position, active anti-Semitism becomes the norm."
With these passages, it became clear that her How to Fight Anti-Semitism was a
book-length attempt to cancel anti-Zionists as a whole, by conflating their opposition to
Israeli apartheid as anti-Semitism.
Anyone who disputes that Israel is "a political and historical miracle" is secretly a Jew
hater, Weiss has argued. She effused, "That I can walk the streets of Tel Aviv today as a
feminist woman in a tank top," she marveled, "that it is a free and liberated society in the
middle of the Middle East, is an achievement so great that it is often hard for many people to
grasp."
As with much of the content Weiss produces, her gushing praise for Israel's supposedly
"liberated society" could have been lifted from a propaganda pamphlet distributed on campus by
a pro-Israel lobbying outfit. But it was never quality writing or original ideas that won Weiss
the attention she sought, and which has virtually ensured she will be "cancelled" into a new,
high-profile position in the mainstream commentariat.
Max Blumenthal is an award-winning journalist and the author of several books, including
best-selling " Republican
Gomorrah ," " Goliath ," "
The
Fifty One Day War ," and " The Management of
Savagery ." He has produced print articles for an array of publications, many video
reports, and several documentaries, including "Killing Gaza ." Blumenthal founded The Grayzone in
2015 to shine a journalistic light on America's state of perpetual war and its dangerous
domestic repercussions.
Ben Norton is a journalist, writer, and filmmaker. He is the assistant editor of The
Grayzone , and the producer of the " Moderate Rebels" podcast, which he co-hosts with editor
Max Blumenthal. His website is BenNorton.com and he tweets at @ BenjaminNorton .
The Republican Party released a scathing advertisement against a Marxist Black Lives Matter co-founder.
Taking aim at Patrisse Cullors, the GOP played
a clip from a 2015 interview in which she identified herself and fellow co-founders of the organization as "trained Marxists."
"I actually do think we have an ideological frame. We are trained Marxists," the ad, released on Thursday, shows Cullors saying.
"... In Washington, a taxpayer-funded museum implicitly endorsed this radical rhetoric last week, when it described some basic tenets of American life – rationality and the justice system to name two – as traits of "whiteness" that should be "deconstructed." ..."
"... These catch-all buzzwords make it perfectly OK for rioters to tear down public monuments, loot and pillage stores and businesses, beat other minorities to a pulp, lay siege to police stations, and take up arms against the state. If you disagree with this, however, you're the racist. ..."
In a bizarre video
captured in Portland, Oregon on Saturday night, a man who goes by the name of 'Princess' was punched by a Black Lives Matter
protester, allegedly for the crime of being flamboyantly gay. Both Princess and his attacker are black.
Once Princess was punched,
protesters descended on his attacker and held him as they debated how to mete out justice. Some thought a black man should
punch him. Others argued that punching him was a crime, and a white man should take the fall, because oppression, and systemic
something or other.
"Let the white man do it,"
one black woman shouted. A white man did eventually step
up to the plate and punch the man, and mob justice was served.
Was anything about this
encounter fairer or more just than the criminal justice system that BLM wants abolished? Because abolishment is what they
want, and this is not just a fringe position among their more loudmouth activists. The Black Lives Matter Global Movement
lists defunding police departments as a top priority, and they're winning.
Just ask the NYPD, who've
seen their plainclothes unit disbanded, a billion dollars slashed from their budget, and more than two dozen officers assigned
to protect a 'Black Lives Matter' mural on Fifth Avenue.
Some go further. Speaking
in Portland on Friday, Lilith Sinclair – a self-described
"afro-indigenous non-binary
local organizer"
– called for the abolition of the
"United States as we know it."
In
Washington, a taxpayer-funded museum implicitly
endorsed
this
radical rhetoric last week, when it described some basic tenets of American life – rationality and the justice system to name
two – as traits of
"whiteness"
that should be
"deconstructed."
The problem with
deconstructing the notions of blind justice that have held the USA together until now is that BLM offers nothing to replace
them but the nebulous and constantly shifting ideas of
"power," "privilege,"
and
"oppression."
Its
self-righteous commissars have used these ideas to act out all manner of personal prejudices.
Like activist Monica
Cannon-Grant, a columnist with the Boston Globe and darling of the Democratic establishment in Massachusetts. She's currently
campaigning to get progressive Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley re-elected, and recently recorded a video slandering Pressley's
opponent, black Republican Rayla Campbell.
According to Cannon-Grant, Campbell is betraying her
"melanin"
by remaining married
to a white man, and isn't a real
"n***a"
because of the
"white
penises [she] rides."
This is a woman described by the Boston press as the face of the Black Lives Matter movement in the
city.
Even more bizarre are the
white BLM activists who took turns hurling
racist
abuse
at a black police officer in Portland last week. Racism, it seems, is perfectly fine when it's directed at a cop,
because oppression, and systemic something or other.
These catch-all buzzwords
make it perfectly OK for rioters to
tear
down
public monuments,
loot
and
pillage stores and businesses,
beat
other minorities
to a pulp, lay siege to police stations, and
take
up arms
against the state. If you disagree with this, however, you're the racist.
We all have our
prejudices, and that's OK. Contrary to what many believe, these assumptions are
hard-wired
into
our brains through thousands of years of evolution. Though we no longer fear spears and arrows from rival tribes, we still
favor our own
"in-group,"
and are wary of those who appear and act differently. We
don't just exhibit racial preferences, but also
preferences
for
those of a similar gender or sexual orientation, or those who support the same sports team.
America's criminal justice
system, for all its faults, has been astoundingly effective until now in creating a harmonious environment for the various
tribes and ethnicities that call the US home.
On the other hand, the
Black Lives Matter movement has been effective in codifying the prejudices of a small number of black Americans and deciding
that this ethno-narcissism and in-group preference should supplant that system. BLM's enablers in the media and in Washington
have decided that to be on the
"right side of history,"
the rest of America must
throw their support behind this ethno-narcissism.
Sooner or later, whatever
its actual wording, the Pledge of Allegiance will translate as
"with liberty and justice
for all, depending on your privilege, and systemic something or other."
It will be an example of the "Bradley Effect" only if this transparent effort to depress
turn-out succeeds and Trump supporters stay home because they think his re-election is
hopeless.
However, unless what we are seeing is some kind of rope-a-dope, the President's own
behavior so far may depress the votes among those who in 2016 put him over the top. I am one
of these.
That's true that Trump was a disappointment for many (probably majority) of low and middle
income voters who voted for him in 2016. But I think more powerful factors are now in play that
can override Trump inaptness and his betrayal of voters and his election promises.
The BLM movement codified the prejudices of black ethno-nationalists and is fully supported
by neoliberal Dems as the last desperate attempt to topple Trump. Kind of "stage three" of the
Purple color revolution (with Russiagate and Ukrainegate as previous two).
Effectively, neoliberal Dems decided that ethno-narcissism and in-group preference can serve
as a smoke screen of their coziness to Wall Street and their utter disregard of the interests
of common Americans in having decent jobs and stemming the sliding standard of living (which
led a large part of working class to vote for Trump in 2016).
They bet that can became the new ideology of Democratic Party creating rag tag coalition
from disaffected minorities and East and West Coast financial and technocratic elite as well as
selected groups of professionals. In short the groups who are net winners from neoliberal
globalization and are not that affected by outsourcing of jobs. I think this is a huge
mistake.
IMHO this might became a very powerful, may be the decisive factor that favors Trump in 2020
re-election.
In fact, I suspect that BLM enablers in the neoliberal MSM actually are working for Trump
re-election. In no way the rest of America will throw their support behind ethno-narcissism and
BLM bigoted underbelly with the new Red Guards running amok.
These catch-all buzzwords about racial justice make it perfectly OK for rioters to tear down
public monuments, loot and pillage stores and businesses, beat others who do not conform to
their views, lay siege to police stations, and take up arms against the state. If you disagree
with this, however, you're the racist. This trick will not work.
Truth be told, the USA criminal justice system, for all its faults, has been reasonably fair
and effective in creating a harmonious environment for the various tribes that exist in modern
USA.
And it egregious to call the USA a racist country, if we compare it for example with Israel
or even Russia, to say nothing about various "stans", or China.
The establishment's massive propaganda campaigns and psyops CANCEL the truth or make it
unrecognizable via coloring and half-truths. Russiagate, White Helmets, Skripals, MH-17,
Integrity Initiative, Assange, Russian Bounties & remaining in Afghanistan, "China
virus", hydroxyChloroquine, etc.
The Trump Administration has CANCELED entire countries via terminating peace treaties,
imposing sanctions, covert war, and conducting a propaganda war.
Where is the outrage from writers, artists, and academics about THAT?
They trot out old power dynamics and pathetically shadowbox authority. Yet they're the ones
who are in charge now. Former New York Times columnist Bari Weiss. Credit: HBO/YouTube
Screenshot
If only we could all lead pampered lives like Salman Rushdie.
Last week, several dozen writers and intellectuals published a letter in
Harper's Magazine that condemned -- though they never used the term explicitly -- cancel
culture. The signatories included Margaret Atwood and Martin Amis, Gloria Steinem and Steven
Pinker, while the missive itself was a fairly routine statement of classical liberal
principles. "The free exchange of information and ideas," it reads, "the lifeblood of a liberal
society, is daily becoming more constricted." Also: "The restriction of debate, whether by a
repressive government or an intolerant society, invariably hurts those who lack power and makes
everyone less capable of democratic participation." The political right under Donald Trump long
ago grew illiberal, the signers say. Now the resistance to Trump and the online woke are going
the same way.
What happened next was utterly predictable. Conservatives, despite being denounced as
illiberal in the very first paragraph, did not attack the letter, demand consequences for the
signers, sneer themselves into post-anoxic comas on Twitter; mostly they praised the document
and passed it around. The left, meanwhile, began a four-alarm hissy fit that's somehow still
ongoing today. The letter was accused of fanning a moral panic. Cancel culture was dismissed as
fake news, a repackaging of normal political passions and activism into a counterfeit
bogey.
Mostly though, progressives just crammed the letter into their usual class war. The
signatories were tagged as elites desperately trying to safeguard their privilege, in contrast
to their targets, the huddled masses of the Twitter woke. The letter's critics, as
Michael Hobbes of the Huffington Post put it, were "ordinary people" who lack
"institutional power" and "point out the failures of those institutions." A woke response
letter published at The
Objective, which appears to have been penned by an illiterate -- it may be that the real
divide here is between those who can write and those who can't -- claimed of the first letter,
"The content of the letter also does not deal with the problem of power: who has it and who
does not." It continued, " Harper's has decided to bestow its platform not to
marginalized people but to people who already have large followings and plenty of opportunities
to make their views heard."
A few words on all this.
First, you don't get more "marginalized" than having a fatwa declared against your novel by
a national government, becoming the target of riots and book burnings, being forced into
hiding, and dodging repeated attempts on your life, as happened to Salman Rushdie, one of the
Harper's signers. Another, Garry Kasparov, was exiled from Russia for supporting
democracy. To be sure, this hardly compares to the tribulations undergone by your average
Huffington Post staffer, who risks ennui-filled glances from her coworkers every time she
shares the wrong Handmaid's Tale GIF. But it does seem like Rushdie and Kasparov might
know something about standing up for free expression. It may even be that we should consider
what they have to say.
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.396.0_en.html#goog_424665540 00:13 / 00:59
00:00 Next Video × Next Video J.d. Vance Remarks On A New Direction For Pro-worker,
Pro-family Conservatism, Tac Gala, 5-2019 Cancel Autoplay is paused
Second and more importantly, the reaction to the letter demonstrates just how oblivious the
left has become to its own power. Back in the 1960s, to be a leftist was to be countercultural,
smashing monogamy and fighting the man. Today's left wants that same rebellious aura, except
that they've since marched through just about every major institution. Academia swallows whole
their assumptions; so does the publishing industry, many corporate boards, much of the media,
the federal bureaucracy, a healthy section of the internet. Those who speak out against the
Harper's letter are thus not remotely "marginalized"; they are heard loudly and often.
Many of them have blue Twitter checkmarks, that garish amulet of the modern elite. This is how
power works now: money and rank matter less than they used to, visibility and influence count
for more. And by those yardsticks, the woke are plenty powerful.
This is why a social media mob -- an aggregate of all that power -- can be just as coercive,
just as authoritarian, as an out-of-control government. Yet the wokesters refuse to see this.
They act as though by participating in cancel culture, they're merely exercising their own free
speech, their right to critique authority, a far cry from the state shutting someone up. In
this, they make a mistake usually committed by only the most doctrinaire libertarians. There's
a tendency among some libertarians to divide the world into the private sector and the public
sector. And right on -- that bifurcation is healthy and necessary, even if these are imprecise
and overlapping terms. But emblazon that line too brightly and the division can become a moral
one. You start treating everything on the public side as suspect and worthy of criticism, while
rationalizing away the bad on the private side. That's just business being business ,
you say. You come to view Google, for example, as not just free to do as it likes, but
fundamentally justified in its actions by mere virtue of its epistemological geography in the
private sector.
The woke left is now falling into a similar trap. So long as the government isn't kicking
down anyone's door, they say, there's no censorship at work, since their angry letters and
boycotts all fall under the umbrella of private expression. Yet such private expression can be
a bullying force all its own. A professor who risks being fired from his position and
permanently stigmatized on the internet because he says the wrong thing is not really free to
speak his mind. He may not receive a cease-and-desist order in the mail, but he's still being
suppressed. Yet the left has willfully blindfolded itself to this. Over at The New
Republic , Osita Nwanevu
notes, "When a speaker is denied or when staffers at a publication argue that something
should not have been published, the rights of the parties in question haven't been
violated in any way." That's technically true. But the result can be close to the same. The
idea that the spirit of free speech can't be squashed by private actors, by a culture or a
crowd, is absurd.
From here, the woke left issues another denial: cancel culture doesn't really exist.
What the Harper's letter frets about, they say, is just a smattering of incidents that
hardly amount to a pattern. Really? A University of Chicago economist was recently
put on leave for criticizing Black Lives Matter and opposing efforts to defund police
departments. A political data analyst was fired for
tweeting out academic research that found that riots in 1968 helped Richard Nixon. A
children's author was sacked for saying she
stood with J.K. Rowling . A novelist
stopped her own book from being published after it was attacked for depicting intra-racial
slavery.
Another novelist
had his book yanked for the crime of being set during the Kosovo War. Two professors at
Yale
stepped down as heads of a residential college because they'd suggested the university
didn't need a policy against offensive Halloween costumes. A New York Review of Books
editor resigned for
publishing an essay by a broadcaster who'd been acquitted of sexual assault.
Conservatives like Charles Murray, Christina Hoff Sommers, and Ben Shapiro have been regularly
attacked and disrupted when they try to speak on college campuses. How much more needs to
happen before we're allowed to acknowledge a trend? This isn't prudent maintenance of the
Overton window, weeding out genuine hatred and bigotry; it's the enforcement of the whims of a
neighing, infantile mob. Its aim isn't to inquire and improve, but to ossify and silence.
The Harper's signers thus aren't "the real illiberals," as the woke have asserted.
Nothing in their letter suggests they want to use their power to silence their critics. What
they desire is the opposite: an end to hair-trigger punishments that have sent a chill through
our intellectual life. It shouldn't be remotely surprising that artists and academics support
free expression. What should really flabbergast us is that the consensus in bohemia and the
ivory tower is tilting in the other direction. As I wrap up this column, Bari Weiss, one of the
Harper's signers, has just left the New York Times , citing a hostile woke work
environment. Steven Pinker, another signatory, has narrowly
survived an attempt to cancel him. The new orthodoxy is intolerant, hell-bent on enforcing
its views, pathetically shadowboxing an elite it long ago joined. It threatens nothing less
than our essential ability to communicate. ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Matt Purple is a senior editor at The American Conservative .
Well, it should be very obvious now what you shouldn't do - throw a Trump against them.
It just revs them up more, and his group are too radical in their own way to win away the
middle from them.
"When you cannot attack then defend. When you cannot defend then retreat." Retreat.
Curse them with victory. Without a force like Trump to allow them to unify a group under
their banner they'll make innumerable enemies, as these shots over their bow indicate, who
no longer have any reason to tolerate them whatsoever.
I believe the left and their elite enablers are intentionally trying to provoke a
response from middle America, so they can crack down. So far, they have been stuck
blue-on-blue. Not only that, but when they do win, they lose, as you said. There is
learning.
They are also rapidly accelerating the number of people they alienate.
A friend of mine was a Navy SEAL. He said sometimes, you just keep quiet and watch.
Most of the victims of cancel culture seem to fall into two groups: 1. people who share
most of the ideology of the cancellers but differ on one or two points, and 2.
old-fashioned (usually older and white) liberals who don't realize that the rules of the
game have changed.
JK Rowling, for instance, belongs to group 1: she was a flaming social liberal who
enthusiastically accepted all liberal assumptions until she found one she couldn't accept.
Examples of group 2 include the dismissed Poetry Foundation officials, and the museum
curator in San Francisco who was canned because he said he wasn't going to discriminate
against white artists.
It is much harder to cancel religious fundamentalists, ethno-nationalists,
neo-reactionaries, and other anti-liberals because they normally refuse to play the liberal
game (correctly seeing at as rigged against them), and therefore they often develop
strategies for surviving "off the grid" of the standard media and institutions.
Your last paragraph isn't true. Many of the Charlottesville people were canceled. They
lost their jobs and lost their income when they were sued for damages. Most of these people
weren't actually living off the grid.
True, but I'm thinking of people like Vox Day (who started his own publishing house) and
the various alt-right/ alt-left/ alt-whatever types who got kicked off YouTube and wound up
at other platforms. "Build your own platforms" is a principle with many of them, because
they assume they will eventually get kicked off of someone else's.
I hate Trump and didn't vote for him in 2016 but am going to this year because the left
has gone off the deep end. And does not recognize how extreme it is. Won't matter though
since I live in Western Washington. But other people must feel the same way.
Exactly the same way. I did not vote for him in 2016 and began his term set firmly in
the anti-Trump camp. I no longer 'hate' Trump (remember he is not a politician but a real
estate developer): nothing he does, not a single tweet, nor even their sum total, comes
anywhere close to the damage the current left is inflicting. He is the dam holding back
total chaos.
" A woke response letter published at The Objective, which appears to have been penned
by an illiterate -- it may be that the real divide here is between those who can write and
those who can't -- claimed of the first letter,"
This is a totally unnecessary and mean spirited line.
I don't think criticizing poor grammar or whatever is necessarily meanspirited. But I
expected that the ensuing quote would illustrate what was "illiterate" about that letter.
As far as I can tell, the alleged illiterate managed to communicate in writing, thereby
disproving Purple's assessment.
If the cancel culture continues, at some point a critical mass will be reached, and the
cancellees will be numerous enough to set up their own media and institutions.
Has anyone ever noticed that many people who seem to be participating in this cancelling
behavior are the groups of people (e.g., black, LGBTQ) who are/have typically been
vulnerable to "cancellation" efforts of a more aggressive kind? Is it possible that is more
of an "offense as defense" situation?
I think this is to some degree the case, yes. Ezra Klein makes the point that the
argument of the letter writers would go down much better if they acknowledged the way that
marginalized people have been cancelled forever, and had some active concern for addressing
the ways that some of the debates that the woke want to shut down have real implications
for the rights and safety of marginalized groups.
I also think that given the climate right now people have the mindset that they have to
take what they can get. There is nothing substantive being done to reunite separated
families at the border, but they can make the Goya people uncomfortable for standing with
those in power for example. If marginalized people felt like their concerns were being
taken seriously by those in power, the value of these boycotts and disruption would likely
be reduced.
Yes, cancel culture, like riots, are to some degree the language of the unheard. There
are plenty of cases where I think cancel culture was the best outlet available, since our
justice system has failed so hard to adequately address injustices. #metoo is a huge
example of this, and was effective and appropriate when it was bringing town powerful
people with multiple accusers (though the real takedowns of #metoo happened less on twitter
and more through journalism). But, of course, this kind of tool is extremely dangerous and
unweildy and is only appropriate for exceptional cases.
What I can't stand are the people that decry cancel culture AND think the status quo is
okay for marginalized people (or for the way sexual assualt is handled in this country). If
you don't address injustice, people will find a way to be heard, and you probably won't end
up liking it.
Again, I say this as someone deeply critical of cancel culture.
Well, the elites have no real problem with cancel culture, especially when they can fund
its purveyors to keep people distracted from demanding health care and living wages for
all, among other things that would actually help a lot more people than tearing down some
statues.
Is it just me, or has most of the Fortune 500 come through the last few years of cancel
culture fairly unscathed?
It's just not that simple to analyze others' psycology. It's so easy to say "if they
REALLY believed X, then they would Y." Liberals would say that if conservatives really
cared about safety they'd be pro-gun control and if they really cared about life they would
be anti-capital punishment and for the social safety net.
I think the defund movement is a ridiculous pipe dream, up there with how libertarians
think we'd all just get along if government got out of the way. But it's bad logic, not bad
faith, that leads them to think this way--they are very, very much motivated by safety.
Given all the comments on Mr. Dreher's post concerning the ousting of Bari Weiss, I
would have placed a different picture for the article... Nobody seems to shed a tear for
that particular person, who appears to have gotten on her position for being a very
skillful at cancel culture herself...
Not sure why this took me so long to figure out. But the reason the woke feel like this
letter is trying to silence them is clear. While the letter in no way trying to silence
anyone, it IS in a very real way, asking to strip the woke of recently achieved power. No
one wants to give up power, and the wokes' power is of a special kind since, as laid out in
this piece, it's power the woke wield while denying they even have it. Someone trying to
take your power away does feel like being silenced.
It's a conundrum I do sympathize with in this sense: no, the Twitter woke are not
marginalized withing the social-political sphere. However, they are still championing and
often made up of the representatives of genuinely marginalized groups who still face
descrimination and threats to their real, actual safety in their daily lives. This is
particularly true of trans people, a deeply vulnerable group who get nothing but ridicule,
political attacks, and efforts to restrict their rights from the right and even from the
center. That is why trans activists are the most militant, their people are the most
vulnerable. So there's this sense that the powerless finally have some power to wield, and
now they are being asked to give it up. None of that changes the dangerousness of the power
held by a righteous mob; it IS illiberal, and and the woke need to (haha) wake up to that
fact and do better.
Transactivists, unlike actual transpeople 20 years ago, are NOT deeply vulnerable, at
all. They are the most militant because half of the males are autogynephiliacs who
literally fetishize transgressing into women's spaces. Their rape and death threats and
endless sexualizing of their transition to their new "identity" and forcing other women
(especially lesbians) to validate their false identity is the behavior of heterosexual
males WITH POWER. This is the most dangerous movement in the past 30 years, causing untold
damage to children and teens. I'm sorry you don't see that and hope you can open your eyes
and ears to alternative media like Women Are Human, Feminist Current, and 4th Wave Now to
learn the facts.
Reddit just cancelled several gender critical groups--international support groups
including for teens going the painful process of "detransitioning"--because saying trans
women are not biological women is "hate speech." Meanwhile Reddit keeps up its militant
mens rights groups and several rape and teen focused pornography sites, because that
apparently isn't hate speech. If you can't see the power dynamics here, I don't know how to
help you.
To elaborate: do you even know any trans people? Because I know plenty. And follow some
on the internet, and read their writings. I hate to break it to you, but they are just
people. Like any people, there are some unsavory people amongst them, of course. But you
are deeply, deeply misguided in your sources, and are slandering people that just want to
live their lives in peace. Due to the difficulty they have doing that, yes, some are rather
militant in their activism; I don't support that, but I do support trans people and trans
rights.
By the way, as an intellectually curious person who doesn't want to miss things, I've
looked into the "gender critical" world, and it's not the least bit convincing. I have a
certain amount of sympathy for women who feel like trans-women are encroaching on their
spaces (they're wrong though, their reactions are a lot like male gatekeeping as women gain
rights), but I have no sympathy whatsoever for the abusive, dehumanizing language about
trans people that is all over those sites (just as I have no sympathy whatsoever for trans
people that throw abuse at detractors).
Your first comment was pretty good but you are wrong on some points here;
1) Biological men don't belong in women's safe spaces.
2) The trans movement is doing enormous damage to children and teens who are sucked up into
its ideology and making (or having their parents make) irreversible choices. See the
suppressed study on Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria by Lisa Littman among others.
There are in addition increasing numbers of people who are transitioning and then coming to
regret their choice, though granted others claim it rescued them. How anyone can ignore the
hige downside of this phenomenon is beyond me.
Thank you. The left today, at least in its extremes, seems to borrow more from the
underworld than from an essay -erred or not -of human reason. The problem is that these
elements are seeping into the left's main current like a weaponized infiltration.
Liberal elites are so steeped in virtue-signaling that they have convinced themselves
that anything they do is just and righteous. That leaves no room for discussion or
disagreement, and opens the door for cancellation. The real "sin" of the letters is to see
in illiberal cancel culture the mirror image of the intolerance that liberals have been
attributing to Trump. It's obvious now that the atmosphere around the left has become
brutally authoritarian, and the responses to Weiss's letter and the Harper's letter
demonstrate this. Both letters contain necessary critiques of the intolerance of cancel
culture/wokeness, but liberal critics chose to ignore the critiques and focus on the
characters of the signers. This is woke culture in action. Using the typical academic ad
hominem attack, liberal critics opted to kill the messengers because they feared the
message.
If the "woke" are just a tiny number of "four alarm hissy-fit" throwers, how can they
cancel anything?
How is what they are doing any different than boycotts, plenty of which have been
orchestrated by so-called conservatives?
And this author's example of Rushdie as marginalized by having a well publicized fatwa
against him issued makes me conclude that he really doesn't understand the concept.
Boycotts are powerful tools--when weilded effectively. But it's hard to do so. You have
to have a LOT of widespread support, organization, and commitment, to make a boycott work.
Plenty of attempted boycotts fail because there just aren't enough people committed to them
for a long enough time. This is a built-in, self-limiting component of them.
Cancellation, on the other hand, requires little more than thought-free keyboard
warriorism. Canecllation has sometimes involved the woke targetting small local businesses,
where the woke mob can be enough to send a business under, as in the Denver yoga studio
case:
https://coloradosun.com/202... I, personally, think the bar for boycotting a local
business should be FAR higher than what is exhibited here.
Cancel culture wokeness will never "make America good again." The more we indulge that
foul spirit, the more diseased and debased our culture becomes. We don't need more mob
vitality; we need more reasonable actors.
While I basically agree with you on the substance of your piece, I resent dismissing the
left of the 60s as wanting to end monogamy--really? I was part of that movement and I can
tell you we were against the Vietnam War and for the end of segregation, and recognizing
the crimes against people of color, native peoples, the poor, sexual minorities and women's
rights and, above all, the right to free speech. We wanted the values we expounded
thunderously around the world to actually mean something. We weren't all united on
everything but pansexualism was a very minor issue among a very small minority of our
number.
I don't recognize the current "left" as leftist at all but precisely who they appear to
be effete cultural snobs from the upper-middle-class who resemble the "know-nothings",
Maoists and have little to do with class-struggle.
"Nothing in their letter suggests they want to use their power to silence their
critics."
There is an entire paragraph devoted to suggesting that some of the signatories of the
original letter - specifically Bari Weiss, Katha Pollitt, Emily Yoffe, Anne-Marie Slaughter
and Cary Nelson - have tried to use their power to silence their critics, and provided
links to the allegations. I didn't actually follow the links, but the suggestion is
certainly there.
"A woke response letter published at The Objective, which appears to have been penned by
an illiterate -- it may be that the real divide here is between those who can write and
those who can't -- claimed of the first letter..."
I didn't find the Observer letter illiterate, at all, myself.
has anyone commenting here actually been targeted by cancel culture?
I have and it's not fun having to talk to HR about why your boss is receiving anonymous
letters trying to get you fired for stuff said online. in my case it was the celebratory tone
I took upon hearing John McCain had died that inspired this gutless piece of shit to act
IRL.
even the New York Times got a piece of the action by threatening to name the blogger
behind Slate Star Codex.
this is from New Statesman:
Scott Alexander are the real first and middle names of the author, a psychiatrist based in
California, who had kept his full identity secret. However, as he revealed in a post this
week, a New York Times tech reporter decided to write about his blog and the community
around it, and intended to publish Scott Alexander's full name. In response, Alexander
decided to close down Slate Star Codex, claiming that revealing his identity would
undermine his ability to treat his patients, and expose him to death threats, something he
said he had already received in small numbers.
The response on Twitter, where many of the blog's readers often dwell, has been one of
outrage. Luminaries such as Steven Pinker described it as a "tragedy on the blogosphere".
Others such as software inventor and investor Paul Graham talked of cancelling their NYT
subscriptions. The title's "threat" has been widely described as "doxxing", a term more
commonly used for posting online the personal details of an individual behind a social
media account than publishing someone's name in a newspaper story.
by making things personal and consequential in real life, cancel culture is fanning
divisive flames that could one day turn into a real civil conflagration.
Does Cancel Culture intersect with Woke? The former's not mentioned in
this fascinating essay , but the latter is and appears to deserve some unpacking beyond
what Crooke provides.
As for the letter, it's way overdue by 40+ years. I recall reading Bloom's The Closing
of the American Mind and Christopher Lasch's Culture of Narcissism where they say
much the same.
What's most irksome are the lies that now substitute for discourse--Trump or someone from
his admin lies, then the WaPost, NY Times, MSNBC, Fox, and others fire back with their lies.
And to top everything off--There's ZERO accountability: people who merit "canceling" continue
to lie and commit massive fraud.
The Chinese and Russian Foreign Ministers just jointly agreed in a rare published account
of their phone conversation that the Outlaw US Empire " has lost its sense of reason,
morality and credibility .
Yes, they were specifically referring to the government, but I'd include the Empire's
institutions as well. In the face of that reality, the letter is worse than a joke.
The other turned out to be a 'Novelist'. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zia_Ha
"Rahman was a college scholar at Balliol College,[6] one of the constituent colleges of
Oxford University, and received a first class honours degree in mathematics,[7] before
completing further studies in mathematics, economics, and law at the Maximilianeum, a
foundation for gifted students, and Munich, Cambridge, and Yale universities. He briefly
worked as an investment banker for Goldman Sachs in New York before practising as a corporate
lawyer and then as an international human rights lawyer with the Open Society Foundations
focusing on grand corruption in Africa.[8] He has also worked as an anti-corruption activist
for Transparency International in South Asia.[9]"
Perhaps a small sample but Culture Cancel and Crooke's Woke most likely intersect, perhaps
being one and the same.
The white nationalist contingent here always whines about the alleged oppression of
white people, and my habitual response is to roll my eyes. It seems obvious to me that
white Americans do not rank highly among this planet's long list of oppressed, subjugated,
and dispossessed.
A couple things on this:
Maybe White "Americans" don't have a long history of being oppressed but "Americans" are
not the only Whites being attacked (physically, culturally, or metaphorically) by the Left,
non-whites, tech billionaires, and Globalists.
They are talking about ALL whites all over the world over our entire histories.
And Whites have been enormously oppressed & subjugated. Whites were enslaved in the
American colonies, in most European nations by the "elites", and by North Africans and Middle
Easterners.
Genghis Khan's Mongolian empire reached as far as Europe where Europeans where subjugated,
slaughtered, and raped. To this day there are some Nordic and Slavic people who have slight
hints of the epicanthic fold, even some with blond, blue eyes.
It is now assumed that Europeans used small pox as a "biological weapon" on American
Indians, which there is little evidence supporting this. In fact, when the Small Pox vaccine
was created (I believe it was around 1798) the US government provided the vaccine to Natives
as well as whites. If there had been a program to genocide the Natives, it would have
happened but it didn't.
In Defense of WHITE MALES :
Where I work, for going on 5 years, the white male supervisory population in our company
has been almost ALL replaced by females (all white females). I enjoyed my last supervisor, a
male, he was always fair and very motivating. Since he left we got a woman who has never been
a supervisor but is best friends with one of the level two managers. Our entire team has gone
down hill.
The whole department is like being in high school now.
I will continue to defend white males, even though they rarely defend me .because they're
my people!
The entire white female/male fight that is on-going is only there to prevent us from
uniting. I hope you will begin to support ALL white folks, even those you disagree with the
more we are supportive the more we become united.
Just look at the cost of smartphone that they display at the riots and you instantly get a
certain impression about income of their parents
Notable quotes:
"... And their radicalism would be resisted, Lasch predicted, not by the upper reaches of society, or the leaders of Big Philanthropy or the Corporate Billionaires. These latter, rather, would be its facilitators and financiers." ..."
A section quoted by Crooke in the piece karlof1 linked to
"A social revolution that would be pushed forward by radical children of the bourgeoisie.
Their leaders would have almost nothing to say about poverty or unemployment. Their demands
would be centred on utopian ideals: diversity and racial justice – ideals pursued with
the fervour of an abstract, millenarian ideology.
And their radicalism would be resisted, Lasch predicted, not by the upper reaches of
society, or the leaders of Big Philanthropy or the Corporate Billionaires. These latter,
rather, would be its facilitators and financiers."
And Crooke's thoughts..
"So, what can we make of all this? The US has suddenly exploded into, on the one hand,
culture cancelation, and on the other, into silent seething at the lawlessness, and at all
the statues toppled. It is a nation becoming angrier, and edging towards violence.
One segment of the country believes that America is inherently and institutionally
racist, and incapable of self-correcting its flawed founding principles – absent the
required chemotherapy to kill-off the deadly mutated cells of its past history, traditions
and customs.
Another, affirms those principles that underlay America's 'golden age'; which made
America great; and which, in their view, are precisely those qualities which can make it
great again."
The USA and GB actually implement caste system. That's what job quota means.
Notable quotes:
"... It might seem divisive to compare different groups, but attainment in education and in life is relative and if we're to help the worst off, we have to know who they are. We should help everyone who needs it -- but it is vital to be able to compare groups to know who's falling behind, relative to their peers. In the UK, Bangladeshi-Brits earn 20 percent less than whites on average, for instance, but those with Indian heritage are likely to earn 12 percent more. Black Britons on average earn 9 percent less, but Chinese earn 30 percent more. What these differences tell us is that employers aren't systematically discriminating between people on the basis of their skin color, and that we have to look elsewhere to see the roots of inequality. ..."
"... Poor Chinese girls (that is to say, those who qualify for free school meals) do better than rich white children. ..."
"... But, interestingly, the ethnic group least likely to get into university are whites. With the sole exception of Gypsy/Roma, every ethnic group attends university at a higher rate than the white British and, of the white British who do attend, most are middle class and 57 percent are female. The least likely group to go on to higher education are poor white boys. Just 13 percent of them go on to higher education, less than any black or Asian group. ..."
"... Angus Deaton, a Nobel Laureate based at Princeton University, came up with the phrase 'deaths of despair' when he looked at the demographics of those suffering from alcoholism, depression and drug abuse. Suicides among whites, he found, was soaring and those who took their own lives tended to be poor and low-educated. His recently-published book on the subject ( Deaths of Despair and the Future of Capitalism , co-written with Anne Case) tells the devastating story of what he calls 'the decline of white working-class lives over the last half-century'. ..."
You can argue about the merits of pulling down statues, but it's hard to make the case that mass protests serve no useful purpose.
At the very least, they provoke debate and draw attention to uncomfortable topics that it might otherwise be easier to ignore. The
recent protests have forced everyone to have difficult discussions about race, class, poverty and attainment. Any serious examination
of the statistics shows that we're pretty far from equal, but what the figures also show is that it's wrong-headed and damaging to
lump very different groups together.
In these discussions politicians often lazily assume that all BAME (Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic) people are the same, and
that all white groups are equally privileged. But a proper look at the data shows not just that there are striking difference within
BAME groups, but that the very worst-performing group of all are white working-class boys -- the forgotten demographic .
It might seem divisive to compare different groups, but attainment in education and in life is relative and if we're to help
the worst off, we have to know who they are. We should help everyone who needs it -- but it is vital to be able to compare groups
to know who's falling behind, relative to their peers. In the UK, Bangladeshi-Brits earn 20 percent less than whites on average,
for instance, but those with Indian heritage are likely to earn 12 percent more. Black Britons on average earn 9 percent less, but
Chinese earn 30 percent more. What these differences tell us is that employers aren't systematically discriminating between people
on the basis of their skin color, and that we have to look elsewhere to see the roots of inequality.
Ucas, the British university admissions service, can provide unique insight into these issues: it is the only outfit in the
world to gather detailed information on all university applicants, including their age, gender, neighborhood and school type. This
is collected along with data on who applied for which courses and who was accepted, and it is renewed in huge detail every year.
Much of the data shows predictable results: there is a gap between rich and poor, as you might expect in a UK state system where
the best schools tend to be located in the most expensive areas. But there are surprising discoveries too: nearly half the children
eligible for free school meals in inner London go on to higher education, but in the country outside London as a whole it is just
26 percent.
Black African British children outperform white children, whereas black Caribbean children tend to do worse. Poor Chinese
girls (that is to say, those who qualify for free school meals) do better than rich white children.
But, interestingly, the ethnic group least likely to get into university are whites. With the sole exception of Gypsy/Roma,
every ethnic group attends university at a higher rate than the white British and, of the white British who do attend, most are middle
class and 57 percent are female. The least likely group to go on to higher education are poor white boys. Just 13 percent of them
go on to higher education, less than any black or Asian group.
This is a trend that can also be seen in the GCSE data; only 17 percent of white British pupils eligible for free school meals
achieve a strong pass in English and maths. Students categorized as Bangladeshi, Black African and Indian are more than twice as
likely to do so. In 2007, the state sector saw 23 percent of black students go on to higher education; this was true for 22 percent
of whites. So about the same. But at the last count, in 2018, the gap had widened to 11 points (41 percent for black students, 30
percent for whites). The children of the white working class are falling away from their peers, in danger of becoming lost.
Going to university is not the golden ticket it once was, but it requires stupefying naivety to believe that seven out of eight
poor white boys take a sober look at the economics of higher education and choose to set up their own businesses instead. The trail
of hard evidence runs cold once they leave school, but the prospects for those who can barely read and write are dreadful and we
can get some idea of the consequences by looking at the 'left behind' areas where unemployment, crime and 'deaths of despair' are
significantly higher than the national average.
Angus Deaton, a Nobel Laureate based at Princeton University, came up with the phrase 'deaths of despair' when he looked at
the demographics of those suffering from alcoholism, depression and drug abuse. Suicides among whites, he found, was soaring and
those who took their own lives tended to be poor and low-educated. His recently-published book on the subject (
Deaths of Despair and the Future of Capitalism , co-written
with Anne Case) tells the devastating story of what he calls 'the decline of white working-class lives over the last half-century'.
Yet while white working-class males are the largest disadvantaged minority, their cause is the least fashionable. In the intersectional
pyramid of victimhood, white males are at the bottom, tarnished by ideas of 'toxic masculinity' and 'white privilege' despite the
fact that in Britain class has always been the most significant indicator of true privilege. It's worrying, then, that any who attempt
'positive action' on behalf of poor white boys face a hostile reaction. Last year, Dulwich and Winchester colleges turned down a
bequest of more than Ł1 million ($1.25 million) because the donor, Sir Bryan Thwaites, wanted the money ring-fenced for scholarships
for white working-class boys. Peter Lampl, founder of the Sutton Trust, a charity whose stated mission is to improve social mobility,
described Thwaites's offer as 'obnoxious'.
When Ben Bradley, the Conservative MP for Mansfield, tried to ask an 'Equalities' question about working-class white boys in parliament
earlier this year, he was turned down by the Table Office because they do not have any 'protected characteristics'. The concept of
'protected characteristics' was wheeled into UK law by Harriet Harman's Equality Act, 10 years ago, and the Tories, then in opposition,
took the rare step of voting for it. The nine protected characteristics include 'race', 'sex' and 'sexual orientation', but the Table
Office is not alone in interpreting these as 'non-white', 'female' and 'gay'.
Under the Equality Act, 'positive discrimination' remains technically unlawful, but the barely indistinguishable concept of 'positive
action' is explicitly legal. Firms cannot have quotas, but they can set targets. Employers cannot refuse to look at job applications
from people who lack protected characteristics, but by stating that 'applications are particularly welcome' from BAME, female or
LBGTQ+ candidates they send a message that some need not apply.
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
In 2016 the BBC pledged that half its workforce and leadership would be female by 2020 despite less than 40 percent of Britain's
full-time workers being women. It also set an 8 percent target for LGBT employees, although only around 2 percent of the population
identify as LGBT. This target has been comfortably exceeded, as has been the target of having 15 percent of employees from a BAME
background. In the wake of the Black Lives Matter protests last month, the corporation raised this target to 20 per cent.
The BBC admits that people from 'low and intermediate income households' are hugely underrepresented in its workforce. But what
does it do about it? Earlier this month Oxford University proudly reported that it was making 'steady progress' in its efforts to
make its campuses 'representative of wider society'. Of its most recent intake of British students, only 14 percent came from the
poorest 40 percent of households.
This fits a pattern: at a push, we can hear acknowledgement of the 'poor white male' problem. But that's as far as it ever goes.
The underperformance of white boys and men is not considered to be a problem worth solving. When figures come out showing the stunning
attainment gaps between boys and girls, the interest lasts for about a day. 'It always got a few headlines,' says Mary Curnock Cook,
the former head of Ucas. 'Where it never got any traction at all was in policy-making in government. I began to think that the subject
of white boys is just too difficult for them, given the politicization of feminism and women's equality.'
When I asked a teacher why white working-class boys have fallen so far behind, he gave me a short answer: girls are better behaved
and immigrant parents are stricter. This is a generalization but nonetheless interesting: if it is the case that parenting is the
problem, then it's not clear how much the UK government can do. Perhaps the reluctance to discuss the subject stems from fear that
such a discussion would lead to difficult territory about family structure, quality of parenting and -- in short -- culture. Perhaps
politicians think it better to let the problem fester, and the children suffer, than to risk discussing it.
Last month, the British government announced that its commission on racial inequality would include an examination into the underperformance
of working-class white boys at schools. Will it look deep into the causes? It might look at recent studies that suggest poor reading
levels in schools is a huge part of the problem. And it might ask whether 'positive action' in the name of diversity has left white
working-class boys behind.
Right now, BLM is a cash cow for the Democrats, earning them a whopping $1.67 billion in
corporate donations so far, with a billion of that coming from Bank of America.
Here's a chart of that HUGE donation pool on BLM:
However, the problem is that, if you go to the organization's webpage and hit the "donate"
button, you're not actually giving that money to BLM. Instead, it takes you to a page for a
group called ActBlue.
What is ActBlue?
ActBlue is a not-for-profit organization that "enables left-leaning nonprofits, Democrats,
and progressive groups to raise money on the Internet by providing them with online fundraising
software."
And they say their mission is to "empower small-dollar donors".
Somebody must have forgotten to tell corporate America that little tidbit.
But there's more
If you go to opensecrets.org, a site that tracks where the money goes in charity, you'll get
an idea of where ActBlue's money goes.
Now, this claim has been disputed by both ActBlue and BLM, but it's hard not to see how this
connection could be made between the money BLM is raking in and these massive ActBlue
donations. If this is true, if BLM is nothing more than a donation front for the DNC, would
that change anybody's mind about giving to them?
The Michigan State University administration pressured professor Stephen Hsu to resign from
his position as vice president of research and innovation because he touted research that found
police are not more likely to shoot black Americans. The study found:
"The race of a police officer did not predict the race of the citizen shot. In other
words, black officers were just as likely to shoot black citizens as white officers
were."
For political reasons, the authors of the study sought its retraction.
The U.S. Department of Education warned UCLA that it may impose fines for improperly and
abusively targeting white professor Lt. Col. W. Ajax Peris for disciplinary action over his use
of the n-word while reading to his class Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.'s "Letter from Birmingham
Jail" that contained the expressions "when your first name becomes "n----r," your middle name
becomes "boy" (however old you are). Referring to white civil rights activists King wrote,
"They have languished in filthy, roach-infested jails, suffering the abuse and brutality of
policemen who view them as 'dirty n----r-lovers.'"
Boston University is considering changing the name of its mascot Rhett because of his link
to "Gone with the Wind." Almost 4,000 Rutgers University students signed a petition to rename
campus buildings Hardenbergh Hall, Frelinghuysen Hall, and Milledoler Hall because these men
were slave owners . University of Arkansas students petitioned to remove a statue of J. William
Fulbright because he was a segregationist who opposed the Brown v. Board of Education that
ruled against school segregation.
The suppression of free speech and ideas by the elite is nothing new. It has a long ugly
history. Galileo Galilei was a 17th-century Italian astronomer, physicist, and engineer,
sometimes called "father of modern physics." The Catholic Church and other scientists of his
day believed that the Earth was the center of the universe. Galileo offered evidence that the
Earth traveled around the sun -- heliocentrism. That made him "vehemently suspect of heresy"
and was forced to recant and sentenced to formal imprisonment at the pleasure of the
Inquisition and was later commuted to house arrest for the rest of his life.
Much of today's totalitarianism, promotion of hate and not to mention outright stupidity,
has its roots on college campuses. Sources that report on some of the more egregious forms of
the abandonment of free inquiry, hate, and stupidity at our colleges are College Reform and
College Fix.
Prof. William S. Penn, who was a Distinguished Faculty Award recipient at Michigan State
University in 2003, and a two-time winner of the prestigious Stephen Crane Prize for Fiction,
explained to his students, "This country still is full of closet racists." He said:
"Republicans are not a majority in this country anymore. They are a bunch of dead white
people. Or dying white people."
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
The public has recently been treated to the term -- white privilege. Colleges have long-held
courses and seminars on "whiteness." One college even has a course titled "Abolition of
Whiteness." According to some academic intellectuals, whites enjoy advantages that non-whites
do not. They earn a higher income and reside in better housing, and their children go to better
schools and achieve more. Based on that idea, Asian Americans have more white privilege than
white people. And, on a personal note, my daughter has more white privilege than probably 95%
of white Americans.
Evidence of how stupid college ideas find their way into the public arena can be seen on our
daily news. Don Lemon, a CNN anchorman, said, "We have to stop demonizing people and realize
the biggest terror threat in this country is white men, most of them radicalized to the right,
and we have to start doing something about them." Steven Clifford, a former King Broadcasting
CEO, said, "I will be leading a great movement to prohibit straight white males, who I believe
supported Donald Trump by about 85 percent, from exercising the franchise (to vote), and I
think that will save our democracy."
As George Orwell said, "Some ideas are so stupid that only intellectuals believe them."
If the stupid ideas of academic intellectuals remained on college campuses and did not
infect the rest of society, they might be a source of entertainment -- much like a circus.
"... By David Kerans , historian of Russia and financial analyst. He has held appointments at Harvard, Stanford, and Yale Universities, as well as at Wall Street investment houses. ..."
"... "It sees America as in its essence not about freedom but oppression. It argues, in fact, that all the ideals about individual liberty, religious freedom, limited government, and the equality of all human beings were always a falsehood to cover for and justify and entrench the enslavement of human beings under the fiction of race. It wasn't that these values competed with the poison of slavery, and eventually overcame it . It's that the liberal system is itself a form of white supremacy ..."
"... "This view of the world certainly has "moral clarity." What it lacks is moral complexity. No country can be so reduced to one single prism and damned because of it. American society has far more complexity and history has far more contingency than can be jammed into this rubric." ..."
"... " the banks frankly own the place." ..."
"... "wall of propaganda" ..."
"... "racial capitalism" ..."
"... "cancel culture" ..."
"... "all lives matter" ..."
"... "silence is violence" ..."
"... "Putin apologist." ..."
"... " a new set of moral attitudes and political commitments that tend to weaken our norms of open debate in favor of ideological conformity" ..."
"... "a vogue for public shaming and ostracism", a "tendency to dissolve complex policy issues in a blinding moral certainty" ..."
"... "calls for swift and severe retribution in response to perceived transgressions of speech and thought." ..."
"... "resistance must not be allowed to harden into its own brand of dogma or coercion," ..."
"... "We are already paying the price in greater risk aversion among writers, artists, and journalists, who fear for their livelihoods if they depart from the consensus or even lack sufficient zeal in agreement. This stifling atmosphere will ultimately harm the most vital causes of our time." ..."
"... Think your friends would be interested? Share this story! ..."
By
David
Kerans
, historian of Russia and financial analyst. He has held appointments at Harvard, Stanford, and Yale
Universities, as well as at Wall Street investment houses.
Should the issue of racism really trump all of America's other flaws, such as runaway wealth inequality, out of control
military spending, a corrupt finance system, an oligarchic mass media, and a throttled democracy?
Headcounters inform us
that 15 to 25 million people have turned up in the past six weeks for demonstrations related to Black Lives Matter (BLM),
making this one of the biggest waves of civic engagement in American history. A few reforms to policing are under discussion,
and we see some shifts in political leanings – polls indicate enthusiasm for Trump ebbing, pessimism about the direction of
the country rising, and support for reduced funding of police departments. But surely something broader is afoot?
It isn't difficult to see
that the BLM movement is making a real mark in two ways. In the conceptual realm, many BLM-supporting scholars are promoting
an unabashedly narrow understanding of the driving forces of American history and power structures, ardently centered on
racial
oppression
.
On the ground, meanwhile, a strong current of left illiberalism has taken shape, wherein a minority of strident activists are
imposing their orthodoxy on race-related matters with a fervor approaching Red Scare McCarthyism.
Andrew Sullivan
, writing in The Intelligencer, has aptly characterized BLM's analytical approach:
"It sees America as in its essence not about freedom but oppression. It argues, in fact,
that all the ideals about individual liberty, religious freedom, limited government, and the equality of all human beings were
always a falsehood to cover for and justify and entrench the enslavement of human beings under the fiction of race. It wasn't
that these values competed with the poison of slavery, and eventually overcame it . It's that the liberal system is itself a
form of white supremacy
"This view of the world certainly has "moral clarity." What it lacks is moral
complexity. No country can be so reduced to one single prism and damned because of it. American society has far more
complexity and history has far more contingency than can be jammed into this rubric."
Allow yourself a moment to
survey the country's primary problems. Your list might include:
Runaway global warming,
plausibly a threat to all forms of life on earth within the foreseeable future.
A finance system that
fuels corruption and capital flight from all over the world to
"offshore"
banking
havens
–
meaning primarily UK dependencies and the US – thereby hollowing out their tax bases, and ours. The amounts are staggering, in
the tens of trillions of
dollars
.
Runaway wealth inequality,
which correlates
persuasively
to
every measurable human pathology, across every geography, across all wealth groups. The biological consequences of the
stresses accompanying inequality are heavy, and even punish the
rich
,
as Richard G Wilkinson and Kate Pickett elaborate throughout their book The Spirit Level.
About 150 million
Americans
live
with chronic disease, attributable partly to pollution from pesticides, plastics, pharmaceuticals, etc, and, likely also to
the stress effects of wealth inequality.
The Pentagon's colossal
budget –
unauditable
and
thus unaccountable to Congress – sucking out ever increasing resources, and inclining the US to stoke international tensions
so as to justify the river of money.
A higher-education constellation steered more to producing profit than mature citizens, with a consequent erosion of America's
human
capital
on
various planes.
A throttled democracy,
where the trivial controls over campaign fundraising allow big-money donors and corporations to influence politicians. Senator
Dick
Durbin
(D-Illinois) expressed his despair about crafting meaningful banking regulations back in 2009:
" the
banks frankly own the place."
And so the stimulus package gives hundreds of billions to Treasury Secretary Mnuchin with
virtually no
controls
and
with corrupt
outcomes
,
but without public uproar.
An oligarchic mass media
that erects a
"wall of propaganda"
(political commentator Cenk Uygur's phrasing)
against anything smelling like social democracy – and, I would add, any gesture of rapprochement with Russia, among other
taboo subjects, including climate change, and military
intervention
.
Are any of these issues
dependent on the legacy of American slavery? America has myriad challenges to face, the vestiges of slavery and racism among
them, not above them. Contorting analytical approaches to prioritize the perspective of racial oppression obscures more than
it illuminates. America needs citizens better informed on all of the crises listed above.
The trajectory of the
George Floyd demonstrations seems to illustrate the risk of BLM becoming myopic.
BLM
architects
in the academy insist that the goal is to end
"racial capitalism"
via a
color-conscious
version
of
social democracy, but the race-grievance dimension – once presented as all-eclipsing – drowns out all other messages. And so
the mass media has easily channeled the demonstrations into very narrow terrain: demands to reduce police budgets and ensure
accountability for rogue cops. (Not so long ago, be it noted, BLM leadership cozied up to numerous corporate donors, and has
looked decidedly not revolutionary to keen critics such as social commentator
Paul
Street
.)
Meanwhile, BLM's
self-righteous repudiation of America has found potent application in its culture wars. An armada of aggressive online
social-justice warriors has honed a seemingly unbridled
"cancel culture"
–
including iconoclasm (toppling statues, for example), conformity control (condemning the phrase
"all
lives matter"
, or anything
else
that
might somehow
dilute
anti-racist
messaging), demanding participatory anti-racism on their terms (
"silence is violence"
,
for
instance
), denunciations (branding any level of skepticism racist, and often insisting that beliefs straying from their
line threaten the physical safety of black
people
),
and punishment. Plenty of people accused of racism – or simply racial insensitivity, or
less
–
have been fired, some even after making self-abasing confessions to their perceived sins, because their employer fears the
wrath of the woke mob.
BLM did not invent any
dimension of cancel culture, ie, the exclusion of tainted persons, groups or institutions from communication venues or
respectful attention. Recall, for instance, the McCarthyist anti-communist witch hunts, or the establishment's branding of
anyone doubting the Russiagate narrative as a
"Putin apologist."
But BLM's
stridency and moral certitude has fomented cancel culture.
Cancel culture is not
risk-free to progressive causes. In 2017, its #metoo emanation claimed the career of Senator Al Franken, one of the most
progressive senators – an outcome many of his colleagues
regret
.
And this is not an epiphenomenon. On July 7, Harper's Magazine published an
open
letter
from more than 150 cultural luminaries, including left-wing icons Noam Chomsky and Gloria Steinem, expressing grave
alarm over
" a new set of moral attitudes and political commitments that tend to weaken
our norms of open debate in favor of ideological conformity"
,
"a vogue for public
shaming and ostracism", a "tendency to dissolve complex policy issues in a blinding moral certainty"
, and
"calls
for swift and severe retribution in response to perceived transgressions of speech and thought."
They warn that
"resistance
must not be allowed to harden into its own brand of dogma or coercion,"
and lament the cowardly obedience of corporate
and university leaders in bowing to digital woke-mob demands.
"We are already paying the
price in greater risk aversion among writers, artists, and journalists, who fear for their livelihoods if they depart from the
consensus or even lack sufficient zeal in agreement. This stifling atmosphere will ultimately harm the most vital causes of
our time."
Let's hope that message
gets through.
Think your friends would be
interested? Share this story!
"... "Whiteness (and its accepted normality) also exist as everyday microaggressions toward people of color," is not a message one might expect to find on the website of a Smithsonian Institution museum. Yet there it is, part of the topic titled 'Whiteness' in a series called 'Talking About Race', second from the top of the home page of the National Museum of African-American History and Culture (NMAAHC). ..."
"... There is no way to tell how long it has been up on the site, but it was brought to the public eye on Tuesday by Claremont Institute president Ryan P. Williams, who described it as "divisive propaganda." ..."
"... "common characteristics of most US White people," ..."
"... "committed to equity." ..."
"... It's bad enough that this kind of racialist propaganda is being pushed by the taxpayer-funded Smithsonian, but it gets worse. The Trump administration is literally paying race hucksters to brainwash its own employees, right now. Defense Secretary Mark Esper virtue-signaled on Twitter on Wednesday about the first meeting of the DOD Board on Diversity and Inclusion, which will do such vitally important work as reviewing "hairstyle and grooming policies for racial bias." ..."
"... Leaked documents published by researcher Christopher Rufo show diversity training along the lines above currently being carried out at the Treasury Department. The contractor who is doing this billed the federal government millions for various "diversity" schemes over the past 15 years. ..."
"... People like that are part of an entire cottage industry of "anti-racism" consultants that charge big money for "educating" captive audiences of corporate and government employees, forced to attend their "sensitivity training" and "unconscious bias" workshops for years. The best part – for them, not for the country – is that the way they define racism, it can never be overcome or resolved, requiring their grift to continue indefinitely. ..."
"... This is "racism masquerading as antiracism" as Rufo puts it, calling for the Trump administration to immediately ban the teaching of "toxic principles of critical race theory, race essentialism, and neo-segregationism." ..."
"Whiteness (and its accepted normality) also exist as everyday microaggressions toward
people of color," is not a message one might expect to find on the website of a Smithsonian Institution museum. Yet there
it is, part of the
topic
titled
'Whiteness' in a series called 'Talking About Race', second from the top of the home
page
of
the National Museum of African-American History and Culture (NMAAHC).
There is no way to tell
how long it has been up on the site, but it was brought to the public eye on Tuesday by Claremont Institute president Ryan P.
Williams, who described it as
"divisive propaganda."
Others weren't so
restrained.
"This is seriously the most racist document I've ever seen in mainstream
circulation,"
said columnist
Inez
Stepman
, while radio show host
Seth
Leibsohn
described it as
"out and out bigotry"
and called to
"Defund
the Smithsonian now."
You see, NMAAHC is the
newest addition to the Smithsonian family of museums – opened in 2016 to great fanfare, with then-President Barack Obama in
attendance – and therefore funded by US taxpayers.
The most controversial
portion of the 'Whiteness' presentation is an infographic about
"common characteristics
of most US White people,"
based on a slide by corporate consultant Judith H Katz and spruced up by NMAAHC designers.
There we find out that self-reliance, nuclear family, the scientific method, 'Judeo-Christian tradition', delaying
gratification, competitiveness and justice based on protecting property and English common law are all
"white"
things.
What's particularly
disturbing is that Katz wrote that back in 1990. According to her
bio
on
the website of Kaleel Jamison Consulting, a New York-based outfit, she actually wrote a Handbook for Anti-Racism Training in
1978. Now her ideas have been dusted off and sandwiched between 'White Fragility' author and corporate grifter Robin DiAngelo,
and radical feminist and social justice activist bell hooks. Capping off the 'Whiteness' section are suggested readings and
videos from liberal media outlets such as the Guardian, Vox and the Atlantic, along with questions designed for teachers.
And then it hits you: it's
a lesson plan. Sure enough, the first of the three categories the museum pitches its 'Talking about race' series to are
"educators,"
followed
by parents and finally persons
"committed to equity."
Which doesn't mean ownership
of assets with debts or liabilities, but "equality of outcomes," in the new language of intersectional social justice.
But wait, there's more!
The current featured topic in the series is '
Being
Antiracist
' – a celebration of race-based policies and outcomes as defined by social justice activist Ibram X. Kendi and
others. Just wait till you get to '
Social
Identities and Systems of Oppression
'...
It's bad enough that this
kind of racialist propaganda is being pushed by the taxpayer-funded Smithsonian, but it gets worse. The Trump administration
is literally paying race hucksters to brainwash its own employees, right now. Defense Secretary Mark Esper
virtue-signaled
on
Twitter on Wednesday about the first meeting of the DOD Board on Diversity and Inclusion, which will do such vitally important
work as reviewing
"hairstyle and grooming policies for racial bias."
Just last week, the US
Army emailed out a graphic describing President Donald Trump's campaign slogan 'Make America Great Again' as an example of
"covert
white supremacy,"
only to say it was done
"in error"
when caught.
Leaked documents published
by researcher Christopher Rufo show diversity training along the lines above currently being carried out at the Treasury
Department. The contractor who is doing this billed the federal government millions for various "diversity"
schemes
over the past 15 years.
People like that are part
of an entire cottage industry of
"anti-racism"
consultants that charge big money
for
"educating"
captive audiences of corporate and government employees, forced to
attend their
"sensitivity training"
and
"unconscious
bias"
workshops for years. The best part – for them, not for the country – is that the way they define racism, it can
never be overcome or resolved, requiring their grift to continue indefinitely.
By the logic of these
anti-racist
"educators,"
when the Rev. Martin Luther King Junior dreamed a dream in
1963 that his children
"will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content
of their character,"
he was in fact racist. Segregation is not an evil to be condemned, but a good that brings about
"equity."
Now
bend the knee and fork over your money, sinners!
This is "racism masquerading as antiracism" as Rufo
puts
it,
calling for the Trump administration to immediately ban the teaching of "toxic principles of critical race theory, race
essentialism, and neo-segregationism."
There is ample evidence
these teachings underpinned last month's race riots across America. If left unchecked, it isn't too hard to see that there
will be war. There is still time to step back from the brink and for people to see reason. Ah, but I forget, that's a
"white
people thing."
Think your friends would be
interested? Share this story!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those
of RT.
"... In their quest to change Western culture, Black Lives Matter and 'Woke Twitter' are redefining racism to weaponize the charge against anyone they choose. It's a dishonest tactic that lets them get away with their own bigotry. ..."
Micah Curtis is a game and tech
journalist from the US. Aside from writing for RT, he hosts the podcast Micah and The Hatman, and is an independent
comic book writer. Follow Micah at
@MindofMicahC
In their quest to change Western culture, Black Lives Matter and 'Woke Twitter' are redefining racism to weaponize the charge
against anyone they choose. It's a dishonest tactic that lets them get away with their own bigotry.
Racism is an evil thing.
People who are branded with that title are given a massive scarlet letter, and are generally cast out of civil society.
Rightfully so, as no one wants to interact with someone who is so malicious towards someone else's skin color. Individuals
like Jared Taylor or Richard Spencer are not tolerated (unless they're
commentating
for
CNN I suppose).
One of the above words
needs to be stressed: it's 'malicious'. As it has been understood for as far as I can remember, racism requires malice. This
is why the term 'hate group' was first coined. Groups such as the Ku Klux Klan, the Aryan Brotherhood, or other white
nationalists or white supremacists are considered 'hateful' because that is their modus operandi. They outright despise anyone
who isn't like they are.
However, racism isn't
something that is understood to be exclusive to a skin color either. Well, unless you're 'woke'. If you're America's Got
Talent host Nick Cannon, you can call white people and Jews
"
closer
to animals
"
and somehow you're not a racist. You can throw a
"
mute
white people
"
button on your platform and you're somehow totally cool. Bill De Blasio can tell Jewish
people
and
other religious groups that they can't assemble, but a BLM mural is serious business. And, of course, you can be a sitting
senator and brand all Trump supporters
"
white
supremacists
"
with no pushback.
The woke mob doesn't like
the current definition of racism because they fit it to a T. Most people that they are trying to say are racists are more
offended by pineapple on their pizza than anyone's melanin. Meanwhile, BLM supporters like Nick Cannon can spout something
that sounds like it would appear in Der Sturmer and he's fine. You're also going to have to explain to me how the Goya Foods
CEO, a Trump supporter, is a white supremacist when he's a Latino.
Why follow the rules or
adhere to definitions, when you can weaponize the debate to change the rules and definitions to suit your needs?
This is exactly how dopey
the conversation has become. The CDC had over a thousand employees asking the organization to
"declare
racism a public health
crisis
."
So
in the midst of an epidemic, your priority is declaring an irrational emotional response to melanin content in one's skin a
health crisis?! That's not even the CDC's job! Not to mention, acting as if America has anything close to the problems we had
in the 1960s and before is just revisionist. But then again, that's the problem with redefining a term that needs a strong
definition. Everything is becoming racist to the point that the term is becoming worthless.
We're at a point where no one knows who the racists are any more, because we can't even agree on the term. Certain groups are
excluded because they're 'the oppressed groups', as if that has anything to do with evil behavior. Racism is evil. Truly evil.
Evil is not relegated to a specific group or social class. Evil is simply evil. If we redefine something evil as the opposite
at any point, we open the door for tragedy. Many groups of people have been the victim of this behavior at one point in
history or another. If the woke mob gets its way, history will repeat itself.
Think your friends would be
interested? Share this story!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those
of RT.
The Talmud is the absolute paradigm for racial supremacy, intolerance and hatred, a
satanic bible compiled for psychopaths and pedophiles. Anyone who burns it gets my vote for a
statue.
Opal Tometi is the daughter of Nigerian immigrants . She is the oldest
of three children and has two younger brothers. She grew up in Phoenix, Arizona , and now lives in
Brooklyn, New
York . She received a Bachelor of Arts degree in History from the University of Arizona[10] and a
Masters in Communication and Advocacy from Arizona State University . On May
7, 2016, she received an honorary doctor of science degree from Clarkson University . [11] Tometi is
a former Case Manager for survivors of domestic violence and still provides community education
on the issue.
Tometi worked as Co-Director and Communications Director, prior to becoming Executive
Director of BAJI. Her contributions included leading organizing efforts for a rally for
immigrant justice and the first Congressional briefing on black immigrants in Washington DC.
[ citation needed ]
Garza was born in Oakland, California , on January 4,
1981. She grew up as Alicia Schwartz in Marin County in a mixed-raced and
mixed-religion household, with a Jewish stepfather and an African American mother.
[1] Garza
identifies as Jewish. [2] The family ran an
antiques business, assisted later by her younger brother, Joey. [1] In her teens,
Alicia engaged in activism, promoting school sex education about birth control . [3] Enrolling in the
University of California,
San Diego (UCSD), she continued her activism by joining the student association and calling
for higher pay for the university's janitors. In her final year at college, she helped organize
the first Women of Color Conference, a university-wide convocation held at UCSD in 2002.
[4] She graduated in 2002
with a degree in anthropology and sociology. [5]
In 2003 she met Malachi Garza, 24, a transgender man and a community activist. In 2004,
Alicia came out as queer to
her family. In 2008, she married Malachi and took the name Garza, settling in Oakland . [1][3]
Career [
edit ]Black Lives Matter [
edit ]stop saying we are not surprised. that's a damn shame in itself. I continue
to be surprised at how little Black lives matter. And I will continue that. stop giving up on
black life. Black people. I love you. I love us. Our lives matter.
Alicia Garza's Facebook post on July 13, 2013, responsible for sparking the Black
Lives Matter movement [6]
With Opal Tometi and
Patrisse Cullors ,
Garza birthed the Black Lives Matter hashtag.
[7][8] Garza is credited
with inspiring the slogan when, after the July 2013 acquittal of George Zimmerman of murder in the death of
Trayvon Martin , she
posted on Facebook "I
continue to be surprised at how little Black lives matter... Our lives matter." Cullors shared
this with the hashtag #BlackLivesMatter. She was also struck by the similarities of Trayvon Martin to her younger
brother, Joey, feeling that it could have been him killed instead. [9] The organization
Black Lives Matter was spurred on by the killings of black people by police in recent media and
racial disparities within the U.S. criminal legal system. Concerns were over violence from the
police, mass incarceration ,
police
militarization , and over-criminalization . [10] In
particular, the movement was born and Garza's post became popularized after protests emerged in
Ferguson,
Missouri , where an unarmed black teenager was shot and killed by a white police officer.
[11]
Garza led the 2015 Freedom Ride to Ferguson, organized by Cullors and Darnell Moore that launched the building
of BlackLivesMatter chapters across the United States and the world. [12] However, Garza
does not think of the Black Lives Matter Movement as ever being created. She feels her work is
only a continuation of the resistance led by black people in America.
[10] The movement and
Garza are credited for popularizing the use of social media for mass mobilization in the United
States; a practice called "mediated mobilization". This practice has been used by other
movements such as the #MeToo movement . [13]
The
Movement for Black Lives was created following concerns over the way that Black Lives
Matter had become synonymous with the Ferguson riots . The Movement for Black Lives is the largest
group inside the Black Lives Matter movement's network. This group directs their activism based on Garza's advocacy style, [ dubious
– discuss ] which works
outside of the existing power structure as a way to avoid what they see as the organizational
failures of past black activist groups. They reject traditional tactics and avoid making
connections and compromises with politicians. The group also puts those with the most
marginalized identities in leadership positions. In 2015, The Movement for
Black Lives created the Policy Table in an attempt to translate their goals into a policy
platform. This involved initiatives that give bail money to black mothers who could not afford
it and a land-rights initiative. [10]
Cullors was born in Los Angeles, California. She grew up in Pacoima , a low-income neighborhood in
the San Fernando
Valley . [1] She became an
activist early in life, joining the Bus Riders Union as a
teenager. [1]
Cullors recalls being forced from her home at sixteen when she revealed her queer identity to her parents.
[2] She was
involved with the Jehovah's Witnesses as a child, but
later grew disillusioned with the church. She developed an interest in the Nigerian religious
tradition of Ifá ,
incorporating its rituals into political protest events. She told an interviewer:
For me, seeking spirituality had a lot to do with trying to seek understanding about my
conditions -- how these conditions shape me in my everyday life and how I understand them as
part of a larger fight, a fight for my life. [3]
She later earned a degree in religion and philosophy from UCLA . [1]
Career
Cullors teaches at Otis College of Art and
Design in the Public Practice Program. [4] She also teaches in
the Master's Arts in Social Justice and Community Organizing at Prescott College.
[5][6]
Cullors credits social
media being instrumental in revealing violence against African Americans, saying: "On a
daily basis, every moment, black folks are being bombarded with images of our death ... It's
literally saying, 'Black people, you might be next. You will be next, but in hindsight it will
be better for our nation, the less of our kind, the more safe it will be." [12]
Our website traffic easily broke all records for the month of June, and these high levels
have now continued into July, suggesting that the huge rise produced by the initial wave of
Black Lives Matters protests may be more than temporary. It appears that many new readers first
discovered our alternative webzine at that point, and quite a few have stayed on as regular
visitors.
A longer-term factor that may be strengthening our position is the unprecedented wave of
ideological purges that have swept our country since early June, with prominent figures in the
intellectual and media firmaments being especially hard hit. When opinion-leaders become
fearful of uttering even slightly controversial words, they either grow silent or only mouth
the most saccharine homilies, thereby forcing many of their erstwhile readers to look elsewhere
for more candid discussions. And our own webzine is about as "elsewhere" as one could possibly
get.
Take, for example, the New York Times , more than ever our national newspaper of
record. For the last few years, one of its top figures had been Editorial Page Editor James
Bennet, who had previously run The Atlantic , and he was widely considered a leading
candidate to assume the same position at the Gray Lady after next year's scheduled retirement
of the current top editor. Indeed, with his brother serving as U.S. Senator from Colorado --
and a serious if second-rank presidential candidate -- the Lifestyle section of the
Washington Post had already hailed
the Bennet brothers as the potential saviors of the American establishment.
But then his paper published an op-ed by an influential Republican senator endorsing
President Trump's call for a harsh crackdown on riots and looting, and a Twitter mob of
outraged junior Times staffers organized a revolt. The mission of the NYT Opinion
Pages is obviously to provide a diversity of opinions, but Bennet
was quickly purged .
A similar fate befell the highly-regarded longtime editor of the Philadelphia
Inquirer after his
paper ran a headline considered insufficiently respectful to black rioters . Michigan State
University researchers had raised doubts about the accepted narrative of black deaths at the
hands of police, and physicist Stephen Hsu, the Senior Vice President who had supported their
work,
was forced to resign his administrative position as a consequence.
Numerous other figures of lesser rank have been purged, their careers and livelihoods
destroyed for Tweeting
out a phrase such as "All Lives Matter," whose current classification as "hate speech"
might have stunned even George Orwell. Or perhaps a spouse or other close relative
had denounced the black rioters . The standards of acceptable discourse are changing so
rapidly that positions which were completely innocuous just a few weeks ago have suddenly
become controversial or even forbidden, with punishments sometimes inflicted on a retroactive
basis.
I am hardly alone in viewing this situation with great concern. Just last week, some 150
prominent American writers, academics, and intellectuals published an open
letter in Harpers expressing their grave concern over protecting our freedom of
speech and thought.
Admittedly, the credentials of some of the names on the list
were rather doubtful . After all, David Frum and various hard-core Neocons had themselves
led the effort to purge from the media all critics of Bush's disastrous Iraq War, and more
recently they have continued to do with same with regard to our irrational hostility towards
Putin's Russia. But the principled histories of other signers such as Noam Chomsky partially
compensated for the inclusion of such unpleasant opportunists.
Although the Harpers statement attracted many stars of our liberal firmament,
apparently few people read Harpers these days, with its website traffic being just a
tenth of our own. Therefore, the reaction in the media itself was a much more important factor,
and this seems to have been decidedly mixed. 150 rather obscure activists soon issued a
contrasting statement, which major outlets such as NYT , CNN , and the Los
Angeles Times seem to have accorded equal or greater weight, hardly suggesting that the
ideological tide has started to turn.
Back a couple of years ago, there was a popular joke going around Chinese social media in
which Chairman Mao came back to life with all sorts of questions about the modern world. Among
other things, he was informed his disastrous Cultural Revolution had shifted to America, a
prescient observation given the events of the last few weeks:
The controversial May 25th death of a black man named George Floyd in Minneapolis police
custody soon set off the greatest nationwide wave of protests, riots, and looting in at least
two generations, and the once-placid hometown of the Mary Tyler Moore Show alone suffered some
five hundred million dollars of damage. Some of the main political reactions have been
especially surprising, as the newly elevated activists of the Black Lives Matter movement have
received massive media support for their demands that local urban police departments be
"defunded," a proposal so bizarre that it had previously been almost unknown.
Statues, monuments, and other symbolic representations of traditional American history
quickly became a leading target. Hubert Humphrey's Minneapolis has long been an extremely
liberal bastion of the heavily Scandinavian Upper Midwest, having no ties to the South or
slavery, but Floyd's death soon launched an unprecedented national effort to eradicate all
remaining Confederate memorials and other Southern cultural traces throughout our society.
Popular country music groups such as the Dixie Chicks
and Lady
Antebellum had freely recorded their songs for decades, but they were now suddenly forced
to change their names in frantic haste.
And although this revolutionary purge began with Confederacy, it soon extended to include
much of our entire national history, with illustrious former occupants of the White House being
the most prominent targets. Woodrow Wilson ranked as Princeton University's most famous alumnus
and its former president, but his name
was quickly scraped off the renowned public policy school , while the Natural History
Museum of New York is similarly
removing a statue of Theodore Roosevelt .
Abraham Lincoln and
Ulysses S. Grant had together won the Civil War and abolished black slavery, but their
statues around the country were vandalized or ordered removed. The same fate befell
Andrew Jackson along with the author of the Star Spangled Banner, our national anthem.
The leading heroes of the American Republic from its birth in 1776 face "cancellation" and
this sudden tidal wave of attacks has clearly gained considerable elite backing. The New
York Times carries enormous weight in such circles, and last Tuesday their lead opinion
piece called for the
Jefferson Memorial to be replaced by a towering statue of a black woman, while one of their
regular columnists has repeatedly demanded that all
monuments honoring George Washington suffer a similar fate . Stacy Abrams, often mentioned
as one of Joe Biden's leading Vice Presidential choices, had previously made
the destruction of Georgia's historic Stone Mountain Memorial part of her campaign
platform, so we now seem only a step or two away from credible political demands that Mount
Rushmore be dynamited Taliban-style.
The original roots of our country were Anglo-Saxon and this heritage remained dominant
during its first century or more, but other strands in our national tapestry are suffering
similar vilification. Christopher Columbus discovered the New World for Spain, but he has
became a hated
and despised figure across our country , so perhaps in the near future his only surviving
North American monument will be the huge statue honoring him in the
heart of Mexico City . Father Junipero Serra founded Hispanic California and a few years
ago was canonized as the first and only Latin American saint, but his
statues have been toppled and his name already removed from Stanford University buildings.
At the time we acquired the sparsely-populated American Southwest, the bulk of our new Hispanic
population was concentrated in New Mexico, but the founding father of that region has now had
his monument attacked and vandalized . Cervantes, author of Don Quixote , is
considered the greatest writer in the Spanish language, and his statue was also
vandalized .
Perhaps these trends will abate and the onrushing tide of cultural destruction may begin to
recede. But at present there seems a serious possibility that the overwhelming majority of
America's leading historical figures prior to the political revolution of the 1930s may be
destined for the scrap heap. A decade ago, President Obama and most prominent Democrats opposed
Gay Marriage, but just a few years later, the CEO of Mozilla
was forced to resign when his past political contribution to a California initiative taking
that same position came to light, and today private individuals might easily lose their jobs at
many corporations for expressing such views. Thus, one might easily imagine that within five or
ten years, any public expressions of admiration for Washington or Jefferson might be considered
by many as bordering on "hate speech," and carry severe social and employment consequences. Our
nation seems to be suffering the sort of fate normally inflicted upon a conquered people, whose
new masters seek to break their spirit and stamp out any notions of future resistance.
A good example of this growing climate of fear came a couple of weeks ago when a longtime
blogger going under the name "Scott Alexander"
deleted his entire website and its millions of words of accumulated archives because the
New York Times was about to run an article revealing his true identity. I had only been
slightly aware of the SlateStarCodex
blogsite and the "rationalist" community it had gradually accumulated, but the development
was apparently significant enough to provoke
a long article in the New Yorker .
The target of the alleged witch-hunt was hardly any sort of right-winger. He was reportedly
a liberal Jewish psychiatrist living in Berkeley, whose most notable piece of writing had been
a massive 30,000 word refutation of neo-reactionary thought. But because he was willing to
entertain ideas and contributors outside the tight envelope of the politically-correct canon,
he believed that his life would be destroyed if his name became known.
Conservative commenter Tucker Carlson has recently attracted the highest ratings in cable
history for populist positions, some of which have influenced President Trump. But just a
couple of days ago, his top writer, a certain Blake Neff, was
forced to resign after CNN revealed his years of pseudonymous remarks on a rightwing
forum, even though the most egregious of these seemed no worse than somewhat crude
racially-charged humor.
Our own website attracts thousands of commenters, many of whom have left remarks vastly more
controversial than anything written by Neff let alone Alexander, and these two incidents
naturally
inspired several posts by blogger Steve Sailer , which attracted many hundreds of worried
comments in the resulting threads. Although I could entirely understood that many members of
our community were fearful of being "doxxed" by the media, I explained why I thought the
possibility quite unlikely.
Although it's been a few years since my name last appeared on the front page of the New
York Times , I am still at least a bit of a public figure, and I would say that many of the
articles I have published under my own name have been at least 100 times as "controversial" as
anything written by the unfortunate "Scott Alexander." The regular monthly traffic to our
website is six or seven times as great as that which flowed to SlateStarCodex prior to its
sudden disappearance, and I suspect that our influence has also been far greater. Any serious
journalist who wanted to get in touch with me could certainly do so, and I have been freely
given many interviews in the past, while hundreds of reasonably prominent writers, academics,
and other intellectuals have spent years on my regular distribution list.
Tracking down the identity of an anonymous commenter who once or twice made doubtful remarks
is extremely hard work, and at the end of the process you will have probably netted yourself a
pretty small fish. Surely any eager scalp-hunter in the media would prefer to casually mine the
hundreds of thousands of words in my articles, which would provide a veritable cornucopia of
exceptionally explosive material, all fully searchable and conveniently organized by particular
taboos. Yet for years the entire journalistic community has scrupulously averted their eyes
from such mammoth potential scandal. And the likely explanation may provide some important
insights into the dynamics of ideological conflict in the media.
Activist organizations often take the lead in locating controversial statements, which they
then pass along to their media allies for ritual denunciation, and much of my own material
would seem especially provocative to the fearsome ADL. Yet oddly enough, that organization
seemed quite reluctant to engage with me, and only after my repeated baiting did
they finally issue a rather short and perfunctory critique in 2018, which lacked any named
author. But even that lackluster effort afforded me an opening to respond with my own
7,300 word essay highlighting the very unsavory origins and activities of that
controversial organization. After that exchange, they went back into hiding and have remained
there ever since.
In my lengthy analysis
of the true history of World War II, I described what I called "the Lord Voldemort Effect,"
explaining why so much of our mainstream source material should be treated with great care:
In the popular Harry Potter series, Lord Voldemort, the great nemesis of the young
magicians, is often identified as "He Who Must Not Be Named," since the mere vocalization of
those few particular syllables might bring doom upon the speaker. Jews have long enjoyed
enormous power and influence over the media and political life, while fanatic Jewish
activists demonstrate hair-trigger eagerness to denounce and vilify all those suspected of
being insufficiently friendly towards their ethnic group. The combination of these two
factors has therefore induced such a "Lord Voldemort Effect" regarding Jewish activities in
most writers and public figures. Once we recognize this reality, we should become very
cautious in analyzing controversial historical issues that might possibly contain a Jewish
dimension, and also be particularly wary of arguments from silence.
However, even dread Lord Voldemorts may shrink from a terrifying Lord Voldemort of their
own, and I think that this website falls into that category. The ADL and various other powerful
organizations may have quietly issued an edict that absolutely forbids the media outlets they
influence from mentioning our existence. I believe there is strong evidence in favor of this
remarkable hypothesis.
Among Trump's surviving advisors, Stephen Miller provokes some of the most intense
hostility, and last November the SPLC and its media allies made a concerted attempt to force
his resignation based upon some of his private emails, which had promoted several controversial
posts by Steve Sailer. The resulting firestorm was discussed on this website, and
I analyzed some of the strange anomalies:
Just as might be expected, the whole SPLC attack is "guilt by association," and Ctrl-F
reveals a full 14 references to VDare, with the website characterized in very harsh terms.
Yet although there are several mentions of Steve and his writings, there is absolutely no
reference to this webzine, despite being Steve's primary venue.
Offhand, this might seem extremely odd. My own guess is that much of the material we
publish is 10x as "controversial" as anything VDare has ever run, and many of my own personal
articles, including those that have spent over a year on the Home page, might be up in the
30x or 40x potency range. Moreover, I think our traffic these days is something like 10x that
of VDare, seemingly making us an extremely juicy target.
Now admittedly, I don't know that Miller fellow, but the horrifying VDare post that Miller
supposedly shared was actually republished by VDare from this website. And that would surely
have made it very, very easy for the SPLC to use the connection as a opening to begin
cataloguing the unspeakingly horrifying list of transgressions we regularly feature, easily
expanding the length of their attack on Miller by adding another 6,000 words. Yet the silence
has been totally deafening. Puzzling
Here's my own hypothesis
As everyone knows, there are certain "powerful groups" in our society that so terrify
members of the media and political worlds that they receive the "Lord Voldemort Treatment,"
with mainstream individuals being terrified that merely speaking the name would result in
destruction. Indeed, the SPLC is one of the primary enforcers of that edict.
However, my theory is that even those dread Lord Voldemorts greatly fear an even more
dreadful Lord Voldemort of their own, namely this webzine. The SPLC writer knew perfectly
well that mere mention of The Unz Review might ensure his destruction. I'd guess that
the ADL/SPLC/AIPAC has made this prohibition absolutely clear to everyone in the
media/political worlds.
Given that Miller's main transgression was his promotion of posts originally published on
this website, the media could have easily associated him with the rest of our material, much of
which was sufficiently explosive to have almost certainly forced his resignation. Yet when the
journalists and activists weighed the likelihood of destroying Trump's most hated advisor
against the danger of mentioning our existence, the latter factor was still judged the
stronger, allowing Miller to survive.
This hypothesis was strongly supported by a second incident later that same month. We had
previously published an article by Prof. Eric Rasmusen of Indiana University, and I read in my
morning Times that he had suddenly
become embroiled in a major Internet controversy , with a chorus of angry critics seeking
to have him removed. According to the article, he had apparently promoted the "vile and stupid"
views of some anti-feminist website in one of his Tweets, which had come to the attention of an
enraged activist. The resulting firestorm of denunciations on Twitter had been viewed 2.5
million times, provoking a major academic controversy in the national media.
Being curious about what had happened, I contacted Rasmusen to see whether he might want to
submit a piece regarding the controversy,
which he did . But to my utter astonishment, I discovered that the website involved had
actually been our own, a fact that I never would never have suspected from the extremely vague
and circuitous discussion provided in the newspaper. Apparently, the old-fashioned
Who-What-Where provisions of the Times style manual had been quietly amended to prohibit
providing any hint of our existence even when we were at the absolute center of one of their
1,000 word news stories.
Highly-controversial ideas backed by strong evidence may prove dangerously contagious, and
the political/media strategy pursued by the ADL, the Times , and numerous other organs
of the elite establishment seems perfectly rational. Since our Bill of Rights still provides
considerable protection for freedom of speech, the next-best alternative is to institute a
strict cordon sanitaire , intended to strictly minimize the number of individuals who
might become infected.
Our webzine and my own articles are hardly the only victims of this sort of strategy -- once
dubbed "the Blackout" by eminent historian Harry Elmer Barnes -- whose other targets often
possess the most respectable of establishmentarian credentials.
Last month marked the 31st anniversary of the notorious 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre, and
elite media coverage was especially extensive this year due to our current global confrontation
with China. The New York Times devoted most of two full pages to a photo-laden
recapitulation while the Wall Street Journal gave it front-page treatment, with just
those two publications alone running some six separate articles and columns on those horrifying
events from three decades ago.
Yet back in the 1990s, the former Beijing bureau chief of the Washington Post , who
had personally covered the events, published a long article in the prestigious Columbia
Journalism Review entitled The Myth of Tiananmen
, in which he publicly admitted that the supposed "massacre" was merely a fraudulent concoction
of careless journalists and dishonest propagandists. At least some of our top editors and
journalists must surely be aware of these facts, and feel guilty about promoting a
long-debunked hoax of the late 1980s. But any mention of those widely-known historical facts is
strictly forbidden in the media, lest American readers become confused and begin to consider an
alternative narrative.
Russia possesses a nuclear arsenal at least as powerful as our own, and the total break in
our relations began when Congress passed the Magnitsky Act in 2012, targeting important Russian
leaders. Yet none of our media outlets have ever been willing to admit that the facts used to
justify that very dangerous decision seem to have been entirely fraudulent, as recounted
in
the article we recently published by Prof. John Ryan.
Similarly, our sudden purge from both Google and Facebook came just days after my own
long article presenting the strong evidence that America's ongoing Covid-19 disaster was
the unintentional blowback from our own extremely reckless biowarfare attack against China (and
Iran). Over 130,000 of our citizens have already died and our daily life has been wrecked, so
the American people might grow outraged if they began to suspect that this huge national
disaster was entirely self-inflicted.
And the incident that sparked our current national upheaval includes certain elements that
our media has scrupulously avoided mentioning. The knee-neck hold used against George Floyd was
standard police procedure in Minneapolis and many other cities, and had apparently been
employed thousands of times across our country in recent years with virtually no fatalities.
Meanwhile, Floyd's official autopsy indicated that he had lethal levels
of Fentanyl and other illegal drugs in his system at the time of his demise. Perhaps the
connection between these two facts is more than purely coincidental, and if they became widely
known, popular sentiments might shift.
Finally, our alternative media webzine is pleased to have recently added two additional
columnists together with major portions of their archives, which will help to further broaden
our perspective.
Larry Romanoff has been a regular contributor to the Global Research website, most recently
focusing on the Coronavirus outbreak in China, and earlier this year he published an
article pointed to the considerable evidence that the virus had originated in the U.S.,
which was cited by Chinese officials and
soon became a flashpoint in American-Chinese relations . After having been viewed millions
of times, that piece and several others seem to have disappeared from their original venue, but
along with the rest of his writings, they are now conveniently available on our own
website .
For the last quarter-century, Jared Taylor has probably been America's most prominent White
Nationalist writer. Although Black Nationalists such as Al Sharpton have cable television shows
and boast of many dozens of visits to the White House, the growing climate of ideological
repression has caused Taylor and his American Renaissance organization to be
deplatformed from YouTube, Twitter, and numerous other Internet services. One of his main
writers is Gregory Hood, whom we have now added as a regular columnist , together with dozens of
his pieces over the last few years.
Claiming 'Unique Opportunity to Lead the Nation,' Parents Ask High School to Adopt 'Freedom
of Expression Resolution'
Has the cancel culture infected your kids' school? A parent group may have a partial remedy.
A
resolution submitted to the New Trier High School board in north suburban Chicago would, if
adopted, assure:
New Trier High School's fundamental commitment is to the principle that debate or
deliberation may not be suppressed because the ideas put forth are thought by some or even by
most members of the New Trier High School community to be offensive, unwise.
It would guaranty all members of the school community "the broadest possible latitude to
speak, write, listen, challenge, and learn."
The resolution apparently would be the first of its kind in the nation at the high school
level. It is modeled on
The Chicago Statement , which was adopted by the University of Chicago in 2015 in response
to the illiberal trend of free speech intolerance on college campuses . The full resolution
appears below.
It was drafted by New Trier
Neighbors , a parent group that grew out of opposition to what was criticized as one-sided
content in the school's "Seminar Day" in 2017, which a
Wall Street Journal article called "Racial Indoctrination Day."
The seminar received extensive, national media attention because of its exclusive focus on
topics like systemic racism, implicit bias and, as the Journal put it, the "divisive view of
race as a primordial fact, the essence of identity, a bright line between oppressed and
oppressor."
We
wrote about it here at the time. My son attended the school then. I was among the critics
who asked for a broader range of viewpoints like those of Robert Woodson, Shelby Steele, Thomas
Sowell, John McWhorter and Corey Brooks. The school rejected our requests.
Since then, the school has only broadened what it describes as its "equity initiative,"
expanding what dissenting parents regard as authoritarian imposition of the far left's
single-minded views on race – as well as other topics. Last year, the school moved to
infuse its administration's views on "equity" into virtually all subject areas including math,
science, sports, language and more, which you can see in the
memo linked here .
Some right-of-center students have
spoken up about having their viewpoints squelched, and even being penalized on grading for
their views. My kids reported the same things when there.
New Trier is hardly alone. Similar stories from high schools and even grade schools around
the country are now common.
The resolution presents the school with an opportunity to move in a more balanced direction
that respects diversity of opinion and returns the school to a focus on critical thinking
skills. New Trier Neighbors drafted the resolution in consultation with the K-12 policy experts
at the Foundation for Individual Rights in
Education.
No word yet on how or when the school board will act on it.
We often receive emails at Wirepoints from ordinary citizens asking "What can I do? How can
I get involved to stop what's happening?"
This resolution is one answer. Push for a similar one in your school districts.
The cancel culture that now plagues the nation has its roots where it should have no place
whatsoever – schools. That's especially true about the disastrously counterproductive
orthodoxy on systemic racism, implicit bias and the like. Its easily predictable consequences
are now apparent across the nation – more racism and division. Race relations have been
set back by fifty years.
For those reasons, what New Trier itself does with the resolution is actually secondary.
While we hope it will adopt the resolution, it's far more important that its introduction set a
trend for districts around the nation.
Indoctrination long ago replaced education on most college campuses. Freedom of expression
resolutions might help save high schools from the same fate.
Parents, it's in your hands.
The New Trier High School Freedom of Expression Resolution, presented to the Board for
adoption in its entirety, and based on The Chicago Statement:
Because New Trier High School is committed to free and open inquiry in all matters, it
guarantees all members of the New Trier High School community the broadest possible latitude to
speak, write, listen, challenge, and learn. Except insofar as limitations on that freedom are
necessary to the functioning of New Trier High School, New Trier High School fully respects and
supports the freedom of all members of the New Trier High School community "to discuss any
problem that presents itself."
Of course, the ideas of different members of the New Trier High School community will often
and quite naturally conflict. But it is not the proper role of New Trier High School to attempt
to shield individuals from ideas and opinions they find unwelcome, disagreeable, or even
offensive. Although New Trier High School greatly values civility, and although all members of
the New Trier High School community share in the responsibility for maintaining a climate of
mutual respect, concerns about civility and mutual respect can never be used as a justification
for closing off discussion of ideas, however offensive or disagreeable those ideas may be to
some members of our community.
The freedom to debate and discuss the merits of competing ideas does not, of course, mean
that individuals may say whatever they wish, wherever they wish. New Trier High School may
restrict expression that violates the law, that falsely defames a specific individual, that
constitutes a genuine threat or harassment, that unjustifiably invades substantial privacy or
confidentiality interests, or that is otherwise directly incompatible with the functioning of
New Trier High School.In addition, New Trier High School may reasonably regulate the time,
place, and manner of expression to ensure that it does not disrupt the ordinary activities of
New Trier High School. But these are narrow exceptions to the general principle of freedom of
expression, and it is vitally important that these exceptions never be used in a manner that is
inconsistent with New Trier High School's commitment to a completely free and open discussion
of ideas.
In a word, New Trier High School's fundamental commitment is to the principle that debate or
deliberation may not be suppressed because the ideas put forth are thought by some or even by
most members of the New Trier High School community to be offensive, unwise, immoral, or
wrong-headed. It is for the individual members of the New Trier High School community, not for
New Trier High School as an institution, to make those judgments for themselves, and to act on
those judgments not by seeking to suppress speech, but by openly and vigorously contesting the
ideas that they oppose. Indeed, fostering the ability of members of the New Trier High School
community to engage in such debate and deliberation in an effective and responsible manner is
an essential part of New Trier High School's educational mission.
As a corollary to New Trier High School's commitment to protect and promote free expression,
members of the New Trier High School community must also act in conformity with the principle
of free expression. Although members of the New Trier High School community are free to
criticize and contest the views expressed on campus, and to criticize and contest speakers who
are invited to express their views on campus, they may not obstruct or otherwise interfere with
the freedom of others to express views they reject or even loathe. To this end, New Trier High
School has a solemn responsibility not only to promote a lively and fearless freedom of debate
and deliberation, but also to protect that freedom when others attempt to restrict it."
Criticisms of "cancel culture" often is hypocrtical, as was the case with Weiss, and are connected with prioritizing speech that
shores up the status quo -- necon dominance in the US MSM.
An open letter published by Harper's magazine,
and signed by 150 prominent writers and public figures, has focused attention on the apparent dangers of what has been termed a new
"cancel culture".
The letter brings together an unlikely alliance of genuine leftists, such as Noam Chomsky and Matt Karp, centrists such as J K
Rowling and Ian Buruma, and neoconservatives such as David Frum and Bari Weiss, all speaking out in defence of free speech.
Although the letter doesn't explicitly use the term "cancel culture", it is clearly what is meant in the complaint about a "stifling"
cultural climate that is imposing "ideological conformity" and weakening "norms of open debate and toleration of differences".
It is easy to agree with the letter's generalized argument for tolerance and free and fair debate. But the reality is that many
of those who signed are utter hypocrites, who have shown precisely zero commitment to free speech, either in their words or in their
deeds.
Further, the intent of many them in signing the letter is the very reverse of their professed goal: they want to stifle free speech,
not protect it.
To understand what is really going on with this letter, we first need to scrutinize the motives , rather than the substance,
of the letter.
A new 'illiberalism'
"Cancel culture" started as the shaming, often on social media, of people who were seen to have said offensive things. But of
late, cancel culture has on occasion become more tangible, as the letter notes, with individuals fired or denied the chance to speak
at a public venue or to publish their work.
The letter denounces this supposedly new type of "illiberalism":
"We uphold the value of robust and even caustic counter-speech from all quarters. But it is now all too common to hear calls
for swift and severe retribution in response to perceived transgressions of speech and thought.
"Editors are fired for running controversial pieces; books are withdrawn for alleged inauthenticity; journalists are barred
from writing on certain topics; professors are investigated for quoting works of literature in class; The result has been to steadily
narrow the boundaries of what can be said without the threat of reprisal. We are already paying the price in greater risk aversion
among writers, artists, and journalists who fear for their livelihoods if they depart from the consensus, or even lack sufficient
zeal in agreement."
Tricky identity politics
The array of signatories is actually more troubling than reassuring. If we lived in a more just world, some of those signing –
like Frum, a former speechwriter for President George W Bush, and Anne-Marie Slaughter, a former US State Department official – would
be facing a reckoning before a Hague war crimes tribunal for their roles in promoting "interventions" in Iraq and Libya respectively,
not being held up as champions of free speech.
That is one clue that these various individuals have signed the letter for very different reasons.
Chomsky signed because he has been a lifelong and consistent defender of the right to free speech, even for those with appalling
opinions such as Holocaust denial.
Frum, who coined the term "axis of evil" that rationalised the invasion of Iraq, and Weiss, a New York Times columnist, signed
because they have found their lives getting tougher. True, it is easy for them to dominate platforms in the corporate media while
advocating for criminal wars abroad, and they have paid no career price when their analyses and predictions have turned out to be
so much dangerous hokum. But they are now feeling the backlash on university campuses and social media.
Meanwhile, centrists like Buruma and Rowling have discovered that it is getting ever harder to navigate the tricky terrain of
identity politics without tripping up. The reputational damage can have serious consequences.
Buruma famously lost his job as editor of the New York Review of Books two years ago after after he published and defended an
article that
violated
the new spirit of the #MeToo movement. And Rowling made the
mistake of thinking her followers would be as
fascinated by her traditional views on transgender issues as they are by her Harry Potter books.
'Fake news, Russian trolls'
But the fact that all of these writers and intellectuals agree that there is a price to be paid in the new, more culturally sensitive
climate does not mean that they are all equally interested in protecting the right to be controversial or outspoken.
Chomsky, importantly, is defending free speech for all , because he correctly understands that the powerful are only too
keen to find justifications to silence those who challenge their power. Elites protect free speech only in so far as it serves their
interests in dominating the public space.
If those on the progressive left do not defend the speech rights of everyone, even their political opponents, then any restrictions
will soon be turned against them. The establishment will always tolerate the hate speech of a Trump or a Bolsonaro over the justice
speech of a Sanders or a Corbyn.
By contrast, most of the rest of those who signed – the rightwingers and the centrists – are interested in free speech for
themselves and those like them . They care about protecting free speech only in so far as it allows them to continue dominating
the public space with their views – something they were only too used to until a few years ago, before social media started to level
the playing field a little.
The center and the right have been fighting back ever since with claims that anyone who seriously challenges the neoliberal status
quo at home and the neoconservative one abroad is promoting "fake news" or is a "Russian troll". This updating of the charge of being
"un-American" embodies cancel culture at its very worst.
Social media accountability
In other words, apart from in the case of a few progressives, the letter is simply special pleading – for a return to the status
quo. And for that reason, as we shall see, Chomsky might have been better advised not to have added his name, however much he agrees
with the letter's vague, ostensibly pro-free speech sentiments.
What is striking about a significant proportion of those who signed is their self-identification as ardent supporters of Israel.
And as Israel's critics know only too well, advocates for Israel have been at the forefront of the cancel culture – from long before
the term was even coined.
For decades, pro-Israel activists have sought to silence anyone seen to be seriously critiquing this small, highly militarized
state, sponsored by the colonial powers, that was implanted in a region rich with a natural resource, oil, needed to lubricate the
global economy, and at a terrible cost to its native, Palestinian population.
Nothing should encourage us to believe that zealous defenders of Israel among those signing the letter have now seen the error
of their ways. Their newfound concern for free speech is simply evidence that they have begun to suffer from the very same cancel
culture they have always promoted in relation to Israel.
They have lost control of the "cancel culture" because of two recent developments: a rapid growth in identity politics among liberals
and leftists, and a new popular demand for "accountability" spawned by the rise of social media.
Cancelling Israel's critics
In fact, despite their professions of concern, the evidence suggests that some of those signing the letter have been intensifying
their own contribution to cancel culture in relation to Israel, rather than contesting it.
That is hardly surprising. The need to counter criticism of Israel has grown more pressing as Israel has more obviously become
a pariah state. Israel has refused to countenance peace talks with the Palestinians and it has intensified its efforts to realize
long-harbored plans to annex swaths of the West Bank in violation of international law.
Rather than allow "robust and even caustic counter-speech from all quarters" on Israel, Israel's supporters have preferred the
tactics of those identified in the letter as enemies of free speech: "swift and severe retribution in response to perceived transgressions
of speech and thought".
Just ask Jeremy Corbyn, the former leader of the Labour party who was reviled, along with his supporters, as an antisemite – one
of the worst smears imaginable – by several people on the Harper's list, including
Rowling and
Weiss . Such claims
were promoted even though his critics could produce no actual evidence of an antisemitism problem in the Labour party.
Similarly, think of the treatment of Palestinian solidarity activists who support a boycott of Israel (BDS), modeled on the one
that helped push South Africa's leaders into renouncing apartheid. BDS activists too have been smeared as antisemites – and Weiss
again has been a prime
offender .
The incidents highlighted in the Harper's letter in which individuals have supposedly been cancelled is trivial compared to the
cancelling of a major political party and of a movement that stands in solidarity with a people who have been oppressed for decades.
And yet how many of these free speech warriors have come forward to denounce the fact that leftists – including many Jewish anti-Zionists
– have been pilloried as antisemites to prevent them from engaging in debates about Israel's behavior and its abuses of Palestinian
rights?
How many of them have decried the imposition of a new definition of antisemitism, by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance,
that has been rapidly gaining ground in western countries?
That definition is designed to silence a large section of the left by prioritizing the safety of Israel from being criticized
before the safety of Jews from being vilified and attacked – something that even the lawyer who authored the definition has come
to
regret .
Why has none of this "cancel culture" provoked an open letter to Harper's from these champions of free speech?
Double-edge sword
The truth is that many of those who signed the letter are defending not free speech but their right to continue dominating the
public square – and their right to do so without being held accountable.
Bari Weiss, before she landed a job at the Wall Street Journal and then the New York Times, spent her student years trying to
get Muslim professors
fired from her university – cancelling them – because of their criticism of Israel. And she explicitly did so under the banner
of "academic freedom", claiming pro-Israel students felt intimidated in the classroom.
The New York Civil Liberties Union concluded that it was Weiss, not the professors, who was the real threat to academic freedom.
This was not some youthful indiscretion. In a book last year Weiss cited her efforts to rid Columbia university of these professors
as a formative experience on which she still draws.
Weiss and many of the others listed under the letter are angry that the rhetorical tools they used for so long to stifle the free
speech of others have now been turned against them. Those who lived for so long by the sword of identity politics – on Israel, for
example – are worried that their reputations may die by that very same sword – on issues of race, sex and gender.
Narcissistic concern
To understand how the cancel culture is central to the worldview of many of these writers and intellectuals, and how blind they
are to their own complicity in that culture, consider the case of Jonathan Freedland, a columnist with the supposedly liberal-left
British newspaper the Guardian. Although Freedland is not among those signing the letter, he is very much aligned with the centrists
among them and, of course, supported the letter in an article
published in the Guardian.
Freedland, we should note, led the "cancel culture" campaign against the Labour party referenced above. He was one of the key
figures in Britain's Jewish community who breathed life into the
antisemitism smears
against Corbyn and his supporters.
But note the brief clip below. In it, Freedland's voice can be heard cracking as he explains how he has been a victim of the cancel
culture himself: he confesses that he has suffered verbal and emotional abuse at the hands of Israel's most extreme apologists –
those who are even more unapologetically pro-Israel than he is.
He reports that he has been called a "kapo", the term for Jewish collaborators in the Nazi concentration camps, and a "sonderkommando",
the Jews who disposed of the bodies of fellow Jews killed in the gas chambers. He admits such abuse "burrows under your skin" and
"hurts tremendously".
And yet, despite the personal pain he has experienced of being unfairly accused, of being cancelled by a section of his own community,
Freedland has been at the forefront of the campaign to tar critics of Israel, including anti-Zionist Jews, as antisemites on the
flimsiest of evidence.
He is entirely oblivious to the ugly nature of the cancel culture – unless it applies to himself . His concern is purely
narcissistic. And so it is with the majority of those who signed the letter.
Conducting a monologue
The letter's main conceit is the pretence that "illiberalism" is a new phenomenon, that free speech is under threat, and that
the cancel culture only arrived at the moment it was given a name.
That is simply nonsense. Anyone over the age of 35 can easily remember a time when newspapers and websites did not have a talkback
section, when blogs were few in number and rarely read, and when there was no social media on which to challenge or hold to account
"the great and the good".
Writers and columnists like those who signed the letter were then able to conduct a monologue in which they revealed their opinions
to the rest of us as if they were Moses bringing down the tablets from the mountaintop.
In those days, no one noticed the cancel culture – or was allowed to remark on it. And that was because only those who held approved
opinions were ever given a media platform from which to present those opinions.
Before the digital revolution, if you dissented from the narrow consensus imposed by the billionaire owners of the corporate media,
all you could do was print your own primitive newsletter and send it by post to the handful of people who had heard of you.
That was the real cancel culture. And the proof is in the fact that many of those formerly obscure writers quickly found they
could amass tens of thousands of followers – with no help from the traditional corporate media – when they had access to blogs and
social media.
Silencing the left
Which brings us to the most troubling aspect of the open letter in Harper's. Under cover of calls for tolerance, given credibility
by Chomsky's name, a proportion of those signing actually want to restrict the free speech of one section of the population – the
part influenced by Chomsky.
They are not against the big cancel culture from which they have benefited for so long. They are against the small cancel culture
– the new more chaotic, and more democratic, media environment we currently enjoy – in which they are for the first time being held
to account for their views, on a range of issues including Israel.
Just as Weiss tried to get professors fired under the claim of academic freedom, many of these writers and public figures are
using the banner of free speech to discredit speech they don't like, speech that exposes the hollowness of their own positions.
Their criticisms of "cancel culture" are really about prioritizing "responsible" speech, defined as speech shared by centrists
and the right that shores up the status quo. They want a return to a time when the progressive left – those who seek to disrupt a
manufactured consensus, who challenge the presumed verities of neoliberal and neoconservative orthodoxy – had no real voice.
The new attacks on "cancel culture" echo the attacks on Bernie Sanders' supporters, who were framed as "Bernie Bros" – the evidence-free
allegation that he attracted a rabble of aggressive, women-hating men who tried to bully others into silence on social media.
Just as this claim was used to discredit Sanders' policies, so the center and the right now want to discredit the left more generally
by implying that, without curbs, they too will bully everyone else into silence and submission through their "cancel culture".
If this conclusion sounds unconvincing, consider that President Donald Trump could easily have added his name to the letter alongside
Chomsky's. Trump used his recent Independence Day
speech at Mount Rushmore to make similar points to the Harper's letter. He at least was explicit in equating "cancel culture"
with what he called "far-left fascism":
"One of [the left's] political weapons is 'Cancel Culture' – driving people from their jobs, shaming dissenters, and demanding
total submission from anyone who disagrees. This is the very definition of totalitarianism This attack on our liberty, our magnificent
liberty, must be stopped, and it will be stopped very quickly."
Trump, in all his vulgarity, makes plain what the Harper's letter, in all its cultural finery, obscures. That attacks on the new
"cancel culture" are simply another front – alongside supposed concerns about "fake news" and "Russian trolls" – in the establishment's
efforts to limit speech by the left.
Attention redirected
This is not to deny that there is fake news on social media or that there are trolls, some of them even Russian. Rather, it is
to point out that our attention is being redirected, and our concerns manipulated by a political agenda.
Despite the way it has been presented in the corporate media, fake news on social media has been mostly a problem of the right.
And the worst examples of fake news – and the most influential – are found not on social media at all, but on the front pages of
the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times.
What genuinely fake news on Facebook has ever rivaled the lies justifying the invasion of Iraq in 2003 that were knowingly peddled
by a political elite and their stenographers in the corporate media. Those lies led directly to more than a million Iraqi deaths,
turned millions more into refugees, destroyed an entire country, and fuelled a new type of nihilistic Islamic extremism whose effects
we are still feeling.
Most of the worst lies from the current period – those that have obscured or justified US interference in Syria and Venezuela,
or rationalized war crimes against Iran, or approved the continuing imprisonment of Julian Assange for exposing war crimes – can
only be understood by turning our backs on the corporate media and looking to experts who can rarely find a platform outside of social
media.
I say this as someone who has concerns about the fashionable focus on identity politics rather than class politics. I say it also
as someone who rejects all forms of cancel culture – whether it is the old-style, "liberal" cancel culture that imposes on us a narrow
"consensus" politics (the Overton window), or the new "leftwing" cancel culture that too often prefers to focus on easy cultural
targets like Rowling than the structural corruption of western political systems.
But those who are impressed by the letter simply because Chomsky's name is attached should beware. Just as "fake news" has provided
the pretext for Google and social media platforms to change their algorithms to vanish left-wingers from searches and threads, just
as "antisemitism" has been redefined to demonize the left, so too the supposed threat of "cancel culture" will be exploited to silence
the left.
Protecting Bari Weiss and J K Rowling from a baying left-wing "mob" – a mob that that claims a right to challenge their views
on Israel or trans issues – will become the new rallying cry from the establishment for action against "irresponsible" or
"intimidating" speech.
Progressive leftists who join these calls out of irritation with the current focus on identity politics, or because they fear
being labelled an antisemite, or because they mistakenly assume that the issue really is about free speech, will quickly find that
they are the main targets.
In defending free speech, they will end up being the very ones who are silenced.
UPDATE:
You don't criticise Chomsky however tangentially and respectfully – at least not from a left perspective – without expecting a
whirlwind of opposition. But one issue that keeps being raised on my social media feeds in his defence is just plain wrong-headed,
so I want to quickly address it. Here's one my followers expressing the point succinctly:
"The sentiments in the letter stand or fall on their own merits, not on the characters or histories of some of the signatories,
nor their future plans."
The problem, as I'm sure Chomsky would explain in any other context, is that this letter fails not just because of the other people
who signed it but on its merit too . And that's because, as I explain above, it ignores the most oppressive and most established
forms of cancel culture, as Chomsky should have been the first to notice.
Highlighting the small cancel culture, while ignoring the much larger, establishment-backed cancel culture, distorts our understanding
of what is at stake and who wields power.
Chomsky unwittingly just helped a group of mostly establishment stooges skew our perceptions of free speech problems so that we
side with them against ourselves. There is no way that can be a good thing.
UPDATE 2:
There are still people holding out against the idea that it harmed the left to have Chomsky sign this letter. And rather than
address their points individually, let me try another way of explaining my argument:
Why has Chomsky not signed a letter backing the furore over "fake news", even though there is some fake news on social media?
Why has he not endorsed the "Bernie Bros" narrative, even though doubtless there are some bullying Sanders supporters on social media?
Why has he not supported the campaign claiming the Labour party has an antisemitism problem, even though there are some antisemites
in the Labour party (as there are everywhere)?
He hasn't joined any of those campaigns for a very obvious reason – because he understands how power works, and that on the left
you hit up, not down. You certainly don't cheerlead those who are up as they hit down.
Chomsky understands this principle only too well because here he is
setting it out in relation to Iran:
"Suppose I criticise Iran. What impact does that have? The only impact it has is in fortifying those who want to carry out policies
I don't agree with, like bombing."
For exactly the same reason he has not joined those pillorying Iran – because his support would be used for nefarious ends – he
shouldn't have joined this campaign. He made a mistake. He's fallible.
Also, this isn't about the left eating itself. Really, Chomsky shouldn't be the issue. The issue should be that a bunch
of centrists and right-wingers used this letter to try to reinforce a narrative designed to harm the left, and lay the groundwork
for further curbs on its access to social media. But because Chomsky signed the letter, many more leftists are now buying into that
narrative – a narrative intended to harm them. That's why Chomsky's role cannot be ignored, nor his mistake glossed over.
UPDATE 3:
I had not anticipated how many ways people on the left might find to justify this letter.
Here's the latest reasoning. Apparently, the letter sets an important benchmark that can in future be used to protect free speech
by the left when we are threatened with being "cancelled" – as, for example, with the antisemitism smears that were used against
anti-Zionist Jews and other critics of Israel in the British Labour party.
I should hardly need to point out how naive this argument is. It completely ignores how power works in our societies: who gets
to decide what words mean and how principles are applied. This letter won't help the left because "cancel culture" is being framed
– by this letter, by Trump, by the media – as a "loony left" problem. It is a new iteration of the "politically correct gone mad"
discourse, and it will be used in exactly the same way.
It won't help Steven Salaita, sacked from a university job because he criticised Israel's killing of civilians in Gaza, or Chris
Williamson, the Labour MP expelled because he defended the party's record on being anti-racist.
The "cancel culture" furore isn't interested in the fact that they were "cancelled". Worse still, this moral panic turns the whole
idea of cancelling on its head: it is Salaita and Williamson who are accused – and found guilty – of doing the cancelling, of cancelling
Israel and Jews.
Israel's supporters will continue to win this battle by claiming that criticism of Israel "cancels" that country ("wipes it off
the map"), "cancels" Israel's Jewish population ("drives them into the sea"), and "cancels" Jews more generally ("denies a central
component of modern Jewish identity").
Greater awareness of "cancel culture" would not have saved Corbyn from the antisemitism smears because the kind of cancel culture
that smeared Corbyn is never going to be defined as "cancelling".
For anyone who wishes to see how this works in practice, watch Guardian columnist Owen Jones cave in – as he has done so often
– to the power dynamics of the "cancel culture" discourse in this interview with Sky News. I actually agree with almost everything
Jones says in this clip, apart from his joining yet again in the witch-hunt against Labour's anti-Zionists. He doesn't see that witch-hunt
as "cancel culture", and neither will anyone else with a large platform like his to protect:
There is no issue in American life about which the mainstream media ignores or distorts
the truth more than Israel/Palestine, and censors or "cancels" the people who could tell
it.
So far, the growing debate over "cancel culture" has understandably focused on individual
cases. Certainly, Israel/Palestine has many examples of courageous thinkers who have suffered
for their views: Steven Salaita and Norman Finkelstein come immediately to mind. But the
blackout has been so far-reaching for so long that we can say that an entire subject has been
ignored or distorted in the mainstream almost beyond recognition.
Right now, Israel is conducting a violent sabotage campaign against Iran, in an effort to
provoke America into war -- and there is a nearly complete news blackout in the United
States.
Maybe the 153 celebrated signatories to that now famous letter to
Harper's magazine that warned about "cancel culture" could draft another epistle,
one that appeals for an end to suppressing free discussion about Israel and
Palestine.
On July 10, another explosion hit near near Tehran, the latest in a string that have
struck at, among other targets, Iran's nuclear energy program at Natanz. The New York
Times , to its credit, is
reporting on the sabotage campaign, and the paper even said that one of the attacks was
"apparently engineered by Israel." But beyond the basic facts, nothing: no editorials, no
opinion pieces warning about the risk of war, no reminder that Benjamin Netanyahu has been
trying to instigate the U.S. against Iran for at least a decade. There was no effort to
explain that Israel's attacks are meant to goad Iran into retaliating, which will draw in the
U.S., and possibly help Donald Trump's sinking reelection campaign.
At least the Times is doing the bare minimum. So far in the Washington
Post, not a word from its own reporters or commenters; you would think that the paper
could find sources in the D.C. intelligence community to explain the danger of war. On
National Public Radio, one short,
confused report that provided no context at all. Foreign coverage on the U.S. cable
networks continues to be an insignificant joke.
U.S. soldiers, sailors and pilots could soon find themselves in a shooting war that would
stun our citizens with its suddenness.
The mainstream U.S. media's failure to report Israel's effort to provoke fighting with
Iran is happening at the same time as American journalistic malpractice continues over
Netanyahu's plan to illegally annex up to 30 percent of occupied West Bank Palestine. There
has been
very little news coverage of annexation, and Palestinian voices continue to be ignored.
Three members of the New York Times editorial board have extensive experience with
Israel/Palestine: Thomas Friedman, Bret Stephens and Bari Weiss. None of them has yet written
a single word about annexation.
Here is a final paradox. "Cancel culture" means that the New York Times and the
rest of the mainstream are nearly closed to the truth about both Israel's instigation over
Iran, and its probable illegal annexation in the West Bank. But Friedman, the most
influential foreign affairs columnist in America, has to, along with his editorial page
colleagues, self cancel -- because he, like them, can't write anything without
sharply criticizing Israel.
When Sportsnet
fired Canadian hockey and media personality Don Cherry in November 2019 for his bigoted remarks on Coach's Corner , we
heard the usual right-wing complaint chorus about the suppression of free speech by the liberal left.
A favored method of censorship nowadays is said to be "de-platforming," or denying those you disagree with a platform to speak.
This is also called "cancel culture." Most recently, a group of around 150 prominent intellectuals signed a "
Letter on Justice and Open Debate " in
Harper 's magazine, setting off a firestorm of debate about the limits of free speech on the left.
In reality, though, cancel culture is (at best) a marginal activity on the left. By and large, progressives still believe in reasoned
debate.
This article refers to experience in Canada, but it has its counterpart in many other countries as well.
If we want to identify the real masters of cancel culture, however, we need to follow the modus operandi of the institutional
pro-Israel lobby and its adherents, like the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA), B'nai Brith Canada (BBC), the Simon Wiesenthal
Center (SWC) and other organizations on the Jewish right. They can teach us a thing or two about how to kill free speech, and how
cancel culture works to stop an utterance before it is even spoken.
Presumably, the reason to nip an Israel-critical event in the bud is that if it goes forward, people might attend and learn something,
especially from a rigorous debate. Even a picket-line outside an event or a disruption during one might draw attention to what is
being said. For the avid intellectual protectors of Israel, that must be stopped at all costs.
The Pro-Israel Cancel Culture Playbook
A spate of examples will follow, but first, to summarize, here are what might be called the "rules of engagement" for the pro-Israel
de-platformers.
The minute you hear about an event featuring a critique of Israel, employ the following formula:
Have a number of organizations at work. If the CIJA is squeamish, then get B'nai Brith Canada to do it. If they or the Simon Wiesenthal
Center have qualms, then the imprudent and belligerent Jewish Defense League or Herut Canada can rush in. No matter how distinguished
and credible the speaker, try guilt-by-association, however tenuous. Did their uncle belong to a questionable organization? Did their
cousin write something critical of Israel? Do they pay dues to a student union that supports Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS)?
Shut them down! If the speakers are academics, go after their publications or insist their tenure be denied. If they are students,
demand that their degrees be withheld. The Canadian Jewish News recently reported
: "Rather than debating them about Israel, Manfred Gerstenfeld, the former chair of the Jerusalem Centre for Public Affairs (JCPA),
makes the case for professionally discrediting the enemies [sic] of Israel. 'Find plagiarism or a wrong footnote and make it public,'
he said at a fundraising event for the Canadian Institute for Jewish Research, in Montreal on Dec. 1 [2019]. 'Only about 10 per cent
of academics are hard-core anti-Israel and the rest are not going to risk their careers. Academics are cowards.'" Absent real evidence
of antisemitism, a mere accusation will suffice. Find out where the event is being held and who are the sponsors. Contact both the
venue and the sponsors and tell them that the speaker or the event is antisemitic. If you don't want to threaten violence yourself,
suggest that there might be violence from some unknown quarter if the event proceeds. Tell the host or sponsor that they too will
be considered antisemitic if they continue involvement. If any of the venues or sponsors accede to these demands, publicize it to
shame the non-acceders. If an event you don't like is cancelled or postponed, claim credit. Even if the shut-down attempt is not
completely successful, the cost and effort involved in resisting your attack will frighten the organizers and make others think twice
about doing something similar in the future. What I call the "cringe effect" is particularly useful with the media. When a critic
of Israel appears, initiate an avalanche of disparaging letters, emails, and phone calls. Even if the preponderance of material in
the particular media outlet has been pro-Israel, criticize the "lack of balance." If all else fails, demand "equal time" of equal
prominence for an opposing view. That should scare the media outlet away from the topic. The Playbook in Action
While pro-Israel cancel culture goes back a long way, the following are more than two dozen fairly recent examples of the playbook
in action. They are taken mostly from published reports, but a few are taken from accounts by people who were directly involved.
Vancouver
In 2016, anti-Israeli-occupation activists were slated for a panel at a Simon Fraser University (SFU) conference on genocide.
One presenter would argue that what had been done to the Palestinians constituted genocide. (The Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime of Genocide definition involves any of the following: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily
or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical
destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; and/or forcibly transferring children
of the group to another group.) B'nai Brith
reached out to SFU to have the panel cancelled. Organizers pushed back, reaching out to a range of supporters at SFU. The panel
and conference went ahead.
In 2017, the University of British Columbia (UBC) Alma Mater Society (student union) gave notice of a referendum to support the
Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement: "Do you support your student union in boycotting products and divesting from companies
that support Israeli war crimes, illegal occupation and the oppression of Palestinians?" Rather than campaigning to get students
to reject that motion on its merits, Hillel, an organization that purports to represent Jewish university students, filed a court
motion to bar the referendum entirely. That court action
failed .
In 2018, the Canadian Association of Cultural Studies sponsored a conference at SFU entitled "Carceral Culture" including a panel
on Israel/Palestine. Again, B'nai Brith attempted to get it cancelled. Counter-mobilization defeated the B'nai Brith gambit.
Calgary
In 2014, the group Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East (CJPME) prepared a photo exhibit entitled "
Dispossessed, but Defiant: Indigenous Struggles
from around the World " which juxtaposed the Palestinian travails with those of other objects of colonialism, like South African
blacks under apartheid and Canadian indigenous peoples. The exhibition was meant to travel to venues around Canada, but pro-Israel
opponents attempted repeatedly to block those displays. In Calgary, they managed to de-platform the exhibit from a small community
centre. When the hosts finally found a United Church location, opponents inundated the new venue with calls and emails. The show
went ahead but the activists have never been able to rent that church since, validating points 10 and 11 in the playbook, above.
In 2016, local activists booked space at the Canadian National Institute for the Blind for a talk by Haider Abu Ghosh of the Palestinian
Medical Relief Society, about the eradication by the Israelis of three Palestinian villages in 1967. The activists were forced by
complaints to switch the event to the Calgary Public Library. Pro-Israel groups put so much pressure on the library that the hosts
were forced to provide security, at significant cost.
Calgary writer Marcello Di Cintio won the City of Calgary W. O. Mitchell Book Prize in 2012 for "
Walls: Travels Along the Barricades " and, again, in 2018
for " Pay No Heed to the Rockets: Palestine in
the Present Tense ." But local pro-Israel organizations opposed his appointment as writer-in-residence at the public library,
insisting, against all evidence, that he was an antisemite.
Winnipeg
In February, 2018, several groups, including Independent Jewish Voices-Winnipeg, the Canadian Arab Association of Manitoba and
the United Jewish Peoples Order-Winnipeg, organized a public meeting at the University of Winnipeg entitled "My Jerusalem" to discuss
the US government's recent decision to move its Israeli embassy to Jerusalem. One of the speakers was Rabbi David Mivasair, a member
of Independent Jewish Voices. Unable to have the meeting cancelled,
B'nai
Brith Canada complained to the university that the speakers were antisemitic and demanded that the university apologize. B'nai
Brith claimed that one of the speakers accused Israel of committing a "genocide" against Palestinians and that another referred to
Israeli Jews as "European settlers." The university's Human Rights and Equity officer investigated the complaint and, claiming to
have consulted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance working definition of antisemitism, allowed the smear to stand, concluding
that the criticism of Israel amounted to antisemitism. When asked by meeting sponsors precisely which statements in the meeting were
antisemitic, the officer declined to answer.
Rabbinical student Lex Rofeberg, an activist with the American Institute for the Next Jewish Future, had been invited as a keynote
speaker to Limmud Winnipeg (an annual Jewish cultural and educational event) in March 2019. Limmud
canceled the invitation when the Jewish Federation of Winnipeg threatened to withdraw its sponsorship, complaining that Rofeberg
was a critic of Israel and a supporter of BDS and the organization
IfNotNow . Neither of Rofeberg's planned presentations (one on digital Judaism, the other on Judaism and sports) had anything
to do with his views on Israel, but he was guilty by association.
In April 2019, the Winnipeg Social Planning Council and the Canadian Muslim Women's Institute invited American-Palestinian activist
and co-founder of the 2017 women's march Linda Sarsour to speak. The Jewish Federation of Winnipeg and B'nai Brith Canada, among
others, lobbied to get the event cancelled and convinced the Winnipeg mayor and the provincial deputy premier to oppose it. The opponents
managed to get Sarsour shut out of the Seven Oaks Performing Arts Centre and the meeting moved to the Ukrainian Labour Temple, where
it
continued .
A MEMBER OF THE JDL DEFACING THE FOODBENDERS STOREFRONT (PHOTO: TWITTER)
Toronto
With Canada's largest Jewish as well as Muslim and Arab populations, Toronto can be a lightning rod for de-platforming outrages.
In 2007, CanStage, a theater company, decided to
cancel
its plans to mount a production of "My Name is Rachel Corrie" (a play taken from the writings of the American activist killed
in Gaza by an Israeli bulldozer while protesting), and two years later Crow's Theatre
presented no more
than a few "staged readings" of "Seven Jewish Children" (by British playwright Caryl Churchill). Both plays were critical of
Israel, and both of these Toronto productions had been subject to negative lobbying by the pro-Israel lobby who labelled them antisemitic.
A more sensational example of cancel culture occurred when, in 2009, scholars at Queen's University and at York University's Osgoode
Hall Law School organized an international conference called "Israel/Palestine: Mapping Models of Statehood and Paths to Peace."
The advisory board of the conference included four Israelis. Yet, pro-Israel organizations including the Jewish Defense League, CIJA,
Hasbara, B'nai Brith, and United Jewish Appeal Federation of Greater Toronto went on the warpath, demanding the conference be cancelled.
York University was warned of boycotts and the cessation of donations and was denounced in full-page newspaper ads. When B'nai Brith
accused one of the speakers of being a Holocaust denier, a threatened lawsuit forced B'nai Brith to apologize on its web page. When
the university refused to cancel the event, the Stephen Harper Conservative federal government ordered the Social Sciences and Humanities
Research Council to reconsider its funding of the event (which the SSHRC refused). The Canadian Association of University Teachers
(CAUT) set up an independent commission of Inquiry under mathematician Jon Thompson to investigate. The commission and the book that
emerged from it (" No Debate: The Israel Lobby and
Free Speech at Canadian Universities ," Lorimer 2011) concluded that, although the event went ahead, academic freedom had been
grievously damaged.
In 2009, the Koffler Centre for the Arts (associated with Toronto's Jewish community) commissioned an art project from Reena Katz
commemorating the history of Kensington Market. But when its executive director discovered that Katz had called Israel an "apartheid
state", the organization dissociated itself
from the project . As in the Limmud case in Winnipeg, above, and other examples, below, the Kensington exhibit had nothing to
do with Israel. But Katz was guilty by association.
In 2011, a master's thesis critical of Israel by University of Toronto student Ben Peto entitled "The Victimhood of the Powerful:
White Jews, Zionism and the Racism of Hegemonic Holocaust Education," was
roundly denounced
by pro-Israel groups , who demanded that the university withdraw their degree. University officials demurred.
For years, pro-Israel organizations have attempted to have the Quds Day march in Toronto entirely shut down. Occurring annually
in June and originally sponsored by the Iranian government, the event has drawn fire from pro-Israel organizations, mostly due to
the strength of its criticism of the Israeli regime. In March 2019, after consultations with legal specialists and other stakeholders,
Toronto city staff reported that shutting down the entire activity was not advisable. After demands to reconsider, staff reported
a month later that the city already had means at its disposal to counter specific acts of alleged hate speech. According to this
second report , moreover, in response to complaints by pro-Israel advocates about the 2018 rally, Toronto police had concluded
"the words spoken during the rally, which were captured and posted to YouTube, did not fit the criteria of a Hate Crime." Undeterred,
opponents initiated other actions to disallow the event. The rally went ahead in June 2019, with 1,000 participants and proceeded
online amid the coronavirus lockdown in 2020.
In summer of 2019, the Palestine Youth Movement was planning an event at Toronto's Trinity St. Paul's United Church to launch
a new scholarship named after Palestinian novelist and nationalist
Ghassan Kanafani . B'nai
Brith Canada appealed to the board of the church to cancel the event, based on its claims that Kanafani was a spokesperson for the
Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and was implicated in the 1972 Lod Airport Massacre (he was assassinated soon afterward
by the Israelis). The church board
quickly capitulated . Kanafani has a martyr's cachet among Palestinians similar to that of
Josef Trumpeldor for Israeli Jews.
Sometimes the pro-Israel cancel culture crowd targets moderate pro-Israel Jews, too, reminiscent of the toxic internal feuds that
tear family businesses apart. In January 2020, York University's Israel and Golda Koschitzky Centre for Jewish Studies
canceled
a panel discussion about the climate for Jewish students on campuses. The Jewish Defense League boasted online that it was responsible,
explaining that it opposed the appearance of moderate Mira Sucharov (which the JDL labelled, incorrectly, a "BDS enabler"). To make
the intervention truly bizarre, the JDL also opposed the presence of Alexandre Joffe, who is the editor and BDS monitor for the group
Scholars for Peace in the Middle East, which is anti-BDS.
In July 2020, an individual with the Jewish Defense League (JDL) was filmed defacing the storefront of the Foodbenders sandwich
shop in Toronto in broad daylight. According to Yves Engler, writing at Mondoweiss
:
"JDL thugs held a rally in front of Foodbenders, which has 'I Love Gaza' painted on its window. During their hate fest they
scrubbed a Palestinian Lives Matter marking from the sidewalk and, similar to what Jewish supremacist settlers do to Palestinian
homes in the occupied West Bank, someone painted the symbol on the Israeli flag onto the restaurant window. Alongside painting
Stars of David on her storefront, Foodbenders' owner Kimberly Hawkins has faced a bevy of online abuse. Hawkins has been called
a 'dirty Palestinian whore' and told 'Palestine sucks I will burn your business down' and 'I hope your family gets trapped inside
the restaurant when it burns.'"
For over 25 years, Hamilton has hosted the Gandhi Peace Festival. In 2019, B'nai Brith attempted to have two speakers kicked off
the program, organized by McMaster Professor Rama Singh. One of the speakers targeted was Azeezah Kanji, an Islamic law scholar and
director of programming at the Toronto-based Noor Cultural Centre. The other was McMaster Professor Emeritus Dr. Atif Kubursi, an
economist specializing in oil and the Middle East and former Acting Executive Secretary of the United Nations Economic and Social
Commission for Western Asia. He is the recipient of the Canadian Centennial Medal for his outstanding academic contributions. Neither
of them was expected to even speak about Palestine at the event, but both had made statements critical of Israel in the past and
thus were accused of guilt by association. At B'nai Brith's urging, the Hamilton Jewish Federation
withdrew its
participation . The event went on without the Federation's participation but with those two speakers presenting.
Institutional Jewish organizations have tried for many years to get university presidents across the country to ban Israeli Apartheid
Week (IAW). One of the more aggressive campaigns against IAW has been at McMaster University. In 2020, several groups, including
the Jewish Defense League and Hillel Ontario
asked McMaster
University to outlaw the annual event , claiming it makes Jewish students on campus uncomfortable and unsafe. The university
declined to comply with the blanket request to shut down the activities. A spokesperson insisted that "The group organizing the event
in question is a student group registered with the McMaster Students Union [these] groups are governed by McMaster's Student Code
of Conduct, which promotes the safety and security of all students and encourages respect for others."
London
The University of Western Ontario's Student's Council
has a long
history of trying to de-platform campus organizations devoted to criticism of Israel. At first, it was Solidarity for Palestinian
Human Rights (SPHR), then UWO Public Interest Research Group (UWO-PIRG). One of the speakers that UWO-PIRG had sponsored (and presumably
offended the Student's Council) was renowned Jewish-Israeli historian Ilan Pappe, author of, among other books, "
The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine
." The Ontario Human Rights Commission upheld three complaints against the university and one against the Student's Council and
required the Student's Council to apologize and to ratify the organizations.
Ottawa
Rehab Nazzal is a multidisciplinary artist of Palestinian origin based in Toronto, some of whose work deals with the harsh treatment
of Palestinians by Israel. Nazzal's 2014 exhibition "Invisible" at the Karsh-Masson Art Gallery on the ground floor of city hall
in Ottawa was publicly condemned by Israel's ambassador to Canada, and several pro-Israel groups, including B'nai Brith Canada demanded
that the mayor cancel the exhibition. The mayor refused, citing freedom of expression. But the city posted a disclaimer outside.
The groups also protested the fact that Nazzal had received a financial award from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council
of Canada. Nazzal later
spoke to a standing-room-only crowd in Ottawa and received a standing ovation. In 2015, an Israeli sniper shot Nazzal in the
leg while she was photographing a confrontation in Bethlehem. According to the Ottawa Citizen, Israeli spokesperson Eitan Weiss
commented , "It's very
difficult to ascertain what happens during a riot, because you have to imagine hundreds of people throwing rocks, Molotov cocktails,
using live firearms it's very difficult to prove that it ever happened, and it's very difficult to prove that it didn't happen."
Montreal
Zahra Kazemi was an Iranian-Canadian photographer who died in 2003 under mysterious circumstances in an Iranian jail after being
arrested for taking pictures of a demonstration in that country. In June 2005,
five photographs were pulled
from an exhibition of her work at the Côte St Luc (in Montreal) municipal library. The controversial photos were taken in Palestine.
A borough official explained that consideration of the borough's large Jewish population played a role in the decision. Kazemi's
son, Stephan Hachemi, refused to let the display continue without the censored photos, arguing that it was an insult to his mother's
legacy.
In January 2009, the Combined Jewish Appeal
cancelled
at the last minute a lecture at its Gelber Centre by the noted Israeli peace activist Jeff Halper. Halper was on a Canada-wide
tour to criticize Israel's Operation Cast Lead against Gaza, which killed 1,417 and wounded 5,303 Palestinians. A similar cancellation
of Halper occurred in Winnipeg, though Halper filled other auditoriums across the country.
In February 2010, pro-Israel organizations
attempted to block the CJPME
photo exhibit (see Calgary above) from being shown at the Cinema du Parc theatre. Lawyers for the cinema's landlord insisted that
the premises were only "for cinemagraphic [sic] use." The cinema, which had hosted other political displays in the past, refused
to back down, and the exhibit went on.
In November 2013, a Limmud Montreal conference (named "Le Mood") funded by the local Jewish federation
canceled
two presentations by Sarah Woolf , an activist behind "Renounce Birthright" (a website critical of junkets to Israel for Jewish
youth). One session was entitled "Where are all the radical Jews?" and another focussed on the history Jewish garment workers in
that city. Woolf and co-facilitator Aaron Lakoff wrote on Lakoff's blog: "Ultimately, we've been banned from speaking at Le Mood
because of our personal politics (or whatever Le Mood and Federation CJA perceive our respective politics to be), not based on the
content of our panels, which were reviewed, accepted, and scheduled months ago." In response to the de-platforming, Lakoff and Woolf
set up the presentations in a parking lot outside the main conference site and garnered a crowd of over 100 people.
Halifax
In October 2016, the Halifax Pride Annual General Meeting
entertained a motion from the group "Queer Arabs of Halifax." The resolution would disallow the distribution at the annual Pride
Fair of materials touting the state of Israel for its alleged LGBT-friendliness. QAH and its allies claimed that these materials
allowed for the 'pinkwashing' of Israel's violations of human rights against the Palestinians. Another group, the Nova Scotia Rainbow
Action Project, had collected over 500 names on a petition condemning the pinkwashing. In response, the Atlantic Jewish Council organized
hundreds of Jewish community members to attend the AGM to protest and disrupt the vote, although the vast majority of the interlopers
were not LGBTQ+. AGM organizers made the controversial decision to allow all attendees at the meeting to vote. This resulted in the
defeat of all Israel-critical resolutions and a walkout by BIPOC (Black, Indigenous and People of Colour) participants claiming,
"Straight white pride wins again." A Palestinian LGBTQ+ participant said the meeting takeover reminded him of the Israeli occupation.
Another commentator
summed it up thus : "This is a classic example of where one group hides behind the guise of free speech until the moment where
they can take their free speech and beat it over the head of everyone else."
During the 2018 Naim Ateek tour mentioned above, the Religious Studies Department of Saint Mary's University, one of the sponsors
of the Halifax event, received a letter from B'nai Brith Canada
demanding the cancellation of
the talk . The department, familiar with Ateek's work and repute, refused, and the event continued.
In June 2019, a Dartmouth, Nova Scotia NDP candidate standing for the 2019 federal election was discovered to have made some tweets
a year earlier comparing the Israeli shooting of Gazans in the "March of the Return" to the actions of Nazi Germany. Rana Zaman,
a tireless community activist, issued an apology with the help of IJV-Halifax, but the NDP federal office suggested she run it by
the Atlantic Jewish Council, the local institutional Jewish organization. The AJC had no response to the apology other than sending
Zaman a copy of the IHRA definition, which labels as automatically antisemitic "drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy
to that of the Nazis." The NDP Federal office
removed
Zaman from the candidacy .
In December 2019, the Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission bestowed a coveted "Individual Human Rights Award" on Zaman. The Atlantic
Jewish Council immediately began a campaign to have Zaman stripped of the award, and the
revocation followed a mere ten days later. Jewish institutional organizations refused to accept Zaman's original apology, insisting
that it was insincere.
Conclusion
All of the above de-platforming takes a lot of work. And it makes the pro-Israel lobby look like the bullies they are. Right now,
there is altogether too much messy debate. Consequently, the lobby wants to build a better mousetrap; one that will alleviate the
need to intervene each and every time there is an event or activity criticizing Israel. How much easier if the better mousetrap operates
to slam shut automatically, breaking the mouse's neck without untidy arguments and recrimination.
Such a better mousetrap is the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance working definition of antisemitism. As Independent
Jewish Voices has pointed out , the IHRA definition is remarkably sloppy and
vague. But it does contain eleven "examples" of antisemitism, seven of which involve criticism of Israel.
The lobby is trying to get the IHRA definition adopted by legislatures, city councils, non-governmental organizations, student
unions, human rights bodies, police departments, universities, and any forum that could possibly be in a position to shut down or
sanction activity critical of Israel. We do not know whether or how the adoption of the IHRA definition by these bodies could actually
criminalize criticism of Israel. In Canada, after all, we still have freedom of expression under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
However, we have seen how the mere accusation of antisemitism -- accurate and deserved or entirely bogus -- has been used to hobble
political and other types of careers.
We have also seen how the IHRA definition has been used to punish people and organizations who have run afoul of it. The case
of the University of Winnipeg cited above is one example. Claiming to have employed the IHRA definition, the university's diversity
officer declared the meeting antisemitic, and the university apologized for allowing the meeting to take place.
We have seen that B'nai Brith Canada
employs the IHRA
definition to decide which occurrences should be added to their audit of antisemitic incidents.
Finally, we have seen that the increasingly open use of the term antisemitic to label those who criticize Israel could encumber
legitimate lawsuits for defamation by victims of that slur.
That is why defenders of Palestinian human rights and proponents of peace and justice in the Middle East need to double our vigilance
to ensure that the IHRA definition goes no further and that freedom of expression and sanity returns.
Outspoken British comedian Ricky Gervais has once again exposed, in his usual direct manner,
the escalating use of the term "hate speech" to crush any dissenting view from the mainstream
narratives has unleashed "a new weird sort of fascism."
In an interview with talkRADIO host Kevin O'Sullivan, Gervais dismissed the new 'trendy
myth' that the only people who want free speech want to use it to say terrible things:
"There's this new weird sort of fascism of people thinking they know what you can say and
what you can't say and it's a really weird thing that there's this new trendy myth that
people who want free speech want it to say awful things all the time, which just isn't true.
It protects everyone ."
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.395.0_en.html#goog_603224593
NOW PLAYING
Ricky Gervais says 'The Office' couldn't be made today
Ricky Gervais And The Bees
Ricky Gervais: Bees are more important than humans
Celebs born on the 25th of June
Ricky Gervais Needs One More Season
Ricky Gervais wants to stop After Life with third series
Ricky Gervais Is In The Writing Room
Ricky Gervais confirms more After Life
Critically, Gervais sees two catastrophic problems with the term 'hate speech':
" One, what constitutes hate speech? Everyone disagrees. There's no consensus on what hate
speech is."
" Two, who decides? And there's the real rub because obviously the people who think they
want to close down free speech because it's bad are the fascists. It's a really weird,
mixed-up idea that these people hide behind a shield of goodness."
Additionally, 'The Office' star points out that "social media amplifies
everything."
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
"If you're mildly left-wing on Twitter you're suddenly Trotsky . If you're mildly
conservative you're Hitler and if you're centrist and you look at both arguments, you're a
coward and they both hate you,"
The root cause of all those flash points are Anglo-American -Israelis Imperialism. Lets
not pretend US-UK-Israel are not joined at the hip. Thats where much of the anti-American
sentiment comes from. Most of the protesters are white who were ticked off at the lockdowns
and police excesses (arresting Moms taking kids to park) but MSM hijacked the narrative. Many
also are tired of our foreign conflicts and income inequality at home, not to mention
ridiculous incarceration rates for non violent crimes (highest in world).
The BLM narrative is an attempt to divide the country and prevent people from uniting
against a common enemy. They are the elite corporate-Government-philanthropic partnership
that seeks to restructure society and push through a global reset after destroying the real
economy. Order out of chaos.
"I am referring to how the US society will deal with a virulently anti-US coalition of
minorities which hate this country and everything, good and bad that it stood for in the
past. Right now the US elites are committing national suicide by not only failing to oppose,
but also by actively supporting the BLM thugs and everything they stand for: BLM & Co.
remind me of Ukronazis whose main expression of national identity is to hate everything
Russian – the BLM thugs do the same thing: their entire worldview is pure hatred of the
hetero White male and the western civilization; and just as the Ukies regale each other with
stories about the "ancient Ukrs" the BLM folks imagine that they will somehow turn the US
into a type Wakanda before expelling (or worse) all those who are not willing to hand over
their country to roaming gangs of illiterate thugs."
That nonsense is right out of the likudite divisive psywar front called american
conservative talk radio: limbaugh*, hannity, levin and the rest of the zionazi-(very)gay
extremist shills that make up the bulk of the neocon psywar machine. Sad to see saker reduce
himself to that very low level of neocon horse manure, but when massa calls, the beholden
comply
*limbaugh is dying of lung cancer, poor guy that Karma's a suka. ;-D
The saker is over exaggerating the impact of the US marxists inc BLM.
It's all media controlled, they control the heat at any given moment, when things start
getting out of hand or against the direction they want it to go they just launch a media
blackout. Simple.
All the media companies are controlled by the same people, just like our reality.
If / when Biden gets in you won't hear about BLM anymore, it's all switched off just like
that.
This article is good as always, but the conclusion has a fishy sheen of Economist
glibness: like the Economist, it sounds good, except when you know something about the topic;
then you start thinking, wait, maybe the arcane exotic stuff is all wet too.
The BLM analysis up there is pure ideology, and frankly silly. BLM is nerf protest,
pretend revolution, a feckless diversion from the aims of this authentic and spontaneous
rebellion. The black guys in the streets know it's bullshit and they say so. BLM is
Democrats frantically trying to climb on the bandwagon and hijack it, divert it toward
innocuous crap. Pulling down statues is the least threatening activity this regime can
imagine.
Statues have nothing whatever to do with American culture or folkways. Statues are civic
religion, not culture. BLM is government cheese, like Washington on a horse. You should be
watching M4BL, it's their rebellion. And what do they want? The one thing that will destroy
this regime. Peace. Not hippy-dippy peace but the human right to peace in the full meaning of
the Santiago Declaration before US satellites bowdlerized it as a resolution. M4BL and its
memory-holed NGO allies want to end state violence at home and abroad through struggle and
international solidarity. They're determined to stop US aggression and repression. That will
destroy the USA as we know it. Which is exactly what we need.
As with the Weather Underground, America's privileged are now lashing out at their own
self-loathing. Protesters demonstrate in front of Lafayette Square near the White House in
Washington, DC on June 20, 2020. (Photo by Alex Wroblewski/Getty Images)
June 24, 2020
|
12:01 am
Matt
Purple Depicting revolutionary France, Dickens wrote, "Six tumbrils roll along the streets.
Change these back again to what they were, thou powerful enchanter, Time, and they shall be
seen to be the carriages of absolute monarchs, the equipages of feudal nobles, the toilettes of
flaring Jezebels, the churches that are not my father's house but dens of thieves, the huts of
millions of starving peasants!"
Today America's tumbrils are clattering about, carrying toppled statues, ruined careers,
unwoke brands. Over their sides peer those deemed racist by left-wing identitarians and
sentenced to cancelation, even as the evidentiary standard for that crime falls through the
floor. Rioters over the weekend
destroyed a statue of Ulysses S. Grant, the general who finished off the Confederacy.
Falsehoods and innuendoes outpace the truth: in Oakland, a panic arose over what were
supposedly nooses in a public park; turns out they were just exercise equipment that had
been there for months. But no matter. America's Jacobins are in no mood to reason. As in
Dickens' France, genuine social problems have mushroomed into a national orgy of self-harm.
But who are these cultural revolutionaries? The conventional wisdom goes that this is the
inner-cities erupting, economically disadvantaged victims of racism enraged over the murder of
George Floyd. The reality is something more bourgeoisie. As Kevin
Williamson observed last week, "These are the idiot children of the American ruling class,
toy radicals and Champagne Bolsheviks playing Jacobin for a while until they go back to
graduate school." Most of the culling is taking place not in the streets, but in the faculty
lounge, the corporate boardroom, the upstart real estate firm with a socially conscious Twitter
footprint and a penchant for Mean Girls GIFs. The most high-profile casualty so far
isn't even a person but a maple syrup, Aunt Jemima, whose threat to world peace seems rather
manageable.
Such superficial victories are a clear sign of the bourgeoisie's soft hand. Meaningful
police legislation, the kind that might prevent future George Floyds, currently being worked on
by serious reformers, is a difficult push. Whereas reducing policymaking to maximalist slogans
is easy; spray-painting a statue is even easier; whining about a visage on a syrup bottle is
easier still. And ease is the currency of these weekend warriors, these erstwhile stoppers of
Kony. Who is the face of their revolution? It's tempting to name Melissa
Click, the white (check) communications professor (check) who at a 2015 protest over racial
issues (check) exhorted others (check) to beat up a student journalist. (Click was later fired
for her misconduct by the University of Missouri, only to be scooped
up by Gonzaga. The culling, it seems, only ever goes in one direction.)
But there's another figure who I think is even more representative than Click -- not from
the French Revolution or our present Tantrum of the Tenured, but the 1960s.
In early 1970, a townhouse in Greenwich Village exploded, leaving a charred hole in the
facade on West 11th Street. Police later concluded that the cause was a short-circuited bomb,
which young radicals had been building in the basement. This was the work of the Weather
Underground, the left-wing terrorist group, which was planning to plant the explosive at an
officers' ball at Fort Dix. Among those killed in the blast was a young woman named Diana
Oughton, who may have been holding the bomb when it accidentally went off.
It will not surprise you to learn that Oughton did not have a difficult childhood. Her
father, James Oughton, was one of the wealthiest men in the state of Illinois thanks to his
vast agricultural holdings. Diana grew up in a small town, Dwight, but amid immense privilege,
and when she arrived right on time at Bryn Mawr, she was a paint-by-numbers Republican who
supported abolishing Social Security. Her transformation over the intervening decade is one of
the most instructive and fascinating cases of radicalization ever documented, one that's
inspired both Hollywood (the movie Katherine is loosely based on her life) and the news
media (a four-part UPI
profile of Oughton by journalists Lucinda Franks and Thomas Powers won a Pulitzer). Somehow
Oughton went from a lively and caring rich girl to very nearly one of America's worst mass
murderers.
How did this happen? Some of it had to do with her volunteer work at a far-flung village in
Guatemala, which opened her eyes to poverty, inequality, and the corruption of American foreign
aid. Some of it had to do with her beau, leftist lowlife Bill Ayers, who later became one of
the Weather Underground's leaders. But a good deal more had to do with her gilded upbringing,
which drew the contempt of her fellow radicals and seemed to turn her hatred inwards. It will
also not surprise you to learn that the Weathermen were white. What drove them to madness was a
cloying need to repudiate their privilege and prove themselves worthy comrades of the African
Americans then fighting for liberation. (It didn't work: the Black Panthers ultimately
denounced them as "chauvinistic" and "scatterbrains.")
Oughton, Franks and Powers note, came to detest "everything that she was." They conclude,
"She regarded the world she saw around her as the implacable enemy of everything she believed
in. Like the rest of the Weathermen, the privileged children of that world, in the end Diana
had only one ambition: to be its executioner."
The Diana Oughtons of today aren't about to start blowing up federal buildings, as did the
Weather Underground. But they do share that mentality: in deploring their privilege, they've
come to reject everything that bestowed it upon them, their history, their nationality, their
traditions, their culture, most of the past and some of the present as well. As recently as a
decade ago, President Barack Obama portrayed America as an imperfect but worthy project,
applying its ideals of opportunity and equality to those still left behind. Today such
incrementalism is a dirty word. The waypoints of societal change are intolerable. All
must measure up to the uniform yet constantly changing woke yardstick. Thus did a CNN
contributor
casually suggest that the Washington Monument might be demolished because George Washington
was a slaveowner. Anyone suspected of harboring racism -- even a founding father who, however
imperfect himself, helped codify principles that ended slavery -- must be brought to his
knees.
It's worth repeating that this isn't a working class production. It's driven by a new
generation of bratty Bolsheviks, those spoiled enough to think they can set a single standard
and then tear down the world for not living up to it. In lashing out at the society that
coddled them, they swing first at themselves. Once our tumbrils were police vans and pickup
trucks with Confederate flag bumper stickers; now they're vehicles for upper-class solipsism
and masochism.
Just the high rates of violent crime. For some reason only the men seem to outperform, one
would think lead intake would not be gender specific. Lead doesn't help, but i suspect it is
more than that. I suspect it is cultural. If people are raised in a. Violent culture, they
resort to violence. Wife beaters are often the children of wife beaters.
Men have always been arrested and incarcerated more than women, worldwide. If we're talking
about comparisons between racial groups, then differing levels of lead exposure should be,
and have been, examined as a factor. It seems to be highly significant.
Instead of trying to improve failing NYC schools it is easier to claim racism. Some people just do not want to study. The
number of people who barely can read in the is really staggering and can't be explained by racism, which typically just mobilize the
oppressed minority to strive in education. That's probably why children of first generation emigrants (which parent having
poor English and discriminated at jobs) usually do very well educationally.
Although further progress is desirable, the level of racism and xenophobia in the USA is much less than in many countries.
Karl Marx once said that history repeats itself, first as tragedy and then as farce. Nothing
proved the truth of Marx's claim better than the farcical battle over the statue of St. Louis
in, yes, St. Louis which followed hot on the heels of the tragedy of George Floyd in
Minneapolis.
The battle over the statue began as an exercise in identity politics, and before long it
degenerated into an example of identity theft. The main protagonist in this story is Umar Lee,
who was born Bret Darran Lee in 1974 to a southern Presbyterian family and grew up in
Florissant, Missouri just outside St. Louis. Lee may or may not be Black, which is an
ideological marker based upon but independent of biological fact, because he claims, according
to The Jerusalem Post that he "has two younger siblings who are half African-American."
[1]
On August 9, 2014, Michael Brown Jr., an 18-year-old Black man, was fatally shot by
28-year-old white Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson in the city of Ferguson, Missouri, a
suburb of St. Louis, leading to extensive rioting . After the death of
Michael Brown, Lee got involved with the Black Lives Matter protests in Ferguson, and was
arrested on two occasions and, in his words, "locked up." After getting fired from his job as
cab driver, Lee became a full-time, but little known activist. In 2015, Lee noticed that
statues started coming down in St. Louis, largely because of agitation on the part of St. Louis
Jews. At some point during this period, Lee made contact with Ben Paremba, an Israeli
restauranteur who was "passionate" about promoting Israel and other Jewish causes. At this
point Paremba was as little known to locals as Lee, but all of that changed after the Jewish
press took notice of their petition to remove the statue of St. Louis and began promoting them
as social justice crusaders, if you'll pardon the term.
In a series of tweets, Lee tried to establish his position as an aggrieved Muslim, bringing
up the Crusades as the cause of his grievance, but the underlying source of his complaint was
inspired by a group of Jews, who were incensed that the city where they had come to study had
erected a statue in honor of a king who had burned the Talmud.
Once Lee mentioned the term "anti-Semitism," the Jewish press began carrying stories which
lionized Lee as a crusader for Jewish rights. Because of his philo-Semitism, Lee soon found
himself lionized in the Jewish press. Writing for the Jewish Telegraph Agency, Ben Sales
described Lee as "a local activist who started the petition and also took part in a
successful drive to remove a nearby Confederate monument in 2017. Lee, Sales continued, "is
not Jewish but started the petition because of Louis IX's anti-Semitism." [2] Because Lee's
petition called St. Louis a "rabid anti-Semite" who "inspired Nazi Germany," it began "drawing
Jewish support" from St. Louis Jews like Rabbi Susan Talve, "the founding rabbi of the city's
Central Reform Congregation, who said taking it down would help advance racial justice in the
United States." According to Talve, St. Louis Jews have "been talking about that statue for a
long time." Talve then added that removing the statue would be "a very important part of
reclaiming history, reclaiming the stories that have created the institutionalized racism that
we are trying to unravel today. If we're not honest about our history we will never be able to
dismantle the systems of oppression that we are living under."
"Susan Talve hated Cardinal Burke," according to one Catholic familiar with the local scene.
He went on to say that Burke told him that Talve had "an animosity toward me for reasons that I
don't understand." Blinded by over 50 years of the failed experiment known as Catholic-Jewish
dialogue, his eminence was evidently incapable of seeing that Talve's animosity toward him was
based on her ancestral animosity toward the Catholic Church, which he led in St. Louis at the
time. Unsurprisingly, Rabbi Talve's animosity toward the Catholic Church has turned her into an
advocate of Lee's attack on the statue.
St. Louis Catholics were determined to ignore the ethnic animosity behind the struggle.
America Needs Fatima, a front group for the Brazilian cult Tradition, Family, and Property
joined the fray, criticizing "limp-wristed politicians" who were giving in to "revolutionary
extremists." ANF Protest Coordinator Jose Ferraz, claimed that "American Catholics" who were
"strong in their faith" were being "pushed around by anarchist revolutionaries," but without
identifying any of the actual players in the dispute.
After local activist Jim Hoft announced that a group of Catholics associated with his
website Gateway Pundit was going to defend the statue, Lee issued a statement describing what
he clearly knew to be a group of Catholics as "White Nationalists" along with "those on the
alt-right such as those who held the infamous and tragic rally in Charlottesville."
Hoft then responded by claiming that Lee deliberately misrepresented the Gateway Pundit
rosary group as white racists: "We are Christians and Christian allies who believe we still
have the freedom to practice our religion in America. We are organizing a prayer rally with
Catholic and Christian men. And now we are being threatened -- In America. We will not
apologize for our Christianity. Not in St. Louis."
The leader of a local rosary group, taken in by Lee's propaganda, began to suspect that
local Catholic activists at the rosary protest "might be backed by white supremacists" and
warned his group off. He then retracted his first tweet after he learned that the Rosary rally
was being sponsored by local activist Jim Hoft's Gateway Pundit and TFP-America Needs Fatima.
Neither group talked about the Jews. As a result, neither group was able to discuss the
conflict's most significant player. Both groups as a result became proxy warriors in an
exercise in street theater which kept the true dynamics of the conflict hidden.
In his article, Sales found a local Catholic who made a valiant attempt to defend the city's
eponymous saint, only to be shot down later by Talve, who opined that "Asserting that your way
is the only way I think is always wrong" with no sense that this was precisely the gist of what
the local Jews and their Muslim front man were imposing on the citizens of St. Louis.
Hoft called Lee's claim that "those on the alt-right such as those who held the infamous and
tragic rally in Charlottesville," were responsible for the demonstration defending the statue
"a lie," and added "There is no one from the Charlottesville rally or linked to the
Charlottesville rally or who promoted the Charlottesville rally who will be at the prayer rally
(that we know about)."
Lee's determination to turn the statue battle into a racial conflict began to generate
opposition from the Black community on Twitter, inspiring one observer to write "Fuck Umar
Lee's Bitch ass. He got fired for taking a company video to start racial tension. He's white.
Not Black. Sorry POS."
Activist, Author and Ex-Cabbie Umar Lee
By now it was obvious that the Black population of St. Louis, in spite of being dragged into
Lee's ad hoc coalition, had no dog in this fight. St. Louis, it turns out, never owned slaves.
Once the racial element disappeared from the conflict, its religious dimensions began to
emerge. The battle over the statue was a religious war between Catholics and Jews, in which
both sides were eager to cover over the conflict's true ethnic configuration. Both Lee and Hoft
were determined to obscure the identity of their opponents as well as the identity of their
backers. As one local observer put it, "Jews end up being in a win-win situation. Either Lee
succeeds in toppling the statue or Hoft succeeds and becomes the gay-married, pro-Zionist hero
to the local bishopless Catholics who are too fearful to organize on their own. Nowhere do
Catholics, or Blacks, or Muslims get a win out of this. Being pro-Zionist on some level
probably gives Hoft permission to misbehave sexually, since Jews are the authors of gay rights
as a movement. It's his way of paying them back, even though he is deeply conservative, like a
typical Iowa farm boy, raised Catholic, in all other areas."
Even after the Catholic-Jewish nature of the conflict became apparent, Lee continued to
portray the pro-statue crowd as white racists. In the days leading up to the Saturday rally,
Lee tweeted a picture of the blonde-haired Hoft with this text by way of explanation. "This is
the guy behind the White Nationalist rally on Saturday at noon on Art Hill. This is why it's
important for us to show up at eleven. . . . Jim Hoft and the Gateway Pundit were absurdly
wrong." [3]
A few hours later, Lee tweeted: "I will never allow Nazis, racists, and White Nationalists
to hold rallies in St. Louis without a response even if it's just me." [4] Hours later, Christine
Eidson Christlieb tried to set the record straight when she tweeted "The people praying the
rosary every night at the statue aren't white nationalists. That's just false. They are
Catholics." [5]
Ignoring Christlieb's tweet, Lee continued to promote identity theft, tweeting on June 24
that "White Christian Nationalists and the alt-right have announced a rally on Saturday at the
Louis IX statue. Please RT and share. We need to counter. Calling all Catholic and Christian
Men and their Allies." The bogus request for Catholic support when Lee knew it was Catholics
who were on the other side of the protest saying their rosaries exposed the hidden grammar of
Lee's strategy, which involved denying his opponents their actual identity and turning them
instead into "white nationalists," a group which could then be deprived of their constitutional
right to free speech and assembly. I discussed this ploy in my article comparing the Arbaeen
march in Dearborn, which was considered legitimate because of its religious sponsorship, and
the Unite the Right Rally in Charlottesville, which was illegitimate precisely because the
protesters were "white," a designation which deprived them of any constitutional protection.
Lee knew he was dealing with Catholics, but he insisted on calling them white supremacists
because that was the category that would demonize them.
Lee's tweets throughout the period leading up to the June 27 protest gave a clear indication
that his real animus was against St. Louis's Catholics, not white supremacists or nationalists.
Lee tweeted "Mel Gibson is probably the most prominent traditional Catholic and critic of the
modern church known to most Americans. He is also a raging anti-Semite who beat his wife. The
Twitter army defending Louis IX I'm sure are huge fans of his."
https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-6&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1275341953585090561&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.unz.com%2Fejones%2Ficonoclasm-in-st-louis%2F&theme=light&widgetsVersion=9066bb2%3A1593540614199&width=500px
Umar Lee Leading a Protest at the St. Louis Statue
Umar Lee is not your typical Muslim. He said nothing about the plight of the Palestinians
who were about to lose control over the West Bank. He failed to mention the connection between
the knee hold which presumably killed George Floyd and ADL sponsored seminars which introduced
Minneapolis police officers to Israeli instructors in Chicago in 2012. Instead he claimed that
"Bringing down the Louis IX statue won't be the [first] time Muslims and Jews coordinated in
St. Louis to stamp out evil." Then combining two contradictory tropes, Lee described his
opponents as "alt-right Catholic fascists," whose "favorite hobbies" were "burning and looting
Jews and impaling heretics." Instead of defending the statue of St. Louis IX, Lee felt that his
Catholic foes could better spend their time studying Jewish history and volunteering "to help
the many thousands of sex crimes victims in the church."
Statues are a sign of hegemony. They help you identify the ruler, and if not the real ruler,
the man those in power would like to have as their ruler. In a revolutionary era, the statues
of the former ruling class must come down. The most striking instance of this was the statue of
Stalin in Prague, which came down as soon as Communism collapsed in the period from 1989 to
1990. The removal of Stalin's statue left an empty pedestal in its place, but just as nature
abhors a vacuum, so pedestals will not remain empty. The first occupant of the empty Stalin
pedestal was a statue of Michael Jackson, who brought his own statue to Prague when he played a
concert there. He was the hegemon of the 1990s. The last time I was in Prague that pedestal was
occupied by a weird crane-liked gnomon which moved in sync with some unheard rhythm of the
spheres, making it seem like a metronome keeping time to an unknown melody.
The battle in Charlottesville in 2017 was ultimately a conflict over a statue, in this case
a statue of Robert E. Lee, which celebrated the "redemption" of the South which occurred a
generation after the Civil War, when the South drove the last remnant of Yankee soldiers from
their soil. The Lee statue was erected, as were many others celebrating Confederate soldiers,
to celebrate the new regime.
During the revolutionary spring of 2020, numerous statues were deposed. Not surprisingly,
the statue of Lenin in Seattle escaped the mayhem which visited that city unscathed, as did the
most recent addition to statuary in South Bend, Indiana, the statue of Rev. Theodore Hesburgh,
CSC, president of Notre Dame University and civil rights icon Martin Luther King, Jr. The
latter statue expresses better than any other the system of control which it symbolizes. The
short-hand explanation of that system of control is the civil rights movement, which celebrates
breaking laws with some higher purpose in mind. A recent article noted that 60 percent of
people in their 20s believe it is okay to break the law for a good cause. Of course, who gets
to determine whether the cause is good did not get mentioned in that article. That is why the
Hesburgh-King statue is important. It was based on a photo taken in Chicago in 1966 (most often
erroneously stated as 1964). When Martin Luther King arrived in Marquette Park, one of
Chicago's many ethnic neighborhoods, the Lithuanians living there greeted him with a hail of
rocks and bottles, one of which staggered King as he got out of his car. Needing help to
prosecute the ethnic cleansing of Catholic neighborhoods in Chicago, King gave Hesburgh a call
and together the two icons sang "We shall overcome" at a rally at Soldier Field that
summer.
The statue is, in other words, a celebration of two of American history's most famous proxy
warriors. As a pawn of Jewish money and Quaker organizing, King obliterated the traditional
Black power structure in Chicago, symbolized by Bronzeville, which was the Black ethnic
neighborhood. As a pawn of the Rockefellers, Hesburgh betrayed fellow Catholics in Chicago in
order to get funding from their foundations, especially the Population Council run by John D.
Rockefeller, 3rd. So the South Bend statue is in no danger of coming down because the
descendants of the oligarchs which turned King and Hesburgh into political icons have found a
new set of proxy warriors in Antifa and Black Lives Matter, who have arrogated the civil rights
mantle to themselves in a bid to stamp out the last remnants of representative government in
the United States. Pedestals will not remain empty. Prepare yourself for a Jeff Bezos statue.
Just as King and Hesburgh were proxy warriors of the oligarchs in collaboration with each
other, so Lee and Hoft are proxy warriors of the oligarchs in opposition to each other.
In the spring of 2015, the iconoclasts of St. Louis succeeded in getting the Jesuit-run St.
Louis University to remove its statue of Pere Pierre-Jean De Smet, a Belgian Catholic priest
who worked as a missionary to the Indians in the Mid-West and western sections of the United
States of America. [6] The Jesuits caved in to
pressure from "a cohort of students and faculty" who complained that the De Smet sculpture
"symbolized white supremacy, racism, and colonialism," [7] at least according to
this news account, which and alumnus disputes, claiming:
Saint Louis University did not get rid of the statue of Father DeSmet. They moved it to the
newly renovated Saint Louis University Museum of Art (SLUMA). There, the statue is prominently
shown quite beautifully along with other artifacts and artwork from the early founding of St
Louis and its Catholic heritage. One could argue that they removed it from its outside area
because of the pressure that the university faced to remove it, but there was never a "cohort
of faculty and students to remove it." During my four years as a student from 2006 to 2009, I
never heard one comment about the statue. I attended the university with a lot of people from
various ethnicities who never mentioned it once. We would also pass it by on a daily basis. I
personally think that this "cohort" was made up and that no one ever had a problem with it,
whether liberal or not. It was made into a problem by those who would like to destroy
Catholicism. The Jesuits should have left it where it was but at least they had enough sense to
keep it and showcase it prominently in their museum, which I will repeat, is
beautiful.
Protestors Argue at the Statue of St. Louis
Two years later, St. Louis mayor Lyda Krewson caved in to the same sort of pressure when she
removed a Confederate statue from the same Forest Park neighborhood where the statue to St.
Louis is located. [8] The statue of Columbus
was also removed in 2017, largely at the behest of Rachel Sender, a graduate student in
biological anthropology at Washington University who claimed that Columbus "represents racism,
colonialism, slavery and white supremacy and should not be given any honorable remembrance or
be a symbol of Tower Grove Park." [9] In attempt to give some
background on Lee and his petition, local Catholic activist Jim Hoft described Rachel Sender as
"some idiot . . . from New Jersey." Sender, however, was much more forthcoming than Hoft in
describing both her identity and motivation in wrecking that city's statues. Buoyed by the
iconoclasts' success in removing the Columbus statue, Sender jumped on the bandwagon to remove
the St. Louis statue, tweeting that "St. Louis was a crusader known for persecuting Jews. This
is also the only city I've experienced [sic] blatant anti-Semitism. His legacy should not be
honored! Lyda Kewson, City of St. Louis, Change the name of St. Louis. Sign the petition."
[10]
Lee was lionized in the Jewish press because even though Lee calls himself a Muslim, he not
only talks like a Jew, he also got the idea of tearing down the St. Louis statue from Jews. In
a recent interview, Lee told The Jerusalem Post "that he became aware of the statue's
history when Rabbi Hershey Novack of the Chabad on the Campus at St. Louis University held a
Tisha B'Av gathering by the Louis IX statue to remember the atrocities he wrought on Jews in
France." [11] Lee was in effect
only doing what he was told, after Novack and local Israeli restauranteur Ben Parembo said,
"Hey, that statue needs to come down. Jewish kids going out with their parents to [park's]
[sic] art museum don't need to be looking at this anti-Semite."
Lee may be the only Muslim in the world who is not upset about the United States moving its
embassy to Jerusalem, thereby making it the capital of Israel. In fact he's planning a trip to
Jerusalem, where he plans to "do a little dance. . . to commemorate the fact that loser [i.e.,
St. Louis IX] never made it to Jerusalem." In the meantime, Lee "will be drafting a letter to
@Pontifex asking for the decanonization of King Louis IX." On June 21, Lee informed his twitter
followers that he was "working on Lindbergh too. Must go. No Nazi named streets in St. Louis
Couny [sic]!" In addition to being a descendant of Robert E. Lee, Umar Lee did time for some
unspecified crime. It was during his stay in prison that he became aware of Jewish history and
the fact that St. Louis "burned Talmuds and embarked upon two crusades." He also learned that
St. Louis was "a Catholic town," a fact which led him to embark on a career as a reformer of
the Catholic Church, forcing him to oppose "some hateful pre-Vatican II trends that are being
repopularized." At some point during his study of Jewish history, Lee discovered that "a group
of Jewish students from Washington University and a rabbi gathered at the statue [of St. Louis]
on Tisha B'av" [or this ninth of Av, the day on which the temple was destroyed]. [12] From
reading the article, Lee also learned that King Louis "organized the burning of 12,000 Jewish
manuscripts in Paris, reasoning that the Jewish manuscripts might corrupt his good Christian
soldiers." [13] The book burning was
small potatoes compared to the destruction of the Temple, but the statue gave local Jews a
reason to feel aggrieved and test the local political waters to see how much clout they had.
Lee discovered that Jewish clout had increased considerably over the past 11 years, and that,
during the revolutionary spring of 2020, the time was ripe to press the issue.
Knowing that the Jews were itching for a battle with that city's Catholics, Lee engaged in
identity theft by claiming that the Catholic protesters were white because religion was a
category which still afforded constitutional protection. Recognizing that any conflict between
Catholics and Jews, with Muslims and Blacks playing minor roles, was unwinnable, Lee attempted
to drag the mayor into a fight against "white nationalists" knowing full well that enlisting
her in a battle against that city's Catholics, a group which made up 26 percent of the
population would have meant political suicide. Hence, Lee's persistent efforts to turn the
rally into something which it was not, as when he wrote: "Does St. Louis Mayor Lyda Krewson
have a problem with alt-right White Nationalists having a protest at the Louis IX statue on Art
Hill this Saturday?" Lee's tendentious formulation of the issue bespoke a combination of
identity theft and moral blackmail. The two issues are, of course, related and the link was
America's Civic Religion, otherwise known as the Civil Rights Movement, otherwise known as the
Black-Jewish alliance. Anyone who had the Black-Jewish alliance on his side occupied the high
moral ground and was on his way to winning the argument by default, because his opponents
lacked a moral leg to stand on. Because of Hollywood and public education, support for the
Civil Rights movement had replaced the ten commandments in America's mind as the source of
moral guidance.
But, as Anne Hendershott pointed out in her book The Politics of Deviance , deviance
is constant. That means that for every precept of the moral law you subtract from your
behavior, you have to add a precept of political correctness by way of compensation. Sexual sin
is the usual motivation for subtracting precepts of the moral law from your conscience. The
public school system in America as well as higher education has as one of its main goals the
sexual corruption of every student unfortunate enough to enter its doors. The moral vacuum that
education creates is filled by tales of the Civil Rights Movement, which proposes Martin Luther
King and Rosa Parks as role models. The sense of grievance and contempt for the positive law
which King and Parks stoked found fulfillment in the homosexual movement which invoked their
name to stoke contempt for the natural law.
So one way to calm your conscience because of the abortion you had is by becoming a
fanatical member of Antifa or a supporter of Black Lives Matter. The Civil Rights Movement of
the '60s was in many ways moral compensation for the adoption of contraception among Protestant
sects. Unsurprisingly, 1964 was the year of both the pill and the Civil Rights Act. This is not
a coincidence.
The battle over the statue served as an update on the Triple Melting Pot. Protestants were
nowhere to be found in this conflict. Their place had been taken by Muslims, who were still
negligible in terms of political power or cultural presence, but they could become significant
if they allied themselves with the Jews, the part of the Triple Melting Pot which was still
negligible in terms of numbers but whose cultural and political power had increased enormously
over the past half century. St. Louis is the home to 60,000 Bosnian Muslims, who harbor animus
against Jews that is now common in the Islamic world, largely because of how Israel has treated
Palestinians. Umar Lee is the exception that proves the rule. Thanks to the state of Israel,
Muslim antipathy to Jews is a widespread phenomenon, but it is not the case in the drama
surrounding the state of St. Louis. If Umar had come out in favor of the Boycott Divestment and
Sanction movement holding Israel accountable for its crimes against Palestinians, he'd still be
driving a cab.
What began as an exercise in identity politics soon devolved into a case of identity theft.
After Lee called the Catholics white nationalists, local Catholic activist Jim Hoft responded
by calling Lee's Jewish coalition "Marxists." When it came to the battle of the St. Louis
statue, the hierarchy of the Catholic Church was missing in action. Archbishop Robert Carlson,
ordinary of the archdiocese of St. Louis, defended the statue, but his comments had little
effect on public opinion because he is on his way out the door. His appointed successor,
auxiliary bishop Mitchell Rozanski of Springfield, Massachusetts, had nothing to say on the
issue. As a result, Hoft became defensor fidei by default, in spite of the fact that Jim
Hoft's relationship with Catholicism is even more troubled that Umar Lee's relationship with
Islam.
Hoft was born and raised in Iowa, but he got his start in local politics in St. Louis after
he established a national internet presence by founding the Gateway Pundit website, which took
the typically conservative line on issues as other websites began to engage in liberal
waffling. Conservative, at this moment in time, had less to do with the Republican populism of
St. Louis native Phyllis Schlafly, and more to do with the Neoconservatives who took over both
the party and the movement over the course of the 1990s. Specifically, that meant that Hoft was
rabidly pro-Israel, even to the point of posting a picture of him and Bibi Netanyahu on the
Gateway Pundit masthead, and disallowing any criticism of Israel or Jews from its combox.
Hoft's loyalty to Israel has earned him Jewish friends, such as film producer Michael Rudin,
who featured Hoft in a 2019 episode of the TV Series The Conspiracy File s and who is
also featured in Hoft's masthead.
In keeping with an even more recent trend in Republican-style conservatism, Hoft announced
that he was a homosexual after the Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando because he "just had
to." Not long after coming out of the closet, Hoft married a gay Filipino in what purported to
be a Catholic ceremony at the rebel St. Stanislaus Church in St. Louis. Not content to keep his
sodomy private, Hoft took out an elaborate wedding announcement complete with picture of him
and the boy, who is about a foot shorter than Hoft.
Hoft's Gateway Pundit has gone on to become a fact-checker's dream, with article after
article in mainstream outlets like the Washington Post describing Hoft and his website
as retailers of conspiracy theories and fake news, but Hoft continues in his role as the Jews'
favorite dumb goy. Hoft's fanatical, pro-Israel chest-thumping Catholicism is a compensation
for homosexuality, and a manifestation of what we might call the Michael Voris syndrome. In
addition to being useful to the Jews whenever they need someone to make the Catholic Church in
St. Louis look ridiculous, Hoft has become defensor fidei by default because in St.
Louis, as elsewhere, nature abhors a vacuum. Archbishop Robert Carlson's defense of the statue
was weakened by his status as a lame duck. [14] The Archdiocese
issued a statement defending St. Louis as "an example of an imperfect man who strived to live a
life modeled after the life of Jesus Christ" and a "model for how we should care for our fellow
citizen." His defense was further weakened by the fact that he did not identify the group
responsible for wanting the statue removed. Catholics, as a result, were once more engaged in
cultural shadow boxing against enemies they could not identify.
That means that the fate of the statue rests in the hands of Carlson's successor,
Archbishop-elect Mitchell Rozanski, who will be installed as St. Louis's new ordinary on August
25, which is, not coincidentally, the feast of St. Louis IX. The fate of the statue rests of
Mayor Lyda Krewson, who is both a Catholic and a liberal Democrat, which means she is pulled in
two opposite directions. She has come out in favor of retaining the statue, but some Catholics
are not sure she can withstand the political pressure pulling her in the opposite direction,
since she has already presided over other acts of public iconoclasm. As a Catholic mayor
presiding over the fate of the statue of a Catholic saint in a city with a large Catholic
population, Krewson finds herself confronted with a revolutionary situation during an
interregnum. The driving force behind that revolution is the Jewish revolutionary spirit.
Because of that fact, the impending arrival of Mitchell Rozanski is not cause for optimism.
Rozanski grew up in Baltimore and is a protégé of Cardinal Keeler, who is the
patron saint of Catholic-Jewish dialogue in the United States and author of a document on
Catholic-Jewish relations that was so heretical that even the notoriously philosemitic United
States Conference of Catholic Bishops refused to publish it. On June 18, 2009, the USCCB took
the unprecedented step of condemning its own document on Catholic-Jewish relations, warning
unsuspecting readers that Keeler's "Reflections on Covenant and Mission should not be taken as
an authoritative presentation of the teaching of the Catholic Church. In order to avoid any
confusion, the USCCB Committee on Doctrine and the Committee on Ecumenical and Interreligious
Affairs have decided to point out some of these ambiguities and to offer corresponding
clarifications." [15]
Archbishop-Elect
Mitchell Rozanski
In an interview with Rozanski which appeared in the National Catholic Reporter ,
Keeler was described as "a legend in the field of Jewish-Catholic dialogue" and "one of
Rozanski's mentors." [16] Eventually Rozanski
succeeded Keeler as moderator for Catholic-Jewish relations. On February 24, 2017, Rozanski
wrote a response to the shooting at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh in his capacity as
U.S. Bishops' Chairman on Interreligious Affairs, expressing "deep sympathy, solidarity, and
support to our Jewish brothers and sisters who have experienced once again a surge of
anti-Semitic actions in the United States. I wish to offer our deepest concern, as well as our
unequivocal rejection of these hateful actions. The Catholic Church stands in love with the
Jewish community in the current face of anti-Semitism." [17]
In an article which appeared in the Springfield, Massachusetts Republican , Rozanski
was quoted as saying, "I fear that the current level of demonizing anyone of a different
opinion sadly will only lead to even more levels of violence and affronts to our fellow human
beings, created in the likeness and image of God." [18] The article went on
to say that the suspected shooter in the attack referred to Jews as "children of Satan," which
the paper described as an "anti-Semitic social media posting" with no indication that the term
came from Jesus Christ in a confrontation with the Jews portrayed in the Gospel of St. John. I
make the claim that there is a historical continuity between that confrontation in the Gospel
and 2,000 years of revolutionary ferment on the part of the Jews in my book The Jewish
Revolutionary Spirit.
Unlike Justin Rigali and Raymond Burke, "whose legacies remain divisive," Rozanski plans to
deal with the polarized situation in St. Louis by promoting "more dialogue, more understanding,
more study of the way that police deal with different situations. And what happened to George
Floyd in Minneapolis was totally, totally unacceptable, totally beyond the pale of whatever
should be done to anyone who is being taken into police custody."
There are, of course, Catholics in St. Louis who can provide a cogent defense of retaining
the statue, but they are currently in hiding, fearing repercussions from Rozanski, whom one
"local Catholic in a very sensitive position that requires him to remain anonymous" described
as their "new super-ecumenical and politically correct Archbishop." As I have said many times
before, the Church can have good relations with the Jews, or she can have unity, but she can't
have both. Rozanski's good relations with the Jews is a sign that local Catholics are in for a
hard time if they try to contest the anti-Semitism label which has been imposed on them by Umar
Lee and his Jewish backers in their defense of the statue. One such Catholic provided the
following defense of the statue, while at the same time declining to give his name:
Saint Louis IX was a devout follower of Jesus, who was scrupulously honest, humble, a
generous and unfailing lover and benefactor of the poor, and a peacemaker and unifier of
factions within his kingdom. It is for these and other virtues that he was canonized by the
Church. Just as we don't eliminate the name and statues of Martin Luther King because he was
a womanizer and a plagiarist, nor should we dishonor St. Louis because of his policies toward
Jews and his crusading ventures. These need to be understood in their historical context of
medieval Christendom – very different from today's secularized world. We're told his
statue is "offensive" to Jews and Muslims. Tearing it down would be deeply offensive to
hundreds of thousands of Catholics in this area, and to quite a few others as well.
As the intensity of the conflict surrounding the rosary vigils increased, the author of the
above statement began to wonder if it had been strong enough in stating the case for St. Louis.
When a local priest attempted to debate with the protestors, a shouting match ensued with no
conclusive outcome. The author then brought up the issue of the Crusades by contexualizing it
with a discussion of Zionism:
It's a pity the priest leading the rosary and the other Catholics there didn't defend St.
Louis from the charge of being "genocidal" and a "murderer." The Crusades were basically a
defensive movement against constant Muslim encroachment on the west and Christendom, which
they vowed to conquer and destroy, and to regain the Holy Places in Palestine which they had
seized after the Holy Land had been under Christian control for over three centuries before
the Muslim invasions of the 7th century. What prompted King Louis to embark on a crusade was
that in 1244 Muslim forces invaded Jerusalem, massacred many Christians there and desecrated
churches and holy places. So it wasn't "Islamophobic" or "genocidal" for a Christian king to
want to defend them! How can Jews condemn Christians for seeking to reclaim lands formerly
under Christian control when they themselves (or at least the great majority, who are
Zionists) justified their takeover of Palestine in 1948 for the same reason, namely, that it
belonged to their ancestors until foreigners (the Romans) conquered it and dispersed
them?
He then addressed the issue of burning the Talmud:
St. Louis was following the precepts of Lateran Council IV and the popes of his time in
having copies of the Talmud banned and burned after it was found out that this volume (only
then recently translated from Hebrew) contained repulsive blasphemies against Jesus and the
Blessed Mother. Regarding Mary, "She who was the descendant of princes and governors played
the harlot with carpenters" (Sanhedrin, 106a). As regards Our Lord himself, he is said to be
now in hell, being boiled in "hot excrement" (Gittin, 57a). Why? "Jesus the Nazarene . . .
and his disciples practiced sorcery and black magic, [and] led Jews astray into idolatry"
(Sanhedrin, 43a). "He was sexually immoral, worshipped statues of stone. . . was cut off from
the Jewish people for his wickedness, and refused to repent" (Sanhedrin 107b, Sotah, 47a). He
"learned witchcraft in Egypt" (Shabbos, 104b). [19]
Jonathan Greenblatt
Missing from this discussion is the role Jews play in getting people they don't like
de-platformed from social media, which is the modern day equivalent of burning the Talmud. On
the same Saturday as the protests at the St. Louis statue, all of my books were removed from
Amazon at the behest of the ADL, the main organization promoting Jewish censorship of the
media. Unlike the ADL, the Inquisition gave the books it burned a fair hearing. Now, because of
Jewish concepts like "hate speech," anyone can lose his livelihood without trial or explanation
at the hands of the same people who take umbrage at burning the Talmud. The only thing
necessary is mention of the magic word "anti-Semitism," which ends all discussion and leaves
the accused person guilty without any possibility of clearing his name. St. Louis, according to
our author:
was no "anti-Semite" (which properly speaking is a racial prejudice, like that of
Hitler); but he was indeed anti-Jewish, i.e., against Judaism as a religion, for the reason
that Jews bitterly hated Christianity (as the Talmud demonstrated) and often worked to
undermine the faith of Louis' Christian subjects, whose eternal salvation he sought to
protect. The consistent position taken by the medieval popes was the Jews were not to be
molested, and their worship was to be tolerated, provided they didn't work to oppose or
undermine the faith of the Christian majority. When punitive measures were implemented or
authorized by the Church, it was because the Church judged that Jews were not abiding by that
condition.
As his final point, our author points out that if the Jews had power over Christians to
implement the Talmud which St. Louis ordered burned, Christians would have died. That's because
Jews only believe in tolerance when they are a powerless minority, and they believe in it only
as a strategy to undermine the coherence and unity of the dominant culture until they get the
upper hand, at which point they become ruthless persecutors of those who are weaker than they
are. Israeli treatment of Palestinians is a good indication of how Jews act when they get the
upper hand. Bolshevism in Russia is another example. Once the Bolsheviks seized power in
Russia, the Jews who controlled that movement turned the instruments of state power against the
Russian Christians whom they saw as their ancestral foes by creating instruments of terror like
the Cheka, which was invariably a Jewish-run operation because Russians were reluctant to
torture and murder other Russians, whereas the Jews who made up the majority of that
organization had no such compunction. "St. Louis's medieval methods," our author continues:
were not such as we would find acceptable today, when a much greater degree of religious
toleration and emphasis on individual rights has been a part of Western culture now for
centuries; but we have to understand St. Louis and other great figures of Christendom and
U.S. history in their own historical context. The idea of a religiously "neutral" or secular
state was unheard of anywhere in the world until after the French and American Revolutions
more than 500 years after St. Louis lived. No religion in those days gave much
emphasis to religious toleration. The Jews themselves (never mind the Muslims!) would have
been very oppressive to Christians if they had been in power, as the Jewish laws set out in
the Babylonian Talmud make clear, even though most of them couldn't be implemented. For
instance, "If a gentile hits a Jew, the gentile must be killed" (Sanhedrin, 58b); "When a Jew
murders a gentile there will be no death penalty. What a Jew steals from a gentile he may
keep" (Sanhedrin, 57a). Indeed, gentiles are dehumanized: "All gentile children are animals"
(Yebamoth 98a); "Gentile girls are in a state of niddah [filth] from birth" (Abodah
Zarah, 36b). If this, and the vitriolic Talmud slurs against Jesus and Mary cited above, are
not "hate speech," what is?"
As some indication of the parlous state which Catholic-Jewish dialogue has created in the
Catholic Church, America Magazine turned to a Jewish Lesbian convert to Catholicism, who
explained the situation in St. Louis to its readers in the following way: "King Louis IX, whom
Catholics know as St. Louis, ordered the burning [of the Talmud] after a rigged 'disputation'
in which a Jewish convert to Christianity debated a rabbi about whether the Talmud was
blasphemous." [20] So are the above
passages blasphemous? Are they in the Talmud? If the answer to those questions is yes, in what
sense was the disputation rigged? Eve Tushnet, who is the author of this article as well as the
author of Gay and Catholic: Accepting My Sexuality, Finding Community, Living My Faith,
never gets around to answering that question. Nor does she tell us whether the statue should be
taken down or left in place, nor does she tell us in what sense someone who describes herself
as a Jewish lesbian has converted to the Catholic faith.
The fact that the author of this eloquent defense of St. Louis chose to remain anonymous out
of fear of retaliation from that city's incoming bishop is a good indication that the violence
will increase. America is now in the middle of a full-blown revolution because largely Jewish
revolutionaries broke the Motion Picture Production Code in 1965 and inundated the country with
pornography and other forms of sexual subversion, which left subsequent generations weakened,
demoralized, and incapable of sustaining their own culture and institutions. The year 1965
inaugurated the failed experiment known as Catholic-Jewish dialogue as well. More than anything
else, the sort of Catholic-Jewish dialogue which the incoming bishop learned at the knee of his
mentor Cardinal Keeler crippled the Catholic Church's ability to defend the moral order in
American society. Repurposed as our "elder brothers" and friends, Jews qua Jews became
the unopposed sponsors of virtually every subversive movement in American culture from abortion
to gay marriage, from race-baiting political correctness to family destroying feminism, from
warmongering neo-Conservatism to brutal shoot-the-protesters-in-the-back Zionism, alienating
people who should have been America's friends because of Israel's barbarous behavior. The Jews
have never abandoned their ancestral commitment to revolution, and now revolution has arrived
at the gates of the Gateway, as the Black revolutionaries who have always been the Jews' proxy
warriors, from the founding of the NAACP to the infusion of George Soros money into the coffers
of Black Lives Matter, broke down the entrance to a gated community two blocks from the St.
Louis statue and continued the march which began after George Floyd died. Threatened by what
looked like a home invasion and abandoned by the local police, who had been told to stand down
by that city's feminist mayor, Mr. and Mrs. McCloskey stood their ground on the front porch of
their house brandishing the weapons that they were forced to exhibit because the cops refused
to come to their assistance when called.
The rally at the statue ended up being much more violent than anticipated as brass-knuckled
Black Lives Matter thugs beat up elderly Catholics who had come to say the Rosary. [21] Some of
the Black Lives Matter demonstrators arrived with firearms. All of the Catholic demonstrators
were unarmed. According to various reports, Black Lives Matter protesters attacked Catholics
praying near the Apotheosis of St. Louis statue in St. Louis. And why did they do this? Were
the Black thugs who took the cane away from a 60-year-old Catholic praying the Rosary and beat
him with it upset about Louis IX burning the Talmud or his position on Albigensianism? I doubt
it. You can view that attack at the link in this footnote. [22] Umar Lee's portrayal
of Catholics as white supremacists, fresh from Charlottesville, is responsible for that
Catholic's injuries. Lee is guilty of incitement. If he and the man who carried out the attack
go unpunished, we can expect more violence.
In reaction to the violence at the statue on Sunday, the Islamic Foundation of Greater St.
Louis issued a stunning rebuke to Umar Lee in a statement on Tuesday, June 31, saying that
removing the statue of St. Louis "will not erase history." The Islamic group went on to say
that they remained "committed to work on interfaith relationships based on honest dialogue and
mutual respect." It did not recommend taking down the statue of St. Louis. Instead it was
saying there were voices of reason in the Islamic community in St. Louis and that Lee's
campaign had no support among the people who did speak for Islam in that city. As one local
Catholic put it after reading the Islamic group's report, "The Jews have overplayed their
hand."
Mr. Greenblatt's attempt to use the ADL to resurrect the Black/Jewish alliance has created
problems of its own. With Israel's annexation of the West Bank looming, the ADL is concerned
that the backlash that the annexation is sure to cause, might spread to its proxy warriors in
Black Lives Matter, as in fact did happen in England [23] :
The "stakeholders analysis memo," which was issued by the ADL's Government Relations,
Advocacy, and Community Engagement department and marked as a draft, warns that the group
will need to find a way to defend Israel from criticism without alienating other civil rights
organizations, elected officials of color, and Black Lives Matter activists and supporters.
The memo suggests that the group hopes to avoid appearing openly hostile to public criticism
of annexation while it works to block legislation that harshly censures Israel or leads to
material consequences, such as conditioning United States military support. [24]
The ADL was not the only Jewish organization supporting Black Lives Matter. According to a a
report in the Jewish Telegraph Agency, "More than 400 Jewish organizations and synagogues in
the United States have signed on to a letter that asserts 'unequivocally: Black Lives Matter.'"
[25] Those groups
represented a broad spectrum "of religious, political, gender, and racial identities. The list
of signatories -- from small congregations to major Jewish organizations -- represents millions
of Jewish people in the United States, the organizers," according to the statement.
The problem in cities like Seattle, Chicago, and St. Louis can be laid at the feet of those
cities' lesbian and feminist public officials, a group which is incapable of enforcing the law
because they see the law as a manifestation of patriarchal oppression. This encourages anarchy
because it allows Jewish-funded thugs like Antifa and Black Lives Matter to act with impunity.
It also encourages political opportunists like Umar Lee to mount assaults on the social order
because they can blackmail those officials because of the guilty conscience which arises from
abortion and sexual perversion. The Church is complicit as well when it appoints bishops who
are known for their skill in appeasing Christ's enemies.
The video of Mr. and Mrs. McCloskey's confrontation in St. Louis garnered over 16 million
views in less than 24 hours, not because violence ensued, but because violence was averted, at
least for the time being. [26] But the assault on
the McCloskeys continues as a signature petition to disbar them is wending its way to the
Jewish head of the local lawyer's disciplinary board. Planning to fight fire with fire, the
McCloskeys have hired a Jewish lawyer to defend them.
As of this writing, St. Louis Circuit attorney Kim Gardner is considering filing charges
against the McCloskey's for defending their home. Gardner was elected in 2017, with the help of
George Soros money. [27] In addition to
supporting Gardner, Soros also funded the Ferguson riots. [28] During Gardner's
tenure as Circuit Attorney, felony prosecutions dropped dramatically. Of the 7,045 felony cases
which the St. Louis Police Department brought before the circuit attorney in 2019, only 1641
were prosecuted, despite claims of significant evidence to prosecute presented by the police
union. [29] After reducing the
cash bond for numerous offences, or removing it altogether, Gardner announced that she was no
longer going to prosecute "low-level" marijuana possession cases. At this point, Gardner
declared war on the State of Missouri. In February 2018, Gardner indicted Missouri Governor
Eric Greitens. [30] Three months later,
the governor's office filed a suit against William Don Tisaby, the ex-FBI agent Gardner had
hired to investigate Greitens. Gardner then went all the way to the Missouri Supreme Court to
block the appointment of a special prosecute to investigate her handling of the Greitens
investigation but lost. That grand jury also brought charges of misconduct against Gardner but
ultimately failed to hand down any indictments.
In 2019 Gardner pleaded guilty to repeated campaign finance violations dating back to her
time as a Missouri State Legislator, but avoided conviction by reaching "an agreement with the
Missouri Ethics Commission to pay a settlement of $6,314 in lieu of a $63,009 fine." [31]
In January 2020, Gardner filed a civil rights lawsuit against St. Louis City and St. Louis
Metropolitan Police Department on the basis of the Fourth Amendment, the Fourteenth Amendment,
and the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1865 alleging a racist conspiracy. The City of St. Louis called the
case "meritless," and Jeff Roorda of the St. Louis Police Officers Association called it "the
last act of a desperate woman." [32]
On June 3, 2020, Gardner released all 36 of the rioters who had been arrested in the wake of
the George Floyd protests. [33] Gardner is
sympathetic St. Louis's revolutionaries because ever since her election, she has been involved
in her own attempt to overthrow the government. The fate of the McCloskeys, who have been told
that the rioters are planning to return to their house, now rests in the hand of this woman and
the police force she has beaten into submission with the help of George Soros.
Whether violence prevails in the future, no one can say at this point, but the best
indication of its likelihood can be found in the fate of the statue which represents that
city's patron saint, and the fighting spirit it inspires in those who are determined to resist
the Jewish revolutionary spirit, as St. Louis did in Paris eight centuries ago.
[19] The last three
Talmud citations here were accessed 6/26/20 on the Jewish website http://www.noahide.com/yeshu.htm, where they are quoted
with approval in an article arguing Jesus was a "false prophet".
Great article, I had no idea of the background behind these various incidents. I saw each
clip on various media channels, but never knew that they were all connected.
Couple of comments:
1) Jewish-Catholic dialogue appears to be a one way shouting match. I have yet to hear of
Jews altering the Talmud to remove the anti-gentile and anti-Christian passages from that
turgid tome.
2) "nor does she tell us in what sense someone who describes herself as a Jewish lesbian
has converted to the Catholic faith." She's obviously an infiltrator, like several of the
major participants in Vatican II. I'm no Catholic, so I'm not about to lecture anyone on
Church history, but there are a few volumes out there on the founding of the Jesuit order and
how gentiles and jews battled for control of it over subsequent decades. Infiltration of
Christian churches is as much of a Jewish tradition as Purim.
3) It was from your work that I finally gained a better understanding of Jesus and his
criticism of the Pharisees. Shame to see it disappear from Amazon, but I fear anything that
even remotely offends Jewish sensibilities is going to be hard to find in future. I believe
they even banned Jewish historian Leni Brenner's book on the transfer agreement.
Interesting to know about the fake-negro and fake-Muslim Umar Lee or Talcum XX. There's
already a fake-negro from KY who's known as Talcum X. He's the one who is stationed at
Haaaavaaahd who collects 20K a pop for speeches advocating that all non-black portrayals of
Christ and Mary be destroyed and churches burned. His BLM followers seem to have been busy in
the past week. Perhaps E. Michael Jones should do a follow-up on this noxious clown. This was
a very informative article with a lot of insightful background provided.
Interesting to note that the first ones to show any resistance to this atrocity were some
Brazilian Traditionalist Catholics. Most of the ones from Murika are too busy fellating the
BLM (Black Looming Monster) created and funded by nice folks like George Soros, who isn't
even a fake Nazi but an actual Nazi employee who (along with his father) aided the famous
Adolf Eichmann in the asset-looting of Hungarian Jews in the wake of the Nazi overthrow of
Admiral Horthy's regime.
Horthy's government refused to send the local Jews to Hitler even though they were allied
with the Germans in fighting the USSR. Isn't there a special division of the Juctice Dept.
devoted to hunting down folks who were involved even slightly with the Hitler regime?? Guess
when you buy citizenship in the Rotten Banana Empire (Soros' was via a special act of
Congress – the finest money can buy), the fearless Nazi-hunters shy away.
One of the worst things Giuliani did was bring back urban revival. If DEATH-WISH-style NY
had continued, America would have been far more conservative.
All that urban renewal and wealth made the city slickers more cosmo and snotty.
The USA is now so wracked with immorality, perversion and identity politics – its
difficult to see that it has a future.
And having read about Lee and Holt, Talve and Gardner I was instantly reminded of the thread
from yesterday. 'Who Should be Shot?'.
With the infestation of pure evil which is ripping apart the society and internal peace of
the American people – are there no patriots left .?
When there is no law, no protection for decency, fairness and justice – the time must
come when citizens need to defend themselves.
Obviously in St Louis that time has come ..
But the brainwashing now is so deep seated, so professional and so ugly but well financed
– it seems to me that the USA will be consumed from within, without the white
population even turning off their TV sets until the killing, raping and looting hits their
actual front doors.
And it will.
The barbarians are no longer at the gates – they are destroying and 'cleansing' all the
concept of history and any 'American dream'from inside the very heart of the country.
Karma – perhaps.
Since E. Michael Jones endorses Christianity, it is appropriate to remind him that
Christians destroyed the holy places of their rivals, destroying statues and libraries of
antiquity, bringing down holy oaks of Germanic tribes etc..
And you Americans did it in Germany not too long ago, even destroying completely
unpolitical statues of Arno Breker and other artists.
So it is all a bit hypocritical.
Nota bene: I don't endorse this destruction in America, and I even lament this, because I
see it as a sign of weakness of the White race, and I identify as a White man, and I see
those who are bringing those statues down as my enemies. But a bit more self-reflection would
certainly be appropriate, if you want someone to sympathize with you.
I guess it surprises me less that Jesus Christ is still being persecuted by the old Jewish
remnant than that the remnant has found so many allies at this point in our history. I'm
equally unsurprised that a much more effective coalition is thereby being formed to oppose
the remnant. Satan, being a liar from the beginning, always makes the same mistakes. He/She
turns a series of small victories, like rampant pornography and an army of weak, duped
Christian leaders like Hesburgh, into a conflagration that demands a response from God, like
the Resurrection.
"But the brainwashing now is so deep seated, so professional and so ugly but well financed
– it seems to me that the USA will be consumed from within, without the white
population even turning off their TV sets until the killing, raping and looting hits their
actual front doors."
I see no evidence that you are wrong. And Trump fiddles while America burns.
And you Americans did it in Germany not too long ago, even destroying completely
unpolitical statues of Arno Breker and other artists.
Breker was artist to the Third Reich, which was a political movement and hostile to
Christianity. While Jones thoroughly condemns all aspects of Nazism he does believe the rise
of Hitler and the Third Reich is attributable to Bolshevism.
Fortunately the cultural record of the 20th century is quite full and easy to access. And what
I see is, until the 60s, Catholics getting along just fine.
The Motion Picture Production Code, before that the Hays Code, certainly pre-Lambeth, when
Protestants and Catholics worked together, America was a paradise, compared to today's
Godforsaken mess.
They could have kept things that way. But the Jews gained game-changing power after WWII. And
since you couldnt name them, you couldnt fight them. And since you couldnt fight them, you lost.
Father
Coughlin , says: July 14, 2020 at 2:42 pm
GMT
appropriate to remind him that Christians destroyed the holy places of their rivals,
destroying statues and libraries of antiquity, bringing down holy oaks of Germanic tribes
etc..
Nope. They Christianized them. Pulled out of them what was true, noble and beautiful and
modified what was error.
Jul 12, 2020 Tyrants HATE This 500 Year Old Trick for Ending Tyranny
The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude, the 16th century treatise on tyranny and obedience by
Étienne de La Boétie. James and Keith highlight some of the book's key insights
and detail how they apply every much to our situation today as they did when they were
written.
Jun 29, 2020 Armed Couple Facing BLM Mob SPEAK OUT "We Were In FEAR OF OUR LIVES The
Agitators WERE WHITE"!!!
When an angry and unruly BLM mob trespassed onto private property homeowners Mark and
Patricia McCloskey armed themselves to protect their lives and their property after the mob
uttered threats that they would kill them.
August 22, 2017 The racist origin of gun control laws
Congress demolished these racist laws. The Freedmen's Bureau Bill of 1865, Civil Rights Act
of 1866, and Civil Rights Act of 1870 each guaranteed all persons equal rights of self-defense.
Most importantly, the 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, made the Second Amendment applicable to
the states.
@Chu N – In a
letter to the American people, Treasury Secretary Jacob J. Lew today announced plans for the
new $20, $10 and $5 notes, with the portrait of Harriet Tubman to be featured on the front of
the new $20.
Secretary Lew also announced plans for the reverse of the new $10 to feature an image of the
historic march for suffrage that ended on the steps of the Treasury Department and honor the
leaders of the suffrage movement -- Lucretia Mott, Sojourner Truth, Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth
Cady Stanton, and Alice Paul. The front of the new $10 note will maintain the portrait of
Alexander Hamilton.
This is a very stupid and uneducated reply. There is so much evidence of wholesale
destruction of "pagan" heritage by Christians. No serious Christian scholar denies this. Read a
bit on the topic.
It is amazing to me how adding that X-factor to the equation seemingly always makes the
incomplete picture make perfect sense. Tucker led his show with the McCloskey story last night,
but he can't say outright many of the hidden variables. He does a better job than anyone in the
MSM by far at leading the horse to water, but will they drink?
though it should be remembered that our Republic was founded upon people saying no to unjust
laws and compacts, hence the Declaration of Independence!
Thus Martin Luther King Jr promotion of non-violent opposition to injustice should not be
condemned, for it is part of the greater important tradition in this country, and it was
precisely the fork-saluting weather underground marxist maoist thugs abetted by funding through
the Ford Foundation, etc to Soros of this day, that wanted to stop King, through murder, to
launch violence and race war as that strategy of divide and conquer is now being deployed once
again.
For it should be remembered that King, like Trump today, was calling out against the Vietnam
war, as Trump was the only antiwar candidate in 2016 against the Obama Bin Bush Bin Clinton Bin
Bush perpetual war machine, where the call for Trump's assassination is by those who want to
stay in Afghanistan, saw nothing wrong with destroying the African nation of Libya by a black
President Obama, the destruction of Syria, etc and are hell bent on stopping cooperation for
world development upon the McKinley American System Model which the Belt and Road and New Silk
Road initiatives were modeled.
Trump unfortunately is in bed with some very poisonous elements, but some of those elements
even understand that no one will survive a nuclear war very much on the table and being
provoked by various elements .
A n open
letter published by Harper's magazine, and signed by dozens of prominent writers
and public figures, has focused attention on the apparent dangers of what has been termed a new
"cancel culture."
The letter brings together an unlikely alliance of genuine leftists, such as Noam Chomsky
and Matt Karp, centrists such as J. K. Rowling and Ian Buruma, and neoconservatives such as
David Frum and Bari Weiss, all speaking out in defense of free speech.
Although the letter doesn't explicitly use the term "cancel culture," it is clearly what is
meant in the complaint about a "stifling" cultural climate that is imposing "ideological
conformity" and weakening "norms of open debate and toleration of differences."
It is easy to agree with the letter's generalized argument for tolerance and free and fair
debate. But the reality is that many of those who signed are utter hypocrites, who have shown
precisely zero commitment to free speech, either in their words or in their deeds.
Further, the intent of many them in signing the letter is the very reverse of their
professed goal: they want to stifle free speech, not protect it.
To understand what is really going on with this letter, we first need to scrutinize the
motives , rather than the substance, of the letter.
A New 'Illiberalism'
"Cancel culture" started as the shaming, often on social media, of people who were seen to
have said offensive things. But of late, cancel culture has on occasion become more tangible,
as the letter notes, with individuals fired or denied the chance to speak at a public venue or
to publish their work.
The letter denounces this supposedly new type of "illiberalism":
"We uphold the value of robust and even caustic counter-speech from all quarters. But it
is now all too common to hear calls for swift and severe retribution in response to perceived
transgressions of speech and thought.
Editors are fired for running controversial pieces; books are withdrawn for alleged
inauthenticity; journalists are barred from writing on certain topics; professors are
investigated for quoting works of literature in class; The result has been to steadily narrow
the boundaries of what can be said without the threat of reprisal. We are already paying the
price in greater risk aversion among writers, artists, and journalists who fear for their
livelihoods if they depart from the consensus, or even lack sufficient zeal in
agreement."
Tricky Identity Politics
David Frum in 2013. (Policy Exchange, CC BY 2.0, Wikimedia Commons)
The array of signatories is actually more troubling than reassuring. If we lived in a more
just world, some of those signing – like Frum, a former speechwriter for President George
W. Bush, and Anne-Marie Slaughter, a former U.S. State Department official – would be
facing a reckoning before a Hague war crimes tribunal for their roles in promoting
"interventions" in Iraq and Libya respectively, not being held up as champions of free
speech.
That is one clue that these various individuals have signed the letter for very different
reasons.
Chomsky signed because he has been a lifelong and consistent defender of the right to free
speech, even for those with appalling opinions such as Holocaust denial.
Frum, who coined the term "axis of evil" that rationalized the invasion of Iraq, and Weiss,
a New York Times columnist, signed because they have found their lives getting
tougher. True, it is easy for them to dominate platforms in the corporate media while
advocating for criminal wars abroad, and they have paid no career price when their analyses and
predictions have turned out to be so much dangerous hokum. But they are now feeling the
backlash on university campuses and social media.
Ian Buruma, at right, with the writer Martin Amis at 2007 New Yorker Festival. (CC BY-SA
2.0, Wikimedia Commons)
Meanwhile, centrists like Buruma and Rowling have discovered that it is getting ever harder
to navigate the tricky terrain of identity politics without tripping up. The reputational
damage can have serious consequences.
Buruma famously lost his job as editor of The New York Review of Books two years
ago after after he published and defended an article that
violated the new spirit of the #MeToo movement. And Rowling made the mistake of thinking her
followers would be as fascinated by her traditional views on transgender issues as they are by
her Harry Potter books.
'Fake News, Russian Trolls'
But the fact that all of these writers and intellectuals agree that there is a price to be
paid in the new, more culturally sensitive climate does not mean that they are all equally
interested in protecting the right to be controversial or outspoken.
Chomsky, importantly, is defending free speech for all , because he correctly
understands that the powerful are only too keen to find justifications to silence those who
challenge their power. Elites protect free speech only in so far as it serves their interests
in dominating the public space.
If those on the progressive left do not defend the speech rights of everyone, even their
political opponents, then any restrictions will soon be turned against them. The Establishment
will always tolerate the hate speech of U.S. President Donald Trump or Brazilian President Jair
Bolsonaro over the justice speech of U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders or Jeremy Corbyn, the former
leader of the Labour Party in the U.K.
By contrast, most of the rest of those who signed – the right-wingers and the
centrists – are interested in free speech for themselves and those like them .
They care about protecting free speech only in so far as it allows them to continue dominating
the public space with their views – something they were only too used to until a few
years ago, before social media started to level the playing field a little.
The center and the right have been fighting back ever since with claims that anyone who
seriously challenges the neoliberal status quo at home and the neoconservative one abroad is
promoting "fake news" or is a "Russian troll." This updating of the charge of being
"un-American" embodies cancel culture at its very worst.
Social Media Accountability
In other words, apart from the case of a few progressives, the letter is simply special
pleading – for a return to the status quo. And for that reason, as we shall see, Chomsky
might have been better advised not to have added his name, however much he agrees with the
letter's vague, ostensibly pro-free speech sentiments.
What is striking about a significant proportion of those who signed is their
self-identification as ardent supporters of Israel. And as Israel's critics know only too well,
advocates for Israel have been at the forefront of the cancel culture – from long before
the term was even coined.
For decades, pro-Israel activists have sought to silence anyone seen to be seriously
critiquing this small, highly militarized state, sponsored by the colonial powers, that was
implanted in a region rich with a natural resource, oil, needed to lubricate the global
economy, and at a terrible cost to its native, Palestinian population.
Nothing should encourage us to believe that zealous defenders of Israel among those signing
the letter have now seen the error of their ways. Their newfound concern for free speech is
simply evidence that they have begun to suffer from the very same cancel culture they have
always promoted in relation to Israel.
They have lost control of the "cancel culture" because of two recent developments: a rapid
growth in identity politics among liberals and leftists, and a new popular demand for
"accountability" spawned by the rise of social media.
Cancelling Israel's Critics
Former Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn at campaign rally in Glasgow, December 2019. (Jeremy
Corbyn, Flickr)
In fact, despite their professions of concern, the evidence suggests that some of those
signing the letter have been intensifying their own contribution to cancel culture in relation
to Israel, rather than contesting it.
That is hardly surprising. The need to counter criticism of Israel has grown more pressing
as Israel has more obviously become a pariah state. Israel has refused to countenance peace
talks with the Palestinians and it has intensified its efforts to realize long-harbored plans
to annex swaths of the West Bank in violation of international law.
Rather than allow "robust and even caustic counter-speech from all quarters" on Israel,
Israel's supporters have preferred the tactics of those identified in the letter as enemies of
free speech: "swift and severe retribution in response to perceived transgressions of speech
and thought."
Just ask Jeremy Corbyn, the former leader of the Labour Party who was reviled, along with
his supporters, as an anti-Semite – one of the worst smears imaginable – by several
people on the Harper's list, including Rowling and Weiss
. Such claims were promoted even though his critics could produce no actual evidence of an
antisemitism problem in the Labour party.
Similarly, think of the treatment of Palestinian solidarity activists who support a boycott
of Israel (BDS), modelled on the one that helped push South Africa's leaders into renouncing
apartheid. BDS activists too have been smeared as anti-Semites – and Weiss again has been
a prime
offender .
Pro-Israel counter demonstration against the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions demonstration
outside School of Oriental and African Studies in London, April 2017. (Philafrenzy, CC BY-SA
4.0, Wikimedia Commons)
The incidents highlighted in the Harper's letter in which individuals have
supposedly been cancelled is trivial compared to the cancelling of a major political party and
of a movement that stands in solidarity with a people who have been oppressed for decades.
And yet how many of these free speech warriors have come forward to denounce the fact that
leftists -- including many Jewish anti-Zionists -- have been pilloried as anti-Semites to
prevent them from engaging in debates about Israel's behavior and its abuses of Palestinian
rights?
How many of them have decried the imposition of a new definition of anti-Semitism, by the
International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, that has been rapidly gaining ground in Western
countries?
That definition is designed to silence a large section of the left by prioritising the
safety of Israel from being criticised before the safety of Jews from being vilified and
attacked – something that even the lawyer who authored the definition has come to
regret .
Why has none of this "cancel culture" provoked an open letter to Harper's from
these champions of free speech?
Double-Edge Sword
The truth is that many of those who signed the letter are defending not free speech but
their right to continue dominating the public square – and their right to do so without
being held accountable.
Bari Weiss, before she landed a job at The Wall Street Journal and then The New
York Times , spent her student years trying to get Muslim professors
fired from her university – cancelling them – because of their criticism of
Israel. And she explicitly did so under the banner of "academic freedom," claiming pro-Israel
students felt intimidated in the classroom.
The New York Civil Liberties Union concluded that it was Weiss, not the professors, who was
the real threat to academic freedom. This was not some youthful indiscretion. In a book last
year Weiss cited her efforts to rid Columbia university of these professors as a formative
experience on which she still draws.
Weiss and many of the others listed under the letter are angry that the rhetorical tools
they used for so long to stifle the free speech of others have now been turned against them.
Those who lived for so long by the sword of identity politics – on Israel, for example
– are worried that their reputations may die by that very same sword – on issues of
race, sex and gender.
[Weiss just
quit her post at The New York Times , citing an illiberal environment. As part of
her full statement
she writes, "Twitter is not on the masthead of The New York Times. But Twitter has become its
ultimate editor. As the ethics and mores of that platform have become those of the paper, the
paper itself has increasingly become a kind of performance space. Stories are chosen and told
in a way to satisfy the narrowest of audiences, rather than to allow a curious public to read
about the world and then draw their own conclusions."]
Narcissistic Concern
To understand how the cancel culture is central to the worldview of many of these writers
and intellectuals, and how blind they are to their own complicity in that culture, consider the
case of Jonathan Freedland, a columnist with the supposedly liberal-left British newspaper
The Guardian . Although Freedland is not among those signing the letter, he is very
much aligned with the centrists among them and, of course, supported the letter in an article
published in The Guardian.
Freedland, we should note, led the "cancel culture" campaign against the Labour Party
referenced above. He was one of the key figures in Britain's Jewish community who breathed life
into the anti-Semitism
smears against Corbyn and his supporters.
Jonathan Freedland in 2013. (Chatham House, CC BY 2.0, Wikimedia Commons)
But note the brief clip below. In it, Freedland's voice can be heard cracking as he explains
how he has been a victim of the cancel culture himself: he confesses that he has suffered
verbal and emotional abuse at the hands of Israel's most extreme apologists – those who
are even more unapologetically pro-Israel than he is.
He reports that he has been called a "kapo," the term for Jewish collaborators in the Nazi
concentration camps, and a "sonderkommando," the Jews who disposed of the bodies of fellow Jews
killed in the gas chambers. He admits such abuse "burrows under your skin" and "hurts
tremendously."
And yet, despite the personal pain he has experienced of being unfairly accused, of being
cancelled by a section of his own community, Freedland has been at the forefront of the
campaign to tar critics of Israel, including anti-Zionist Jews, as anti-Semites on the
flimsiest of evidence.
He is entirely oblivious to the ugly nature of the cancel culture – unless it
applies to himself . His concern is purely narcissistic. And so it is with the majority of
those who signed the letter.
Conducting a Monologue
The letter's main conceit is the pretence that "illiberalism" is a new phenomenon, that free
speech is under threat, and that the cancel culture only arrived at the moment it was given a
name.
That is simply nonsense. Anyone over the age of 35 can easily remember a time when
newspapers and websites did not have a talkback section, when blogs were few in number and
rarely read, and when there was no social media on which to challenge or hold to account "the
great and the good."
Writers and columnists like those who signed the letter were then able to conduct a
monologue in which they revealed their opinions to the rest of us as if they were Moses
bringing down the tablets from the mountaintop.
In those days, no one noticed the cancel culture – or was allowed to remark on it. And
that was because only those who held approved opinions were ever given a media platform from
which to present those opinions.
Before the digital revolution, if you dissented from the narrow consensus imposed by the
billionaire owners of the corporate media, all you could do was print your own primitive
newsletter and send it by post to the handful of people who had heard of you.
That was the real cancel culture. And the proof is in the fact that many of those formerly
obscure writers quickly found they could amass tens of thousands of followers – with no
help from the traditional corporate media – when they had access to blogs and social
media.
Silencing the Left
Occupy Wall Street protesters engaging in the "human microphone," Sept. 30 2011. (David
Shankbone, CC BY 3.0, Wikimedia Commons)
Which brings us to the most troubling aspect of the open letter in Harper's . Under
cover of calls for tolerance, given credibility by Chomsky's name, a proportion of those
signing actually want to restrict the free speech of one section of the population – the
part influenced by Chomsky.
They are not against the big cancel culture from which they have benefited for so long. They
are against the small cancel culture – the new more chaotic, and more democratic, media
environment we currently enjoy – in which they are for the first time being held to
account for their views, on a range of issues including Israel.
Just as Weiss tried to get professors fired under the claim of academic freedom, many of
these writers and public figures are using the banner of free speech to discredit speech they
don't like, speech that exposes the hollowness of their own positions.
Their criticisms of "cancel culture" are really about prioritizing "responsible" speech,
defined as speech shared by centrists and the right that shores up the status quo. They want a
return to a time when the progressive left – those who seek to disrupt a manufactured
consensus, who challenge the presumed verities of neoliberal and neoconservative orthodoxy
– had no real voice.
The new attacks on "cancel culture" echo the attacks on Bernie Sanders' supporters, who were
framed as "Bernie Bros" – the evidence-free allegation that he attracted a rabble of
aggressive, women-hating men who tried to bully others into silence on social media.
Bernie Sanders' 2020 Campaign Co-chair Nina Turner at Los Angeles City Hall rally, March
2019. (Sara Mossman, Flickr)
Just as this claim was used to discredit Sanders' policies, so the center and the right now
want to discredit the left more generally by implying that, without curbs, they too will bully
everyone else into silence and submission through their "cancel culture."
If this conclusion sounds unconvincing, consider that President Donald Trump could easily
have added his name to the letter alongside Chomsky's. Trump used his recent Independence Day
speech at Mount Rushmore to make similar points to the Harper's letter. He at
least was explicit in equating "cancel culture" with what he called "far-left fascism":
"One of [the left's] political weapons is 'Cancel Culture' -- driving people from their
jobs, shaming dissenters, and demanding total submission from anyone who disagrees. This is
the very definition of totalitarianism This attack on our liberty, our magnificent liberty,
must be stopped, and it will be stopped very quickly."
Trump, in all his vulgarity, makes plain what the Harper's letter, in all its
cultural finery, obscures. That attacks on the new "cancel culture" are simply another front
– alongside supposed concerns about "fake news" and "Russian trolls" – in the
establishment's efforts to limit speech by the left.
Attention Redirected
This is not to deny that there is fake news on social media or that there are trolls, some
of them even Russian. Rather, it is to point out that our attention is being redirected, and
our concerns manipulated by a political agenda.
Despite the way it has been presented in the corporate media, fake news on social media has
been mostly a problem of the right. And the worst examples of fake news – and the most
influential – are found not on social media at all, but on the front pages of The
Wall Street Journal and The New York Times .
What genuinely fake news on Facebook has ever rivalled the lies justifying the invasion of
Iraq in 2003 that were knowingly peddled by a political elite and their stenographers in the
corporate media. Those lies led directly to more than a million Iraqi deaths, turned millions
more into refugees, destroyed an entire country, and fuelled a new type of nihilistic Islamic
extremism whose effects we are still feeling.
Most of the worst lies from the current period – those that have obscured or justified
U.S. interference in Syria and Venezuela, or rationalized war crimes against Iran, or approved
the continuing imprisonment of Julian Assange for exposing war crimes – can only be
understood by turning our backs on the corporate media and looking to experts who can rarely
find a platform outside of social media.
I say this as someone who has concerns about the fashionable focus on identity politics
rather than class politics. I say it also as someone who rejects all forms of cancel culture
– whether it is the old-style, "liberal" cancel culture that imposes on us a narrow
"consensus" politics (the Overton window), or the new "leftwing" cancel culture that too often
prefers to focus on easy cultural targets like Rowling than the structural corruption of
western political systems.
But those who are impressed by the letter simply because Chomsky's name is attached should
beware. Just as "fake news" has provided the pretext for Google and social media platforms to
change their algorithms to vanish leftwingers from searches and threads, just as "antisemitism"
has been redefined to demonise the left, so too the supposed threat of "cancel culture" will be
exploited to silence the left.
Protecting Bari Weiss and J K Rowling from a baying leftwing "mob" – a mob that that
claims a right to challenge their views on Israel or trans issues – will become the new
rallying cry from the Establishment for action against "irresponsible" or
"intimidating" speech.
Progressive leftists who join these calls out of irritation with the current focus on
identity politics, or because they fear being labelled an antisemite, or because they
mistakenly assume that the issue really is about free speech, will quickly find that they are
the main targets.
In defending free speech, they will end up being the very ones who are silenced.
UPDATE:
Noam Chomsky. (Duncan Rawlinson)
You don't criticize Chomsky however tangentially and respectfully – at least not from
a left perspective – without expecting a whirlwind of opposition from those who believe
he can never do any wrong.
But one issue that keeps being raised on my social media feeds in his defense is just plain
wrong-headed, so I want to quickly address it. Here's one my followers expressing the point
succinctly:
"The sentiments in the letter stand or fall on their own merits, not on the characters or
histories of some of the signatories, nor their future plans."
The problem, as I'm sure Chomsky would explain in any other context, is that this letter
fails not just because of the other people who signed it but on its merit too . And
that's because, as I explain above, it ignores the most oppressive and most established forms
of cancel culture, as Chomsky should have been the first to notice.
Highlighting the small cancel culture, while ignoring the much larger, Establishment-backed
cancel culture, distorts our understanding of what is at stake and who wields power.
Chomsky unwittingly just helped a group of mostly Establishment stooges skew our perceptions
of free speech problems so that we side with them against ourselves. There is no way that can
be a good thing.
UPDATE 2:
There are still people holding out against the idea that it harmed the left to have Chomsky
sign this letter. And rather than address their points individually, let me try another way of
explaining my argument:
Why has Chomsky not signed a letter backing the furor over "fake news," even though there is
some fake news on social media? Why has he not endorsed the "Bernie Bros" narrative, even
though doubtless there are some bullying Sanders supporters on social media? Why has he not
supported the campaign claiming the Labour Party has an anti-Semitism problem, even though
there are some anti-Semites in the Labour Party (as there are everywhere)?
He hasn't joined any of those campaigns for a very obvious reason – because he
understands how power works, and that on the left you hit up, not down. You certainly don't
cheerlead those who are up as they hit down.
Chomsky understands this principle only too well because here he is setting it out in
relation to Iran:
"Suppose I criticise Iran. What impact does that have? The only impact it has is in
fortifying those who want to carry out policies I don't agree with, like bombing."
For exactly the same reason he has not joined those pillorying Iran – because his
support would be used for nefarious ends – he shouldn't have joined this campaign. He
made a mistake. He's fallible.
Also, this isn't about the left eating itself. Really, Chomsky shouldn't be the issue. The
issue should be that a bunch of centrists and right-wingers used this letter to try to
reinforce a narrative designed to harm the left, and lay the groundwork for further curbs on
its access to social media. But because Chomsky signed the letter, many more leftists are now
buying into that narrative – a narrative intended to harm them. That's why Chomsky's role
cannot be ignored, nor his mistake glossed over.
UPDATE 3:
Apologies for yet another update. I had not anticipated how many ways people on the left
might find to justify this letter.
Here's the latest reasoning. Apparently, the letter sets an important benchmark that can in
future be used to protect free speech by the left when we are threatened with being
"cancelled" – as, for example, with the anti-Semitism smears that were used against
anti-Zionist Jews and other critics of Israel in the Labour Party.
I should hardly need to point out how naive this argument is. It completely ignores how
power works in our societies: who gets to decide what words mean and how principles are
applied. This letter won't help the left because "cancel culture" is being framed – by
this letter, by Trump, by the media – as a "loony left" problem. It is a new iteration of
the "politically correct gone mad" discourse, and it will be used in exactly the same way.
It won't help Steven Salaita, sacked from a university job because he criticized Israel's
killing of civilians in Gaza, or Chris Williamson, the Labour MP expelled because he defended
the party's record on being anti-racist.
The "cancel culture" furor isn't interested in the fact that they were "cancelled." Worse
still, this moral panic turns the whole idea of cancelling on its head: it is Salaita and
Williamson who are accused – and found guilty – of doing the cancelling, of
cancelling Israel and Jews.
Israel's supporters will continue to win this battle by claiming that criticism of Israel
"cancels" that country ("wipes it off the map"), "cancels" Israel's Jewish population ("drives
them into the sea"), and "cancels" Jews more generally ("denies a central component of modern
Jewish identity").
Greater awareness of "cancel culture" would not have saved Corbyn from the anti-Semitism
smears because the kind of cancel culture that smeared Corbyn is never going to be defined as
"cancelling."
For anyone who wishes to see how this works in practice, watch Guardian columnist
Owen Jones cave in – as he has done so often – to the power dynamics of the "cancel
culture" discourse in this interview with Sky News. I actually agree with almost everything
Jones says in this clip, apart from his joining yet again in the witch-hunt against Labour's
anti-Zionists. He doesn't see that witch-hunt as "cancel culture," and neither will anyone else
with a large platform like his to protect:
"... The cancel culture -- the phenomenon of removing or canceling people, brands or shows from the public domain because of offensive statements or ideologies -- is not a threat to the ruling class. Hundreds of corporations, nearly all in the hands of white executives and white board members, enthusiastically pumped out messages on social media condemning racism and demanding justice after George Floyd was choked to death by police in Minneapolis. ..."
The cancel culture -- the phenomenon of removing or canceling people, brands or shows from the public domain because of offensive
statements or ideologies -- is not a threat to the ruling class. Hundreds of corporations, nearly all in the hands of white executives
and white board members, enthusiastically pumped out messages on social media condemning racism and demanding justice after George
Floyd was choked to death by police in Minneapolis. Police, which along with the prison system are one of the primary instruments
of social control over the poor, have taken the knee, along with Jamie Dimon, the chief executive of the
serially criminal JPMorgan Chase , where
only 4 percent of the top executives are black . Jeff Bezos, the richest man in the world whose corporation, Amazon, paid no
federal income taxes last year and who fires workers that attempt to unionize and tracks warehouse laborers as if they were prisoners,
put a "Black Lives Matter" banner on Amazon's home page.
The rush by the ruling elites to profess solidarity with the protestors and denounce racist rhetoric and racist symbols, supporting
the toppling of Confederate statues and banning the Confederate flag, are symbolic assaults on white supremacy. Alone, these gestures
will do nothing to reverse the institutional racism that is baked into the DNA of American society. The elites will discuss race.
They will not discuss class.
We must be wary of allowing those wielding the toxic charge of racism, no matter how well intentioned their motives, to decide
who has a voice and who does not. Public shaming and denunciation, as any student of the Russian, French or Chinese revolutions knows,
is one that leads to absurdism and finally despotism. Virulent racists, such as Richard Spencer, exist. They are dangerous. But racism
will not end until we dismantle a class system that was created to empower oligarchic oppression and white supremacy. Racism will
not end until we defund the police and abolish the world's largest system of mass incarceration. Racism will not end until we invest
in people rather than systems of control. This means reparations for African-Americans, the unionization of workers, massive government
jobs programs, breaking up and nationalizing the big banks along with the for-profit health services, transportation sector, the
internet, privatized utilities and the fossil fuel industry, as well as a Green New Deal and the slashing of our war expenditures
by 75 percent.
Occupy Wall Street Sept. 25, 2011. (David Shankbone via Flickr)
Politically correct speech and symbols of inclusiveness, without a concerted assault on corporate power, will do nothing to change
a system that by design casts the poor and working poor, often people of color, aside -- Karl Marx called them surplus labor -- and
forces them into a life of misery and a brutal criminal caste system.
The cancel culture, with its public shaming on social media, is the boutique activism of the liberal elites. It allows faux student
radicals to hound and attack those deemed to be racist or transphobic, before these "radicals" graduate to work for corporations
such as Goldman Sachs, which last year paid $9 million in fines to settle federal allegations of racial and gender pay bias. Self-styled
Marxists in the academy have been pushed out of economic departments and been reborn as irrelevant cultural and literary critics,
employing jargon so obscure as to be unreadable. These "radical" theorists invest their energy in linguistic acrobatics and multiculturalism,
with branches such as feminism studies, queer studies and African-American studies. The inclusion of voices often left out of the
traditional academic canon certainly enriches the university. But multiculturalism, moral absolutism and the public denunciations
of apostates, by themselves, too often offer escape routes from critiquing and attacking the class structures and systems of economic
oppression that exclude and impoverish the poor and the marginal.
The hedge fund managers, oligarchs and corporate CEOs on college trustee boards don't care about Marxist critiques of Joseph Conrad.
They do care if students are being taught to dissect the lies of the neoliberal ideology used as a cover to orchestrate the largest
transference of wealth upwards in American history.
The cancel culture, shorn of class politics, is the parlor game of the overeducated. If we do not examine, as Theodor Adorno wrote,
the "societal play of forces that operate beneath the surface of political forms," we will be continually cursed with a more ruthless
and sophisticated form of corporate control, albeit one that is linguistically sensitive and politically correct.
"Stripped of a radical idiom, robbed of a utopian hope, liberals and leftists retreat in the name of progress to celebrate diversity,"
historian Russell Jacoby writes. "With few ideas on how a future should be shaped, they embrace all ideas. Pluralism becomes a catchall,
the alpha and omega of political thinking. Dressed up as multicultural, it has become the opium of disillusioned intellectuals, the
ideology of an era without an ideology."
The cudgel of racism, as I have experienced, is an effective tool to shut down debate. Students for Justice in Palestine organizations,
which almost always include Jewish students, are being banned on college campuses in the name of fighting racism. Activists in these
outlawed groups are often barred from holding any student leadership positions on campus. Professors that dare to counter the Zionist
narrative, such as the Palestinian American scholar Steven Salaita, have had job offers rescinded, been fired or denied tenure and
dismissed. Norman Finkelstein, one of the most important scholars on the Israel-Palestine conflict, has been ruthlessly targeted
by the Israel lobby throughout his career, making it impossible for him to get tenure or academic appointments. Never mind, that
he is not only Jewish but the son of Holocaust survivors. Jews, in this game, are branded as racists, and actual racists, such as
Donald Trump, because they back Israel's refusal to recognize Palestinian rights, are held up as friends of the Jewish people.
May Day 2015 demonstration at Union Square, New York City. (All-Nite Images, CC BY-SA 2.0, Wikimedia Commons)
I have long been a target of the Israeli lobby. The lobby, usually working through Hillel Houses on college campuses, which function
as little more than outposts of American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), does not attempt to address my enumeration of the
war crimes committed by Israel, many of which I witnessed, the egregious flouting by Israel of international law, exacerbated by
the plans to annex up to 30 percent of the West Bank, or the historical record ignored and distorted by the lobby to justify Jewish
occupation of a country that from the 7 th century until 1948 was Muslim. The lobby prefers not to deal in the world of
facts. It misuses the trope of anti-Semitism to ensure that those who speak up for Palestinian rights and denounce Israeli occupation
are not invited to events on Israel-Palestine conflict, or are disinvited to speak after invitations have been sent out, as happened
to me at the University of Pennsylvania, among other venues.
It does not matter that I spent seven years in the Middle East, or that I was the Middle East Bureau Chief for The New York
Times , living for weeks at a time in the Israel-occupied territories. It does not matter that I speak Arabic. My voice and the
voices of those, especially Palestinians, who document the violations of Palestinian civil rights are canceled out by the mendacious
charge that we are racists. I doubt most of the college administrators who agree to block our appearances believe we are racists,
but they don't also want the controversy. Zionism is the cancel culture on steroids.
The Israel lobby, whose interference in our electoral process dwarfs that of any other country, including Russia, is now attempting
to criminalize the activities of those, such as myself, who support the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement. The lobby,
with its huge financial clout, is pushing state legislatures, in the name of fighting anti-Semitism, to use anti-boycott laws and
executive orders to punish companies and individuals that promote BDS. Twenty-seven states have so far enacted laws or policies that
penalize businesses, organizations and individuals for supporting BDS.
AIPAC gathering. (Wikimedia Commons)
The debate about the excesses of cancel culture was most recently ignited by a letter signed by 153 prominent and largely privileged
writers and intellectuals in Harper's Magazine
, a publication for educated, white liberals. Critics of the letter
argue , correctly, that "nowhere
in it do the signatories mention how marginalized voices have been silenced for generations in journalism, academia, and publishing."
These critics also point out, correctly, that signatories include those, such as The New York Times columnist David Brooks
and Malcolm Gladwell, with access to huge media platforms and who face no danger of being silenced. They finally
note that a few of the signatories
are the most vicious proponents of the Zionist cancel culture, including The New York Times editor Bari Weiss, who
led campaigns while at Columbia University to destroy the careers of Arab professors ; literary scholar Cary Nelson,
who was one of those who denounced the Palestinian American scholar Salaita as a racist; and political scientist Yascha Mounk,
who has attacked
Rep. Ilhan Omar as an anti-Semite.
I find the cancel culture and its public denunciations as distasteful as those who signed the letter. But these critics are battling
a monster of their own creation. The institutional and professional power of those targeted by the Harper's letter is insignificant,
especially when set against that of the signatories or the Israel lobby. Those singled out for attack pose little threat to the systems
of entrenched power, which the signatories ironically represent, and indeed are more often its victims. I suspect this is the reason
for the widespread ire the letter provoked.
The most ominous threats to free speech and public debate do not come from the cancel culture of the left, which rarely succeeds
in removing its targets from power, despite a few high profile
firings
such as James Bennet , who oversaw a series of tone-deaf editorial decisions as the opinion page editor at The New York Times.
These corporate forces, which assure us that Black Lives Matter, understand that the left's witch hunts are a harmless diversion.
Corporations have seized control of the news industry and turned it into burlesque. They have corrupted academic scholarship.
They make war on science and the rule of law. They have used their wealth to destroy our democracy and replace it with a system of
legalized bribery. They have created a world of masters and serfs who struggle at subsistence level and endure crippling debt peonage.
The commodification of the natural world by corporations has triggered an ecocide that is pushing the human species closer and closer
towards extinction. Anyone who attempts to state these truths and fight back was long ago driven from the mainstream and relegated
to the margins of the internet by Silicon Valley algorithms. As cancel culture goes, corporate power makes the Israel lobby look
like amateurs.
The current obsession with moral purity, devoid of a political vision and incubated by self-referential academics and educated
elites, is easily co-opted by the ruling class who will say anything, as long as the mechanisms of corporate control remain untouched.
We have enemies. They run Silicon Valley and sit on corporate boards. They make up the two ruling political parties. They manage
the war industry. They chatter endlessly on corporate-owned airwaves about trivia and celebrity gossip. Our enemies are now showering
us with politically correct messages. But until they are overthrown, until we wrest power back from our corporate masters, the most
insidious forms of racism in America will continue to flourish.
Chris Hedges is a Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist who was a foreign correspondent for fifteen years for The New York Times
, where he served as the Middle East bureau chief and Balkan bureau chief for the paper. He previously worked overseas for
The Dallas Morning News , The Christian Science Monitor and NPR. He wrote a weekly column for the progressive website
Truthdig for 14 years until he was fired along with all of the editorial staff in March 2020. [Hedges and the staff had gone
on strike earlier in the month to protest the publisher's attempt to fire the Editor-in-Chief Robert Scheer, demand an end to a series
of unfair labor practices and the right to form a union.] He is the host of the Emmy Award-nominated RT America show "On Contact."
:::stands up slowly::: :::starts a slow clap::: Reading Chris Hedges is like dancing with the truth. Well done, sir.
Chumpsky , July 14, 2020 at 19:34
Cancel culture comes across as more of a form of woke guerilla marketing than as a phenomenon supported by the economically
exploited. Ex. all the FAANG companies that are essentially propping up the stock market – see how quickly they've embraced this
"culture" when they realized it was excellent for business.
IMO, such is a trend, and it too, will pass -- when folks realize that the powers that be have hijacked their ideas for profit.
Lesson learned: when fringe goes mainstream it's all over – 1960's redux.
Litchfield , July 14, 2020 at 17:04
"I find the cancel culture and its public denunciations as distasteful as those who signed the letter. But these critics are
battling a monster of their own creation. The institutional and professional power of those targeted by the Harper's letter is
insignificant, especially when set against that of the signatories or the Israel lobby. Those singled out for attack pose little
threat to the systems of entrenched power, which the signatories ironically represent, and indeed are more often its victims.
I suspect this is the reason for the widespread ire the letter provoked."
Basically I agree with Hedges. But I cannot follwo what he is saying in this graf.
Also this:
"As cancel culture goes, corporate power makes the Israel lobby look like amateurs."
What? I thought the beginning portion of the piece was about the power of AIPAC and other Israel Lobby entities to shape narrative
and cancel out those who defend Palestinian rights.
IMO and for my understanding t he essay wanders toward the end until I am not sure who Hedges thinks is doing the actual canceling
and who is actually powerful: Israel lobby? corporate interests? Misguided young people?
Andrew Thomas , July 14, 2020 at 15:43
A beautifully written argument. Cheers to Chris Hedges and Robert Scheer and Consortium News.
Great article as always from Chris Hedges. Jonathan Cook also has an excellent article published today at Global Research regarding
the open letter from Harper's. Censorship is never the answer.
firstpersoninfinite , July 14, 2020 at 13:51
Chris Hedges and Cornel West are always worth listening to and/or reading. Very pleased to have the actual situation with "cancel
culture" brought into light with such clarity. We are living in the rarefied air of late-stage capitalism, in which an identifying
feature is more important than our collective humanity. When someone argues over their right to their particular piece of pie
while arguing against sharing the whole pie, I can't tell if they're an academic or a billionaire. All I hear is the ca-ching
of people protecting the last scraps thrown to them by an inhuman system.
DW Bartoo , July 14, 2020 at 13:34
Chris Hedges, in this article, lays out substantial portions of the many corruptions people of conscience and actual principle
must confront if a sane, humane, and sustainable global human society is to be established.
He briefly suggests that, in academia in particular, there are to be found very few articulated visions of what that society
could, should, and must be premised upon, how it might function, and what forms of critically necessary participatory democracy,
guiding such a society, would look, and feel, like.
He makes very clear that symbolic "progress" is simply a rhetorical deceit employed to ensure that the currently destructive,
and fully corrupt, "system" may prevail, even as many are lulled into believing that "things" are "improving", that semantic fiddling
will keep the fire, next time, harmlessly contained and its energy bent and dissipated into meaningless gesture.
As Hedges points out, were universities, indeed, all of education, dedicated to developing critical thinking, rather than to
breathlessly proclaiming the sandbox "politics" of childish bullies as being highly evolved example of social competence, or of
praising private equity as proof that vulture capitalism is the "end of history", or of touting Panglossian pronouncements of
U$ian virtue and exceptionalism as inevitably placing all of humankind in the pinker regions of a rose-colored present, then the
young might, intentionally, be provided with the tools of actually comprehending the massive fraud and corruption which controls
and curtails the lives of most human beings on this planet, to the immense benefit of approximately two thousand kakistocratic
elites.
In other articles, over the years, Hedges has stressed, time and again, that there is no guarantee of success in the struggle
which must be undertaken if humanity is to have any future at all.
Some may regard such sober assessment as "negative" or even "defeatist".
However, considering what we are up against, beyond the relatively "easy" target of symbols, it is the deeper recognition that
Hedges provides, which is the first real step toward understanding what must be changed and why.
And, unless, there is a clearly articulated destination, a coherent idea of where we wish to arrive, of the pathways, maps,
and a developed sense of the terrain that must be crossed, fraught, as it will be, with pitfalls and land mines of distraction,
and of being maliciously led astray, with "movements" being absorbed into dead end detours and dissipation, then a very real risk
of going nowhere, of becoming disoriented and fatally lost, is more than likely.
We may not envision defeat, yet it is foolhardy to assume success.
As there are, quite literally, no existing forums for such discussions and considerations as we must enjoin, it is to be hoped
that "education" will be understood as a group effort which, of necessity, involves listening quite as much as talking.
Frankly, we are not even to square #1, yet.
Getting there will not be easy.
And that, rather than toppling symbols, is only the beginning.
Clear strategy must evolve, which cannot happen until organization with the intent of engaging a coherent sense of collective
plight is first undertaken.
This process is not about saviors or awaiting some "one" who will magically provide a guaranteed plan of success.
Rather, it is about the hard slog of getting from the untenable moment of increasing precarity, to an shared awareness of individual
competence and wholeness, among the many.
That is the basis of the power and energy which we must bring into being.
We must find it in each of our selves and then encourage it in each other.
That may well sound both trite and obvious.
Yet it leads to a beginning, not of following, but of becoming.
James Whitney , July 14, 2020 at 13:13
Thanks to Chris Hedges for this informative article.
"Twenty-seven states have so far enacted laws or policies that penalize businesses, organizations and individuals for supporting
BDS."
BDS is also illegal in France since 2015 (not the fault of the dreadful president Macron, it was the "socialist" Hollande president
at that time). A reference is
which seems now to be no longer available, but the link indicates the content.
JOHN CHUCKMAN , July 14, 2020 at 11:39
Yes, Chris Hedges has it exactly right.
But look at so very much of American society – especially the young – involved in the almost game-like empty battles about
slogans on t-shirts.
Social media could almost have been a security services invention.
I don't know whose words can reach those people.
I'm afraid a great many have little more grasp of the realities of history and the shaping of their society than Trump has.
And in a sense, I think it is a continuation of a politics that rarely struggles with anything important. Too much invested
in wealth and serving wealth, as with the empire.
150 prominent intellectuals and Ivy League academics of leftish persuasion have signed a letter in
Harper's protesting the breakdown in civilized debate and imposition of ideological
conformity.
The signatories made the obligatory bow to denouncing Trump as "a real threat to democracy"
and called for "greater equality and inclusion across our society."
But this wasn't enough to save them from denunciation for stating these truthful facts:
" The free exchange of information and ideas, the lifeblood of a liberal society, is daily
becoming more constricted. While we have come to expect this on the radical right,
censoriousness is also spreading more widely in our culture: an intolerance of opposing
views, a vogue for public shaming and ostracism, and the tendency to dissolve complex policy
issues in a blinding moral certainty. We uphold the value of robust and even caustic
counter-speech from all quarters. But it is now all too common to hear calls for swift and
severe retribution in response to perceived transgressions of speech and thought.
More troubling still, institutional leaders, in a spirit of panicked damage control, are
delivering hasty and disproportionate punishments instead of considered reforms. Editors are
fired for running controversial pieces; books are withdrawn for alleged inauthenticity;
journalists are barred from writing on certain topics; professors are investigated for
quoting works of literature in class; a researcher is fired for circulating a peer-reviewed
academic study; and the heads of organizations are ousted for what are sometimes just clumsy
mistakes.
Whatever the arguments around each particular incident, the result has been to steadily
narrow the boundaries of what can be said without the threat of reprisal. We are already
paying the price in greater risk aversion among writers, artists, and journalists who fear
for their livelihoods if they depart from the consensus, or even lack sufficient zeal in
agreement."
The signatories to the letter do not understand that time has passed them by. Free speech is
no longer a value. Free speach is an ally of oppression because it permits charges against
Western civilization and the white racist oppressors to be answered, and facts are not welcome.
The purpose of the woke revolution is to overthrow a liberal society and impose conformity with
wokeness in its place. Whiteness has been declared evil. There is nothing to debate.
The signatories do not understand that today there is only one side. In place of debate
there is denunciation, the purpose of which is to impose ideological conformity. It is
pointless to search for truth when truth has been revealed: Western civilization and all its
works are a white racist construct and must be destroyed. There is nothing to debate.
To make clear that in these revolutionary times not even prominent people of accomplishment
such as Noam Chomsky are entitled to a voice different from woke-imposed conformity, the letter
was answered by a condescending statement signed by a long list of woke journalists of no
distinction or achievement , people no one has ever heard of.
Noam Chomsky and the other prominent signatories were dismissed as irrelevant just as the
prominent historians were who took exception to the New York Times 1619 project, a packet of
lies and anti-white propaganda. The famous historians found that they weren't relevant. The New
York Times has an agenda that is independent of the facts.
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT
MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
The message is clear: shutup "white, wealthy" people and you also Thomas Chatterton
Williams, a black person with a white name. Your voices of oppression have been cancelled.
The "oppressed" and "marginalized" voices of woke revolutionaries, who have imposed tyranny
in universities, the work place, and via social media, are the ones that now control
explanations. No one is permitted to disagree with them.
Lining up on the woke side are
CNN , New York Times ,
Los
Angeles Times , Slate ,
and other presstitute organizations desperately trying to remain relevant. Everyone of these
institutions quickly took the side of the woke revolution against facts and free speech.
The revolution is over unless the guillotine is next. Academic freedom no longer exists.
Free speech no longer exists. The media is a propaganda ministry. Without free speech there can
be no answer to denunciation. White people are guilty. Period.
Tucker Carlson escalated the ongoing war between FOX News and CNN Wednesday, bringing
attention to Don Lemon for breathtaking hypocrisy on issues of black family culture.
TUCKER CARLSON: If you're running a channel like CNN, you want dumb people on tv because
they are compliant. They will say what they are told. They will tell the audience with the
moment demands. They will level stray from the script and that's exactly what Mr. Lemon is
doing. Seven years ago it was a different country and people were kind of a lot to say what
they thought was true. At the time, here's what Don Lemon was saying about black communities.
Watch this.
DON LEMON: More than 72 percent of children in the African-American community are born out of
wedlock. That means absent fathers. And the studies show that lack of a male role model is an
express train right to prison and the cycle continues. So, please, black folks, as I said if
this doesn't apply to you, I'm not talking to you. Pay attention to and think about what has
been presented in recent history as acceptable behavior. Pay close attention to the hip-hop and
rap culture that many of you embrace. A culture that glorifies everything I just mentioned,
thug and reprehensible behavior, a culture that is making a lot of people rich, just not you.
And it's not going to.
TUCKER CARLSON: Wow. Can you imagine what would happen if Don Lemon or his bodybuilding
buddy over there or any of these people said something like that? On CNN tonight or MSNBC? It
would be their last live broadcast ever. They would be fired immediately. You can't express
views like that. So they don't.
Let me be clear: Cops are
not shooting black men
for no reason . Things are better for blacks today than for most of our history and for
blacks
anywhere else .
But the fact remains that impressions are real. Many blacks really do think they should fear
police and other government agencies. We must accept this. Denying it, or explaining why blacks
have nothing to fear, is pointless.
A historical analogy: Blacks' fears and resentments are reminiscent of those among
Sudeten-Germans in
the Czechoslovak Republic before World War II. When the
Austro-Hungarian Empire was dismantled in 1918, the German-speaking people of Bohemia , later called Sudetenland , suddenly found
themselves under Czech rule. Most non-German observers thought the country was a bastion of
democracy in Central Europe. But the Sudeten-Germans, like American blacks, did not perceive
the state in which they lived as democratic or even fair.
It is a hard thing to be ruled by an alien race; and I have been left with the impression
that Czechoslovak rule in the Sudeten areas for the last twenty years, though not actually
oppressive and certainly not 'terroristic,' has been marked by tactlessness, lack of
understanding, petty intolerance and discrimination, to a point where the resentment of the
German population was inevitably moving in the direction of revolt.
Like the Sudeten-Germans , American
blacks are "moving in the direction of revolt." They have been ruled by an "alien race" much
more alien than the
Czechs were to the Germans, the period of rule has been 400 long years, mostly in
slavery
.
Runciman wisely suggested that the Sudeten-German areas be ceded to Germany for the good of
both nations. His mistake was thinking that
Adolf Hitler was an honest broker and would maintain the deal struck at Munich, but that
aside, Runciman's proposal was a form of restitution; i.e., giving the Sudeten-Germans some
form of justice, however imperfect it might have been.
a: a restoration of something to its
rightful owner
b: a making good of or giving an equivalent for some injury
2: a legal action serving to cause restoration of a previous state
Restoring a "previous state," returning blacks to the state before the wrong was done, is
the restitution the U.S. should offer to repair the damage done by slavery.
Let's return to the situation before 1619, when the first African slaves
landed in Virginia, before the transatlantic
shipment of millions of Africans to the New World for sale.
Marcus Garvey, in my opinion the greatest black leader in modern history, created the
Universal Negro Improvement Association to just that end. His group purchased steamships to
return blacks to their motherland.
Unhappily, the era's Cheap Labor lobby encouraged the government to charge him with mail
fraud, leading to his
deportation from the U.S. (he was a Jamaican immigrant) and to
the collapse of his 5-million-strong movement, the largest black movement in our history.
Cheap black labor was more important than the freedom and well-being of blacks or the end of
the racial problems in the United States for those long-ago Chamber of Commerce
types.
The Black Muslim faith was founded on the concept of the return to the Motherland as well,
although current black Muslims seem content with trying to create a back state here or taking
over the US altogether.
And before them both, of course, was the American Colonization Society
, formed in 1816 to encourage the voluntary emigration of blacks. Its members and supporters
included James Madison ,
Henry Clay, and,
famously, Abe Lincoln himself, although the 16th president stopped talking about the idea
after the War Between the States.
How practical it was to send blacks back to Africa by sailing or steamship will never be
known. But today, international airline travel is affordable to all: a
ticket from the U.S. to Ghana, host of the 2019 Year of Return , can be had
for less than $1,000 . Airline capacity to Africa appears to be enormous and underused,
which offers any large-scale program of return the possibility of substantial per-seat savings
[ Africa Aviation Outlook 2019: Change may be in the air – at last ,
CentreForAviation.com, January 31, 2019].
As well, $14 trillion in reparations for slavery, as proposed by Black Entertainment
Television founder Robert Johnson, would easily cover the cost of sending all 37.1 million
American blacks to Africa, with more than $10 trillion left for generous resettlement packages.
[
BET founder Robert Johnson calls for $14 trillion of reparations for slavery, CNBC,
June 1, 2020]
That's a lot of money. But it also solves a problem, at least for blacks who feel hunted and
unsafe in the white jungle.
Of course, returning to Africa should be voluntary, and blacks who consider themselves
Americans and do not feel hunted or discriminated against should not be forced to return to a
country and continent they do not know or even want to know.
But for the BLM activists, for those convinced the deck in the U.S. is stacked against them,
repatriation permanently repairs the continuing "legacy of slavery." To participate, blacks
would have to renounce American citizenship and accept the passport of an African country.
But the hard fact is, opportunity often comes knocking disguised as hard work. Ten million
or 15 million English-speaking blacks with American know-how and a pocket full of resettlement
money would certainly spur economic growth for the whole region, and perhaps counterbalance the
growing Chinese infiltration of the continent. Some have already moved there at their own
cost, and are happy to be in the land of their people.
A return to the Motherland -- restitution in kind -- would give social, mental, emotional,
economic and perhaps even physical benefits to American blacks.
For whites in the Historic American Nation, it would give all the same -- plus the added
knowledge that the debt of slavery is paid in full, this country's
original sin , as it is always called, washed away.
Divorce is another and somewhat more familiar way to think of it. The marriage of the two
main racial groups here has never worked and has not turned out well despite all efforts for
improvement -- as the founders of the American Colonization Society, not least
The Great Emancipator himself, predicted
.
Four hundred years in, the death of one man can lead to near rebellion, destruction of our
cities and death on the streets. A bad marriage needs to be ended, so let's start talking about
property division and payout.
It's time to face the truth and recognize that Marcus Garvey was right, and that the U.S.
would be wise to fund the only possible and reasonable form of restitution for slavery -- an
orderly resettlement to the Motherland of those blacks who believe they are oppressed
155 years after the end of slavery and 50 years after the Voting and Civil Rights acts.
Let me be clear: Cops are
not shooting black men
for no reason . Things are better for blacks today than for most of our history and for
blacks
anywhere else .
But the fact remains that impressions are real. Many blacks really do think they should fear
police and other government agencies. We must accept this. Denying it, or explaining why blacks
have nothing to fear, is pointless.
A historical analogy: Blacks' fears and resentments are reminiscent of those among
Sudeten-Germans in
the Czechoslovak Republic before World War II. When the
Austro-Hungarian Empire was dismantled in 1918, the German-speaking people of Bohemia , later called Sudetenland , suddenly found
themselves under Czech rule. Most non-German observers thought the country was a bastion of
democracy in Central Europe. But the Sudeten-Germans, like American blacks, did not perceive
the state in which they lived as democratic or even fair.
It is a hard thing to be ruled by an alien race; and I have been left with the impression
that Czechoslovak rule in the Sudeten areas for the last twenty years, though not actually
oppressive and certainly not 'terroristic,' has been marked by tactlessness, lack of
understanding, petty intolerance and discrimination, to a point where the resentment of the
German population was inevitably moving in the direction of revolt.
Like the Sudeten-Germans , American
blacks are "moving in the direction of revolt." They have been ruled by an "alien race" much
more alien than the
Czechs were to the Germans, the period of rule has been 400 long years, mostly in
slavery
.
Runciman wisely suggested that the Sudeten-German areas be ceded to Germany for the good of
both nations. His mistake was thinking that
Adolf Hitler was an honest broker and would maintain the deal struck at Munich, but that
aside, Runciman's proposal was a form of restitution; i.e., giving the Sudeten-Germans some
form of justice, however imperfect it might have been.
a: a restoration of something to its
rightful owner
b: a making good of or giving an equivalent for some injury
2: a legal action serving to cause restoration of a previous state
Restoring a "previous state," returning blacks to the state before the wrong was done, is
the restitution the U.S. should offer to repair the damage done by slavery.
Let's return to the situation before 1619, when the first African slaves
landed in Virginia, before the transatlantic
shipment of millions of Africans to the New World for sale.
Marcus Garvey, in my opinion the greatest black leader in modern history, created the
Universal Negro Improvement Association to just that end. His group purchased steamships to
return blacks to their motherland.
Unhappily, the era's Cheap Labor lobby encouraged the government to charge him with mail
fraud, leading to his
deportation from the U.S. (he was a Jamaican immigrant) and to
the collapse of his 5-million-strong movement, the largest black movement in our history.
Cheap black labor was more important than the freedom and well-being of blacks or the end of
the racial problems in the United States for those long-ago Chamber of Commerce
types.
The Black Muslim faith was founded on the concept of the return to the Motherland as well,
although current black Muslims seem content with trying to create a back state here or taking
over the US altogether.
And before them both, of course, was the American Colonization Society
, formed in 1816 to encourage the voluntary emigration of blacks. Its members and supporters
included James Madison ,
Henry Clay, and,
famously, Abe Lincoln himself, although the 16th president stopped talking about the idea
after the War Between the States.
How practical it was to send blacks back to Africa by sailing or steamship will never be
known. But today, international airline travel is affordable to all: a
ticket from the U.S. to Ghana, host of the 2019 Year of Return , can be had
for less than $1,000 . Airline capacity to Africa appears to be enormous and underused,
which offers any large-scale program of return the possibility of substantial per-seat savings
[ Africa Aviation Outlook 2019: Change may be in the air – at last ,
CentreForAviation.com, January 31, 2019].
As well, $14 trillion in reparations for slavery, as proposed by Black Entertainment
Television founder Robert Johnson, would easily cover the cost of sending all 37.1 million
American blacks to Africa, with more than $10 trillion left for generous resettlement packages.
[
BET founder Robert Johnson calls for $14 trillion of reparations for slavery, CNBC,
June 1, 2020]
That's a lot of money. But it also solves a problem, at least for blacks who feel hunted and
unsafe in the white jungle.
Of course, returning to Africa should be voluntary, and blacks who consider themselves
Americans and do not feel hunted or discriminated against should not be forced to return to a
country and continent they do not know or even want to know.
But for the BLM activists, for those convinced the deck in the U.S. is stacked against them,
repatriation permanently repairs the continuing "legacy of slavery." To participate, blacks
would have to renounce American citizenship and accept the passport of an African country.
But the hard fact is, opportunity often comes knocking disguised as hard work. Ten million
or 15 million English-speaking blacks with American know-how and a pocket full of resettlement
money would certainly spur economic growth for the whole region, and perhaps counterbalance the
growing Chinese infiltration of the continent. Some have already moved there at their own
cost, and are happy to be in the land of their people.
A return to the Motherland -- restitution in kind -- would give social, mental, emotional,
economic and perhaps even physical benefits to American blacks.
For whites in the Historic American Nation, it would give all the same -- plus the added
knowledge that the debt of slavery is paid in full, this country's
original sin , as it is always called, washed away.
Divorce is another and somewhat more familiar way to think of it. The marriage of the two
main racial groups here has never worked and has not turned out well despite all efforts for
improvement -- as the founders of the American Colonization Society, not least
The Great Emancipator himself, predicted
.
Four hundred years in, the death of one man can lead to near rebellion, destruction of our
cities and death on the streets. A bad marriage needs to be ended, so let's start talking about
property division and payout.
It's time to face the truth and recognize that Marcus Garvey was right, and that the U.S.
would be wise to fund the only possible and reasonable form of restitution for slavery -- an
orderly resettlement to the Motherland of those blacks who believe they are oppressed
155 years after the end of slavery and 50 years after the Voting and Civil Rights acts.
Back home, no doubt, they will be "free at last, free at last, Lord God almighty, free at
last!"
Their home is America. Not sure I agree with reparations. That would certainly make things
worse. The elite would soon find a way to get their hands on most of them.
Reparations if paid should be paid by the British-and EU. The US ended the legal
importation of slaves upon its formation. Obviously, a few states controlled by a small
number of large plantation owners continued the practice until the Civil War ended it as
punishment for trying to break free of the North.
Lets also not forget the many indentured servants (estimated at 300,000) many of whom were
forced to the colonies against their will ( irish catholics and England's/Scotlands poor). In
theory they were free after working a number of years as slaves but this was not always
enforced. Also because the holder of the indentured servant was not the owner, some were
treated even more poorly than African slaves who were valued capital of their owners. Indeed,
the 500,000 Africans imported into British North America are now 41 million strong. If the
rest of the 9.5 million slaves imported to other areas of the Americas multiplied in same
proportion the Americas combined would have a population of 800 million African Americans .
The total population today of north and south America combined (All races) is 1 billion with
only 100 million being of African descent (40% in US despite receiving only 5% of the slaves
from Africa).
Now that said, have African Americans been subject to many indignities? Yes, no doubt, and
the war on drugs has disproportionately affected them. We definitely should stop
incarcerating young men and woman for non violent crimes like drugs, and stop breaking up
families who need financial assistance. That said, many immigrants of other
races/religions/ethnic regions have been subjected to discrimination. Assimilation has been
the key for them, but the education system (and MSM) starting with bussing (50 years ago)
seeks to continue promoting the divisions between white and black and thus holding back
progress.
As they said during the cultural revolution, behind every angry black there is a
Jew , that is as true today as it was back in the 60's. Blacks wouldn't be such a problem
if it weren't for the Jews indoctrinating, enslaving (with welfare), instigating, and egging
them on. Send all the Jews back to Israel, and the blacks can be put back in their place by
learning individual accountability like everyone else. The most violent ones and the race
hustlers can be sent with their Jew masters to Israel.
Expulsion of 10m is a lot cheaper than 38m with restitution. We don't have $14Trillion to
give away, our national debt is already at $23Trillion.
This is the most fair, even compassionate solution. Africa is a magnificently beautiful
place. The fruit grows plentifully. The marijuana is the best on Earth. Chickens are
everywhere. There's no need for shoes or even down jackets. The music and dance scene is like
nothing else. There are no American police at all. Many white women will visit and hopefully
stay on.
Well, being that government programs never end, and often morph, the question arises
that after all the blacks are gone who is next, and next, and next, and finally, what is
left?
Well, LIFO (last-in, first-out) means that the last people forcibly expatriated
will be religious whites from the North-east, I guess.
That said: LIFO is generally not permitted under IFRS (although they're permitted under
GAAP). Under IFRS inventory (i.e., stock and we are livestock) must be accounted for using
FIFO. Under FIFO it's the whites who have to fuck off beck whence they came. (Protip: that's
why unions prefer LOFO: last-on, first-off).
.
There are abundant historical records regarding who owned what land at the point in time
when the proto-US_Death_Machine declared that only it could buy land from natives.
There's a Supreme Court case about it: Johnson & Graham's Lessee v.
McIntosh , 21 U.S. 543 (1823) , and as part of its discussion of the
background of the case it outlines the completely invalid claims to land already owned by
other peoples that were made from 23 May, 1609 onwards.
Simply reverse those false claims – which were not claimed as spoils of war, and
cannot support a claim of terra nullius , because the lands were already occupied by
people who had a recognisable system of land title.
That would put ownership of all Federal land, and all subsequently-alienated Federal land,
back in the hands of the people from whom it was falsely taken.
That would only affect land acquired without 'clean hands' – i.e., probably 99% of
the continental US (Louisiana doesn't get a pass, because it was acquired from a State whose
claim was fraudulent: ditto Alaska).
That's what would happen if people took morality and ethics seriously: things acquired
by fraud remain the property of the person defrauded, in perpetuity – and if the
fraudster improves the property they obtained by fraud, that's just too fucking bad for
them.
That said: there is land that was acquired with 'clean hands' – by the
voluntary alienation of land from its prior owners, by a person authorised to do so, for good
consideration, with no coercion or duress.
That is true in every colony in history: those contracts were almost never with agents of
a government, and must be honoured. And they were documented at the time, and the original
owners don't dispute that they happened.
(Disclosure: that's how my white predecessors got ownership of their land in New
Zealand).
.
That said: back to " reparations and repatriation "
Far from the masturbatory fantasies of the " Pay the dindus off, then ship 'em out
", there is zero chance that the US political class implements even a voluntary
"reparations + resettlement" scheme, for fear that there would be a significant number of
takers.
It would be unimaginably bad optics, and probably the final nail in the "city on a hill"
Exceptionalist horse-shit that the US Death Machine has used on its most-gullible dumbfucks
for 200 years.
Any smart-but-non-"insider" black who turned his nose up at $100k plus a ticket to Africa,
would be out of their fucking mind. I would take that bet tomorrow, and I'm not African.
If the US announced such a policy tomorrow, by next Wednesday they would have half the US
black community signed up. If the blacks had any sense they would insist on payment in specie
(e.g., gold) so that they didn't have to worry about the US government delaying payment until
after the US hyperinflates its currency to death.
The reason for that last sentence Russia and China are in the process of ending the USD's
reign as reserve currency. Pricing oil an gas in non-USD is the first step.
Repatriation and to Africa.
What an excellent idea.
Hopefully we in Britain and Europe could latch on and emulate your freeing up of people and
helping them to re establish their lives in their homelands.
We have tens of millions – many many tens of millions of imported islamics in
Europe.
A great deal more dangerous – according to our security experts – islamics openly
intent on creating the European Caliphate on the blood of we the European people if
necessary, if we don't flee..
We in Europe are on course for a continental wide bloody Balkan style bloodbath as they
import and let the countless killers and radicals loose all over our continent.
America would be doing the American blacks a real kindness by helping them home to the
countries of their origin.
And you could do us a favour, backing Europe, in doing the same to a vicious and dangerous
islamic invasion force – a far greater threat than even BLM.
The islamic invasion of Europe is serious and they mean business as they did in the theft of
Kosovo and the mass murder of Serbs and others..
Slaughter next on a vast scale.
They don't even bother to hide their intent.
Start with blacks, then you can work your way toward Illegals, Stupid White folks of whom
there are millions. And last but certainly not least .America's very special people who
created all the fore mentioned disastrous groups. The Goys Know.
There are many American blacks in SA. They seem to have adopted it as a homeland, because
it is a western built-up country (for Now). Not a single slave was from SA, too far south
Show me a group of immigrants that weren't fighting with one another . The Irish fought
the Italians, the Germans had to fight the Americans, the Polish fought the Ricans, Blacks vs
them all sometimes, etc. I remember in the 60s , heading into little Italy in Chicago –
to see a girlfriend and it wasn't pleasant for this blonde haired, blue eyed boy. Today, it's
not as bad with the Italians, Irish, Germans etc. as it was, but it hasn't changed with the
Blacks and some Latino areas. But this was the NWO Government Plan all along. Divide the
people and keep the melting pot in turmoil, in order to continue the lies, theft, murder,
that it takes, to keep the Corporate NWO in control. And the NWO has been around , for a long
long time. Wanna send the Blacks to Africa , well send some more to Israel too.
"OK, Let's Give Them Reparations -- If They Go Back to Africa"
I suppose the same could be said to all the descendents of the colonials who invaded North
(and South too probably) America and stole the land from the natives already living
there.
Been there done that. In South Africa the Apartheid government sought to dismantle the
British Colonial Structure which it had inherited, and return tribal lands to blacks and turn
them into self-governing states. Many white farmers had to sell their land at rock-bottom
prices to the government in order to achieve this. I met a bitter son of such a farmer
recently.
Apart from being torpedoed by the liberal West and mostly jewish orgnisations (who also
represented the interests of the mining magnates Oppenheimer and De Beers) , the blacks
themselves were incapable of running even their small Bantustans. Incompetence, corruption
and crime were rampant and eventually white administers and army officers took over most of
the key institutions in the Bantustans.
Of course that was not enough for them, they wanted it ALL. And ALL they got. Now ALL of
SouthAfrica resembles the erstwhile Bantustans.
You are mistaken if you think blacks in the US are interested in a fair or equitable
solution. They want reparations, AND political power, IN the US, in order to rule OVER
whites. This is the real agenda and unless whites fight back, it is not going away. They are
not stupid, they know what Africa looks like, they know that half of Africa would migrate to
Europe given half a chance, and they do not want to go back there.
Let's be humanitarians here. The ones who've reached their 65th birthday by a certain year
should be allowed to live out their lives here if they want. Otherwise they can be deported
with the rest if they'd like.
stupid racists. You have been fucked and gutted by the Zionists for the last 100 years and
yet, foolishly. blame Blacks and other non whites for your misery.
Pheeeeew! the propaganda is now unapologetic and more ridiculous and flowing non-stop
lies, tormeted twists and insane tangents all the way, in creating justification for
something the Unz s building towards, contrbuting to developing..something horrific for
america – and for Black people especially.
watch then, observe as the Unz Review topples headlong into murderous irrelevance, into a
garbage bin, ready for the dump of history a historical dump. there are lots of them about
the Unz seemingly most suitable for the one Adolf Hitler occupies
the Unz review was some kind of half decent blog. with stuff like this Boehm's article
here this blog is becoming rapidl, pure propagandistic garbage, something relative to the
wartime Germany that is often described as Nazi murderous, genocidal behavior and the
preparation for justification of such in the minds of the people with garbage like this
polluted river flow from Boehm
the Unz Review is well on its way to irrelevance. lets hope it does not contribute to a
stop along its way at #1936 Berlin, with all of us on the train.
Good point.
The "chamber of commerce" types want to make a quick buck, or maximize profits for their
poorly run businesses, and become dependent on cheap foreign labor. They did this without
thinking of the social consequences hundreds of years ago, importing Africans. Now today,
it's mass immigration from all over the world -- again, businesses not thinking about the
long term social consequences.
Voluntary return to Africa was the Policy the Lincoln wanted to support, and which ended
with the conspiracy and murder.. Some see the Policy as the reason for the assassination, ie
Lincoln was murdered for the same reason as Marcus Garvey was removed – to keep the
cheap labor and to keep the working class caught in internal strife which ruling class
exploits as "racism"- the term being a modern word
Boss> "Why doan y'all fight each other for dis dollar?"
The fellas I worked with @ the Army some of them took their pensions and social security
and their bibles and did go to Africa we talked about it. Understand, they loved America, but
it was obvious that it was not working out.
The Black Muslim faith was founded on the concept of the return to the Motherland as
well, although current black Muslims seem content with trying to create a back state here
or taking over the US altogether.
Most blacks aren't content with simply going their own way. They wish to rule over whites
with an iron fist and forcibly confiscate all of our wealth if not murder us off. That's the
textbook definition of racial hatred and racial supremacy yet they are called "civil rights"
crusaders by the Jewish media.
The masses of blacks are pretty ignorant and do think they are being targeted by "racist"
police and "racist" white people but most of the leaders of BLM and other black extremist
movements know better and just exploit the ignorance and natural antipathy towards whites of
most blacks to gain political power and money.
Send the Jews back to where? They're from Russia, mostly, and Russia doesn't want them.
Palestine isn't for them either. Best if they just stay on here and behave themselves, and if
you smarten up enough to see that they do. But there's not much chance of that happening.
The author wrote that with 10-15 English speaking blacks with American money and
American know how blah blah would make some kind of a difference in Africa.
For a start millions of black Africans already speak english.
99.9% of American blacks for all the ebonic trash they spew about Africa have never been
to that continent. They will receive a most unpleasant surprise when they arrive in their new
homeland.
Liberia should serve as a warning to them all. What was supposed to be a homeland for
slaves who wished to return to Africa is in essence another black shit hole on the
continent.
Bros, there are no subsidised housing, food stamps and welfare over there. Where is you
going to live ?
And that repatriation money you is coming with will spend out because y'all dont know to
manage your finances.
And the black police, black military and dictators ..oooooooooo weeeeeeeeee ! Dem boys
never heard about human rights. Few jobs as well my Bros and what da jobs they got goes to
family and tribal members. Looting, burning and tearing down statues dere = AK 47 time by the
security forces. All dat is why blacks in Africa wants to come here while you dumb niggers
wants to go there.
If youse can't make it in the US with all dem perks and freeness youse cannot make it in
Afreeka.
US blacks may be 99% retarded but that 1% of intelligence tells them dey gots a better
deal here.
So, crackers. dem boys aint going nowhere. We is stuck with dem HERE.
They are not know for any thinking whatsoever, in the moment, short, medium or long term.
That results from their cranium being mostly bone with a small barely functioning squishy
glob THEY refer to as a brain.
The old idea is little too late in formulating. It should have been thunk of back in the
day before Barak Hussein Obama became president of these united states before a white
Christian woman. Now charge the half African Barry O to lead his people back to Wakanda,
where he would be the first chancellor (blacks like fancy words) of the United States of
Africa (we can legally change our name to America, plain and simple!). It can be achieved
with the "American" military might in case radicals here and in the dark continent (it would
be enlightened soon with the arrival of 40 millions of "African Americans" the figure
includes the men and women who're married to Wakandans) opppse the idea. It would be good for
all around being that Africa is so huge. And the best part is that all Einsteins, Steinems,
Freuds, Rands et al can go with them to help build it or eff it up depending upon your point
of view, from nearby Israel. Last but not least, the dirty yellow rat (chinaman) would be
sent packing from exploiting the ignorant natives with the arrival of the crips and bloods,
i.e. feral black bipeds I am all in!
14 trillion dollars to repatriate our now-useless "farm machinery" would be a bargain.
After repatriation, within a few years, the USA would be a paradise.
That would leave the USA with only one other major problem: the jews.
Now, what to do with our most troublesome "minority"-the jews? They already have money and
own the banking system, own the mainstream media and popular culture, and would be difficult
to dislodge ((them)) from their present "supremacist" position.
We could declare those who espouse "judaism" to be "agents of a foreign government" and
expel them from all government, banking, corporate, media and cultural systems within the
country. Jews would also be prohibited from operating and being board members of the various
philanthropic "foundations" within the USA.
All jewish "freak shows" (holohoax museums) would be "repurposed" as public schools.
Schoolchildren would be educated on the ways the jews used the "system" to perpetuate that
"hoax of the twentieth century" for so long.
If ((they)) do not accept these changes, they can get out of the country along with the
negroes.
As the old saying still applies: "behind every negro, there is a jew", ((they)) can go to
Africa along with their "pets".
"Gaggle" is for geese.
Likewise:
A pod of whales;
A flock of sheep;
A pride of lions;
A herd of cattle;
A murder of crows;
A riot of niggers.
So, how about a cancer of Jews?
FWIW-any debate that talks about "conditional reparations" as a way of solving problems
needs expert issues entrepreneurship from a very strong intellectual and moral foundation. I
don't think we have that foundation yet.
Consider unintended consequences:
Ten million or 15 million English-speaking blacks with American know-how and a pocket
full of resettlement money would certainly spur economic growth for the whole region . . .
'.
Really? What's to prevent those recently resettled American Blacks from using their
resettlement money not to spur economic growth, but instead to demonstrate their commitment
to their African homeland by purchasing shitloads of Soviet-era military equipment, and,
worse, purchasing the first African nuclear weapon from a rogue state or other bad actor.
I favor debate on the merits of distancing people from one another, and I liked this
article. But, we have far smaller fish to fry, such as ending affirmative action, and we
don't seem to have the gumption to fry them. (Exceptions for those very costly legal
challenges to specific affirmative action policies.)
Jul 6, 2020 Thomas Sowell/Black Wisdom Matters – The Impact of Culture
A look at how black culture has affected the advancements of blacks in America. Thomas
Sowell, Walter E Williams, Jason Riley, Shelby Steele and Glenn Loury.
Blacks have had their reparations and then some. Matter of fact, THEY (The Blacks) OWE
WHITES REPARATIONS AND AS A WHITE MAN, I WOULD GLADLY CALL IT EVEN IF BLACKS LEAVE AMERICA
AND OTHER TRADITIONALLY WHITE NATIONS AND ARE NOT ALLOWED TO COME BACK.
Correct me if I am wrong, but did not Blacks not even have to fight for their freedom
because a bunch of Whites did that for them in the American War Between The States, where
over 700,000 Whites died ensuring the Black man's freedom. REPARATIONS PAID IN FULL. Matter
of fact some things never change because ignorant Whites and other outcasts still fight for
Blacks in the year 2020, although it is the Whites who are enslaved this time around and the
Blacks who are the privileged class. I know this sounds retarded but America in 2020 is
retarded. When you consider that the AFRICANS IN AMERICA were originally bought and sold by
their own people, so it isn't as if the White man went to Africa and captured free Africans,
they were already enslaved and more than likely brutalized far worse by their own, than the
White man.
Welfare generation after generation, affirmative action laws that have allowed unqualified
Blacks to receive jobs over better qualified Whites, etc. REPARATIONS PAID IN FULL AND THEN
SOME, THE BLACKS NOW OWE WHITES.
Destruction of our major cities, MILLIONS of White victims over the years to Black
violence. How many Whites have been raped, murdered or beaten at the hands of Blacks from
1865-2020, IT WOULD TOTAL MILLIONS. White cops killing or beating Blacks? Compare that number
to the number of White cops who have been beaten or killed by Black thugs or better yet,
compare that number to the number of Whites killed by cops.
I think Blacks have been paid their reparations and then some and THEY OWE US and THEIR
ANCESTORS, if not for being shipped from Africa, most would be living in squalor and swatting
flies from their face while they dropped a deuce on their dirt floor. This is nothing but
more EXTORTION AND THEY LEARNED THOSE TECHNIQUES FROM THE KING OF EXTORTION RACKET. You wanna
guess who the king of the extortion racket is?
Americans need the goofy libertarian musings of some kid who grew up in Whitopia,Wisconsin
and shuffled off to chase poontang in Southeast Asia about as much as my pet bird needs an
Ipad.
As someone who lives in the USA and know people of all kinds of ethnicities I can tell you
for certain that the AA community, to the extent there is one, is not headed for "revolt" any
more than any other sector. What we are headed for is chaos and some kind of multi-headed
civil-war. Most "black" people are not stupid and will not want to go "back" to Africa.
Garvey had a point in his time when conditions were pretty bad but it's different now. Our
problem is that we have "racialized" our society by insisting that race is the a central part
of our identity that is encouraged by every f*cking form I fill out so we are in this sense a
deeply racist society because we are encouraged to think about race all the time by the
public and private authorities that rule our lives.
This article puts things to the logical end of racialism and racism. I've been to Africa
and have know Africans and they don't have that much in common with most American "blacks"
who are often of mixed race. The culture and music are very different as anyone familiar with
African music can tell you–there are some similarities to be sure but that comes, in
some ways, from the almost ubiquitous influence of James Brown on African music.
Can't we stop this bullshit? There are some people of African origin who are "revolting"
but, if you notice, there are just as many "white" of various ethnicities who demonstrated
and rioted. These people are not the majority of either ethnicity. People are tired of the
same old corrupt shit that continually gets worse because we are so easily divided along
racial lines as the oligarchs laugh all the way to the bank.
@orionyx g conquered.
The are caucasian and Khazars.
So far this search for another area to purloin and occupy has led to the problems, certainly
in Georgia and the Ukraine.
Much of the recent trouble in the Ukraine were created by the USA dual citizen neo cons.
They were, it is rumoured, intent on taking the Crimea as the new 'zion', however Putin
– their most loathed adversary – saw it coming and acted.
The Jews mass murdered and terrorised the Russians for some 70 years.
The Jews made up the greater part of the Bolsheviks and inflicted communism on the Russians
with no mercy.
Russia didn't want them back.
I don't see any actual arguments nor have you given any examples of statements you
consider to be lies. Your post amounts to nothing except a barrage of vituperation. Some of
us can be swayed with a combination of facts and reasoned argument, perhaps you could try it
sometime.
@Anon the Dems will steal the next election and use the "hands up, don't shoot" Trojan
horse to provide cover for combatants once invasion of the suburbs gets underway.
Furthermore, the Black Panthers, BLM types, and former ACORN revolutionaries will become
Obama's internal security force that's as well-funded, armed, and numerous as the US military
as he promised, making door-to-door gun confiscation and looting inevitable and effectively
unopposed by "all hat/no horse" conservatives pointing to the number of guns their atomized
and demoralized supporters own. Eventually, the Republican Party that conservatives stupidly
believe has their back will be run out of town, that is, if its members can be located hiding
out among Antifa and the like.
@SteveK9 %-meaning that it probably was 30-35% in real life. (The rate for whites at the
time was 3-4%).
That's different from children in two parent homes. If a kid was born to married parents,
he/she wasn't a b@stard. If daddy left a day later, the kid was fatherless just like most
b#stards were.
Adding the illegitimate kids w/out dads to the legitimate kids whose dad bailed on the
family, the fatherless rate in negro homes back then was probably well over 50%.
And what, specifically, were the "strong incentives" for groids to bail on their families?
LOL.
Anything to avoid assigning blame to negroes, I swear ..
– https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~kw/crichton.html
exc.: " The noble savage is a fantasy, and it was never true . That anyone still
believes it, 200 years after Rousseau, shows the tenacity of religious myths"
@Anonymous onghold of the white race – Russia – will lock its doors for sure
and Britain is full for a start.
Like many others I have grave doubts if the big mouths and their arsenals – the last
gasp of any pretense of American masculinity – will actually stand and fight.
Forget the Alamo .
The Crocketts and Bowies are long gone.
The Mexicans are invading and running loose all over the USA , occupying it for free –
how the mighty have fallen.
Texas – joke – they are occupying the whole country.
Speaks volumes for the degeneracy and collapsing of the latest Roman Empire. as it goes down
to the neo. black, barbarians.
The only way any of them will accept is if they get some gibs. $100,000 per, conditioned
upon renunciation of U.S. citizenship would be a small price to pay to solve the problem.
This is a good, (tongue-in-cheek?) article. However, the overall goal of our present civic
unrest is societal destabilization – not the attainment of justice or "fairness
(whatever that is supposed to be)."
The operative Hegelian dialectic is: Thesis – the USA treasures its sovereignty and
is, therefore, a speed-bump to attainment of a Globalist, one-world order; Antithesis –
create intractable societal destabilization by pitting class against class, race against
race, and by bankrupting the country (where various patriotic elements are not permitted to
derive solutions); and Synthesis – restoration of order by total destruction of
individual freedoms in favor of statist, tyrannical control.
And the "problem" cannot be solved via public debate and negotiation, because the
"Progressive" leadership – which is truly controlling events via having seized
near-total domination over the MSM, educational system, courts, etc. – will not permit
any solution at variance to the overall "solution" of one world sovereignty.
The fact that Russia and China are disputing the one-world trajectory suggests that,
unless some great-power accommodation is made, both internal and external stress for the USA
is just beginning.
When you make blanket statements like "European Americans complain about the Africans they
stole and shipped to ", you are making a terrible error in thinking.
Facts are hard. Math is hard. But thinking from facts, reality, while hard work in the
short run, will pay off in less work in the long run. If you get it right now, you won't
prescribe programs for reform that will lead us down many dead ends–more work in the
long run.
Facts and math aren't emotionally satisfying, won't help you cheat your opponents or tilt
the table to favor your friends, but generally, the long way around is the short way
home.
On May 29, two federal security officers guarding a courthouse in Oakland, California,
were ambushed by machine-gun fire as elsewhere in the city demonstrators marched peacefully
to protest the killing of George Floyd. One of the guards, David Patrick Underwood, died as a
result of the attack, and the other was wounded. For days, conservative news broadcasters
pinned the blame on "antifa," the loosely affiliated group of anti-fascist anarchists known
to attack property and far-right demonstrators at protests. But the alleged culprit,
apprehended a week later, turned out to be a 32-year-old Air Force sergeant named Steven
Carrillo, the head of a squadron called the Phoenix Ravens, which guards military
installations from terrorist attacks.
According to prosecutors, Carrillo and an accomplice, 30-year-old Robert A. Justus Jr.,
were part of the "boogaloo" movement, a patchwork of right-leaning anti-government
libertarians, Second Amendment advocates, and gun enthusiasts all preparing for another
American civil war.
Authorities say that when they went to apprehend Carrillo at his residence, he attacked
them with pipe bombs, killing a police sergeant named Damon Gutzwiller. Investigators found a
boogaloo-themed patch in a vehicle used by Carrillo. And Carrillo had scrawled boog, along
with various boogaloo slogans, in his own blood on the hood of a car."
Or better still, why don't you all go to where you came from?Who are you to send them
anywhere, they are the only ones, that didn't come by their own will!
@silviosilver years. But it was still Czech kingdom, not German. So the "Sudetens" were
inside old Czech historical borders.
The problem was that once Hitler came to power in 1933, Czechs were faced with a large
German minority adjacent to Germany. Political agitation against Czechs took off and
Freikorps (German militias) were established to undercut Czech authority. The "Sudetens"
welcomed Hitler since they considered Czechs to be inferior to them ("Untermenschen").
In German history books, they are mad at Hitler that he undid 700 years of eastward
expansion. I guess now they have to start all over again, this time using EU as their
tool.
@padre o Europe when all the raping, looting, thieving, nonwhite parasites go back to
where they are from? Btw, where are you from, (((amigo?))) How about the "Jews" going back to
where they are from and leave Palestinians alone?
They ( the Blacks) were sold by their own people to not only Whites, but Jews and Arabs as
well.
Who are you to tell anyone anything, (((amigo?)))
Jews, Arabs, Pakis, Southeast Orientals, Africans/Blacks, East Indians, MIXED RACE
HISPANICS, etc., the only way these people can live in first world nation is to ride on the
back of Whites. Btw, (((amigo))), Native Americans can't stand Blacks or Mexicans.
Plan 1: Libtards and Blacks get California, Nevada and Oregon. (Keep Washington or San
Diego for access to the Pacific). Also, all SJW agitators are exiled to this new country. You
Libtards don't believe in race differences? Fine. Have fun with your 40 million Negroes and
Mestizos.
Plan 2: let Blacks have the naturally developing Black Belt in the South. Mestizos get the
Southwest which they already dominate.
Whites and a small minority of intelligent and patriotic Browns (Asians and Hispanic
Michelle Malkin types. et al) get the rest. (95% White and 5% patriotic Browns sounds good to
me). Also a few hundred Clarence Thomas / Ben Carson types – because of their service
– are allowed to stay if they prefer.
I used to prefer Plan 2, but seeing all the spoiled White brats taking part in the Black
Antifada, I'm starting to think certain Whites deserve Blacks. Some people need to get a dose
of what they espouse and vote for good and hard.
When that greasy puerto rican spickkk in Cleveland kidnapped those girls and held them for
years, and the cops finally rescued them, they didn't leave the girls there to stay with the
spickk family and live their lives. No, they took them back to where they came from. You
don't leave kidnap victims there at the scene of the crime–the biggest remedy is to get
them home.
And the longer they've been there is a bug, not a feature. They shouldn't have been
brought here in the first place. If you had a tumor or a wart, bragging about how long you
have had it is kind of stupid. You need to fix it. It doesn't belong.
Nobody would be that foolish! Odd isn't it though, nobody has suggested (yet) that whites
are repatriated to Europe leaving the Americas to the Indians and blacks.
definitely an interesting piece with some thoughtful comments. all this deserves our
attention. how about a bit more of a classic liberal approach? allow any native born american
to expatriate with their taxes wholly or partially refunded and money for resettlement based
on some equitable formula. conditioned on their being barred from ever again obtaining
american citizenship, at least without first paying huge penalties. this will allow anyone to
go anywhere willing to have them. a voluntary exchange between the citizen and state. let the
market decide.
some stunning remarks on CNN, declaring protests in the streets were perfectly acceptable
while canceling other large events through September.
De Blasio joined CNN's Wolf Blitzer on Thursday evening, discussing the evolving pandemic
and policy response by City Hall to mitigate the spread in the city. He said social justice
warriors were too important after months of protests have yet produced an outbreak in
cases.
"This is a historic moment of change. We have to respect that but also say to people the
kinds of gatherings we're used to, the parades, the fairs -- we just can't have that while
we're focusing on health right now," de Blasio told Blitzer.
The transcript from the body camera worn by J. Alexander Kueng shows clear evidence that
George Floyd was suffering respiratory distress before police laid hands on him. He died from a
Fentanyl overdose, not from being choked out by Minneapolis police. This news will not bring
joy to the crazed, leftist mob screaming to lop off the heads of the Minneapolis police
officers who stand accused of "murdering" George Floyd and little attention has been paid to
the transcript since its release on July 7. I hope to correct that oversight.
First a note about Officer J. Alexander Kueng. He also is a black man. He was adopted
shortly after birth by a white woman and single mother. Can't have that story out there. Simply
does not promote the meme that white Americans are inherently and irredeemably racist. How can
a racist white woman be a loving mother to a black child? Racists don't do that.
Officer Kueng and George Floyd
Once you read the transcript you will understand why the Minnesota Attorney General withheld
the video evidence from the public and why the defense attorneys are trying to get the
information out--it exonerates the police.
I don't think Chauvin will be exonerated, but there is no question advocates of the racist
police brutality narrative are ignoring facts.
The conclusion of the private autopsy requested by the family was wrong. They didn't know
the results of the toxicology report. One of the experts hired by the family, who kept making
television appearances (including on Hannity), didn't even look at the body. To the best of
my knowledge, this man only saw the video and ruled it a homicide on that basis alone.
Another expert hired by the family saw the body, but again she didn't see the toxicology
report. The lawyer for the family, Ben Crump, is an ass for calling the toxicology report a
red herring.
The fact is when the store clerks called the cops, they said Floyd appeared drunk. He was
clearly inebriated or intoxicated. The fact he handed off an obviously fake $20 bill suggests
he wasn't all there. There is no denying the toxicology report which does prove he was
intoxicated. And the police were right to apprehend him. This Floyd was inebriated or
intoxicated while sitting behind the wheel of a car, so he clearly represented a danger if he
began to drive.
With all that being said, despite the fact he had trouble breathing beforehand doesn't
exclude that the manner he was being detained had contributed to his death. The second
autopsy (I'm not talking the private one, but the official second autopsy) officially did
rule his death a homicide because the manner he was held down was deemed a contributing
factor in his death.
In my personal opinion, I think there is a case to be made that Chauvin did recognize
Floyd and deliberately kept Floyd on his stomach, with his face pointed downward, so that
Floyd wouldn't recognize Chauvin. Maybe Chauvin was also trying to pass Floyd out or induce
Floyd to vomit something he may have swallowed to hide from the police, who knows, but the
manner Floyd was held down, even if it is considered accepted albeit rare procedure, will not
hold in front of a jury. Procedures aside, there has to be common sense.
May good ideas about the level of suppression of "free thought" in US universities.
But this Red Guard persecution are really bizarre and contradict all moral norms.
Notable quotes:
"... One of the main problems with this sort of lofty rhetoric is that it misrepresents the severely deficient reality of American political discourse. We live in a period when the rise of neoliberal capitalism and untrammeled corporate power have cheapened "public" political discourse to serve the interests of plutocratic wealth and power, while assaulting notions of the common good and the public health. Idealistic rhetoric about exploring diverse views falls flat, and is a mischaracterization of reality to the deficiencies in U.S. political discourse under neoliberal corporate capitalism, when debates are perverted by political and economic elites who have contempt for the free exchange of ideas. ..."
"... Ours is a reactionary culture, which celebrates ideas that service political and economic power centers. In this society, views that are elevated to being worthy of discussion include milquetoast liberal values that are sympathetic (or at least not antagonistic) to corporate power, apolitical content that's aimed at mindless entertainment and political diversion, and reactionary authoritarian views that border on fascistic, but are vital to demonizing immigrants, people of color, and other minorities, and reinforce a white patriarchal corporate power structure. Radical lefties, or even progressive-leftists, need not apply to be included in this circumscribed discourse. Their views are routinely blacklisted from the mass media, and are increasingly marginalized in higher educational institutions. ..."
"... My understanding of how the mass media operates is based on extensive personal experiences, and those from countless left intellectuals I know. Many of us have struggled (and mostly failed) to break into "mainstream" discourse because of the limited space in corporate news devoted to marginalized perspectives. With this marginalization comes the near erasure of critical views, including those seeking to spotlight record (and rising) economic inequality, repressive institutions that reinforce racial, gender and transphobic systems of repression, the corporate ecocidal assault on the environment, the rise of unbridled corporate power and plutocracy, the rising authoritarianism in American politics, and the increasingly reactionary and fascistic rhetoric that has taken over the American right. ..."
"... Reflecting on my own experiences within this system, the very notion of academics serving as public intellectuals has been under systematic assault by the rise of a "professionalization" culture that depicts political engagement as "biased," "unprofessional," and "unacceptable." Whatever lingering commitment to higher education as a public good was rolled back decades ago with the rise of corporatized academic "professional" norms. Scholars are now primarily concerned with publishing in esoteric, jargon-laden journals that no one reads, and almost no one cites, while elevating a discussion of the methods of how one does research over a discussion of the political and social significance of our work. In this process, there's been a suppression of any commitment to producing active citizens who see themselves as having an ethical or moral responsibility to be regularly politically engaged. ..."
"... The reactionary "professionalization" that's celebrated in the ivory tower is relentlessly promoted at every step of the process through which academics develop and are socialized: in the graduate school experience, in the job hiring, tenure, and promotion processes, and in the process of peer review for academic publications. Those who don't get with the program are filtered out at some point in this process. Very few who are committed to challenging professionalized academic norms make it through PhD programs, and fewer still obtain tenure-track jobs and tenure. It is a rare to find academics who learn how to effectively hide their political values in grad school, and who then actively draw on those same values in their scholarship once they've secured an academic job. ..."
"... I see zero interest in elite academic publishing houses – the Oxfords, Princetons, and Cambridges of the world – in making space for openly leftist frameworks of analysis, let alone for the sort of applied Gramscian and Marxian empirical research that I do on media propaganda, hegemony, indoctrination, and mass false consciousness. Neither do any of the reputable journals in most social science disciplines express interest in this sort of research. ..."
"... There's little interest in prioritizing high-profile campus speaking events for such topics in the neoliberal corporate academy. Considering the utter contempt for such scholarship, it's difficult for me to focus my limited time and energy lamenting campus attacks on authoritarians like Milo Yiannopoulos, or whatever other reactionary pseudo-intellectual flavor of the week who has been disinvited from paid speaking engagements that I and other leftist scholars couldn't dream of receiving in the first place. ..."
"... I won't shed a tear for reactionaries who seek to appropriate dwindling university resources for their own personal publicity and self-aggrandizement, considering that their ideology actively supports gutting the very institutions that they so shamelessly take advantage of. ..."
"... U.S. media and educational institutions have never been committed to the free exploration of competing views, at least not for those who question corporate power. The sooner we stop pretending this landscape represents a free and open exchange of ideas, the better. ..."
Harper's Magazine's July 7 th " Letter on Justice and Open
Debate " is making its rounds in popular political discourse, and takes aim at the "PC"
"cancel culture" we are told is being fueled by the most recent round of Black Lives Matter
protests. This cancel culture, we are warned, is quickly and perniciously taking over American
discourse, and will severely limit the free exploration of competing viewpoints.
The Harper's letter signatories run across the ideological spectrum, including prominent
conservatives such as David Brooks and J.K. Rowling, liberals such as Mark Lilla and Sean
Willentz, and progressives such as Noam Chomsky and Todd Gitlin. I have no doubt that the
supporters of the letter are well meaning in their support for free speech. And I have no
interest in singling out any one person or group of signatories for condemnation. Rather, I
think it's warranted to focus on the ways in which "free speech" is being weaponized in this
case, and in contemporary American discourse, to empower reactionary voices, under the
façade of a free exploration of ideas.
The ideas established in the Harper's letter sound just fine in principle, and when examined
in a vacuum. The supporters embrace norms of "open debate" and "toleration of differences," and
opposition to "dogma[s]," "coercion," and "intolerant climate[s]" that stifle open exploration
of competing views. The letter's supporters celebrate "the free exchange of information and
ideas," which they deem "the lifeblood of a liberal society," contrary to a rising "vogue for
public shaming and ostracism and the tendency to dissolve complex policy issues in a blinding
moral certainty." The letter elaborates :
"But it is now all too common to hear calls for swift and severe retribution in response
to perceived transgressions of speech and thought. More troubling still, institutional
leaders, in a spirit of panicked damage control, are delivering hasty and disproportionate
punishments instead of considered reforms. Editors are fired for running controversial
pieces; books are withdrawn for alleged inauthenticity; journalists are barred from writing
on certain topics; professors are investigated for quoting works of literature in class; a
researcher is fired for circulating a peer-reviewed academic study; and the heads of
organizations are ousted for what are sometimes just clumsy mistakes. Whatever the arguments
around each particular incident, the result has been to steadily narrow the boundaries of
what can be said without the threat of reprisal."
Appealing to Americans' commitment to civic responsibility for open dialogue, the Harper's
letter warns, "restriction of debate" "invariably hurts those who lack power and makes everyone
less capable of democratic participation. The way to defeat bad ideas is by exposure, argument,
and persuasion, not by trying to silence or wish them away."
One of the main problems with this sort of lofty rhetoric is that it misrepresents the
severely deficient reality of American political discourse. We live in a period when the rise
of neoliberal capitalism and untrammeled corporate power have cheapened "public" political
discourse to serve the interests of plutocratic wealth and power, while assaulting notions of
the common good and the public health. Idealistic rhetoric about exploring diverse views falls
flat, and is a mischaracterization of reality to the deficiencies in U.S. political discourse
under neoliberal corporate capitalism, when debates are perverted by political and economic
elites who have contempt for the free exchange of ideas.
Numerous passages in the Harper's letter create the impression that U.S. political discourse
is characterized by a vibrant and open exploration of diverse and competing views. The letter
includes
:
A lament that the emerging "cancel culture" threatens to "weaken our norms of open
debate and toleration."
The claim that the "free exchange of information and ideas, the lifeblood of a liberal
society, is daily becoming more constricted."
The assertion that American discourse is characterized by institutions that "uphold the
value of robust and even caustic counter-speech from all quarters."
The call "to preserve the possibility of good-faith disagreement without dire
professional consequences."
All of these claims are romanticizations of American life. They obscure the reality that
progressive left and radical dissident views are routinely blacklisted from "mainstream"
political, economic, and social discourse by the media and by mainstream academic
institutions.
The "let's engage in a diversity of competing views" position sounds great until one
realizes that we do not, and have never lived in, that sort of pluralistic democracy. We live
in a political culture that, on its face, is committed to free speech protections for all, in
which through the respectful exchange of ideas, we arrive at a better understanding of truth,
to the benefit of all. But we don't really live in that society. Ours is a reactionary culture,
which celebrates ideas that service political and economic power centers. In this society,
views that are elevated to being worthy of discussion include milquetoast liberal values that
are sympathetic (or at least not antagonistic) to corporate power, apolitical content that's
aimed at mindless entertainment and political diversion, and reactionary authoritarian views
that border on fascistic, but are vital to demonizing immigrants, people of color, and other
minorities, and reinforce a white patriarchal corporate power structure. Radical lefties, or
even progressive-leftists, need not apply to be included in this circumscribed discourse. Their
views are routinely blacklisted from the mass media, and are increasingly marginalized in
higher educational institutions.
I don't draw these conclusions lightly. My understanding of how the mass media operates is
based on extensive personal experiences, and those from countless left intellectuals I know.
Many of us have struggled (and mostly failed) to break into "mainstream" discourse because of
the limited space in corporate news devoted to marginalized perspectives. With this
marginalization comes the near erasure of critical views, including those seeking to spotlight
record (and rising) economic inequality, repressive institutions that reinforce racial, gender
and transphobic systems of repression, the corporate ecocidal assault on the environment, the
rise of unbridled corporate power and plutocracy, the rising authoritarianism in American
politics, and the increasingly reactionary and fascistic rhetoric that has taken over the
American right.
Despite complaints about a pervasive liberal bias in higher education, available evidence
reveals the opposite. As I've
documented through my own comprehensive analysis of hundreds of national opinion polling
questions on Americans' political and economic values, there's virtually no empirical evidence
to suggest that increased education in the U.S. is associated with increased likelihood of
holding liberal attitudes. The reason for this non-link between education and liberalism is
obvious to those leftists who have struggled to carve out a space in the increasingly
reactionary American university: there's very little commitment to progressive or leftist
values in the modern corporate collegiate "experience"-oriented schooling system.
Reflecting on my own experiences within this system, the very notion of academics serving as
public intellectuals has been under systematic assault by the rise of a "professionalization"
culture that depicts political engagement as "biased," "unprofessional," and "unacceptable."
Whatever lingering commitment to higher education as a public good was rolled back decades ago
with the rise of corporatized academic "professional" norms. Scholars are now primarily
concerned with publishing in esoteric, jargon-laden journals that no one reads, and almost no
one cites, while elevating a discussion of the methods of how one does research over a
discussion of the political and social significance of our work. In this process, there's been
a suppression of any commitment to producing active citizens who see themselves as having an
ethical or moral responsibility to be regularly politically engaged.
The reactionary "professionalization" that's celebrated in the ivory tower is relentlessly
promoted at every step of the process through which academics develop and are socialized: in
the graduate school experience, in the job hiring, tenure, and promotion processes, and in the
process of peer review for academic publications. Those who don't get with the program are
filtered out at some point in this process. Very few who are committed to challenging
professionalized academic norms make it through PhD programs, and fewer still obtain
tenure-track jobs and tenure. It is a rare to find academics who learn how to effectively hide
their political values in grad school, and who then actively draw on those same values in their
scholarship once they've secured an academic job.
In my more than two decades in higher ed, I can say there's no such thing as a fair hearing
for the progressive-radical left when it comes to academic publishing. Thinking of my own
research, I see zero interest in elite academic publishing houses – the Oxfords, Princetons, and Cambridges of the world – in making space for openly leftist frameworks
of analysis, let alone for the sort of applied Gramscian and Marxian empirical research that I
do on media propaganda, hegemony, indoctrination, and mass false consciousness. Neither do any
of the reputable journals in most social science disciplines express interest in this sort of
research.
Considering the research I do focuses on social movement protests, media propaganda/fake
news, and inequality studies, one might think these timely topics would draw a large number of
requests for university speaking engagements. These are, after all, defining political issues
of our time. But this isn't at all the case. The academy remains as reactionary as ever in
terms of sidelining and blacklisting leftist ideas and frameworks for understanding the world.
There's little interest in prioritizing high-profile campus speaking events for such topics in
the neoliberal corporate academy. Considering the utter contempt for such scholarship, it's
difficult for me to focus my limited time and energy lamenting campus attacks on authoritarians
like Milo Yiannopoulos, or whatever other reactionary pseudo-intellectual flavor of the week
who has been disinvited from paid speaking engagements that I and other leftist scholars
couldn't dream of receiving in the first place.
I won't shed a tear for reactionaries who seek to appropriate dwindling university resources
for their own personal publicity and self-aggrandizement, considering that their ideology
actively supports gutting the very institutions that they so shamelessly take advantage of. The
reality of the matter is that there's no First Amendment "free speech" right to be invited to
numerous campus engagements, to be paid a generous speaking fee, or to have campus security
resources devoted to protecting arch-reactionary authoritarian speakers in light of the large
student protests that are mobilized against these campus events.
We should recognize that the recent wave of laments against PC "cancel culture" from the
right reinforce a specific power dynamic in American society. It is one in which reactionaries
have initiated an assault on what little remains of independent and critical thinking within
the media and higher ed.
They have done so by draping their contempt for free and critical
inquiry in the rhetoric of "free speech." But U.S. media and educational institutions have
never been committed to the free exploration of competing views, at least not for those who
question corporate power. The sooner we stop pretending this landscape represents a free and
open exchange of ideas, the better.
Anthony DiMaggio is Associate Professor of Political Science at Lehigh University. He earned
his PhD from the University of Illinois, Chicago, and is the author of 9 books, including most
recently: Political Power in
America (SUNY Press, 2019) and
Rebellion in America (Routledge, 2020). He can be reached at:
[email protected]
Are you ready for this week's absurdity? Here's our Friday roll-up of the most ridiculous
stories from around the world that are threats to your liberty, risks to your prosperity and on
occasion, inspiring poetic justice.
2 + 2 = imperialism
Making its rounds on Twitter is a Tweet stating: "Nope the idea of 2 + 2 equalling 4 is
cultural, and because of western imperialism/colonization, we think of it as the only way of
knowing."
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.393.1_en.html#goog_823449589 NOW
PLAYING
Nutritionists Say You Should Never Drink Coffee On An Empty Stomach
The Coronavirus Pandemic Is Throwing A Wrench Into The Lives Of High School Juniors
How Some People End Up With Brewery Inside Their Bodies
Amazon Ditches $2-An-Hour Raise For Essential Workers
Having A Few Drinks A Week Is Good For Your Brain
Unsold Guinness Used To Fertilize Christmas Trees
Harvard and MIT Sue Trump Administration Over Foreign Student Visa Rule
California Suing Trump Admin Over New Visa Rule For International Students
You might think this is a troll, intentionally causing controversy while remaining
anonymous. No one could seriously believe this, right?
But this is an actual PhD student specializing in mathematics education. She is even listed
on Rutgers' PhD student directory,
In fact, she already has a Master's Degree in architecture but I'm not sure you would want
to go into any buildings she has designed, just in case she thinks structural integrity is
another imperialist lie.
This is how far the Bolshevik worldview has reached. You'd expect this from an
underwater-basket-weaving major. After all, colleges are the bastion of the Marxists.
But this is math. And she is part of the next generation of instructors and educators.
Maybe it's time to start rethinking the value of a degree.
British man convicted for drinking carrot juice from a beer can
A British man was angry about open container laws in his town, so he filled a beer can with
carrot juice, and walked around downtown.
As expected, he was cited by police, and given a ticket for drinking alcohol in public.
But challenging the ticket in court, the case was dismissed since he hadn't actually been
caught with alcohol in public.
You'd think it would end there. Man hassles town, town hassles man, and we're done.
But the town decided this case was important enough to appeal the court's decision.
After going back to court and arguing why drinking carrot juice out of a beer can should be
enough for an open container ticket, the defiant man lost the case. He will be forced to pay
the fine.
This was a two year legal battle at the taxpayers' expense, for drinking carrot juice out of
a beer can.
Clearly the man was just trying to troll the town government.
But who is more ridiculous– one guy with a bone to pick, or a town that spent two
years prosecuting a man for drinking carrot juice, just to prove who's really in charge?
How you could Double Your Money with an asset
That Has a 5,000 Year History of Prosperity
Why gold could potentially DOUBLE, and why silver could increase by up to 5
TIMES
The 5 smartest, safest and most lucrative ways to own gold and silver (and one way
you should definitely avoid)
Why gold is the ultimate anti-currency and insurance policy against the systematic
destruction of the US dollar (that everyone should at least consider owning)
Why ETFs are a lurking timebomb and why you want to avoid them like the
plague
And everything else you need to know about buying, owning, storing and investing
in precious metals
This 50-page report is brand new and absolutely free.
"... "People who are actually 'cancelled' don't get their thoughts published and amplified in major outlets," ..."
"... "held accountable" ..."
"... "an entire TV network" ..."
"... "stoking hatred" ..."
"... "white supremacist [with] a popular network show" ..."
"... "in dangerous ways," ..."
"... You and your mob have been destroying careers and reputations and livelihoods on a whim. Now you're being hoist by your own petard. Those of us blacklisted, libeled, and falsely maligned have zero sympathy. You all started it. May you be devoured by it. https://t.co/PGzMzNa0ku ..."
"... "fired from their jobs and have their livelihoods threatened." ..."
"... There was similar disillusionment with the lawmaker's assertion that she is being maliciously smeared by news networks and "white supremacists." "You're not a victim, you're a United States congresswoman," observed an unsympathetic Twitter user. ..."
"... Whether AOC wants to acknowledge it or not, a seemingly endless internet crusade has ruined the lives of countless individuals (many of them private citizens with little or no power) accused of holding politically incorrect views or of expressing insensitive remarks. ..."
"... An open letter published by Harper's Magazine which criticized the "vogue for public shaming and ostracism" among journalists, academics, and other figures ended up backfiring spectacularly after several signatories of the document rescinded their endorsements. They explained that they'd been unaware that 'problematic' people had also signed the letter. ..."
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has denied the existence of cancel culture, suggesting it is an
invention of privileged moaners who can't handle criticism. Her thesis prompted speculation
that the powerful lawmaker has no self-awareness. The rookie New York congresswoman, whose
'woke' Twitter takes have made her a hero to many on the Left, attempted to debunk the concept
of cancel culture in a series of profound posts.
"People who are actually 'cancelled' don't get their thoughts published and amplified in
major outlets," she argued , adding that the whiners who
complain about being 'cancelled' are actually just entitled and hate being "held
accountable" or "unliked."
To prove her point, she claimed that "an entire TV network" is dedicated to
"stoking hatred" of her, and that a "white supremacist [with] a popular network
show" regularly misrepresents her "in dangerous ways," but that she never
complains about it. (The congresswoman may be referring to Fox News host Tucker Carlson, who is
white and undoubtedly not a fan of hers.)
According to Ocasio-Cortez, the people who "actually" get cancelled are
anti-capitalists and even abolitionists – apparently a hat-tip to activists who
campaigned to end slavery, which was formally abolished in the United States in 1865 with the
ratification of the 13th Amendment.
Her airtight dissertation received poor marks from many on social media, however. Countless
comments accused her of being part of the very movement which she claims doesn't exist.
"You and your mob have been destroying careers and reputations and livelihoods on a whim.
Now you're being hoist by your own petard," quipped actor James Woods.
You and your mob have been destroying careers and reputations and livelihoods on a
whim. Now you're being hoist by your own petard. Those of us blacklisted, libeled, and
falsely maligned have zero sympathy. You all started it. May you be devoured by it.
https://t.co/PGzMzNa0ku
Others argued that AOC was technically correct. Instead of having their views broadcast by
mainstream outlets, 'cancelled' individuals are often "fired from their jobs and have their
livelihoods threatened."
Correct. Instead, they are often fired from their jobs, harassed by twitter mobs, &
have their livelihoods threatened. And so since they cannot speak up, we who have a platform
choose to use our power responsibly to speak up on their behalf. You should do the same. Join
us, AOC https://t.co/lQ5yiuKFq6
There was similar disillusionment with the lawmaker's assertion that she is being
maliciously smeared by news networks and "white supremacists." "You're not a victim, you're a
United States congresswoman," observed an unsympathetic Twitter
user.
However, her remarks also garnered applause from social media users, who dismissed cancel
culture as a right-wing talking point.
Cancel culture is fake. It's a right wing framing of social accountability and people need
to stop giving the term any credence.
Whether AOC wants to acknowledge it or not, a seemingly endless internet crusade has
ruined the lives of countless individuals (many of them private citizens with little or no
power) accused of holding politically incorrect views or of expressing insensitive
remarks.
An open letter published by Harper's Magazine which criticized the "vogue for public
shaming and ostracism" among journalists, academics, and other figures ended up backfiring
spectacularly after several signatories of the document rescinded their endorsements. They
explained that they'd been unaware that 'problematic' people had also signed the
letter.
Under pressure from the NAACP, this one is also being exiled.
I have always liked this one because it is a very accurate depiction of an Army of Northern
Virginia rifleman just as they embarked on the Gettysburg Campaign in 1863.
On the pediment is inscribed "Leesburg to her sons who fought for constitutional
government."
The revolution continues. The tactics never change.
Catholic philosopher Ed Feser (professor, Pasadena City College, CA) has an amazing blog
post "The popes against the revolution" where he cites papal encyclicals from late 19th and
early 20th centuries condemning every aspect of this revolution we're currently seeing in
America. From the destruction of cultural artifacts being a common tactic of communists to
how police protection and punishment of criminals is necessary for social order to how
socialism and communism are intrinsically evil.
The Church condemns anarchism and socialist revolution
[A] deadly plague is creeping into the very fibres of human society and leading it on to
the verge of destruction We speak of that sect of men who, under various and almost
barbarous names, are called socialists, communists, or nihilists, and who, spread over all
the world, and bound together by the closest ties in a wicked confederacy, no longer seek
the shelter of secret meetings, but, openly and boldly marching forth in the light of day,
strive to bring to a head what they have long been planning – the overthrow of all
civil society whatsoever. (Pope Leo XIII, Quod Apostolici Muneris 1)
[T]he most disastrous national upheavals are threatening us from the growing power of
the socialistic movement. They have insidiously worked their way into the very heart of the
community, and in the darkness of their secret gatherings, and in the open light of day, in
their writings and their harangues, they are urging the masses onward to sedition; they
fling aside religious discipline; they scorn duties; they clamor only for rights; they are
working incessantly on the multitudes of the needy which daily grow greater, and which,
because of their poverty are easily deluded and led into error... (Pope Leo XIII, Graves de
Communi Re 21, 25)
'Slavery is not mentioned'. It would not matter if it was, because the current era Red
Guards do not care about slavery or about rewriting history.
Like all socialists or useful idiots they have only an eye on the great and glorious future,
or as the delightful Kshama Sawant concisely states .. 'a world based instead on solidarity,
genuine democracy, and equality – a socialist world.' To that end the falling statues
have included those of emancipationists and Liberals, purely for the purpose of demonstrating
the relative powerlessness of stood down law enforcement, rubbing their own willpower in the
face of the middle class, and pushing the psychological boundary of normality.
The latter is of great significance to them. After the statues, place names, particular words
and designated reactionary organisations are neutralised, they can then begin to enact
legislation, in activist Democrat enclaves, once seen as absurd but lately seen as expected
and deserving of acquiescence. Have a listen to AOC's thoughts on the matter of this never
ending revolution (which we know does end like all revolutions, after various stages of
chaos). https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1275633659291136001
'We will not stop'(and then we're going to keep pushing anyway).
We have a similar Rifleman statue in Charlottesville and the pediment has an inscription
"Confederate Soldiers, defenders of States' Rights". Although in downtown Charlottesville's
Court Square, it's on Albemarle County property and not subject to Charlottesville's City
Council whims.
Is that the one that has "Love makes memory eternal?" inscribed on the base? A French Army
friend visiting with his wife read that and wept saying we have nothing like this. At
Gettysburg he told his wife on Cemetery Ridge "Le General de Brigade Armistead etait blesse a
mort just ici avec sa main sur la bouche d'un cannon." (Brigadier General Armistead was
mortally wounded here with his hand on the muzzle of a cannon.)
after 40 years of the long march through the institutions (look it up) the education
system is producing what the marxists who took it over want it to produce. If we can ever
start it will be a long road back.
Loudin County Va,Leesburg,is the birth place of my Great,Great grandfather,William Henry
Andrews born in 1811.He married Elizabeth Goff and they moved to Monticello ,Jefferson County
Florida in 1833 when it was a territoty.............Both the city and county name was in
honor of Thomas Jefferson.............William Henry's first son,my great grandfather,John
Slicer Andrews, enlisted in the 50 th Ga Regiment "The Santlla Rangers" in 1862.........This
regiment eventually was assigned to the ANV under Lt General James Longstreet.They were
involved in the battle of Gettysburg and on July 4th 1863 John Slicer Andrews was captured at
Cashtown PA.He spent about 19 months in Union prisons .He died years later of "consumption"
which his doctor said was a result of his prison stay..........One of John Andrew's son was
responsible for the Florida Legislature to pass a bill giving Confederate widows a
penson.
Diana, would that long road back start at the door of the Education Secretary, an
appointment currently held by Betsy deVos ? Although the powers of that appointment are
limited by the US Constitution, it would seem to be the ideal coordinating office for the
redress of the decline that you describe.
Betsy DeVos herself does not seem up to that task, and those who appointed her would not seem
to have that intent. She seems a lovely and comfortable sort, devoid of any need to overwhelm
those who would at least be ideological opponents.
I see in the Richmond Times Dispatch today that the wokies now running the commonwealth
have decided that the way to get the bronze Lee down is to cut him in three pieces.
George Santayana's aphorism; "Only the dead have seen the end of war" seems inadequate for
a time in which the effigies of soldiers are mutilated. For me, the wokies' lack of respect
for the dead betrays their faux concern for the living.
One month after the killing of George Floyd, the mass multi-racial demonstrations against
police violence are in danger of being hijacked and misdirected by reactionary political forces
who are attempting to promote racial divisions, sabotage the unity of working people and youth,
and undermine the development of the class struggle against capitalism. This campaign is
now concentrated on desecrating and destroying the statues of figures who led the American
Revolution and the Civil War.
It is difficult to find words that adequately express the sense of revulsion produced by the
monstrous attacks on memorials that honor the memory of Abraham Lincoln, the United States'
greatest president, who led the country during the Second American Revolution that destroyed
the Slave Power and emancipated millions of enslaved African Americans.
On the evening of April 14, 1865, less than a week after the surrender of the main
Confederate army, which brought the four-year Civil War to an end, Lincoln was shot in the head
by the pro-slavery actor John Wilkes Booth. Nine hours later, at 7:22 on the morning of April
15, Lincoln died of the wound inflicted by the assassin. Standing beside Lincoln's death bed,
Secretary of War Edwin Stanton famously declared: "Now he belongs to the ages."
Lincoln's martyrdom produced an outpouring of grief throughout the United States and the
world. The working class recognized that it had lost a great champion of democracy and human
equality. Karl Marx, writing on behalf of the International Working Men's Association, wrote in
the days after Lincoln's assassination that he was "one of the rare men who succeed in becoming
great, without ceasing to be good."
Abraham Lincoln was an extraordinarily complex man, whose life and politics reflected the
contradictions of his time. He could not, as he once stated, "escape history." Determined to
save the Union, he was driven by the logic of the bloody civil war to resort to revolutionary
measures. In the course of the brutal struggle, Lincoln gave expression to the
revolutionary-democratic aspirations that inspired hundreds of thousands of Americans to fight
and sacrifice their lives for a "new birth of freedom."
Every period of political upsurge in the United States has drawn inspiration from Lincoln's
life. Since its opening in 1922, the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, DC has been the site of
some of the most important moments in the struggle against racial oppression and for equality.
In 1939, when Hitler's Nazis were on the march in Europe and fascism had many sympathizers
among the American ruling elite, the famous African American contralto Marian Anderson was
denied the right to sing at Constitution Hall. So instead she sang on the steps of the Lincoln
Memorial before a crowd of 75,000.
In 1963, at the March on Washington, Martin Luther King, Jr. stood at the same location as
he delivered his "I Have a Dream" speech, calling for equality and racial integration before a
crowd of 250,000. Later in that decade, tens of thousands of youth protesting the Vietnam War
assembled at the monument.
It is not coincidental that the working-class upsurge of the 1930s was associated with many
great artistic depictions of Lincoln, including the films Young Mr. Lincoln (1939) and
Abe Lincoln in Illinois (1940). Aaron Copland's beloved orchestral-narrative
masterpiece, Lincoln Portrait (1942), concludes with the declaration that the
sixteenth president of the United States "is ever-lasting in the memory of his countrymen."
But now, 155 years after the tragedy at Ford's Theater, Lincoln is the subject of a second
assassination. This one must not succeed.
Eleanor Holmes Norton, Washington DC's nonvoting delegate to Congress, said she will
introduce a bill to remove the famous Emancipation Monument from the Lincoln Park in
Washington, DC. The race-fixated protesters have declared their intention to tear down the
monument, which was paid for by former slaves and movingly dedicated by black abolitionist
Frederick Douglass in 1876.
"The designers of the Emancipation Statue in Lincoln Park in DC didn't take into account the
views of African Americans," Norton stated in a Tweet. Democrats assert that the statue demeans
"the black community" because it depicts Lincoln freeing a slave crouched in a runner's pose,
which the sculptor intended to symbolize the liberation of the Civil War.
Norton's reactionary effort is being supported by Democratic Party officials in Boston, who
will hold hearings in the coming weeks to entertain demands for the removal of a replica of the
Emancipation Memorial in that city.
Lincoln is not the only leader of the anti-Confederate forces to be targeted. In San
Francisco last week, a statue of Ulysses S. Grant, the great general of the victorious Union
army and later president of the United States, was torn down.
An even filthier example of the racialist campaign is the desecration of the Boston monument
honoring the legendary 54th Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry Regiment. The 54th Massachusetts,
led by abolitionist Robert Gould Shaw, was the second all-black regiment organized in the Civil
War. Protesters object to the fact that the 54th, famously depicted in the film Glory
(1989), was commanded by a white officer, Shaw. Holland Cotter, the New York Times'
co-chief art critic, slandered the monument as a "white supremacist" visual for its depiction
of Shaw leading his African American battalion.
Another Union monument, a statue of abolitionist Hans Christian Heg (1829–1863), was
pulled down Tuesday night in Madison, Wisconsin. The statue was beheaded before being thrown
into a nearby lake.
A Norwegian immigrant, Heg led the 15th Wisconsin regiment, known as the Scandinavian
Regiment, against the Confederacy. Prior to the war, Heg, a member of the Free Soil Party,
fiercely opposed slavery and headed an anti-slave catcher militia in Wisconsin. He was killed
at the age of 33 at the Battle of Chickamauga in September 1863.
The Socialist Equality Party rejects all the lame liberal excuses and justifications that
are offered to legitimize the desecration of these memorials. Actions, whatever the motivations
ascribed to them, have objective significance and very real political consequences.
The assault on Lincoln monuments and other memorials honoring the leaders of the American
Revolution and Civil War are political provocations aimed at whipping up racial animosities.
Such provocations are well-known forms of communalist politics, which resemble the burning down
of Muslim mosques by Hindu fanatics or Hindu temples by Muslim fanatics. Here in the United
States, the statues are being attacked as examples of "white" rule.
The attacks on the statues are the outcome of a campaign by the two capitalist parties and
various reactionary elements in the upper-middle class to racialize and communalize American
politics. The growing intensity of this campaign is a response to the upsurge of working-class
militancy, which is seen as a threat to capitalism. Far from welcoming the interracial unity
displayed in the demonstrations against police brutality, the ruling elites and most affluent
sections of the middle class are terrified by its political implications.
In the promotion of racial politics, there is a division of labor between the Democratic and
Republican parties. Trump and the Republicans pitch their appeal to the most politically
disoriented elements in American society, manipulating their economic insecurities in a manner
intended to incite racial antagonism and deflect social anger away from the capitalist
system.
The Democratic Party employs another variant of communalist politics, evaluating and
explaining all social problems and conflicts in racial terms. Whatever the particular issue may
be -- poverty, police brutality, unemployment, low wages, deaths caused by the pandemic -- it
is almost exclusively defined in racial terms. In this racialized fantasy world, "whites" are
endowed with an innate "privilege" that exempts them from all hardship.
This grotesque distortion of present-day reality requires a no less grotesque distortion of
the past. For contemporary America to be portrayed as a land of relentless racial warfare, it
is necessary to create a historical narrative in the same terms. In place of the class
struggle, the entire history of the United States is presented as the story of perpetual racial
conflict.
Even before the outbreak of the pandemic, efforts to create racial foundations for
contemporary communalist politics were well underway. The New York Times , the
principal voice of corporate and financial patrons of the Democratic Party, concocted the
insidious 1619 Project, the central purpose of which was to promote a racial narrative. The
main argument of this project, which was unveiled in August 2019, was that the American
Revolution was undertaken to protect North American slavery and that the Civil War, led by the
racist Abraham Lincoln, had nothing to do with the ending of slavery. The slaves, so the new
story went, liberated themselves.
The purpose of lies about history, as Trotsky explained, is to conceal real social
contradictions. In this case, the contradictions are those embedded in the staggering levels of
social inequality produced by capitalism. These contradictions can be resolved on a progressive
basis only through the methods of class struggle, in which the working class fights consciously
to put an end to capitalism and replaces it with socialism. Efforts to divert and sabotage that
struggle by dissolving class identity into the miasma of racial identity lead inexorably in the
direction of fascism.
Through the promotion of a racial version of communalism, all factions of the ruling class
seek to divide the working class so as to better exploit it and ward off the threat of
revolution. It is no coincidence that when American society is straining under the weight of
the COVID-19 pandemic, which has killed more than 120,000 people and sparked an economic crisis
on the scale of the Great Depression, the Democrats are ever-more ferociously seeking to make
race the fundamental issue.
The alternative to the politics of racial communalism is the socialist politics of
working-class unity. This is the program of the Socialist Equality Party, and those who agree
with this perspective should join our party.
This is an excellent piece. I in no way consider myself a socialist, but I do believe that
politicians and the media and all around bad people have bastardized and driven a wedge
between what could be.
Great article.
"An even filthier example of the racialist campaign is the desecration of the Boston monument
honoring the legendary 54th Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry Regiment. The 54th
Massachusetts, led by abolitionist Robert Gould Shaw, was the second all-black regiment
organized in the Civil War."
This attack demonstrates the utterly anti-historical, politically relativist nature of the
current "protests". These protesters hate reality, & wish nothing less than to bend
history to their own short-term, selfish & impulsive demands. They do NOT represent
working people, the 99%.
"The attacks on the statues are the outcome of a campaign by the two capitalist parties and
various reactionary elements in the upper-middle class to racialize and communalize American
politics. The growing intensity of this campaign is a response to the upsurge of
working-class militancy, which is seen as a threat to capitalism. "
Absolutely correct. Dozens of multi-billion dollar corporations are jumping on this racialist
bandwagon. Their presence should arouse the suspicion of even the most stupid of "useful
idiots".
"The assault on Lincoln monuments and other memorials honoring the leaders of the American
Revolution and Civil War are political provocations aimed at whipping up racial
animosities."
when i read Lincoln, and when i read Trotsky these days, i know in my heart that that they
consciously spoke to future generations as much as they did to their contemporaries -- they
knew the struggle to be fierce and long, and so the imperative to speak to future generations
-- when i read Lincoln and Trotsky, i am not reading a history book, i am listening to a man
speak directly to me about the times i live -- they want to tell us what they learned, they
want to guide us and strengthen our spine for the battles ahead ! a hundred, a hundred-fifty
years since they lived ? they understood that, the length of the struggle, and this is why
they speak so clearly to us, like a hammer ringing on a blacksmith's anvil ! they live in our
hearts and continue to lead us, they are beloved of the workers in this world
Obama's second term was seared by civil unrest over the multiple murders of young black
men by racist cops... but no 'rainbow CIA color revolution' against Obama was required at
that point so the carnage was glossed over and the protests suppressed. This year however the
CIA Democrats need to harness identity politics to destabilise Trump's regime in time for
November (to get war with Russia back on track); furthermore American oligarchs are petrified
at a class uprising after Lockdown so have instructed their mass media to seize on the the
George Floyd killing, lionise the spontaneous protests, and spin them (with
billionaire-funded NGOs like Black Lives Matter) to create a largely state-sponsored
worldwide 'reaction'... to channel real class anger into the deadend of racial division.
Not sure how others see it but I see the mass protests that erupted (that saw democrats
and trump both attacking, the former attacking the multiracial character especially) as a
different thing to what is taking place now at the sites of these statues of Lincoln, Grant
etc. I believe the media are trying to treat them as part of the same thing while even
admitting there is only the tiniest fraction of the numbers at the statues I mentioned above
compared to the numbers demonstration before. The latter is about shifting everything into
race where there was a real fear of class gaining expression in the mass demonstrations.
When the unions know, and the transnational corporations more than know, and the workers
of the world all know and how that tens of thousands of workers are infected with the
Corvid-19 virus and thousands upon thousands are dead or in the process of dying of it
under
a forced labor pogrom, but the American people aren't told and the workers are bullied and
threatened not to bring it up, evidently, and lied to about the figures, thereby take to
manipulating and degrading the Black Lives Matter banner and movement by using them like
Trojan horses bloated with divisive racialist and identity politic of the Democratic Party--
the capitalist antebellum slaver class potty and the complicit Nationalistic anti-labor
unions whom we got the skinny on and know of here and now-- in order to divide, confuse,
isolate and decimate the working classes and swallow up what's left of the middle class
medium and small indie businesses -- while, in tandem, the Republican Potty mops up the rest.
WORKERS LIVES MATTER!
I agree that the goal of the government and media is to delimit, or kettel, the substance
of these demonstrations to race...by submerging the multilpicity of issues at stake under an
incessant, obsessive racial narrative. They know its about much more than that and so do the
people in the streets.
Lincoln was an advocate of slavery as long as it wasn't expanded, he wanted to make the US
a whites only country like Edmon Barton of Australia later did with his constitutionally
connected self governing colony, and Lincoln while "freeing slaves" continued enslaving and
murdering Native Americans. I hold no anger to those who wants to target his monuments and
remove them.
Can you put this into the context of what the article is about, namely that the racialist
narratives being promoted seek to divide the working class today?
Western culture (which includes America) is built on a foundation of so many lies and half
truths that any objective critical examination causes it ti crumble like a house of cards.
Hero worship and symbolism die hard in the minds of the "symbol minded" (Carlin).
spot on comrade and Rest in power to George Carlin along with Bill Hicks and Frank Zappa
one of the finest dissident artist, truthtellers and mythbusters. Carlin was the Miles Davis
and Picasso of stand up comedy, the older he got, the better :)
haha! your against tearing down monuments that glorify and engage in half truths and
propaganda and instead of engaging in dialogue you want the censorship? wonderful!
If it's propaganda, like your comment about Lincoln being a white supremacist, yes, in my
humble opinion but than again I actually studied history most my life so I'm not going to
make up things to justify why the world is the way it is today. That's why the SEP is a
principal party based upon scientific Socialism unlike you who uses his emotions as
facts.
He is on record as saying he did not agree with blacks and whites as equals and living in
close quarters. He said that the white race was superior to the black race. It is on
record.
You are a historical falsifier. You are taking certain incidents out of their context, and
ignore the process of history. Your worldview is superficial and reactionary.
I'm what you call an inconvenient truthteller and mythbuster much like this outlet, and
its ok to not always agree with authors and what I said about Lincoln is historical fact,
sticks and stones Comrade.
Why is it that we want our designated heroes to be two dimensional? Lincoln like most of
the Founding Fathers by his own admission was a White Supremacist in the strictest sense.
They all believed and expressed in their writings that the White race was superior to the
rest of humanity (Blacks, Asians, Natives, Hispanic....).
If Lincoln was a white supremacist, what would you call John Wilkes Booth? As for the
founders expressing superiority in their writings, I'd like for you to prove that it against
"Hispanics", seeing the term was created in the 1970's. You don't even know what you're
talking about yet you try to revise history. Read a book and you might learn something.
Nice try at misdirection, but the Founding fathers have openly expressed many times in
multiple correspondences that they believed that the White Race was naturally superior to all
other races on the face of this planet. It's not hard to find and they were not shy about
saying it out loud so I suggest you take your own snarky advice and read a few books
yourself. Also, I used the term "Hispanic" which is now Latinx (?) to include peoples in
their time who were a mixture of Spanish and Native who actually did exist in their time.
Note that the term "White Supremacist didn't exist in those days as well but the Fumbling
Fathers clearly fit the description.
You still didn't provide any correspondence because they don't exist so who's really
misdirecting. Also I was responding to your misinformation about "Lincoln, by his own
admission was a White Supremacist in the strictest sense", and I said prove it but you can't
because you only know how to read NYT propaganda. The Hispanic part of your comment is the
most ridiculous. I guess the fumbling fathers, pathetic and infantile insult, must of had a
time machine to travel to the future and oppress people that were just called Mexicans back
during their time. I'd tell you to grow up but grownups don't troll.
Lincoln didn't believe that. His placing into law the right for black people and freedmen
to vote showed he no longer held even a whiff of prejudice and Douglass said as much. Lincoln
was not a racist and certainly not a White Supremacist which was the ideology of the
confederacy. He was a heroic revolutionary who stood firm while others folded.
First of all Lincoln was a man not a two dimensional heroic fictional caricature like you
put forth. In many correspondences he like most White men of his time saw the Negro and
Natives as inferior. As far as being exceptional I say John Brown, William Lloyd Garrison and
the Quakers fit that description. They could rise above convention and see humanity
objectively.
No, what WSWS and anybody reasonable wants is for people to study history and describe and
quote people accurately, not repeat absurd slanders or recite carefully edited quotations.
(Always the same ones)
Blatant falsehoods like "Lincoln was an advocate of slavery.." or pulling down a statue of
Lincoln are exactly the kinds of stupid, self-destructive act that agents provocateurs lead
movements and dupes like Eleanor Holmes Norton into doing.
The deepest point of the attack, why it is so crucial for these Bad Guys to attack Lincoln
et al is because:
(a) Lincoln was on our side. He was on the side of the slaves, the downtrodden, the
working class, black or white. and
(b) Lincoln was a rare, great and heroic leader. He - and we - succeeded in the real
world . Most others - say Garrison, by his own admission - would have failed.
It's easy to spout the correct slogans and positions. Infinitely harder to put them into
practice, to lead a whole country into saying them. Lincoln did. Lenin did. No matter where
or when, such leaders are the supreme target of the pro-slavery forces, who do anything to
blacken their name and falsify their memory, who endlessly work to split us.
Their supreme aim by this is to demoralize us and convince us that we have NEVER succeeded
once, that we cannot win. No, if one studies Lincoln and the Civil War we can learn - we did
win then. So we can win now.
Should all critics of the website's prevailing wisdom be lumped into one category? You use
the term "Bad Guys" to describe people who question convention (a term Dick Cheney & the
"Intelligence Community" frequently deploys) or as you put it "attack Lincoln." As an atheist
I have no Messiahs and very few heroes. Lincoln was a human being like you and I.
The North won the Civil War because A.) they had more fighting men. B.) they had a greater
manufacturing capacity to make weapons of war. If the circumstances had been reversed the
South would have won. Trial by combat where good always conquers evil only happens in the
movies. Personally, I am not pro-human slavery be it ancient Egypt, Rome or America, but I am
pro-facts; even if said facts don't neatly fit into one's heroic narrative.
Should all critics of the website's prevailing wisdom be lumped into one
category?
I did not and did not intend to. By "Bad Guys" I meant the ruling class and their agents
provocateurs. I was not including you or anyone else here necessarily in that category. But
people who spread blatant lies or contrive to get statues of Lincoln or abolitionists pulled
down for malicious purposes.
I was trying to explain why there are so many peddlers of crap history about Lincoln etc.,
explain their ultimate aims and how this is an effective tool of oppression. And noting that
they have seriously misled, divided and damaged left/liberal/progressive forces. They appear
to have fooled you and Youri in this thread.
As for Garrison, whose objectivity you praise, what was his objective, final estimate of
the living Lincoln? A few days before the assassination Garrison gave a rousing speech to
tumultuous applause - briefly mentioned above - where he repeatedly said "I will not hear a
word said against Abraham Lincoln" . Garrison said that Lincoln showed himself a wiser
strategist and better abolitionist than he, Garrison, because he had succeeded at the
enormously difficult and absolutely necessary task of leading public opinion - to win the
war, to eliminate slavery everywhere in the South. Garrison before the war had sometimes
merely aimed at eliminating slavery in the USA by - Northern seccession. As Garrison
knew, Garrison could preach to the converted. But Lincoln didn't have that luxury - but still
succeeded.
So my point is again that the anti-Lincoln narrative is the one that doesn't fit "the
facts", that requires prejudice and contorted arguments and politically edited revisionist
history. Not the "heroic narrative" - which the facts, warts and all, happen to fit far more
neatly into.
What you refer to as a "anti-Lincoln narrative is just people like me pointing out that
bases on Lincoln's own words he was a White Supremacist. The question seems to be is it
possible for a confessed White Supremacist to fight a war and strategically free the slaves?
Yes.
We'll get this before the people, and
then tell the people all, and, while we are at it, ask
the working class if those who don't
mind at all might take some time off to recall the Union
Army as our Second Amendment is now
half empty as we're needing to finish ,for once and for all, Reconstruction restarting
from where Lincoln's murder left off!
" The purpose of lies about history, as Trotsky explained, is to conceal real social
contradictions."
False consciousness, as Engels wrote to Mehring, is the underclass thinking and acting a role
written by the ruler. Such is racialism.
Hi! Thanks so much for writing this! I totally agree that we can't let anything divide the
working class – we've got to stay united if we want to win this fight. Thanks for
advocating for us. I'm a little confused about where the author wants that unity to come
from, though. Is the author saying that we should ignore all of the things that specifically
black folks have faced (namely, slavery, explicitly racist torture at the hands of vigilante
groups and the state, subtler practices like redlining that were still clearly predicated on
race rather than just class) and expect them to join us in the fight? Isn't it our job, as a
class and as a movement, to make sure we are advocating for ALL working class (and poor)
folks? Don't we want to unite all people against the ruling class? Isn't that where our power
comes from? I guess I'm just not sure why Black folks would want to join the movement if we
don't address the inequality they've disproportionately faced – if they join, and we
don't address these things, and we win, then the socialist society that comes after is still
full of folks who have benefited from racism, and internalized the subtleties of white
supremacy (I am not saying that anyone in our group is a racist. Just that our society was
built by white folks to cater to their own needs, while Black folks were enslaved, and our
systems still live in that legacy. White folks consider majority-white spaces the norm. We
turn a blind eye to the over-policing of Black neighborhoods because it is easy to buy into
the idea – one that our ancestors passed down to us – that Black folks are
inherently more likely to be criminals. But Black folks are dying at much higher rates that
while folks. We don't notice it because it feels normal to us. But Black folks do. Don't take
it from me, though- are there Black folks within the movement that could potentially speak to
this?). I am wondering why it is not our job to advocate specifically for justice for Black
folks – if our goal is equity, and the Black working class has less of it than the
white working class, why does fighting for that equity undermine the movement? Isn't justice
for all what we're fighting for? Why would anyone join us if we are not paying attention to
the specifics of their struggle? Any clarity you have would be so helpful – thank you
in advance!
Racism was invented to divide the working class. Social equality cannot be achieved under
capitalism--that is an oxymoron. Reforms addressing racial issues will not do away with this
underlying contradiction under capitalism. Marxism needs to be taken into the working class
to all workers. Workers need to understand they are part of the historical process. You said,
"our society was built by white folks to cater to their own needs, while Black folks were
enslaved". This is a wide generality; "white folks" obscures the class nature of society. All
workers are still enslaved. To paraphrase Engels, the difference between chattel slavery and
wage slavery is that the slave is sold to a master all at once and is his individual
property; the wage slave must sell himself piecemeal, by the hour etc. and not to an
individual but to the ruling class as a whole. Thus wage slaves cannot get free until they do
away with the class structure.
Actually, two remarkable events happened before I fled the responsibility of party
building before your parents were born. The predecessors of this party circa 1974 when the
working class wave , now gathering , ebbed. Mind you graduate school and profiitable careers
were available, unlike now. Until then, I answered a lot questions like your , just before
Feminism gathered force and Black Nationalism turned into Black Capitalism. You know, mayors,
policemen, nasty capitalists. That red hot revolutionary Eldridge Cleaver opened a Better Get
a Gun fashion outlet in Beverly Hills no less. There are shameless opportunists who
discovered their race as their most important contribution now beside you on the streets.
One more things, just as all the comrades left for grad school , the Trostkyists of SEP
built a socialist youth movement among black youths in New York for which a comrade was
murdered. Not only that, but SEP as Workers League relocated to Detroit where it had a base
in the black working class among auto workers. One thing though, we are not all alike and
should just get together. It took rivers of Trotskyist blood to drill that in, and every
attempt to ignore it met with disaster.I am a supporter. Join.
You make it sound like there's no black workers already in the socialist movement. These
advocates of racialism are not your average black working class, some instances they're not
even black. What they are primarily drawn from are upper middle class, privileged layers
despite all their yarns about white privilege, who advocate this stuff precisely to block
class unity and class consciousness. And when you get down to our level, there really ain't
that much difference. Plenty of enough white workers getting harassed and murdered by the
State. I say don't let the upper middle class speak for workers
Just that. The guys I work with who happen to have varying shades of skin color and we all
discuss from serious matters to the inane and joke together, it's all the same stuff. Same
worries, same troubles, same concerns. We all know there's racism, each of us whatever our
background take offense to it because we know it's an attack on all of us at the end of the
day. Plus we all know Obama was a fraud, that it doesn't change anything for us putting more
black people in boardrooms or the police - we all still get attacked and screwed around. And
we all take offense when these self appointed representatives of race start telling us that
our real enemy is each other rather than those destroying our livelihoods with job cuts,
speed ups, austerity, attacks on rights and war.
White workers, black workers, Latino workers, male, female, straight, gay whatever - can be
won to socialism without having to resort to adapting to the middle class advocates of
identity - in fact, if that's what the wsws and SEP were to adapt to, it wouldn't win over
any workers; it might win over very reactionary elements of the middle class though who would
use this as platform to get more privileged positions.
My mistake - did not mean to imply that Black folks are not part of the movement. Now that
you mention it, though, my experience within the movement has been with mostly white men - do
you happen to know if the party has significant Black membership? Not rhetorical, seriously
wondering!! If you have the time, I'd also love to know more about these proponents of
racialism - in my experience, many of the activists leading the charge in the current moment
Black folks from working class or poor backgrounds (pointing to some of the national and
local organizations who are doing work right now - naarpr/caarpr, for example, a lot of local
youth-led orgs leading the charge in Chicago). Would you be able to send me more information
about the upper middle class background of this movement? Thanks!
Yes, there is significant black membership in the SEP and the ICFI. Always has been since
before I became a part of it. A major section of the ICFI is in Sri Lanka and the Sri Lankans
are South Asian and yet they are a part of the Trotskyist movement and have a long history
within it. True socialists have never been racists. Also see:
https://www.wsws.org/en/art...
Kaline below has given some links, I would also suggest searching for as much background
information as possible from the wsws on the efforts of the ruling class, media and academics
to racialise matters. In fact I would suggest the book on pseudo left and the Frankfurt
school and postmodernism. This isn't just about racialising but the whole effort of
postmodernism to deny the working class the tools to study history and formulate a class
perspective.
On that score I won't say no black worker can't get caught up in racialism, just as no white
worker can't get pulled behind white supremacists - great efforts are made to subordinate
different sections of the working class to various middle class organisations, perspectives
etc. But what I'm trying to convey is these things we're seeing (not the mass protests but
pulling down statues of historically progressive figures), while they may involve worker
elements, are formulated and given full vocalisation first and foremost by the upper middle
class. These are not spontaneous attitudes that the mythical black community just pops out
with (and it is mythical: Obama, Powell, Beyonce etc are not part of what George Floyd,
Trevon Martin, Michael Brown, Eric Gardner etc are). Where the socialist movement has been
attacked, pushed back and betrayed by so called socialist forces (who incidentally began
spouting the same identity politics and attacking class conceptions) obviously sections of
the working class have come under middle class influence. But to tackle that one has to
ruthlessly expose this identity politics and be somewhat bold in it recognising and having
confidence that identity politics isn't some bottom up, natural expression or reflection of
the real state of affairs. That's revealed very quickly when engaging in discussion with
other workers of all different stripes. Of course the first stage is understanding where
identity politics comes from, how we got to be here and what identity politics expresses.
Apologies I'm replying quickly between shifts.
aristocracy. Our party is a part of the same milieu, not of the basic exploited masses of
whom the Negroes are the most exploited. The fact that our party until now has not turned to
the Negro question is a very disquieting symptom. If the workers' aristocracy is the basis of
opportunism, one of the sources of adaptation to capitalist society, then the most oppressed
and discriminated are the most dynamic milieu of the working class..
Always liked how the politics of racialism is the first to silence and attack black
workers and deny their existence within the socialist movement, just as feminists silence
women workers and Zionists silence workers of Jewish descent.
Are you a member of the socialist equality party?
An historically important perspective. I would like to extend my most profound thanks to
David and Niles, and the editorial staff of the WSWS as a whole, for the incredible work they
have done in preparing the ground for the struggle against these aptly called "lame
liberals."
The attacks on the Great Emancipator remind me of Goya's painting of Saturn eating his
children at birth on the off chance they might overthrow him.
Two paragraphs in this article strike me as being worthy of serious study:
"The purpose of lies about history, as Trotsky explained, is to conceal real social
contradictions. In this case, the contradictions are those embedded in the staggering levels
of social inequality produced by capitalism. These contradictions can be resolved on a
progressive basis only through the methods of class struggle, in which the working class
fights consciously to put an end to capitalism and replaces it with socialism. Efforts to
divert and sabotage that struggle by dissolving class identity into the miasma of racial
identity lead inexorably in the direction of fascism.
Through the promotion of a racial version of communalism, all factions of the ruling class
seek to divide the working class so as to better exploit it and ward off the threat of
revolution. It is no coincidence that when American society is straining under the weight of
the COVID-19 pandemic, which has killed more than 120,000 people and sparked an economic
crisis on the scale of the Great Depression, the Democrats are ever-more ferociously seeking
to make race the fundamental issue."
One of the most revolting things about contemporary liberalism is how incredibly fascistic
it is. It seems impossible for the Democrats to mention anything without turning to the
fetishistic zoological Idealism of Race with a capital R. While liberals might not (yet) be
fascists, they certainly think like fascists.
In November, the state-sanctioned choice - and by extension the only choice presented to
the American people by the state mouthpieces in the corporate media - will be between a
military junta under the "auspices" of the CIA Democrats/latter day Maoists or a
quasi-fascist regime under Trump. Democracy in America - specifically bourgeois "democracy" -
is on its last legs. Only the intervention of the working class, led by a genuine socialist
leadership, can avert a catastrophe that will threaten all of humanity.
"The designers of the Emancipation Statue in Lincoln Park in DC didn't take into account
the views of African Americans. It shows. Blacks too fought to end enslavement."
First, the statue was funded by donations from freedmen, gathered by members of the
Western Sanitary Society, an abolitionist-run organization. The impetus for the monument came
from a freedwoman named Charlotte Scott, who declared in the wake of Lincoln's
assassination:
"Colored people had lost their best friend on earth I will give five dollars of my wages
towards erecting a monument to his memory."
At least $16,000 was raised, including from African American Union soldiers who had fought
at some of the key fronts in the Civil War.
A description of the artist's design for the monument states: "In the original the
kneeling slave is represented as perfectly passive, receiving the boon of freedom from the
hand of the great liberator. But the artist has justly changed all this by making the
emancipated slave an agent in his own deliverance. He is represented as exerting his own
strength, with strained muscles, in breaking the chain which had bound him."
As the WSWS states, the reactionary interests of those bound up with the destruction of
these monuments today must, by definition "require a no less grotesque distortion of the
past."
This monument was created in 1876, at the height of the revolutionary-democratic upswell
known as Reconstruction. In attacking this monument, representatives of the ruling class
today, including its nominally "liberal" representatives, are seeking to topple the legacy of
a genuine multi-racial upsurge of the population against racial hatred and discrimination. In
today's case, it is to fundamentally hide the fact that the root cause of racial oppression
and racism lies in the depths of poverty and social inequality, and militarism on a massive
scale, that happens to characterize capitalism today.
In tearing down this statue, they will attempt to complete what the remnants of the slave
masters failed to do in the time of Reconstruction. Nathaniel Bedford Forrest would be
proud.
Trotsky: I believe that the first question is the attitude of the Socialist Workers Party
toward the Negroes. It is very disquieting to find that until now the party has done almost
nothing in this field. It has not published a book, a pamphlet, leaflets, nor even any
articles in the New International. Two comrades who compiled a book on the question, a
serious work, remained isolated. That book is not published, nor are even quotations from it
published. It is not a good sign. It is a bad sign. The characteristic thing about the
American workers' parties, trade-union organizations, and so on, was their aristocratic
character. It is the basis of opportunism. The skilled workers who feel set in the capitalist
society help the bourgeois class to hold the Negroes and the unskilled workers down to a very
low scale. Our party is not safe from degeneration if it remains a place for intellectuals,
semi-intellectuals, skilled workers and Jewish workers who build almost isolated from the
genuine mass. Under these condition our party cannot develop -- it will degenerate.
We must have this great danger before our eyes. Many times I have proposed that every member
of the party, especially the intellectuals and semi-intellectuals, who, during a period of
say six months, cannot each win a worker-member for the party, should be demoted to the
position of sympathizer. We can say the same in the Negro question. The old organizations,
beginning with the AFL, are the organizations of the workers' aristocracy. Our party is a
part of the same milieu, not of the basic exploited masses of whom the Negroes are the most
exploited. The fact that our party until now has not turned to the Negro question is a very
disquieting symptom. If the workers' aristocracy is the basis of opportunism, one of the
sources of adaptation to capitalist society, then the most oppressed and discriminated are
the most dynamic milieu of the working class.
Trotsky was writing as always to to align the subjective consciousness of the working
class with objective reality. The words you quote were written in April, 1939, when support
for mixed marriages was in the low single digits, when the experiences of integration in the
wars just about to begin had not yet occurred, when less than a quarter of the Great
Migration had concluded and thus few blacks and whites had yet had the opportunity to sort
out common cause in the great industrial struggles, as had already been illustrated in the
Flint sit-down strike where workers chose their only black fellow worker, Roscoe Van Zandt,
to lead them out of the occupied plants in a victory parade. Gallup would not even poll to
measure acceptability of a black presidential candidate for another 19 years, when the number
was a mere 38%.
That's the objective reality at the time with which Trotsky was seeking to align the
subjective consciousness of the working class to forge a political instrument.
Are you maintaining that the objective reality is unchanged today?
No that is not what I'm suggesting at all. Obviously much has changed since 1939.. we no
longer have sharecroppers and it's no longer the case where a major section of blacks work as
servants.. but it also easy to think that 1939 was "so long ago" and that these words no
longer hold any relevance. The black working class remains even today one of the most
oppressed sections of the working class and today large sections of this population are
entering into the class struggle. I think the party should consider the best way under TODAYS
CONDITIONS to recruit and educate those workers. Bring them under the banner of the 4th
international. Immigrant workers are a very similar case, and similar conditions exist for
unskilled workers compared to the various "professionals" and skilled labor. This era was
birthed from the yoke of the last. The working class is much more unified along race lines as
you have pointed out. That means we as revolutionaries we are in an even more favorable
situation to this work. It does not mean that the work is unneeded. This article states the
growing movements are under danger of being hijacked by reactionary petite bourgeois forces
and that is true but only as true as the revolutionary proletariats failure to bring these
working elements entering struggle under our banner. I do not suggest we adopt any program
from the 30s and 40s. I do however think the party could benefit from Trotsky's suggestion of
a 6 month worker recruitment rule.
Though not a party member I recommend George Breitman's writings on American Black
nationalism--as distinct from the narrow cultural nationalism of too many Black Panthers, the
New Black Panthers especially--expounding on and integrating pertinent thoughts of Malcom X
and Trotsky. Recently Vladimir Zhirinovsky suggested Blacks be assigned three states
bordering Canada as a homeland and/or go to Liberia. Needless to say such sweet revenge
dreams of Russian elites for the very real dismembering of their lands by Washington's ethnic
cleansing pot stirring a la Yugoslavia/Syria ad nauseam coming home to roost may approach
reality as the US rich find it hard to bottle their race genie.
"Before exhausting or drowning mankind in blood, capitalism befouls the world atmosphere
with the poisonous vapors of national and race hatred...
An uncompromising disclosure of the roots of race prejudice and all forms and shades of
national arrogance and chauvinism, particularly anti Semitism, should become part of the
daily work of all sections of the Fourth International, as the most important part of the
struggle against imperialism and war. Our basic slogan remains: Workers of the World
Unite!"
This article is critical in countering the dangerous communalist agenda of the social
layers seeking to prop up the Democratic Party and prevent the working class from achieving
its political independence. This is part of a trend that's taking place on every continent.
Our movement is leading the way in opposing this attempt to derail the emerging revolutionary
movement of the international working class.
The toppling of statues of progressive figures such as Lincoln is part of a broader attack
on rational thought. At stake is the entire progressive heritage of the Enlightenment and the
centuries-long struggle for social equality that, since the birth of scientific socialism in
the 19th century, has been embodied in the Marxist movement -- -today the Trotskyist
movement.
What do the forces who toppled the Lincoln statue have to say on pressing contemporary
issues such as imperialist war, climate destruction, extreme social inequality, etc. that
cannot be understood through racial theory.
Why is it that Abraham Lincoln was a symbol of the fight for equality and social justice
across the world? Why, during the American civil war, did workers' display such heroic
solidarity in enduring the cotton famine -- -which paralysed much of the cotton industry due
to the collapse in trade? Why did workers' in 19th century Manchester in northern England
collect the money to build a statue of Lincoln in their city? This article explains this:
How the British workers' movement helped end slavery in America .
In Britain, the IYSSE (UK) saw that identity politics and the historical falsification
associated with it was a direct attack on Marxism and workers' class consciousness that had
to be countered. We polemicise against the pseudo-left in their attempts to promote a
postmodernist re-writing of history motivated by the defence of their social privilege
against the long-term interests of the working class.
We attacked the "Decolonise Education" movement, which is raising its head again today in
the article
The racialist agenda of the "Decolonise Education" movement . We explained their slogan
"Why is My Curriculum White?" as follows: "The classification of philosophers based on their
skin colour, rather than their place in the historical development of human thought, is
combined with an attack on the entire progressive tradition of the Enlightenment."
I strongly encourage all class-conscious workers and young people to take up an active
study of history and the theory of Marxism which is essential to orient oneself in today's
complex and rapidly-changing world political situation
The campaign by the Stalinists against their opponents, Leon Trotsky constituting their
greatest enemy, involved the greatest wholesale destruction of history ever seen. The banning
of books, the murder of an entire generation of genuine Marxists and the greatest crime, the
assassination of Trotsky in 1940. Photos that included Trotsky, Kamenev, Zinoviev--pretty
much anyone who fell afoul of Stalin and the bureaucratic interests he defended--were
airbrushed out history with the intent to obliterate their role in the October revolution.
Their books were destroyed, any positive mention of them were eliminated and they were
slandered as "fascists", "Mensheviks", "counter-revolutionaries". No lie was too outrageous
in defaming Stalin's victims.
Vadim Ragovin, the great Russian historian once said that the "Russian people did not only
not know their future, they did not know their past." This falsification of history went far
in eliminating the Trotskyist alternative to Stalinism and enshrining Stalin--the gravedigger
of the revolution, the antithesis of Lenin--as the supposed incarnation of Bolshevik/Leninist
resoluteness.
The present campaign against Lincoln, Grant and others, is remarkable for the fact that
they are targeting revolutionaries. Bourgeois revolutionaries, but none-the-less,
revolutionaries. Those revolutionists carried out the greatest destruction of wealth,
slavery, to that point in history. No monuments to capital, such as the infamous Charging
Bull in front of Wall Street, (my city has a stack of oversized coins as a monument to
capital) have been the target of such vilification, vandalism or destruction by the
instigators of racialist politics. They indeed know what class they are oriented to.
My favorite Lincoln story took place shortly before his assassiation when the great
liberation army had captured the confederate capital of Richmond. Lincoln visited the city
shortly thereafter and walked around to have a look. An older Black man recognized him on the
street and ran up to him declaiming "The Messiah has come" and bowed down. Lincoln asked the
man to stand up saying: "Get up man. As long as I am president you don't need to bow to
anyone but God."
Yup. That one and and another one on the same trip.
In reference to you, colored people, let me say God has made you free. Although you have
been deprived of your God-given rights by your so-called masters, you are now as free as I
am, and if those that claim to be your superiors do not know that you are free, take the
sword and bayonet and teach them that you are ...
This is the man that malicious deluders contrive into an enemy of freedom and black people
and capitalist pawn. And there are dupes aplenty pulling down statues and presenting the same
old predigested delusional arguments, prepared for them by capitalist slavocrats, even
here.
Division does not have to be sewn into the working class. It is there as it has been for
centuries. "The color line" remains the border of divide between white workers and those of
color. What is most important is that millions of white workers have joined the struggle.
I too condemn the desecration of the statues and yes the identitarians and the Democrats
are riding the tide, attempting to bring the ships into the the harbor of electoral politics,
however equating this movement as "racial- communalist" is just as dangerous. The cops are
doubling down and people of color will remain the usual suspects. I have to think that the
32% of Trump supporters who supported the burning down of the police precinct in Minneapolis
were from it's working class wing. That is way significant.
Participation in the movement should always be critical but using the "racial-
communalist" term not good
The Democrats and the pseudo-left seek to undermine the legacy of the Civil War and the
related abolitionist and Underground railroad conductors precisely because it shows
workers (and middle class) collaborating across racial and ethnic "lines" towards positive
change, which helps solidify, rather than break up, an increasingly militant and working
class, which is increasingly coming into conflict with the whole capitalist system, which the
Democrats and pseudo-left rabidly defend. Workers of all races are shown daily working
together in protests against the police violence of the capitalist state, exploding daily the
myth of the "racist white working class". It is the duty of the socialist to oppose these
racial-communalist attempts to divide the working class by the bourgeois and
petty-bourgeois.
What's gonna happen as the economy continues to go down? It seems the ruling class did all
it could to send the working class down various blind alleys....now it's gonna come back,
through reactionary methods, to haunt everyone.
This is what I have to say about it all.....we asked the capitalist ruling class nicely to
make meaningful changes, the ruling class said they would. Nothing changed because they
lied.
So now, the working class is taking the matter into its own hands.....and it ain't gonna
look pretty. Heads are gonna roll.
Vast amounts of the working class have, over their lifetime, been manipulated by the
capitalist class.....so the working class is mostly confused and is in the process of lashing
out in all directions.
As hard as the wsws tried to fight against the liberal classes 1619 disinformation
project, many in the working class were not reached. That is the strength of anti working
class propaganda. And what Socialists are constantly fighting against.
As with the ethos of Capitalist Realism , it's easier to see the end of the world than to
see the end of capitalism.
This is an enormously important statement that deserves the widest possible international
readership. Particularly important is the section explaining the division of labor between
the capitalist parties. The fascistic filth emanating from the White House, scripted by
Stephen Miller and similar elements, is being "answered" by equally reactionary communalist
backwardness. The New York Times is the most consistent and determined purveyor of this, and
there seems to be no limit to how low they are prepared to go.
Another passage in this article that should get special attention is the timing of the
current campaign against Lincoln and others, "It is no coincidence that when American society
is straining under the weight of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has killed more than 120,000
people and sparked an economic crisis on the scale of the Great Depression, the Democrats are
ever-more ferociously seeking to make race the fundamental issue."
They are desperately working to divert the progressive but limited response to police
murders into the Democratic Party. They need to whip up as much tension and confusion within
the working class as they possibly can, precisely because they know what is coming over the
next few months, as millions confront additional mass layoffs, evictions and other attacks.
The more that workers and youth are fixated on "race" the less they are able to unite against
these threats of the pandemic, economic devastation and the threat of dictatorship.
Targeting "anti-Confederate" forces is just what you'd expect from the party of slavery,
Jim Crow, and now the no less despicable identity politics, not to mention it being the
oldest capitalist party in the world.
I can understand (but certainly not sympathize with) the twisted logic used against
statues of Grant and Lincoln but why Heg? Was it because he was white? I recall one of the
funeral rants of the Reverend Al Charleton about racism as "the DNA" in the American
character revealing the dangerous influence of the 1619 Project that may soon become
mandatory in colleges and schools.
Regrettably, there are otherwise sane people who genuinely argue that any statue depicting
any person who had white skin and a penis has to be taken down.
What a fantastic writing! The fight against communalism takes center stage for socialists.
The SEP is the the only genuine socialist tendency, defending historic gains as an
indispensable part of building a new working class counteroffensive. Please share this
document widely! Perspective is critical! Not one inch to the "lame liberals" and no
adaptation to racialist politics!
On the subject of "building a new working class counteroffensive", if I may:
The protests since May 25 have often begun peacefully only to be taken over by well-trained
violent actors. Two organizations have appeared regularly in connection with the violent
protests -- Black Lives Matter and Antifa (USA). Videos show well-equipped protesters
dressed uniformly in black and masked (not for coronavirus to be sure), vandalizing police
cars, burning police stations, smashing store windows with pipes or baseball bats. Use of
Twitter and other social media to coordinate "hit-and-run" swarming strikes of protest mobs
is evident.
What has unfolded since the Minneapolis trigger event has been compared to the wave of
primarily black ghetto protest riots in 1968. I lived through those events in 1968 and what
is unfolding today is far different. It is better likened to the Yugoslav color revolution
that toppled Milosevic in 2000.
America's Own Color Revolution
By F. William Engdahl
Region: Europe, USA
Theme: History, Intelligence, Police State & Civil Rights
Niles and David, as you note, "Whatever the particular issue may be -- poverty, police
brutality, unemployment, low wages, deaths caused by the pandemics -- it is almost
exclusively defined in racial terms."
And as you note of Trotsky, " The purpose of lies about history, as Trotsky explained, is
to conceal real social contradictions."
Which is exactly why this meta-causal cancer of the under-diagnosed Disguised Global Crony
Capitalist Empire must be fully exposed, expunged, and/or surgically and peacefully 'excised'
in a Third American "Revolution Against Empire" [Justin du Rivage] by 'we the American
people' firing a; loud, public, sustained, 'in-the-streets', but totally non-violent "SHOUT
(not shot) heard round the world" to ignite a Third American people's peaceful and complete
"Political/economic & socialist Revolution Against Empire" to lead the world toward
socialist democracy as our first one did in 1776 and our second one did in 1861 -- but
without the muskets.
One can only react with disgust and hatred for those in and around the Democratic Party,
who hiding behind the phrase "fight racism" are doing the exact opposite. The article is spot
on in exposing the sinister motives behind the attempt to erase from historical memory any
vestiges of this country's revolutionary past. As workers are risking their lives in the
assembly plants and warehouses, it is obvious whose interests are served by these outrageous
acts and proposals. Young people must reject those who spurn history. You must draw a line in
the streets against those who would do these things, and instead break out of the straight
jacket imposed by both capitalist parties and the media to keep these protests fixated on the
questions of "race".
Fellow Comrades the liberal bourgeois establishment in America are intentionally using
racial Communalist politics in order to divert the public from the growing class antagonisms.
Now one group is using ultra nationalism and authoritarianism as the only way forward while
the other one is using race and gender ideas as part of their orientation in this upcoming
elections. Basically they are both seeking to divide the working class along reactionary
slogans and agendas.
They are both working together to perpetuate the system and divide the people. They know
what they are doing. They are diverting any thought about changing the laws that allow the
oppression to begin with, here and abroad. We are doomed because the majority of people are
under their spell and have no desire to think critically.
This is a moving and brilliant defense of the revolutionary democratic foundations of the
United States, which provide an impulse today for the working class to carry out the third
American Revolution--the socialist revolution to put an end to capitalism as part of the
world socialist revolution. The American bourgeoisie very long ago repudiated the
revolutionary democratic ideals that inspired the American Revolution and the struggle of
Lincoln and the North in the Civil War. That repudiation finds expression today in the
denigration and attack on those revolutions and the figures who led them. As the Perspective
explains, there is a division of labor in this assault between Trump/Republicans and the
Democrats, but both have in common the fact that they utilize racialism to do its traditional
dirty work of seeking to divide the working class and undermine the class struggle against
capitalism.
Of particular importance, as noted by other commentors, is the following observation:
"This grotesque distortion of present-day reality required a no less grotesque distortion
of the past. For contemporary American to be protrayed as a land of relentless racial
warfare, it is necessary to create a historical narrative in the same terms. In place of the
class struggle, the entire history of the United States is presented as the story of
perpetual racial conflict."
Further down, the statement asserts: "Efforts to divert and sabotage that struggle by
dissolving class identity into the miasma of racial identity lead inexorably in the direction
of fascism."
In that connection, there is a parallel between the struggle being led by the SEP, WSWS
and ICFI against the promotion of racial-communalist politics and accompanying falsification
of history in the US and the struggle our movement has been and continues to wage in Germany
against the rehabilitation of Hitler and the Nazis by the ruling class and the falsification
of German and world history to declare the source of all the evils and catastrophes of the
20th century to be the October Revolution and establishment of the Soviet Union.
BG, the form in which these mass eruptions take in the states is, and has to be, different
than that of European and other countries.
Statutes have been desecrated and toppled elsewhere. Some deservedly without doubt.
For the mass of youth whose knowledge of historical events is one of great distortion and one
sidedness.
In their eyes, statues in major squares and other prominent places represent powerful and
powering pillars of the establishment. Hence the "senseless" vandalism.
Only those divorced from and hostile to the revolutionary aspirations of today's youth
fail to perceive and grasp that.
Thank you Niles and David for this excellent perspective. As you explain, a section of the
ruling class is attempting to hijack what is a progressive multi-racial movement opposing
police brutality and other forms of social injustice to promote reactionary racial and
communal politics in a desperate attempt to maintain the capitalist order. I strongly
encourage all of our readers to carefully study the material produced by the WSWS on the 1619
project. Understanding this history is critical in orienting ourselves to answer these new
racial attacks. Permit me to quote from the end of our analysis of the NY Times reply
defending the project to five historians, "As Marxists, we understand and have settled
accounts with the limitations of the bourgeois-democratic revolutions of the 18th and 19th
centuries. We know very well the difference between ideological rationalizations and
historically determined realities. But those who are not inspired by the world-historical and
universal ideals proclaimed by Jefferson's immortal Declaration and Lincoln's Gettysburg
Address are neither socialists nor revolutionaries. Those who glibly surrender positions won
through the shedding of blood in the past will never conquer new ones."
"The uncompromising defense of the progressive heritage of the first two American
revolutions is necessary for resisting intellectual retrogression and political reaction,
educating the working class, and, on that basis, building a powerful American and
international socialist movement."
What a wonderful article about our surreal times. I keep dreaming that I'm in a movie
theatre again and again which is strange because we can't go there anymore, at least not at
the time being. These times are so strange. For a memorial of Abraham Lincoln to be under
attack... this is something I could have never imagined a few years ago. Thank you Niles
Niemuth and David North for providing historical background about the statue, even a little
bit of history is such a profound thing and of course history is repurposed time and time
again to serve anyone's political agenda. Rage is not a particularly rational thing and takes
on incomprehensible forms.
"The Democratic Party employs another variant of communalist politics, evaluating and
explaining all social problems and conflicts in racial terms. Whatever the particular issue
may be -- poverty, police brutality, unemployment, low wages, deaths caused by the pandemics
-- it is almost exclusively defined in racial terms. In this racialized fantasy world,
"whites" are endowed with an innate "privilege" that exempts them from all hardship."
I think this is wrong. The Trump movement is defined by prejudice (banning muslims,
scapegoating immigrants, anti-black racism etc.) so for us to have a president right now, a
con artist (I'll emphasize the black community) who began his entire campaign by saying the
first Black president was not born in America, talking about how a black lives matter
protester attacked at his rally "should have been roughed up" in 2015, playing footsies with
the KKK, called Africa a "shit hole", Mike Pence comparing Donald Trump to Martin Luther King
Jr. etc. all of this snowballing into today of course people of color and anyone who
empathizes is outraged. Every day of this has been a dangerous embarrassment for the black
community.
Yesterday:
Fired Wilmington cop: "We are just going to go out and start slaughtering them f -- -- ni
-- –. I can't wait. God, I can't wait."
This kind of thing is going on all over the country. The most tangible issue is certainly
class in the sense I think it's the most practical thing for us to focus on, at least it's
all we can focus on because there's no rational way to end the racism that exists between
people, but at the same time, to think that any amount of money, healthcare, or well-being
for this person and his family would stop him from being prejudiced doesn't make sense. There
is a long history of racism and we are at a moment where America is undergoing a radical
shift in its diversity.
"In this racialized fantasy world, "whites" are endowed with an innate "privilege" that
exempts them from all hardship."
There have been 44 white male presidents.
Again, of course amongst white men class supersedes the identity group, but that being
said certainly there is such a thing as white privilege, in so many different ways, this
country was built to revolve around property owning white men. Donald Trump's presidency is
defined by this. If President Obama had done even one of the things Trump does on a daily
basis he would have never been president. That is white male supremacy. We went from
Republicans being critical of Michelle Obama for showing her shoulders as first lady to
having an ex-centerfold as first lady. The double standard couldn't be more apparent.
We have a republican party who yes have constituents who have suffered under the aegis of
neoliberalism but not disproportionately in comparison to the people who vote blue. Their
political movement is defined by prejudice. This is not a "racialized fantasy world" people
are under attack.
I agree that class is the salient issue but also at the same time as we're seeing with the
trump movement prejudice can be used to get people to vote blatantly against their own
interests in supporting a con artist. So how can class be addressed without first
acknowledging racism? I don't have the answers for this question, no one does. Hatred is a
bulwark which swaddles capitalism.
If you think class warfare is wrong, you are in the wrong website and have missed the
point of the article. When class war is initiated by the working class, liberation is on the
agenda.
Every time I think I cannot be more disgusted with the Democrats, I am wrong. There is a
certain slime that is all over the Democratic Party that eeven the Republicans cannot match.
I guess it never occurs to any of the protesters that destroying your history is creating a
form of collective amnesia. No notice is taken that what is happening witht this wonton
destruction of history sure looks a lot like what happened in Iraq during the U.S. Invasion
when many historical treasures of what was the cradle of civilization were either destroyed
or looted. Just a complete erasure of history and, of course, if you do not know who you are
because your memories, your history, have been erased, then how will you move forward? You
are a tabula rasa at that point so the future can only be met unprepared and with
trepidation.
That, as today's perspective explains, is exactly the point. Figures like Jefferson, Grant
and Lincoln (Lincoln!!!!) are shat upon and denigrated. No effort is made to understand them
as historical figures in the context of their epoch and the giants they are in world history.
What can we learn from them and other historical figures and do right where they went wrong?
I guess if history's destroyers have their way we'll not be able to learn anything at all.
Just as intended. I say let the statues be and down with the CCOOTs (Criminal Capitalists Of
Our Times)!
''This grotesque distortion of present-day reality requires a no less grotesque distortion
of the past. For contemporary America to be portrayed as a land of relentless racial warfare,
it is necessary to create a historical narrative in the same terms. In place of the class
struggle, the entire history of the United States is presented as the story of perpetual
racial conflict.''
A very profound encapsulation of what we are seeing going on now. As others have commented
, history does not travel on some moral straight line. Lincoln could not escape the powerful
contradictions of his time, he could only guide the progressive forces where he could.
It is not for us to idealise Lincoln, nor for those who do so in the negative. When push
comes to shove the reactionary essence of the racialists is that they offer no way out for
black or white . The ''purity of their outrage'' is nothing but a case of bad wind, and it is
not an accident that it comes from those orbiting the Democrats.
Good point about racialists offering no way forward for the whole working class,
nationally and internationally. How could the constricted racialist narrative, by dividing as
opposed to uniting, have anything to lend to progressive change, which can only be
accomplished through the unity of the working class and socialist revolution? How can the
legacy of racial oppression and discrimination, effecting most acutely the black masses as
opposed to the affluent African American layer, be overcome with this regressive co-option of
a progressive mass struggle that erupted in the past month?
Unmentioned in this critical call to arms by David and Niles is the role of the pseudoleft
in actively promoting this racialist campaign of vile and reactionary iconoclasm.
The pseudo-Trotskyist "Left Voice", co-thinkers of the Argentinian Morenoites, is
spearheading an attack from within the New York DSA against "class reductionism" purportedly
represented by Jacobin Magazine. This attack recently led to the cancellation of a live
streaming event featuring African American scholar, Adolph Reed. Reed, one of the scholars
interviewed by the WSWS in the campaign against the 1619 Project, was charged with "class
reductionism". The identity politics sensitive DSA, a club within the Democratic Party,
capitulated to the internal attacks and cancelled the event just as it was to begin.
Another pseudo-Trotskyist Facebook page yesterday attacked the WSWS and the SEP for its
"Hands off the Monuments" call. The Trotsky's Armored Train and rolling Pizzeria (?) Facebook
page, featured a screen shot of the WSWS with a warning to "Please stay away from the WSWS
and the SEP!" Site members followed with a lengthy thread of scurrilous attacks on both the
WSWS and the statues, especially the Jefferson Memorials. Jefferson is dismissed as a rapist
for his inter-racial relationship with the slave, Sally Hemings. This writer fought a rear
guard action on this site to combat the slander of the WSWS and to set the historical record
straight. Obviously these poseurs are very much afraid of the class perspective of the
WSWS.
Very interesting, especially concerning the "Left Voice" intervention in the New York DSA
and the DSA response. Well, Dr. Reed likely wouldn't have been much appreciated by that bunch
anyway, though he was
(along with all the learned, honest historians who came forward to conflict with the 1619
Project) greatly appreciated by WSWS readers. However, it would have been good if any
leftward moving workers and youth in attendance had some exposure to real history, including
a class based perspective. But, of course, the pseudo-socialst Dem club wouldn't want that!
By the way, my wife and I really found your contribution to the discussion of the previous
related Perspective by Tom and Niles of a few days ago quite enlightening on the plight and
response of the European indentured servants (slaves in all but name) on the Tidewater
tobacco plantations.
Yes, the "Jefferson was a rapist" trope is the common thread of the pseudo-left, fitting
right in with their support for MeToo and hostility to Julian Assange.
My goodness, not Moreno. So they are still about wouldn't have thought. He was, of all
things for Che Guevera, but not Castro, and led many youths to the early grave. Actually, the
Pabloists were big on Castro but not old Moreno who thought that Castro had Che killed and
the famous picture of Che's corpse on his ill-fated adventure doctored. Castro was not amused
and the Pabloists stopped dropping by/ He was allied with a dude called Posadas who
eventually got obsessed with inter-galacting communication from Bolsheviks in Outer Space. I
actually read article defending that nonsense in the Jacobin. The obscurantist have again
pushed themselves to the front.
I find at least Posadas was amusing in his somewhat more innovative ideas about
intergalactic travel and talking with dolphins. At least it follows a historical materialist
line which would say that productive forces can not be unleashed to their full potential
until the constraints of private mode of production, classes are abolished. Aliens,
theoretically and scientifically would and could exist given our own existence. Intergalactic
travel would be surely one of the most pressing issues of a worldwide socialist republic
after addressing earthly needs.
During the Russian Revolution peasants took to burning down the huge houses of the local
rich landowners.
The Bolsheviks had to intervene and patiently explain that these were now the property of the
working masses.
The peasants were of course almost universally illiterate.
It is probably more true to state that those that are desecrating and destroying statues
of Lincoln and others are miseducated.
This article is one of a series published by WSWS attempting to rectify these backward
destructive measures.
I don`t want to be annoying. It was bitter opponents of Lenin and the Bolsheviks , the
Social Revolutionaries, SR who led the peasants. The Bolsheviks had nothing to do with the
burning of mansions, and had no intention to stop the burning of mansions and seizure of
land. They formed strategically the worker-peasant alliance, but had insignificant influence
and numbers at this first stage of the revolution.. There were lot of troubles with the
SR`s-- and the peasants after.
I was not aware of suggesting the Bolsheviks had anything to do with the burnings. My
comment, bad grammar included, stated the Bolsheviks intervened to stop the arsonists.
The vast majority of peasants knew nothing of Bolshevism at the time.
It was the Bolsheviks agrarian program, which none of the bourgeois parties -- Cadets, SR --
could match in any shape or form, won the multimillioned peasantry to Socialist Revolution
under Lenin and Trotsky.
The vast majority of demonstrators across the global have not heard of WSWS or even the ICF,
yet alone be aware of its program. Dissemination of our program is a precursor to proletarian
revolution.
You miss the point. They are not so much miseducated as representing a definite social
layer. They reject the class basis of this racialist campaign, which is led by the New York
Times and Democratic Party to divide the working class. These forces seek to turn the
democratic sentiments and anger of young people in a reactionary form.
Note that they don't put forward any social demands, against the ravages of the lives of all
working class people created by the Pandemic and the economic crisis of the past decades.
Let us all get this article around as widely as possible, to wage a struggle against this
communalist attempt.
BLM demonstrators are heterogeneous in terms of race ethnicity, religion, age, but
undoubtedly predominantly youth. Every photograph has elucidated that.
I do not think I miss the point.
The pent up frustrations and anger following years of police violence, austerity, insecure
jobs, poor education and opportunities for youth is expressed in every street disturbance --
what the bourgeoise press calls senseless violence.
Undoubtedly elements amongst them are conscious of their actions, but for many the
opportunity to fight all that is perceived to be "part of the repressive state" cannot be
missed.
Being part of millions strong demonstrations has its own momentum. That scares the ruling
elite.
Destruction of statues is not just a US phenomenon, it is global.
It's not pretty, but it could be the opening shots of World Socialist Revolution.
We cannot impose our own values upon the masses.
What this and previous articles have set out to achieve, I believe, is to educate these
millions not to be mislead. Learn the lessons of history, lessons that capitalist education
has denied them.
WSWS has to intervene and direct these revolutionary stirrings away from identity politics
and to advance under the banner of the ICFI.
decades of undermining of class politics by Social democracy, trade unionism, Stalinism make
this a difficult task; difficult but not impossible.
That social layer is also well-organized and well-funded in varied salaried political
formations , including Black Lives Matter and those who would "occupy" space. They come out
of nowhere, disorient and as quickly disappear into profitable progressive Democratic Party
beds. Mayakovsky called them in a failing Russian Revolution under Stalin--" Bedbugs". Great
play..And so they are.
Please read this article and share widely. There is developing a tendency by the
Democratic party and Republican Party, for a fascist movement, in the US, and elsewhere
around the world. Only the working class can stop this rot, lead by the ICFI, SEP and
wsws.org .
This is one of the most direct and important WSWS perspectives I have ever read. It is
both a historical corrective and an impassioned warning to the working class in defense of
history, equality and any kind of democratic rule.
The freed slave depicted by Thomas Ball's statue "Lincoln the Emancipator" has the
likeness of Archer Alexander, a real slave who never actually met Lincoln, but freed himself
and was separated from his family in order to warn Union troops of Confederate sabotage. His
act of courage, and the hundreds of thousands of slaves who risked their lives during the
war, are also memorialized by this statue. It was commissioned based upon donations by
liberated slaves. Some of Alexander's descendants today oppose tearing down this statue,
whose complex history also reflects the struggles of Reconstruction in the aftermath of the
Civil War.
Within privileged layers of academia, the distortion of history and misrepresentation of
contemporary suffering by the global working class has become a major industry. Some
students, including those with genuine democratic intentions, are being seriously miseducated
and encouraged to participate in racially divisive politics. Students and workers need to
study history now more than ever, and it is no accident that America's leading historians of
the American Revolution and Civil War have sided with the WSWS in its defense of historical
truth (see the WSWS's writings on the 1619 project). The political perspective needed to end
police brutality and economic injustice requires an accurate appraisal of past struggles for
democratic rights, and today a unified struggle by not just the American but also the global
working class. Students and workers should take note.
"... Paul Craig Roberts is aware of false flags/staged events as he has written a number of articles about the 9/11 false flag. For some reason he has bought in to this George Floyd hoax ..."
"... "Peoples with a history of mutual distrust – i.e. mutual fear – have to take a real risk in order to even begin the process of growing mutual trust. Great discipline is required by all people on both sides for mutual trust to become possible. Mutual trust would need great discipline in perpetuity in order to be sustained. The harmful effect of instances of unworthiness of trust would need to be deeply understood." ..."
Floyd was collapsing before he even got out of his car, and I have seen video of Floyd
being uncooperative/complaining as the cops try to put him in the back of a squad car.
He overdosed on drugs–either out of panic or stupidity. When it comes down to it,
I've always said, ol' George his heart was just too darned big. That's what did him
in–his gigantic heart.
Excellent article, Dr. Roberts. Unless a mind has been trained to fully understand a
science, it likely lacks the cognitive thought to see clearly. Almost all people see the
world with a jumble of emotions and pseudo logic. They've never experienced the rigor of
theorem-based proofs, deductions, and the struggle to comprehend high-level thought. Almost
all adults live in a shallow world of mind drift, reacting to their emotions.
Paul Craig Roberts is aware of false flags/staged events as he has written a number of
articles about the 9/11 false flag. For some reason he has bought in to this George Floyd
hoax. The evidence is overwhelming that Floyd didn't die. They used a dummy with no legs, as
well as at least two different actors to play George Floyd. There is other evidence but that
should be enough. I'm disappointed in PCR.
"Peoples with a history of mutual distrust – i.e. mutual fear – have to take a
real risk in order to even begin the process of growing mutual trust. Great discipline is
required by all people on both sides for mutual trust to become possible. Mutual trust would
need great discipline in perpetuity in order to be sustained. The harmful effect of instances
of unworthiness of trust would need to be deeply understood."
Apparently, this comment was fished out of a time capsule from 1860.
@FB y
respiratory COVID-19 virus
– Autopsy results stating he died of cardio pulminary issues, not from being restrained
What do we have when putting all these points together?
The conclusion that the issues causing Floyd's death were present before excessive
restraint (he was firstly handcuffed) and that something prexisting was likely to blame.
Signs of a heart attack, that even a bystander remarked on, seem to highlight it was likely
that George Floyd was already in the process of dying as the police arrested him, not because
the police were arresting him.
If you are going to trust the word or investigations of anyone in the law enforcement
world, and that includes the coroners – just watch how the Ms Maxwell's case -- is
handled. The cop is guilty of manslaughter – just like you or I would be – had
you done this to Floyd.
@FB In
the previous 'article' we had the FALSE INFORMATION that the Hennepin County Medical Examiner
supposedly did not rule the death a homicide, when in fact he did only this is, as per
standard procedure, included in the death certificate, not the autopsy report
The autopsy was carried out on 26 May 2020 and signed 1 June 2020 by Dr Baker. He certifies
that there are no life-threatening injuries. So it cannot be used as the basis for an
allegation for homicide. This was released with the approval of Floyd's family. There has been
no second autopsy to contradict this, as shown by Dr Roberts.
If you look at the autopsy report ( link in previous article ), you will find in the
comments section that the ME Dr Baker found evidence of Sickle Cell Anaemia. The article in
Wikipedia is highly informative ( not always the case ).
In the Developed World, life expectancy is between 40 and 60. Floyd was 46
.
One complication is Acute Chest Syndrome
Acute chest syndrome is defined by at least two of these signs or symptoms: chest pain,
fever, pulmonary infiltrate or focal abnormality, respiratory symptoms, or hypoxemia.[25] It is
the second-most common complication and it accounts for about 25% of deaths in patients with
SCD. Most cases present with vaso-occlusive crises, and then develop acute chest
syndrome.[26][27] Nevertheless, about 80% of people have vaso-occlusive crises during acute
chest syndrome.
So on top of the serious heart diseases, the potentially fatal ( on its own ) fentanyl
level, it looks like you can add Sickle Cell anaenia as well.
I asked him why the fentanyl body count was so high, he just shrugged and said the street
fentanyl is poison. The DEA was then blaming it on "China" but there are reasons to doubt
anything coming from them. since they were also talking about "cheap Mexican heroin" which is a
CIA myth. What's next, Russian Quaalude?
When they reported speed, specifically meth, in Floyd's system that was enough to clinch it.
The man was mixing his stash.
All that's going to happen now is cops seeing anybody black having an OD will just go the
other way. Can't say as I'd blame them.
Will the country and the legacy of hard work, intense sacrifice, honesty and creativity of
the millions of people who built this country be ultimately destroyed by either
A. A large middle aged negro, who while he didn't do anything, did die with a belly full of
fentanyl while resting in the street with cops either restraining him or intent on killing
him
Or
B. A lovely 60-ish year old Jewess billionaire who ran an international blackmail ring for
everyone's greatest ally Israel, that exploited the bizarre and lurid sexual proclivities of
our ruling class
Same thing happened to Germany Germans were so propagandized and brainwashed after WW2 about
the War & the Holy Hoax, that they will kiss JooAss with both lips to avoid being punished
further for what they never did.
@lysias t
talking about possible fentanyl superman adds to the mix.
People who died from fentanyl overdose had readings from 0.75 ng/mL to an astounding 113
ng/mL. The average death dose was 9.96 ng/mL. According to George Floyd's toxicology report,
his blood contained 11.0 ng/mL Fentanyl, plus 5.6 ng/mL norfentanyl, 19 ng/mL of
methamphetamine, and three other drugs.
If he had survived that shit, he would above average on everything. It is quite likely that
he was way below average. Let's say 6 ng/mL would have been sufficient to send him ad
patres
What we are dealing with is not only the brainwashing of white students as to the evil
origin of their country and their inherited guilt, but also their inability to think
rationally and to make an objective conclusion from evidence.
I see that this article is not about the death of George Floyd, a tragedy, even if the usual
suspects are out and commenting their usual immovable opinions on that death.
Roberts is pointing out that no discussion is possible about this event. If George Floyd
came back from the dead and volunteered to give an interview alongside the police officers who
arrested him to explain what had happened, no one would listen. They SAW the video and formed
an emotional response. Facts are entirely irrelevant. One of the commenters above has already
taken that position. He said, following a more detailed article, "All you need to know is
what's on that video!"
Roberts blames the educational system and I've noticed that the more prestigious the degree
a young person has, the less able they are to engage in a rational discussion on any subject.
They look at you with this superior attitude, ready to spout some meaningless rejoinder like,
"OK Boomer," or "Do you still believe that?" As if truth were dependent on one's age or facts
are a matter of religious faith.
Are they being given mentally fatal doses of propaganda as they qualify for the better
schools or do the better universities have a selection system that singles out only those
already emotionally disassociated? That's where we are.
Why dont you write such titles in a medical magazine. Just like "Dr." Bill Gate of MS who
has been writing on vaccination in medical journals for past several years.
And we blame Americans are misinformed.
People who believe that suspected felons have the right to violently resist arrest or
otherwise obstruct the legitimate arrest process are anarchists who should own up to their
philosophy.
"None of the people watching the video had any awareness of any of the facts."
Ah, the "medical expert" pcr "proves" once again all the other medical experts are wrong and
Floyd did die of a drug overdose despite the heroic attempts of the sainted men in blue to
prevent his self initiated demise.
"The transcripts reveal that as the officers forced Floyd into the vehicle, the 46-year-old
black man said: "I can't breathe" and "I want to lay on the ground."
They reveal a lot more which roberts judiciously decided wouldn't help his spin about the
murder and didn't mention. Let's take a look at what else they reveal, shall we:
George Floyd warned police he thought he would die because he couldn't breathe, according to
body camera transcripts
@FB s.
You're arguing from literal survivorship bias, an obvious fallacy.
Also PCR is NOT a doctor, yet he makes doctor-like assertions about what is a 'fatal' dose
of fentanyl [actually all the medical literature says there is no MINIMUM fatal blood level
of fentanyl, because it depends on the tolerance of the user] and that Floyd was in the
'process of dying'
Either what PCR said is true, or it isn't, regardless of credentials. And the fact that
there is no minimum fatal blood level undermines rather than supports the case that St.
Fentanyl couldn't have died of a fentanyl overdose.
The little exculpatory evidence that has seen the light of day suggests the cops were trying
to figure out how to keep the guy alive. It seems that Black Felon Lives do indeed matter.
Anyone opening up a mouth about cops using their actions in this incident should consider
what they would do upon encountering someone with Fentanyl poisoning. In my experience, those
who get on a big talker high-horse wouldn't come to the aid of a drowning child.
This was a Perfect Storm. Someone took a heart-rending video of George Floyd's death, and
the Democrats and Allied Media ran with it because they're desperate to reverse POTUS Trump's
20% plus support with black voters. Add in the mass psychosis their lockdowns induced and we
were off to the races.
Here's my question. Should the clerk in the convenience store be brought up on charges of
accessory to murder for reporting the fake $20 and pointing out to the police the vehicle
George Floyd was sitting in?
You're just like black lives matter 'piling on' pitting one against the other. I wouldn't be
surprised if you were on their payroll.
The shills for destruction have no shame in their quest to divide and conquer. Thanks to your
help the Deep State is winning. Trump and his white patrons have a finite future in
America.
@FB gher
than the final lab results show. Fentanyl as an analgesic and especially as an additive to
general anaesthetics is applied in a controlled setting by highly trained anaesthesiologists.
It has a byphasic mode of action with a pronounced depression of the respiratory centre in the
first phase.
Its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic activity is greatly altered by age, race ( e.g. Asians
metabolize at a higher rate, Blacks at unpredictable rate etc), comorbidities (e.g. impaired
liver function, slow circulation syndrome), presence of other drugs (benzodiazepines,
metamphetamine etc).
Opiates including Fentanyl do not cause respiratory distress. There is no shortness of
breath or breathlessness. Opiates depress the area of the brain controlling respiration. They
will NOT complain of any breathing problems. The impetus to breathe is gone. They pass out and
die unless treated with an antagonist like Naloxone or ventilation is assisted or if the opioid
is miraculously metabolized prior to death. Direct injury to the lung from trauma, broken ribs,
infection, heart failure, being held in a stress position so the chest cannot expand, will
cause distress and the person will complain bitterly.
I know what I speak of: I have practiced emergency medicine for more than 40 years.
I agree. Thanks – your comment astounded me, because now – after the hundreds of
comment-pages I've read about this case, you are able to bring more new information here to the
public's eye.
Now I wait for someone to add these facts up – unz.com would almost do by itself, and write the book Sebastian Junger
did write about – – – – The Perfect Storm!
PS
(Would you know about the way in which the second autopsy was conducted? I remember having
read, it had been conducted by video – but I can't trace back just where I've read
this).
You are a complete ass. I hope one day someone as big and as black and as violent as Floyd,
all doped up on some dangerous drug, thumps you in the street. Buy it or dont buy it you will
lick the Cops balls to restrain him using any means. You are a moron !
However, for pretty much the same reasons, I am not inclined to believe he/they deliberately
intended to cause death, if that were the case they would have been more aware of
appearances.
I note that the police version of the incident has been suppressed to avoid "tainting a
potential jury pool" and "impair[ing] all parties' right to a fair trial," Given the massive
amount of one sided publicity given to the prosecution account, that decision is ridiculous.
Derek Chauvin has already been tried and convicted of murder in the media, a fair trial is
surely impossible anyway.
You have written a load of steamy horseshit. As Nick Stix alluded you must have pulled this
from a time bubble of 1860. In case you have not noticed we are now in 2020 with the Chimps
running out of control. Get real and dump all that brotherly love and cum bye ah.
I tell you what, the next time you are near to a ghetto, enter it and walk through it
shouting all the crap you have written above.
The one good thing that will come of your canter through the hood is that Unz will be one
idiot commenter less !
Well I also have another question for this Kouros dunderhead. He should try to subdue a
felonious monster as big as Floyd and with a history of violence and prison time. A pitiful
specimen like Kouros would be writing with a pen in his mouth, in his wheel chair while his
24/7 nurse changes his diapers.
This Kouros's comment was the most foolish I have ever read. He must be some kind of
simpleton or Chimp lover.
@Kouros
eos (none of us have) and believe "too (little) in the professionalism or well intentions of
the police." As others have noted, the missing bodycam videos should shed light on Floyd's
physical and mental state at the time he was being put in the police car.
PCR is examining evidence and noticing facts. You seem to be subject to the emotional
clouding of reason he is describing. To wit, making generalized statements without any factual
foundation to support what you "want to believe" is true.
PCR can now add you to the list of readers whose "opinions" rest upon emotion instead of
logic.
Agree. Here in NYC, there has been a big spike in men OD'ing on the street. I've noticed it
myself for some time (Frequently on subways) and have often wondered what cops would do in that
situation. The situation is fraught with risk.
The ruin of the productive American economy is the root cause of almost all social ills find
those who dismantled industries and exported jobs overseas, mainly to China, to punish them
severely, physically and financially to start remedy the nation or it's all lost.
The reason a patient wakes up after fentanyl anesthesia is that the anesthesiologist
supports the patient's breathing ( and other vital signs ) while under. If the doctor simply
walked away , the patient
would surely die. In fact, to treat a fentanyl overdose , one would mechanically support
breathing while reversing agent (narcan) takes effect.
Also, Floyd had potentially lethal dose of morphine (another narcotic)in his blood as well.
He also had methamphetamine and THC present which could have altered a classic narcotic
stuporous state with added agitation and delirium.
He had significant coronary artery disease which could have caused fatal arrhythmia under
stress of arrest or resisting arrest, hypoxia from respiratory depression from narcotics,
excitation from methamphetamine, or even by itself.Shortness of breath alone can be a symptom
of an impending heart attack without chest pain. Or chest pain could have been masked by
narcotic . People die of apparently unprovoked heart attacks and sudden arrhythmic deaths every
day.
There were no signs of brain ischemia or airway trauma.
Remember , one has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the officer killed Floyd. One
does not have to prove that Floyd died from drugs or heart disease, only that it was not
unreasonable.
It is clearly not unreasonable that he died from drugs/ heart disease instead of at the hands
of police.
Could things have been done differently that might have saved his life, in retrospect?
Maybe.
Perhaps narcan could have been given at the scene.
Remember, though, these are policemen with a person resisting arrest, not emergency room
physicians in a cooperative setting.
@MarkU g
Chauvin does not cut a deal and decides to go to trial and take his chances with a jury (or
judge).
However, what did Chauvin in, is exactly what you wrote. Maybe he is so jaded, or so had had
it with Floyd*, that he just didn't care anymore. His smirking face, with left arm nonchalantly
on his leg, while Floyd was dying – looks awful.
Damning optics, as they say.
________________________________________________
* Apparently Chauvin and Floyd worked as private security a while back at the same club. And
may have known each other. Imagine that.
May 27, 2020 New video shows Minneapolis police arrest of George Floyd before death
Four white officers involved in the death of George Floyd have been fired from the
Minneapolis Police Department, but Mayor Jacob Frey is saying that one of the officers should
be arrested for pressing his knee on Floyd's neck.
Cops are not diagnosticians. They are trained to react, not to conditions, rather how people
present. A diabetic slurring words and unsteady on his feet, due to low blood sugar, will be
suspected of being intoxicated. High blood sugar may make him appear violent.
Hindsight is 20/20. Cops are trained to react, not stand back and run 50 possible scenarios
through their heads before making an informed decision. If the cops were following protocol, they
are not "absolutely wrong". They would have been wrong not to follow protocol.
When in fact all doctors who have spoken about this have said Floyd showed NO SIGNS of
going into overdose,
Then those doctors are committing malpractice. Viewing a video taken many feet away from the
patient without interaction with the patient or someone with the patient does not qualify as
tele-medecine. No licensing body for physicians allows a diagnosis without examining the
patient or diagnostic tests on the patient. That would include you, if you are a physician.
Yes, he was saying he couldn't breath way before the knee was on his neck, and I'm convinced
the knee didn't kill Floyd, who died of (likely a combinations of) other reasons.
But when a man is subdued, and unresisting, and looking like he's increasingly placid, and
gasping that he can't breath, then if for no other reason, the simple optics, (knowing they
were being filmed), would have been a cue to get off his neck. Especially in our current
societal upheaval and hysteria over the deaths of some other black men- lied about in the
((media)) to make it look like they're all deaths by white racism.
They also started performing CPR once he became unconscious. So they provided him with all
the medical care they could and waited for the professionals to come and take him..
No, not according to the autopsy. And Jacob Frey is a soy boy Bolshevik, not a doctor or a
police officer. If he was doing his job he would know that the knee on the neck restraint is a
police department authorized technique and has been used hundreds of times. And was not the
cause of the thugs death.
@Kouros ot
on windpipe at all. A wrestling coach copied the exact maneuver for the same time to show it is
fairly harmless he was fired for it.
Officers are not chemists or doctors. They do not know what exactly is wrong with perps they
deal with. And they are not going to risk themselves or public if they can help it while
bringing them in. Ridiculous to think they should be goving medical doses. Blacks will riot
over anything: racial profiling, police abuse, overdoses by police, Fredric Douglass statues,
etc
Case Reports Chest
. 2013 Apr;143(4):1145-1146. doi: 10.1378/chest.12-2131.
Fentanyl-induced Chest Wall Rigidity
Başak Çoruh 1, Mark R Tonelli 2, David R Park 2
Affiliations expand
PMID: 23546488 DOI: 10.1378/chest.12-2131
Abstract
Fentanyl and other opiates used in procedural sedation and analgesia are associated with
several well-known complications. We report the case of a man who developed the uncommon
complication of chest wall rigidity and ineffective spontaneous ventilation following the
administration of fentanyl during an elective bronchoscopy. His ventilation was assisted and
the condition was reversed with naloxone. Although this complication is better described in
pediatric patients and with anesthetic doses, chest wall rigidity can occur with analgesic
doses of fentanyl and related compounds. Management includes ventilatory support and reversal
with either naloxone or a short-acting neuromuscular blocking agent. This reaction does not
appear to be a contraindication to future use of fentanyl or related compounds. Chest wall
rigidity causing respiratory compromise should be readily recognized and treated by
bronchoscopists.
About 25 years ago, I was chatting with an older acquaintance, who was a retired railway
labourer, about the economic fraud being perpetrated on the public. He said 'It doesn't take a
big education to see what is going on in this country. My three boys are in university. It seems
the more they learn, the less they understand.' One of the boys was in accountancy, another in
business. The third dropped out of university, took up a trade, and the last I heard, didn't have
much to do with his brothers. The two university grads still believe in the mystical "market
forces".
The death of St. Floyd is a stunt. The ruling banking cabal made a decision: time to start a race riot. They made a video and
activated their communist agents in BLM and Antifa to begin the riots.
The Communism that the Jewish overlords are attempting to impose on America has nearly 0%
popular support. They have spent decades trying to embitter blacks and still haven't really
gathered much in terms of a revolutionary cadre. Nevertheless, they are moving into active
insurgency mode and have many major corporations backing their play. They have no hopes of success without disarming America. Good luck with that Jews. They continue to expose themselves to more and more 'normies' while confirming many of the
already aware's worst suspicions. They won't be happy until they impose one gov't, one religion
(satanic) and one currency (bogus). I'm really looking forward to treason trials. At some point, it will become unstoppable.
@vot tak
y, the coroner, in your opinion, is not a medical expert, despite having dissected Floyd's body
and ordered testing on body fluids. It would seem the second pathologist signing off on the
coroner's report isn't an expert either. However, the medical experts, who have never seen
George Floyd in person, spouting off about their theories, are more credible than those who
examined the body and reviewed the autopsy report before it was released.
Did you miss the number of times in the body cam transcript that the cops asked Floyd if he
was "on" something and what it was? If the dumbshit had told them, he might have survived.
Direct injury to the lung from trauma, broken ribs, infection, heart failure, being held
in a stress position so the chest cannot expand, will cause distress and the person will
complain bitterly.
None of which were present in Floyd's case according to the autopsy report.
If Floyd had died in New York , I'm certain his death certificate would simply have read,
cause of death: covid19. When you watch the plane crash investigation shows on tv and they
trace the disaster backwards to a determining event, here you go back and see that Floyd would
be alive today if he had said no to drugs. Take drugs, shorten your life. Simple as that.
Certainly blame the cops, his parents, maybe even society but if a grown man doesn't respect
his own body then nobody else will. Maybe the only way to solve these types of deaths is to
have trained medicos travelling constantly in tandem with the cops. But what is the cost
benefit.
And concerning a knee to the throat, I know I would not last eight minutes, let alone half that
if someone kneeled on my throat. I still can't believe that people think that a knee to the
neck killed Floyd.
Working with the scum of society rubs off on cops eventually, and Chauvin seems no different
than a lot of others, but here it appears that he and his colleagues were doing everything
right by the book. Maybe those baying for blood need to look elsewhere, perhaps higher up in
officialdom. Condemning the cops for doing the right thing seems very harsh.
Thank you for this article. I also appreciate the running commentary on the state of
American education. Although you have me by two decades, we both come from a place where we
were taught to think rather than emote. You say it so well in the following excerpt.
This perversity of education spells the end of the United States. The kind of people American
education is producing are not capable of scientific thinking. The kind of education Americans
receive today cannot produce scientists or engineers. We have the emotive generation, people
trained to be guided by emotion.
The inability of American education to produce people capable of thought is already our
reality.
I have found that lack of logic and inability to think in a linear fashion is passed off as an
artistic temperament. If that isn't a line of bunk I don't know what is.
I think this will become the central issue of the trial.
As this video illustrates, there is overwhelming evidence that police departments in the US
have become increasingly militarized by receiving training from the Israeli military.
Yes, there might be difficulty in restraining a big fella. There were at least four police
officers in the proximity, and while there was a bit of a struggle, it wasn't something to
difficult to handle.
never considered that the police was onto killing George Floyd.
Nobody, nobody commented on the issue of police not being trained and equipped to deal with
overdosed people, especially opioid overdoses. Being able to provide quick help is essential
and other jurisdictions have enabled police with syringes with Naloxone and try to use those
rather than tasers or guns.
"And then there are the many readers for whom it is of the utmost emotional importance that
Floyd was murdered by white police for racist reasons. These readers are immune to all facts.
One told me that fentanyl is not toxic. Another told me that it is not possible to overdose on
fentanyl. Yet another told me that the medical examiner is white and his report is a racist
report. Another asked me when did I become a racist.
In other words, they only want to hear what they have been brainwashed to believe. Facts
have no importance to them. Indeed, there are no facts, only emotional responses, and they are
indoctrinated with the emotional response that is valid. As long as the response is anti-white,
it is valid."
I ran into just this the other day with my relation to a Leftist organization I had
volunteered to do some technical work for. The group originally appeared to be a legitimate and
more open Left organization than I have seen in recent years. But in the end they were as close
minded as any other such group.
I tried to present Dr. Roberts' findings to them on this subject not to convince anyone of
its legitimacy but simply as a different perspective to be considered. I even did some research
on Dr. Roberts' earlier article on this subject regarding the existence of a second autopsy.
Using an article from the Daily Kos, a Left leaning rag, that promoted the existence of this
second autopsy I looked at the links they provided to only find that they pointed to the very
original autopsy report that Dr. Roberts provided in his original essay on this matter. So much
for journalistic integrity.
When posted to this Left organization's chat board for consideration, no one wanted to hear
of it. All they cared about was Floyd was dead and that was all that mattered. I tried to
explain that it did very much matter, considering that Floyd's death sparked so much outrage
and national trauma, somehow transforming him into some type of martyr.
Yet, again, people asked why I was posting such information when the matter was implicitly
settled.
One leader of the organization told me to stop posting such "Right-wing crap" or I would be
removed (cancelled). I told her to go ahead and remove me, which she promptly did.
Though I agree with the general grievances of The Left, this side of the political spectrum
appears to be populated with very immature adults and even more ignorant younger people not to
say the least of all the various proponents of their biological victimhood. They have no sense
of honest, historical relevance to anything they do and really don't care. As long as things
conform to their very limited world view, they are satisfied.
Though I tend to be somewhat conseratative with my opinions on things, I could hardly be
considered Right-wing in my views. But I do insist on historical honesty for our past and our
current events (which means legitimate debate on such matters). But The Left will never yield
on this, which makes them I believe as dangerous as the extreme Right
@FB ost
safe and effective control measure or therapy for what is most likely an extremely agitated
patient."
-- "There are well-documented cases of ExDS deaths with minimal restraint such as handcuffs
without ECD use. This underscores that this is a potentially fatal syndrome in and of itself,
sometimes reversible when expert medical treatment is immediately available".
@KenH
ersities have besmirched the founding of America and its history until 1965 along with blood
libeling the white population.
Yep . but it is longer than decades, because owning the press/narrative is part of Jewish
evolutionary method. Jewish usurpation via press and book publishing, goes back in time even
further than 150 years as discussed by Luther Pierce in link below.
Kouros has gone to a great deal of trouble to remain totally uninformed:
From the newly-released transcripts that are part of a legal filing by Lane's attorney, Earl
Gray, who has requested that the Hennepin County District Court dismiss the case against his
client:
The transcripts reveal that as the officers forced Floyd into the vehicle, the 46-year-old
black man said: "I can't breathe" and "I want to lay on the ground."
@FB on't
need a pathologist, you need a biologist.
I am Floyds size, even bigger actually. Did you ever look at Floyd's neck muscles?. He's got
a pretty solid well muscled neck, and I wouldn't want to tangle with him. (I have fought big
men, and it is not fun.)
The windpipe runs down the middle of your neck and is flanked by muscles on the side.
I've pressure tested my neck, and while it is uncomfortable It can take considerable
pressure when said pressure is delivered from the side. I can still breath with side
pressure.
It is easy to brainwash people, which is PCR's argument.
He was
on his stomach because nausea is one result of fentanyl overdose and the police did not want
Floyd choking to death on his own vomit.
So many commentators who hide behind false names are incapable of reason and simply
emote.
They are narcissists and it makes them feel good to denounce people who know a lot more than
they do. Some are also self-righteous and enjoy engaging in ignorant moral denunciation.
"A picture is worth a thousand words." And the picture Americans saw was interpreted for
them by a dishonest media. Their ignorance of anatomy made it easy for the presstitutes to
deceive them.
Some commenters have asked for references in the literature for the point I made about
surviving overdose at far higher fentanyl levels than that in Floyd's blood toxicology
report
Here is a paper by a group of physicians who treated 18 fentanyl overdose patients in about
a one week period in 2016 only one out of the 18 did not survive
All 18 patients tested positive for fentanyl in the serum. Quantitative assays conducted
in 13 of the sera revealed fentanyl concentrations of 7.9 to 162 ng/mL (mean=
52.9 ng/mL)
Note that highest number is FIFTEEN TIMES Floyd's blood level the mean [average] of all
those patients is about 53 ng/ml about FIVE times Floyd's level
So clearly a lot of people have survived a dose of fentanyl much higher than George Floyd
this medical data immediately invalidates the very notion that a number like 11 mg/ml is de
facto a 'lethal' dose clearly it's not
And again I stress in the entire medical community NOT ONE DOCTOR has come out and said
Floyd died of an overdose is the entirety of medical science completely ignorant ?
Or is it the case that a bunch of completely unqualified people are googling the internet
for medical literature [which any doctor will tell you requires a level of expertise to put
into proper context] and pulling numbers willy nilly, and then simply making doctor-like
pronouncements ?
Please find one single pathologist or emergency doctor who will say that Floyd died of an
overdose
If and when you do so, then we can start having an intelligent discussion until then this
kind of discussion is just pure nonsense
@FB What
is used in patients, who were chronic high dose users to put them under? Different drugs and
modulators.
I am not sure if Naloxone, if applied immediately in Mr. Floyd's case could change the outcome,
given that he had other serious comorbidities, possibly pulmonary complications of COVID
infection and high stress of the arrest, as shown in the video.
It is a probably a case of
gross medical negligence, leading to the fatal outcome, although, I am not sure how much we can
expect from police in this regard. It needs proper investigation and establishing the causality
of each factor and cofactors.
"... Then in June 2020, he forced the resignation of James Bennet , editor of the NYT 's op-ed page. Why? Because they carried an opinion piece by the Republican senator Tom Cotton which argued that demonstrations which turned violent should be met with "an overwhelming show of force" – a phrase that caused outrage among some of the staff. Bennet had been tipped as the future Editor of the New York Times . Now he was out the door. ..."
"... Journalism, in the protesting staffs' view, must conform to novel, liberal verities, which include the protection of audiences from material seen as hurtful, even dangerous. The view of John Stuart Mill in On Liberty (1859) – "to utter and argue freely, according to conscience"- is now discarded in many parts of the cultural landscape . The sharpening of one's own convictions by setting them against opposing opinions would now, under this approach, be impossible. ..."
"... Part of this may be the phenomenon which Jonathan Swift noted when he wrote that "you cannot reason someone out of something that he or she was not reasoned into": that views held because fashionable, or approved by one's circle, or regarded as morally beyond question, are sometimes too shallow to be able to sustain argument. Dogmatic positions adopted with little thought except for signaling virtue often collapse when questioned hard. ..."
"... A letter signed by prominent writers, scholars and others organized by Harper's Magazine on July 7 – " On Justice and Open Debate " – noted that "it is now all too common to hear calls for swift and severe retribution in response to perceived transgressions of speech and thought. More troubling still, institutional leaders, in a spirit of panicked damage control, are delivering hasty and disproportionate punishments instead of considered reforms". ..."
"... The concession to staff protests in the great New York titles and the punishments to Buruma and Bennet were "hasty and disproportionate". These journals stood as examples to others: their example has been weakened. Journalists have been trained to keep an open mind to all events they chronicle, conscious of their complexity: and to listen to and allow space for views which are far from their own. That tradition is not past its useful life. ..."
In 2018, David Remnick, editor of the New Yorker and Pulitzer Prize-winning author,
cancelled a public interview with Steve Bannon, a former senior adviser to President Donald
Trump, which he had organised for the magazine's annual festival. Several staff members had
complained and two or three participants in the festival had said they would withdraw if Bannon
appeared . Two of the magazine's most distinguished writers, Malcolm Gladwell and Lawrence
Wright, strongly criticised Remnick's decision: " journalism is about hearing opposing views" ,
said Wright. Gladwell noted that " If you only invite your friends over, it's called a dinner
party ". The episode was a worrying sign of things to come.
In 2019, New York Review of Books publisher Rea Hederman – who has a proud history of
anti-racism – fired Ian Buruma, editor of the Review for only sixteen months, after
pressure from the staff . Buruma's crime? He had printed an essay – 'Confessions of a
Hashtag' by Jian Ghomeishi, a former Canadian Broadcasting radio host, who had been accused of
violence to around twenty women, but had been recently acquitted in a case brought by some of
them. Ghomeishi's piece, which addressed these accusations, was deemed to be out of step with
the spirit of the #MeToo movement. That the next issue of the NYRB was to devote a large amount
of space to rebuttal was not enough to save Buruma.
A G Sulzberger had, in his apprentice journalist years, used relentless coverage to force a
Lion's Club in Narragansett to reverse its decision to bar women, and revealed misconduct in an
Oregon sheriff's office, causing his resignation. He took over as publisher of the New York
Times in 2018, the sixth Sulzberger to take that position: he strongly criticized President
Trump, in an Oval Office meeting, for calling the Times "treasonous" and rendering journalists'
work more dangerous.
Then in June 2020, he forced the resignation of James Bennet , editor of the NYT 's op-ed
page. Why? Because they carried an opinion piece by the Republican senator Tom Cotton which
argued that demonstrations which turned violent should be met with "an overwhelming show of
force" – a phrase that caused outrage among some of the staff. Bennet had been tipped as
the future Editor of the New York Times . Now he was out the door.
In each case, the main actors were men I admired – Hederman and Sulzberger by
reputation, Remnick (whom I met when we were both correspondents in Moscow) by his writing and
editing. They had faced difficult decisions, made enemies and hard choices. In each case, the
men worked for a journal with a history of innovative, no-hold-barred criticism of the
powerful.
And in each case, they had folded because of pressure from the staff – pressure which
stemmed from an article or an event the complainants deemed unsuitable for any audience. For
those staff, opinions they dislike are seen as intolerable in a publication on which they work.
A red line had been crossed.
Journalism, in the protesting staffs' view, must conform to novel, liberal verities, which
include the protection of audiences from material seen as hurtful, even dangerous. The view of
John Stuart Mill in On Liberty (1859) – "to utter and argue freely, according to
conscience"- is now discarded in many parts of the cultural landscape . The sharpening of one's
own convictions by setting them against opposing opinions would now, under this approach, be
impossible.
Part of this may be the phenomenon which Jonathan Swift noted when he wrote that "you cannot
reason someone out of something that he or she was not reasoned into": that views held because
fashionable, or approved by one's circle, or regarded as morally beyond question, are sometimes
too shallow to be able to sustain argument. Dogmatic positions adopted with little thought
except for signaling virtue often collapse when questioned hard.
What's to be done about this? First, the phenomenon itself has to be held up to the light as
much as possible. If, as I suspect, much of it is loudly proclaimed but lightly ingested,
argument and debate has to be brought to bear. The best argument remains Mill's: that opinions,
many of them having to do with central issues of our time, are too important not to be
challenged, worked over, considered anew and either strengthened or weakened – and, in
the latter case, either modified or discarded.
Journalism needs now, more than ever, to build debate and contestation into news media
worlds. The challenge is to rediscover the fundamentals of journalism – without which it
ceases to be a necessary pillar of democratic, civic societies: in short, journalism needs to
rediscover a belief in the fact of facts, and in the plurality of opinion. No liberal would for
a moment agree that criticism of President Trump, distasteful to his supporters, should be
censored.
Editors' mission is to insist that, barring the dangerous extremes, all opinions deserve
airing and contesting, just as all facts deserve to be checked and given context . Those in
journalism who object to views in their journal, channel or website must accept that the robust
clash of beliefs remains a necessary insurance against enforced conformity, and indeed
reaction. In a society built on diverse ways of looking at the world, some upset on seeing or
reading an account or a conviction which strongly contradicts your own has to be borne,
considered and where possible replied to, not shut down.
A letter signed by prominent writers, scholars and others organized by Harper's Magazine on
July 7 – " On Justice and Open Debate "
– noted that "it is now all too common to hear calls for swift and severe retribution in
response to perceived transgressions of speech and thought. More troubling still, institutional
leaders, in a spirit of panicked damage control, are delivering hasty and disproportionate
punishments instead of considered reforms".
The concession to staff protests in the great New York titles and the punishments to Buruma
and Bennet were "hasty and disproportionate". These journals stood as examples to others: their
example has been weakened. Journalists have been trained to keep an open mind to all events
they chronicle, conscious of their complexity: and to listen to and allow space for views which
are far from their own. That tradition is not past its useful life.
John Lloyd is a Contributing Editor to the Financial Times, ex-editor of The New Statesman
and a co-founder of the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism at the University of
Oxford.
This is about a new generation of Red Guards, not so much about watching Bruce Springsteen
And Dionne Warwick Be Pelted With Dogshit For Singing We Are the World
Notable quotes:
"... This Marxian denunciation of the defense of free speech as cynical capitalist ruse was brought to you by the same Ezra Klein who once worked with Yglesias to help Vox raise $300 million . This was just one of many weirdly petty storylines. Writer Thomas Chatterton Williams, who organized the letter, found himself described as a " mixed race man heavily invested in respectability politics ," once he defended the letter, one of many transparent insults directed toward the letter's nonwhite signatories by ostensible antiracist voices. ..."
"... The whole episode was nuts. ..."
"... In this conception there's nothing to worry about when a Dean of Nursing at the University of Massachusetts-Lowell is dismissed for writing "Black Lives Matter, but also, everyone's life matters " in an email, or when an Indiana University Medical School professor has to apologize for asking students how they would treat a patient who says 'I can't breathe!' in a clinical setting, or when someone is fired for retweeting a study suggesting nonviolent protest is effective. The people affected are always eventually judged to be "bad," or to have promoted "bad research," or guilty of making "bad arguments," etc. ..."
"... In this case, Current Affairs hastened to remind us that the people signing the Harper's letter were many varieties of bad! They included Questioners of Politically Correct Culture like "Pinker, Jesse Singal, Zaid Jilani, John McWhorter, Nicholas A. Christakis, Caitlin Flanagan , Jonathan Haidt, and Bari Weiss ," as well as "chess champion and proponent of the bizarre conspiracy theory that the Middle Ages did not happen, Garry Kasparov," and "right wing blowhards known for being wrong about everything" in David Frum and Francis Fukuyama, as well as -- this is my favorite line -- "problematic novelists Martin Amis, Salman Rushdie , and J.K. Rowling." ..."
"... Where on the irony-o-meter does one rate an essay that decries the "right-wing myth" of cancel culture by mass-denouncing a gymnasium full of intellectuals as problematic? ..."
"... Mao and his Red Guard invented cancel culture. This is the Chinese cultural revolution American style. Same ****, just round eyes instead of slant eyes. ..."
Any attempt to build bridges between the two mindsets falls apart, often spectacularly, as
we saw this week in an online fight over free speech that could not possibly have been more
comic in its unraveling.
A group of high-profile writers and thinkers, including Pinker, Noam Chomsky, Wynton
Marsalis, Salman Rushdie, Gloria Steinem and Anne Appelbaum, signed a letter in Harper's calling for
an end to callouts and cancelations.
"We refuse any false choice between justice and freedom," the authors wrote, adding, "We
need to preserve the possibility of good-faith disagreement without dire professional
consequences."
This Hallmark-card-level inoffensive sentiment naturally inspired peals of outrage across
the Internet, mainly directed at a handful of signatories deemed hypocrites for having called
for the firings of various persons before.
Then a few signatories
withdrew their names when they found out that they would be sharing space on the letterhead
with people they disliked.
"I thought I was endorsing a well meaning, if vague, message against internet shaming. I did
know Chomsky, Steinem, and Atwood were in, and I thought, good company," tweeted Jennifer Finney
Boylan, adding, "The consequences are mine to bear. I am so sorry."
Translation: I had no idea my group statement against intellectual monoculture would be
signed by people with different views!
In the predictable next development -- no dialogue between American intellectuals is
complete these days without someone complaining to the boss -- Vox writer Emily VanDerWerff
declared herself literally threatened by
co-worker Matt Yglesias's decision to sign the statement. The public as well as Vox editors
were told:
The letter, signed as it is by several prominent anti-trans voices and containing as many
dog whistles towards anti-trans positions as it does, ideally would not have been signed by
anybody at Vox His signature on the letter makes me feel less safe.
Naturally, this declaration impelled Vox co-founder Ezra Klein to take VanDerWerff's side
and publicly denounce the Harper's letter as a status-defending con.
"A lot of debates that sell themselves as being about free speech are actually about power,"
tweeted
Klein, clearly referencing his old pal Yglesias. "And there's a lot of power in being able to
claim, and hold, the mantle of free speech defender."
This Marxian denunciation of the defense of free speech as cynical capitalist ruse was
brought to you by the same Ezra Klein who once worked with Yglesias to help Vox raise $300
million . This was just one of many weirdly petty storylines. Writer Thomas Chatterton
Williams, who organized the letter, found himself described as a " mixed race man heavily
invested in respectability politics ," once he defended the letter, one of many transparent
insults directed toward the letter's nonwhite signatories by ostensible antiracist voices.
The whole episode was nuts. It was like watching Bruce Springsteen and Dionne Warwick be
pelted with dogshit for trying to sing We Are the World .
This being America in the Trump era, where the only art form to enjoy wide acceptance is the
verbose monograph written in condemnation of the obvious, the Harper's fiasco inspired multiple
entries in the vast literature decrying the rumored existence of "cancel culture." The two most
common themes of such essays are a) the illiberal left is a Trumpian myth, and b) if the
illiberal left does exist, it's a good thing because all of those people they're
smearing/getting fired deserved it.
In this conception there's nothing to worry about when a Dean of Nursing at the University
of Massachusetts-Lowell is dismissed for writing "Black Lives Matter, but also,
everyone's life matters " in an email, or when an Indiana University Medical School
professor has to
apologize for asking students how they would treat a patient who says 'I can't breathe!' in
a clinical setting, or when someone is fired for
retweeting a study suggesting nonviolent protest is effective. The people affected are
always eventually judged to be "bad," or to have promoted "bad research," or guilty of making
"bad arguments," etc.
In this case, Current Affairs hastened to remind us
that the people signing the Harper's letter were many varieties of bad! They included
Questioners of Politically Correct Culture like "Pinker, Jesse Singal, Zaid Jilani, John
McWhorter, Nicholas A. Christakis, Caitlin
Flanagan , Jonathan Haidt, and Bari Weiss ,"
as well as "chess champion and proponent of the bizarre conspiracy theory that the Middle Ages
did not happen, Garry Kasparov," and "right wing blowhards known for being wrong about
everything" in David Frum and Francis Fukuyama, as well as -- this is my favorite line --
"problematic novelists Martin Amis, Salman
Rushdie , and J.K. Rowling."
Where on the irony-o-meter does one rate an essay that decries the "right-wing myth" of
cancel culture by mass-denouncing a gymnasium full of intellectuals as problematic?
How long before Tiabbi is forced into a life of dumpster diving. I am pretty sure his
world is rocking right now but free speech needs all of the defenders it can get.
Jackprong , 7 minutes ago
They're even throwing Orwell to the dogs! They have no shame!
Secret Weapon , 10 minutes ago
Mao and his Red Guard invented cancel culture. This is the Chinese cultural revolution
American style. Same ****, just round eyes instead of slant eyes.
Justus_Americans , 13 minutes ago
The Overton Window The Illusion Of Choice Free Speech Respectful Discourse The Best
Interests of USA
" The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of
acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum—even encourage
the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there's free thinking
going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the
limits put on the range of the debate " Noam Chomsky
"... As we highlighted yesterday , 150 intellectuals, authors and activists including Noam Chomsky, Salman Rushdie and JK Rowling signed the letter, which was published by Harpers Magazine. ..."
"... The letter criticized how "the free exchange of information and ideas, the lifeblood of a liberal society, is daily becoming more constricted" as a result of "an intolerance of opposing views, a vogue for public shaming and ostracism, and the tendency to dissolve complex policy issues in a blinding moral certainty." ..."
Some of the public figures who signed an open letter decrying the rise of cancel culture retracted their support, presumably fearing
they too might become a victim of it.
As we
highlighted
yesterday , 150 intellectuals, authors and activists including Noam Chomsky, Salman Rushdie and JK Rowling signed the letter,
which was published by Harpers Magazine.
The letter criticized how "the free exchange of information and ideas, the lifeblood of a liberal society, is daily becoming
more constricted" as a result of "an intolerance of opposing views, a vogue for public shaming and ostracism, and the tendency to
dissolve complex policy issues in a blinding moral certainty."
"Editors are fired for running controversial pieces; books are withdrawn for alleged inauthenticity; journalists are barred
from writing on certain topics; professors are investigated for quoting works of literature in class; a researcher is fired for
circulating a peer-reviewed academic study; and the heads of organizations are ousted for what are sometimes just clumsy mistakes,"
states the letter.
Following its publication and pushback from leftists, some of the signatories caved and publicly withdrew their support.
... ... ...
Vox journalist Matt Yglesias was also reported to his own employers by a transgender colleague because she claimed his support
for free speech and his association with JK Rowling was an 'anti-trans dog whistle'. (tweet since deleted)
Is it any wonder that free speech is in such dire straits when this is the reaction to a letter that simply expresses support
for it?
* * *
My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL
that you support me. Please sign up for the free newsletter here . Donate
to me on SubscribeStar here . Support my sponsor –
Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.
Demeter55 , 41 minutes ago
Such cowardice! They put Joseph McCarthy's victims in heroic contrast to their stupid selves.
Ohiolad , 1 hour ago
We have never seen the degree of cowardice that we are now seeing from the so-called "intellectual" class. How can these people
be so spineless?
Looks like not all MSM are hopeless. "Newsweek" published an unusually sane piece by a
reasonable black guy "Why black lives don't matter to 'Black Lives Matter'", where he exposes
BLM for what they are: opportunistic frauds
People vote their resentments as much as their wallets. Dems are fighting to create voting
block that will lead them to the victory. In the past (and in some countries who updated the
applicable definitions, still), the most relevant additional class was the petty bourgeoisie; in
the modern US, however, the concept of the professional-managerial class is the most useful frame
of reference as for the base of neoliberal Democrats.
People who think the Democratic Party is responsive to the concerns or interests of the poor
and working classes are delusional, full stop. The Democrats are neoliberal sellouts to the
financial oligarchy.
Notable quotes:
"... The Democrats are resolved to set the agenda by deciding what issues "will and will not" be covered over the course of the campaign. And -- since race is an issue on which they feel they can energize their base by propping-up outdated stereotypes of conservatives as ignorant bigots incapable of rational thought -- the Dems are using their media clout to make race the main topic of debate. ..."
"... Let's be clear, the Democrats do not support Black Lives Matter nor have they made any attempt to insert their demands into their list of police reforms. BLM merely fits into the Dems overall campaign strategy which is to use race to deflect attention from the gross imbalance of wealth that is the unavoidable consequence of the Dems neoliberal policies including outsourcing, off-shoring, de-industrialization, free trade and trickle down economics. These policies were aggressively promoted by both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama as they will be by Joe Biden if he is elected. They are the policies that have gutted the country, shrunk the middle class, and transformed the American dream into a dystopian nightmare. ..."
"... They are also the policies that have given rise to, what the pundits call, "right wing populism" which refers to the growing number of marginalized working people who despise Washington and career politicians, feel anxious about falling wages and dramatic demographic changes, and resent the prevailing liberal culture that scorns their religion and patriotism. ..."
"... This is Trump's mainly-white base, the working people the Democrats threw under the bus 30 years ago and now want to annihilate completely by deepening political polarization, fueling social unrest, pitting one group against another, and viciously vilifying them in the media as ignorant racists whose traditions, culture, customs and even history must be obliterated to make room for the new diversity world order. ..."
"... "Our nation is witnessing a merciless campaign to wipe out our history, defame our heroes, erase our values and indoctrinate our children. Angry mobs are trying to tear down statues of our founders, deface our most sacred memorials and unleash a wave of violent crime in our cities." ..."
The answer is "not always" due to existence of "What's the matter with Kansas" effect.
People can and do vote against their economic interests, although this is more common for
lower strata of population than for the elite.
This is the essence of the current play by the Neoliberal Democrats. Mike Whitney pointed
out that their support of black population is just a tactical trick:
The protests are largely a diversion aimed at shifting the public's attention to a
racialized narrative that obfuscates the widening inequality chasm (created by the
Democrats biggest donors, the Giant Corporations and Wall Street) to historic antagonisms
that have clearly diminished over time. (Racism ain't what it used to be.)
The Democrats are resolved to set the agenda by deciding what issues "will and will
not" be covered over the course of the campaign. And -- since race is an issue on which
they feel they can energize their base by propping-up outdated stereotypes of conservatives
as ignorant bigots incapable of rational thought -- the Dems are using their media clout to
make race the main topic of debate.
In short, the Democrats have settled on a strategy for quashing the emerging populist
revolt that swept Trump into the White House in 2016 and derailed Hillary's ambitious grab
for presidential power.
The plan, however, does have its shortcomings
Let's be clear, the Democrats do not support Black Lives Matter nor have they made
any attempt to insert their demands into their list of police reforms. BLM merely fits into
the Dems overall campaign strategy which is to use race to deflect attention from the gross
imbalance of wealth that is the unavoidable consequence of the Dems neoliberal policies
including outsourcing, off-shoring, de-industrialization, free trade and trickle down
economics. These policies were aggressively promoted by both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama
as they will be by Joe Biden if he is elected. They are the policies that have gutted the
country, shrunk the middle class, and transformed the American dream into a dystopian
nightmare.
They are also the policies that have given rise to, what the pundits call, "right
wing populism" which refers to the growing number of marginalized working people who
despise Washington and career politicians, feel anxious about falling wages and dramatic
demographic changes, and resent the prevailing liberal culture that scorns their religion
and patriotism.
This is Trump's mainly-white base, the working people the Democrats threw under the
bus 30 years ago and now want to annihilate completely by deepening political polarization,
fueling social unrest, pitting one group against another, and viciously vilifying them in
the media as ignorant racists whose traditions, culture, customs and even history must be
obliterated to make room for the new diversity world order. Trump touched on this
theme in a speech he delivered in Tulsa. He said:
"Our nation is witnessing a merciless campaign to wipe out our history, defame our
heroes, erase our values and indoctrinate our children. Angry mobs are trying to tear
down statues of our founders, deface our most sacred memorials and unleash a wave of
violent crime in our cities."
He than went off the rail, but still the part of his analysis reproduced above looks
pretty prescient.
The CHOP/CHAZ occupants reportedly established a reverse hierarchical social structure where
whites self-flagellated by performing quasi-religious rituals of atonement for the sins of
slavery. There was also a diversity quota of "centering" certain individuals based on their
ethnic background, gender and sexual orientation to cede leadership roles at the co-op, with
white participants coerced into overcoming their "fragility" (or sensitivity in discussing
racism). Concurrent with the protests, corporate consultant and University of Washington
professor Robin DiAngelo's intellectually fraudulent book White
Fragility shot to the top of The New York Times bestseller list and is a perfect
example of how such identity politics fails in dealing with social issues.
Collective punishment is never a suitable guiding principle in addressing social problems,
nor is using a conception akin to the religious idea of original sin where "white privilege" is
the root cause of racism. There were even mini-reparations demanded of repenting white
protesters reminiscent of the collection plate passed around by worshippers in a church. This
sort of bizarre and self-indulgent identity politics is much like what was widely mocked in a
viral video of a
Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) convention collapsing into infighting last year.
What began as protests against police brutality were not only derailed into efforts to
set-up communes in major cities but a nationwide debate on statues, after the wave of
demonstrations and rioting across the country led to the Taliban-style destruction of
historical monuments perceived as glorifying racism. As a result, the toxic political
atmosphere which surrounded the events in Charlottesville, Virginia in 2017 was reignited.
While the calls for the removal of Confederate statues erected during the Reconstruction era is
long overdue, more debatable is the removal of those honoring slave-owning Founding Fathers
such as George Washington and Thomas Jefferson which were toppled in Portland, Oregon. This was
followed by a statue of Union General Ulysses S. Grant being knocked over in San Francisco and
calls to remove the Lincoln Memorial in D.C., two men who victoriously led the North in the
Civil War. Regrettably, the prioritization of such iconoclastic gestures has not only defanged
the protests but diverted them from bringing real change to social inequities in the immediate
future.
This is not the first time we have witnessed this phenomena. Last year, a more troublesome
example were the calls to
remove a historic mural at George Washington High School in San Francisco that were
capitulated to by the city school board. The thirteen panel mural, Life of Washington ,
painted in 1936 by Russian-American artist Victor Arnautoff was commissioned as part of the
Federal Art Project, a New Deal program funded by the Works Progress Administration (WPA) which
employed visual artists to create public works during the Great Depression. One controversial
panel depicts George Washington pointing to a group of armed colonizers standing over the
corpse of a Native American, while another fresco portrays two colonizers surveying land as
slaves toil in a field. It would seem obvious to anyone that the mural is not only explicitly
anti -racist but representative of an important period in U.S. history where art was a
force for social change and progressive politics was at the center of American life. Arnautoff
was a Russian immigrant who was an assistant to Mexican muralist Diego Rivera, while the WPA
and its art program were dominated by communists such as the two men. Still, no matter the
context or intent -- the unflinching depiction of American history was deemed
"offensive to certain communities" because students were "triggered" by the harsh realities
illustrated.
This might seem unrelated, but the same illogic is behind the vigilantism of the statue
removals. While the Arnautoff mural is clearly anti-racist and certain monuments may glorify
slavery, the distinction is indecipherable to the social justice sect which needs its "safe
space" from the uncomfortable truths of American history. The differentiation between a
left-wing WPA mural opposing racism and colonial statue commending it is illegible to them. The
entire purpose behind the Arnautoff mural is to make one uncomfortable because its
subject matter is something no one should ever be at ease with. Yet its undeniable educational
and artistic value did not prevent the San Francisco school board from voting to paint over it,
while articles were published in The New York Times and even The Nation magazine
applauding their decision. What on earth is happening to the left when it is censoring
anti-racist art in the name of fighting racism?
The whole point of education at a high school is to teach students to analyze and interpret
subjects like art and history, not just emotionally react to them. When the very fabric of
culture and society like a historic mural or statue can be torn down simply because people are
upset by them, the next plausible step is book burning. San Francisco High School completely
failed to educate its students when they decided upon the most backwards way of interpreting
the mural, just as the protesters tearing down these statues did not use their faculties to
understand them in a historical context. Genocide and slavery are indeed the foundations of the
U.S., but we should learn from our tragic history to grasp the equivalent injustices happening
today. Simply eradicating murals and statues that remind us of it, whether they oppose or
elevate them, is totally ineffectual.
While some activists have expressed concern that the protests have deviated from their
original purpose, the right has fixated on the presence among the marches of "Antifa" which
Trump wants to designate as a "terrorist organization", a reckless idea given the completely
decentralized nature of the group. The original Antifa movement in the 1930s had been part of
the Communist Party of Germany (KPD) in its effort to form a popular front against fascism, but
the dilettantes in the modern incarnation are closely associated with black bloc anarchism and
other amateurish orientations. Two decades ago, Seattle had been the site of the 1999 protests
against the World Trade Organization (WTO), often referred to as the 'Battle of Seattle', which
saw 40,000 march against globalization. Some may recall this was where the black bloc first
became notorious for injecting vandalism and senseless violence into peaceful demonstrations
and were widely thought to have been
infiltrated by law enforcement . In 2016, the current embodiment of Antifa first came to
attention during protests on college campuses against speaking appearances by far right media
personalities during the U.S. presidential election, including at the University of California
at Berkeley which had ironically been the site of the Free Speech Movement in the 1960s.
Following Trump's election, the stage was set in Charlottesville during the Unite the Right
rally and counter-protests over the removal of a Robert E. Lee statue in August 2017 for
'Antifa' to be crowned as heroes shadowboxing the historical ghost of fascism. When the likes
of The New York Times is suddenly
promoting the black bloc , that's your first clue something else is afoot. In order to
prevent the emergence of a truly progressive movement in the wake of Hillary Clinton's defeat,
a false narrative was concocted by the political establishment about the significance of
Trump's victory, which we were told was the result of alleged Russian meddling and the racism
of "deplorable" Trump voters. Instantly, any critique of the system which produced Trump
disappeared and the establishment wing of the Democratic Party was able to neutralize the
Bernie Sanders-led opposition in its ranks.
As a result, the vast majority of the left became convinced by the interpretation that
Trump's election was purely the outcome of a resurgence of "fascism", thus making Trump the
singular, most immediate danger -- while U.S. imperialism and endless war continue unopposed,
including the support for actual fascists in Ukraine. It should be understood that what Trump
and the wave of pro-Zionist, Islamophobic right-wing populists in the EU represent is something
qualitatively different. Still, anyone on the left who dares oppose U.S. imperialism today is
risking being branded a 'red-brown' collaborator. The Democratic Party, which spearheaded the
Orwellian idea of "humanitarian interventionism" used to justify the wholesale destruction of
uncooperative nations by the American war machine in recent decades, has since tricked the
majority of the left into unwittingly backing U.S. imperialism to unseat "dictators." Even when
the left today ostensibly opposes war, it is often forced to qualify its objections by
repeating the same talking points about countries attacked by Washington used to justify
it.
The U.S. foray in the Syrian war is a perfect example. Trump's idea to designate Antifa as a
terrorist group would be especially ironic considering that many American leftists who
self-identify using the "Antifa" black and red standard have thrown their support behind the
creation of another infamous "autonomous zone" in Northeast Syria established by mostly-Kurdish
militias known as Rojava -- with the help of none other than the U.S. military. There is even a
self-proclaimed International Freedom Battalion of American and European volunteers fighting to
defend the enclave that purports to be in the tradition of the International Brigades which
defended the Spanish Republic during the Spanish Civil War. These "Antifa" conscripts fight
alongside the YPG (People's Protection Units), a Kurdish-majority militia which has been
rebranded by the Pentagon as the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). These leftists are apparently
in serious need of a history lesson, considering it was the Soviet Union alone which intervened
to defend the Spanish Republic from fascism, not the United States. From Washington's
perspective, CHOP/CHAZ should be considered blowback from this policy.
The U.S. creation of the SDF has not been without controversy, as the YPG is widely regarded
as the Syrian branch of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) in Turkey which Washington's NATO
ally regards as a terrorist organization . While the Kurds and
their Western volunteers may believe they are creating an anarchist utopia, in reality they are
infantryman for the Zionist plan to balkanize Syria and
prevent Damascus from accessing it own resources . So it makes perfect sense that they
would try to replicate what they learned in Afrin in an American city using Rojava as a model.
When Trump tried to follow through on his anti-interventionist pledges as a candidate and pull
U.S. troops out of Syria, it sparked outrage from the pro-war "left" which glorifies Rojava as
a 'libertarian socialist' and 'direct democracy' experiment, even though non-Kurds such as
Arabs and Assyrian Christians face ethnic cleansing at hands of Kurdish nationalists in their
efforts to create an ethno-state.
"... In 2013, the national outcry over Trayvon Martin's death and George Zimmerman's acquittal sparked a national outcry over racial injustice. Amid this controversy, three activists, Patrisse Cullors , Alicia Garza , and Opal Tometi , started a hashtag, #BlackLivesMatter, which soon went viral. They then founded the national Black Lives Matter organization. ..."
"... No doubt, the organization itself was quite radical from the very beginning. Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrisse Cullors described herself and fellow co-founder Alicia Garza as "trained Marxists" in a recently resurfaced video from 2015. ..."
"... The official Black Lives Matter organization is Marxist ..."
"... Such a divisive ideology only fuels perpetual conflict, not progress toward reconciliation. By failing to drive this toxic extremism out loudly and clearly from their side of the issue, the large majority of Black Lives Matter supporters -- who simply seek reform, justice, and reconciliation -- take a chainsaw to any chance of achieving common ground and consensus. ..."
n Monday night, Terry Crews was grilled over his criticism of Black Lives Matter by CNN host
Don Lemon. As Gina Bontempo pointed out on Twitter : "Don
Lemon did everything he could to talk over Terry and silence him as soon as they started
approaching what the BLM organization is *really* about."
So what is Black Lives Matter really about?
Many conservatives insist Black Lives Matter is a Marxist, anti-police, radical organization
that wants to tear down America . Meanwhile, most liberals simply view Black Lives Matter as a
heroic movement and powerful slogan signaling support for racial justice and opposition to
police brutality.
Both are right.
There is Black Lives Matter™️, and there is "black lives matter."
Black Lives Matter as a broad sentiment and movement then gained national attention and name
recognition after the 2014 deaths of Eric Garner and Michael Brown. Meanwhile, the official
group expanded and many more local chapters formed.
No doubt, the organization itself was quite radical from the very beginning. Black Lives
Matter co-founder Patrisse Cullors described herself and fellow co-founder Alicia Garza as
"trained Marxists" in a recently
resurfaced video from 2015.
"We actually do have an ideological frame[work]," Cullors said
of her organization. "We are trained Marxists. We are super-versed on, sort of, ideological
theories."
Meanwhile, the national organization's official
platform , published in 2015, contained a specific call to "[disrupt] the
Western-prescribed nuclear family structure."
At the local level, official Black Lives Matter chapters are essentially far-left front
groups that use racial justice as a Trojan horse for leftist policy and ideology. For example,
the official organization Black Lives Matter DC openly dedicates itself to "creating the conditions
for Black Liberation through the abolition of systems and institutions of white supremacy,
capitalism, patriarchy and colonialism."
Image credit: Johnny Silvercloud, Flickr
Unsurprisingly, conservatives have bashed the radical group en masse.
"Black Lives Matter is an openly Marxist, anti-America n group," conservative commentator
Mark Levin said . "There's no denying
it. And it is fully embraced by the Democrat Party and its media and cultural
surrogates."
"Black Lives Matter is a Marxist movement," Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz tweeted . "Black Lives
Matter is not about police, it's not about race, it's not about justice. It's about making us
hate America so they can replace America."
"You know, I know plenty of people who are for Black Lives Matter. A lot of them are nice
people," Fox News Host Tucker Carlson
recently said . "I'm not mad at them. I disagree I think Black Lives Matter is
poison."
These kinds of conservative criticisms of Black Lives Matter are widespread. And on one
hand, they're right : The official Black Lives Matter organization is Marxist, is anti-American
in its values, and its views are rightfully alarming to anyone who believes in the
Constitution, capitalism, and civil society as we know it.
But in applying their reflexive response to all Black Lives Matter supporters, conservative
critics are failing to see the forest for the trees.
Most of these people, I suspect, don't even know that there is an official Black Lives
Matter organization. And I'm sure hardly any of them could name Patrisse Cullors or Alicia
Garza.
Whether it's where I'm from in deep-blue Massachusetts or where I live now in Washington
D.C., walking by a Black Lives Matter sign sticking out from someone's yard is just about an
everyday occurrence. After the death of George Floyd, more of my acquaintances, friends, and
relatives than I could count posted #BlackLivesMatter.
Many others changed their picture to a black square or otherwise signaled their support for
the movement.
I can personally guarantee you that the vast majority of these people, while liberal, do not
support ending capitalism or dismantling the family. Conservatives are led astray as soon as
they apply their (valid) criticisms of Black Lives Matter™️ the organization to
the Black Lives Matter movement and its supporters broadly.
Image Credit: John Lucia, Flickr
Just look at the way some on the Right responded to Sen. Mitt Romney after he attended a
Washington, D.C. protest against police brutality, telling reporters he did so "to make sure
that people understand that Black Lives Matter."
Here's a sampling of how hostile the response was from some conservative pundits on
Twitter:
Even President Trump attacked Romney over it:
No matter how you feel about the conservative Mormon senator politically (and I'm far from a
fan), no one can credibly argue that Romney supports destroying the nuclear family, ending
capitalism, or abolishing the police.
Meanwhile, Sen. Mike Braun of Indiana faced a similar unfair backlash when he announced his
support for Black Lives Matter and
unveiled a modest police reform proposal :
It may well be true that in particular conservative circles, everyone is well aware of the
obscure history of the Black Lives Matter founders' Marxist roots. But the average person on
the street and the average person who shares the hashtag are most certainly not. And the
movement itself has become something much bigger, broader, and more benevolent than the
original organization.
However, it's by no means just conservatives who err in their approach to Black Lives
Matter. For one, many on the Left fail to acknowledge at all the Marxist roots of the official
Black Lives Matter organization, and thus, paint anyone who objects to the organization as
racist, unthinkingly inveighing: "How could anyone not support black lives?" This kind of
clever naming of a controversial movement, similar to "Antifa" supposedly standing for
"anti-fascist," makes it easy to baselessly paint critics as extreme and immoral. Yet this is a
reductive oversimplification that serves only to divide.
So, too, much of the blame for the Black Lives Matter perception gap lies with liberals,
Democrats, and others who support the movement for failing to adequately distance themselves
from the radical organization.
For example, I visited one of my favorite coffee shops in Arlington, Virginia over the
weekend. Like many a hipster coffee shop, it had a Black Lives Matter sign in the window and
had a fundraiser going on for the cause as well. But I was dismayed to read the flyer and
notice that the proceeds of the fundraiser were going to the official Black Lives Matter DC
organization -- yes, the same one that openly wants to abolish capitalism.
Now, I highly doubt that the owners of this coffee shop, even if they are progressives or
Democrats, actually support Marxism. More importantly, I'm certain that most customers who
donated, even in the liberal-leaning neighborhood, do not realize they are donating to a
Marxist, anti-American revolutionary organization by participating in the fundraiser. But they
are.
Many a mainstream liberal has signaled support for the generic "black lives matter" cause by
sharing fundraisers that, if you look closely, go to official Black Lives Matter organizations
that do not actually represent their views. Meanwhile, liberal-leaning media outlets such as MSNBC
regularly platform official members of the Marxist Black Lives Matter movement and pass the
radical activists off as within the mainstream.
From corporations to politicians to random Facebook users, Black Lives Matter supporters
need to do a much better job distancing themselves from the radical organization at the root of
their slogan. (Or, alternatively, they should come up with a new and different slogan that
doesn't have such malign associations.)
This lack of due diligence is lazy and irresponsible, but more importantly, it's
dangerous.
Marxism is a vicious ideology, and it's one that is rooted in a divisive vision of
irreconcilable class conflict. As important economist Ludwig von Mises
noted ,
"According to the Marxian view... human society is organized into classes whose interests stand
in irreconcilable opposition." Moreover, as Mises explains ,
Marxists believe that people's very thoughts ought to be determined by their class and that
those who differ from the prescribed worldview are class traitors.
Such a divisive ideology only fuels perpetual conflict, not progress toward reconciliation.
By failing to drive this toxic extremism out loudly and clearly from their side of the issue,
the large majority of Black Lives Matter supporters -- who simply seek reform, justice, and
reconciliation -- take a chainsaw to any chance of achieving common ground and consensus.
When Don Lemon took issue with Terry Crews's take on Black Lives Matter, Crews was
crystal clear , saying, "This is the
thing. It's a great mantra. It's a true mantra. Black lives do matter. But, when you're talking
about an organization, you're talking about the leaders, you're talking about the people who
are responsible for putting these things together. It's two different things."
We need more of that kind of clarity in our discourse. Right now, the debate over "Black
Lives Matter" is muddled and confused. Liberals and conservatives alike need to make an effort
to listen and understand the other side's perspective, not the strawman caricature of it used
as a punching bag in partisan echo chambers. Until both sides take the time to understand each
other, we will keep talking past each other -- and any real progress or harmony will remain a
fantasy.
snedly arkus, comment 121, starts off interesting and then descends into typical
anti-communist lunacy. Really sad to see how bourgeois psyops of the 20th century still have
victims.
BLM is Marxist? I wish. I'm not sure why conservatives think tarring anything and
everything that they find themselves in opposition to as "communist" or "Marxist" does
anything other than increase interest in these ideas among those being tarred, who weren't
Marxist to begin with but who are all of a sudden being turned on to scientific socialism.
You realize they have access to the primary texts, right? They can read Capital for
themselves and find out, for themselves, that it is the greatest economics textbook ever
written, to this day, and that it and it alone provides a foundation for a scientific
understanding of capitalist political economy. That's my story, at least. I have the Tea
Party to thank for the fact that I'm a Marxist, and I never would have found out about Marx
if they didn't make the laughable claim that President Obama was one of his acolytes.
Go to BLM's homesite and you will find their mission statement. It clearly says the
movement was founded and grounded in Marxist thought, with a side of identity-politics (in
this case, a trio of black lezbians who say Marxism ultimately stems from Queer-theory, or
vice versa, I forget).
Irrespective of whether their proposed iteration of Marxist thought is intrinsically
correct is the question, of course.
I absolutely concur however, with "Republicans", that their methodology with their action
is indeed intrinsically Marxist, because it involves the putting aside of dialectics and
philosophy with the intention of clear material ends in mind. Whether or not they themselves
are able to articulate these ends is another matter.
You made me link and look. There might be some claim there that BLM is Marxist, I can't
find it quickly and the site is such a disaster it's not worth the trouble.
Their site is slightly larger than last time I looked. Still dominated by t-shirt sales
and vague LGBTQ mush. They need a web page designer and editor badly. What is most notable is
a total absence of content. Vague is too nice. Supposedly a huge organization with a big
budget, nothing to show for it. Purposely set up so you can't find out anything. My guess
would be the site is managed from a cubicle at Langley, with instructions to the
clerk-in-charge to keep it simple, keep it impenetrable. This is not a popular movement in
any sense at all.
There is "BLM", the mass movement which resembles a network of contentious and largely
autonomous activist circles (i.e., there is no central leadership), and then there is "BLM" a
501c-something organization that exists for young middle class "people of color" to get some
activist credentials that look good on applications to elite colleges. I'm guessing you're
talking about the latter, but conservatives confuse that (maybe deliberately) for the
former.
thanks fnord.... unfortunately many people don't make these distinctions and some are not
interested in making them either... i wonder how the black panther party would have done in
this day and age? as it was they were infiltrated by the cia-fbi and made to appear
completely different then their mandate, but of that no one will be reporting on
factually...
NemesisCalling @152: "I merely stated that their [BLM] methodology is akin to any
Marxist movement."
Really? I totally missed where BLM was organizing tenant associations, labor unions, and
farmers' associations. Thanks for cluing me in on the fact they were doing these things!
I stated that their methodology is the same, not their mission statement. I have said
since the beginning of these shenanigans that their intent isn't to cast a light on our
current neoliberal plight. Then they would have to admit that whites are just as affected as
they are. And these racially divisive tactics must stand!
They view themselves as the historically oppressed class where only government
intervention (in this case, getting rid of POTUS) will ensure their material ascension into
"mattering." At least they looked at the Marxist playbook, eh?
They are gathering up the feeble-minded and guilt-ridden whites among us as their
vanguard. To what end?...obviously to get Uncle Joe to help them out.
But you can't see how x can be subbed for y in this case?
If you say American history has been building to a point where black lives can finally
matter if only we do...*static* *garble* *warble*...then everything will be ok, but we have
to make sure that we...*hiss* *static* *hiss*. Do you understand?
If we are talking about the material ascension of a historically victimized class of
people, we are talking about the Marxist-playbook.
But in this case, you are right...it walks like a duck, it talks like a duck, but it isn't
a duck.
The BLM looks like an intrinsically American phenomenon (racial wars, the unsettled racial
question, etc. etc.). They don't look Marxist at all.
But your point highlights us a potentially interesting information: the hidden fear
Americans of from the post-2008 era have of communism.
After 2008, the word "socialism" suddenly came to forefront, as if from nowhere, in the
USA. This must certainly have generated a timor among the traditional American
population.
From your comment historic here in this blog, you seem to be highly susceptible to
conspiracy theories. The fact that you don't doubt an American is Marxist merely from the
fact he/she states she's Marxist gives us a sign Americans like you have a deep respect and
fear for the term.
Are Americans really afraid of a communist revolution happening in their own soil?
Of course I am worried about Marxist infiltration. I am a Catholic. I want as little
government as possible. And, furthermore, this is America. It is not a potential Marxist
utopia and will never be one except by the barrel of a gun, but in that case you will have
100 million+ guns pointed right back atcha.
I respect Marxism for its contributions to the laborer's plight. But I also respect
Marxism for its ability to destroy western philosophy. But the Magna Carta, the Declaration
of Independence, the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights, these were all brought forth long
before Marx and they are enough to work off.
The CCP has a polluted form of Hegelianism, which is the absolute knowledge of Hegel's
Logic, or the ability to project such knowledge in its appearance. It is a powerful force on
the world stage. And I do not underestimate it.
We Americans have room, liberty, and faith.
I respect China in its natural traditions and feel that the CCP can do wonders for its
people if it ceases the world dominance aspect of its Hegelian-Marxism and return to the
teachings of the Tao Te Ching and stay within its lanes.
Is it too late to call it a draw and avoid the bloodshed? I hope so, but *shakes
8-ball*..."outlook grim."
"Will Europeans shy away from the Outlaw US Empire's determination to fail, see the rising
East as their future savior, and abandon their chosen Neoliberal path for it's not too
late?"
I'm wondering, karlof1, whether our oligarchs in the US might themselves see the writing
on the wall, (as well as the Europeans if not before them) simply as this country and those
become so crippled by what is happening thanks to the remorseless onslaught of the covid
virus, that all pretenses of having an 'economy' fly out the window. This came to my mind as
I looked at a photo on another site of a group of protesters advancing with pitchforks on NY
Hamptons estates. The pitchforks turned out to be plastic, but the headline did not say that,
and had I been on or near such a happening, the mere fact that they could have been real but
were not, would have given me considerable pause.
There has been a flexibility about protests in the past, a large amount of goodwill on the
part of protesters while enduring the state's inflexibility. That, it seems to me, is going
to change.
The pitchforks may not remain plastic much longer. Desperate times make for desperate
people. Surely a modicum of self preservation resides in the hearts of the well to do. They
have the power to change course, but time's running out.
The statue was vandalized
over the July 4th weekend, Rochester police told local media on Sunday.
Photos from the scene show
an empty spot where the statue used to stand in Maplewood Park, as well as its debris scattered in the vicinity. The statue
was lying 50 feet from its pedestal when officers found it.
The statue
"had
been placed over the fence to the gorge and was leaning against the fence,"
police said in a statement, as cited by The
Democrat and Chronicle daily.
Carvin Eison, director of
the 'Re-Energizing the Legacy of Frederick Douglass' project, said the monument is beyond repair and will need to be replaced.
"It's particularly painful that it happened at this time,"
he said.
Dozens of statues have
been knocked off their pedestals across the country in a monument-toppling spree championed by Black Lives Matter activists,
which see it as a way of reckoning with the nation's troubling legacy of slavery and racism. While the initial targets of the
protesters were Confederate generals, later vandalism, which met little resistance from law enforcement, saw the statues of
Christopher Columbus and other historical figures being removed as well.
It's so far unclear who was behind the Douglass statue incident.
The monument, inaugurated
in 2018 to mark Douglass' 200th birthday, is part of a city-wide installation consisting of 13 statues – all replicas of a
larger statue of Douglass, which was unveiled in Rochester's Highland Park neighborhood in 1899. The statues were placed
throughout the city in places of significance to the abolitionist's life in a bid to bolster his legacy.
In a speech in 1852,
Douglass made a case against celebrating July 4th by African Americans, saying:
"The
blessings in which you, this day, rejoice, are not enjoyed in common. This Fourth July is yours, not mine. You may rejoice, I
must mourn."
It's not the first time
the installation has been targeted by vandals. In December 2018, two students from Rochester's St. John Fisher College were
arrested and charged with misdemeanors after they were filmed dismantling one of the statues and stealing it. The students
claimed they were drunk and later apologized, calling what they had done to the statue
"a
terrible thing,"
and offered to help repair the monument.
As protesters target statues around the nation, one town is becoming a statue sanctuary city
for monuments honoring select figures.
Newton Falls, Ohio City Manager David M. Lynch has signed a proclamation that states that
the city will accept and display spurned statues of people including George Washington, Abraham
Lincoln, and certain other prominent figures.
"A Proclamation declaring that Newton Falls is a Statuary Sanctuary City and declaring a
general amnesty for George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, Ulysses S. Grant,
Patrick Henry, Francis Scott Key, Theodore Roosevelt and Christopher Columbus as represented by
the statues of these great leaders, and volunteering to accept these statues that have been
removed throughout the USA and place them in a location of honor in our community," the
proclamation says, according to a copy posted by
21-WFMJ .
"They founded our nation, they ended slavery, and established and protected our national
parks," Lynch said, according to
Fox 8 .
"Yes, they had warts but they laid the foundation for what we have today," he said.
Protesters in Baltimore, Maryland on July 4th
toppled a statue of Christopher Columbus and dumped it into the city's Inner Harbor.
The answer is "not always" due to existence of "What the matter with Kansas" effect.
People can and do vote against their economic interests, although this is more common for
lower strata of population then for the elite.
This is the essence of the current play by the Neoliberal Democrats. Mike Whitney pointed
out that their support of black population is just a tactical trick:
The protests are largely a diversion aimed at shifting the public's attention to a
racialized narrative that obfuscates the widening inequality chasm (created by the Democrats
biggest donors, the Giant Corporations and Wall Street) to historic antagonisms that have
clearly diminished over time. (Racism ain't what it used to be.)
The Democrats are resolved to set the agenda by deciding what issues "will and will not"
be covered over the course of the campaign. And– since race is an issue on which they
feel they can energize their base by propping-up outdated stereotypes of conservatives as
ignorant bigots incapable of rational thought– the Dems are using their media clout to
make race the main topic of debate.
In short, the Democrats have settled on a strategy for quashing the emerging populist
revolt that swept Trump into the White House in 2016 and derailed Hillary's ambitious grab
for presidential power.
The plan, however, does have its shortcomings
Let's be clear, the Democrats do not support Black Lives Matter nor have they made any
attempt to insert their demands into their list of police reforms. BLM merely fits into the
Dems overall campaign strategy which is to use race to deflect attention from the gross
imbalance of wealth that is the unavoidable consequence of the Dems neoliberal policies
including outsourcing, off-shoring, de-industrialization, free trade and trickle down
economics. These policies were aggressively promoted by both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama as
they will be by Joe Biden if he is elected. They are the policies that have gutted the
country, shrunk the middle class, and transformed the American dream into a dystopian
nightmare.
They are also the policies that have given rise to, what the pundits call, "right wing
populism" which refers to the growing number of marginalized working people who despise
Washington and career politicians, feel anxious about falling wages and dramatic demographic
changes, and resent the prevailing liberal culture that scorns their religion and patriotism.
This is Trump's mainly-white base, the working people the Democrats threw under the bus 30
years ago and now want to annihilate completely by deepening political polarization, fueling
social unrest, pitting one group against another, and viciously vilifying them in the media
as ignorant racists whose traditions, culture, customs and even history must be obliterated
to make room for the new diversity world order. Trump touched on this theme in a speech he
delivered in Tulsa. He said:
"Our nation is witnessing a merciless campaign to wipe out our history, defame our
heroes, erase our values and indoctrinate our children. Angry mobs are trying to tear down
statues of our founders, deface our most sacred memorials and unleash a wave of violent
crime in our cities."
He then went off the rail, but still the part of his analysis reproduced above looks pretty
prescient.
Taibbi said in a Hill.TV this past week there is an "extraordinary irony" in white Americans
elevating a white corporate consultant to the top of bestseller lists in the wake of George
Floyd's killing by police in Minneapolis.
In the book, which has seen a resurgence in popularity amid the nationwide reckoning on race
relations, DiAngelo lays out her theory on white Americans' defensiveness when it comes to
addressing racism.
"This is how they want to reinterpret their racial issues," he said. "This is the racism
problem as seen through the lens of somebody who makes thousands of dollars an hour, being
hired by companies."
Taibbi said that rather than confronting how they contribute to systematic racism, companies
tend to force their employees into trainings with outside academics like DiAngelo.
"This is how corporate America views the race problem, it views it as an individual issue
that where racism is is sort of inexorably stuck in all of us and the only way that we can
combat it is through relentlessly listening to corporate consultants," Taibbi said.
As
Medium reported you can use this list as a guide in what businesses you wish to support.
Please also consider using this list the next time someone makes the argument that we are
living in a white supremacist country with institutionalized racism. If major companies
consider supporting violent rioters and looters good for their bottom line, your cause isn't
oppressed.
Twitter's engineering team will systematically purge a list of offensive terms from its
source code and internal documents in the name of political correctness. Terms like "master"
and "slave" will go, as will gendered pronouns.
"We're starting with a set of words we want to move away from using in favor of more
inclusive language," Twitter Engineering announced on Wednesday.
Among the terms to be terminated are "whitelist" and "blacklist,""master" and "slave,"
which will be replaced with "allowlist" and "denylist," and "leader" and "follower"
respectively. Gendered pronouns such as "guys" will be swapped for gender-neutral terms like
"folks" and "y'all," while the terms "man hours" and "grandfathered" will have their
patriarchal connotations expunged, and will be replaced with "person hours" and "legacy
status." Even "dummy value" was deemed offensive.
All the more reason Twitter can go fuck itself. I have a Twitter account, but almost never
use it, and only created it so I could respond to things that really make me mad. Since then
almost everyone I strongly dislike has banned me anyway, so if they want to go to Ze and Zir
and Zippity Fuckin' Doo Da, it's no bother for me. But if they are really serious in their
busybody political correctness, they are embarking on a path which will eventually make the
English language almost unrecognizable. "Master" is a useful and common verb – I hope
one day to master the knots used in rigging – as well as an adjective: he is a master
of the instrument.
Sort of unsurprising for the country that claims to be the last word in free speech,
though. One wonderful day the only words allowed to be used in any questionnaire sent around
by your employer will be "I approve", and anything you say will be changed to that by
software.
I think you must mean Susan Rice – Obama's former National Security Advisor. A known
Russophobe and neo-liberal Democrat warhawk. I believe Biden promised, in one of his lucid
moments, to choose 'a woman of color' for his VP. This is what it has come to in the fight to
capture votes; it's not enough to spend – literally – billions in campaign funds,
but you also have to court as many communities as possible instead of just picking the best
person for the job. I'm not suggesting it is impossible a black or brown woman could be the
best person for the job, but in that case there would be no need to announce it in advance,
thereby eliminating all whites and males from competition. You can blame the voters for that
as much as the politicians – screwing up the job of leadership has become so
commonplace that a perception has arisen that the choice should be made on the basis of
'whose turn it is'.
Susan Rice could be baited into war with Russia at the drop of a hat – she is not a
diplomat, has a filthy temper and is totally committed to the ideal of the United States as a
benevolent tyrant which is not afraid to make the tough decisions because it knows what's
best. When it says 'do', you do. Or else. I think it is pretty plain now that the Democratic
strategy is to either use Biden – if elected – as a talking head for the Clinton
Machine if he is able to remain reasonably convincing, or to relieve him for health reasons
if he becomes visibly incompetent. Either way, rule in that administration will not be
Biden's decisions.
It is so much easier to get along when both can be right and wrong in the same exchange. I
do not have to run to my room to bury my face in my pillow and scream, like I do when I'm
wrong. Well, that's The Hill, so it's a solid recommendation and not one of those throwaway
"Hey, she'd make a great president!" endorsements like the papers make whenever some new
mouthpiece appears briefly on the radar (remember 'Joe the plumber'?) But Condi has been out
of politics an eternity, in political time, and would have to rebuild alliances and get
quickly up to speed. I frankly doubt Biden is considering her.
She would be a marginal improvement on Susan Rice, though, for the faults I have already
cited.
During Obama's presidency, the US ambassador to the UN was a wonderfully talented brown
woman. Can't remember her name now, but she liked taking names.
No, no, this was during the first couple of years of Donald Trump's Presidency: the
woman's name was Nikki Haley, originally born Nimrata Randhawa and of Sikh Indian background.
She liked keeping a long shit list of people and countries to nurture dreams of punishment
against.
Sens. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) are getting most of the
buzz, but former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice is also been getting a lot
of attention in Joe Biden's campaign as he considers who to pick as his running mate, sources
say
####
I say, is that a cheeky cooking pun squeezed in to the headline? It gets a clap from me if
it is intentional!
The statue, dedicated in 1984, is the latest monument to be destroyed in what President
Trump dubbed the "left-wing cultural revolution" by "angry mobs."
According to the
Baltimore Sun , the Columbus statue has been the site of a wreath-laying ceremony right
before the annual Columbus Day parade, which, in 2019 was replaced with the Italian Heritage
Festival.
Republican state delegates and Italian-American activists held a press conference at the
statue last month to ask Gov. Larry Hogan and Baltimore Mayor Bernard C. "Jack" Young to
preserve and protect the memorials , following activists' comments about pulling down the
monuments themselves and the introduction of a City Council bill this week to rename one of
them in honor of victims of police violence.
The downed statue is one of three monuments to Columbus in Baltimore. -
Baltimore Sun
BLM thugs have already started going after patriots. They ambushed our governor at the
small town of Ackley Iowa. They were stalking her as she visited companies providing
essential services during the pandemic. Her driver refused to stop, likely saving her life.
One BLM thug was hit but not seriously injured. They are not waiting to run out of statues.
We ordinary Americans must be heavily armed at all times now. Midwest states are full of
illegals, who serve the left as an army. Open civil war is upon us whether we would have it
or not.
warsev , 3 minutes ago
What these malicious rioters don't realize is that they are handing the November election
to DJT and Republicans for senate and house. Average Americans look on the footage that
accompanies this article with revulsion; for the ideas and the people behind them. Trump will
walk away with 2020. Just keep it up, loony lefties.
vic and blood , 4 minutes ago
We have been in a race and culture war with multiple factions for some time. The presumed
winner is not overtly participating.
Most white people are oblivious, though that is changing. Too bad we are demographically
doomed.
SolidGold , 1 minute ago
Divide and conquer. Who creates that genius?
NumberNone , 12 minutes ago
Was in downtown Baltimore less than 2 years ago, it felt like you were one person away
from someone that wanted to rob you. The downtown had all the usual suspects of faux high end
shopping but the vibe was one of John Wayne Gacy in his clown suit...it had all the look and
feel that was supposed to make you happy but it was rotten to the core.
Whoa Dammit , 13 minutes ago
We can't keep coddling these stupid brats. It's time to start making their parents pay for
the mess and destruction that their ill raised offspring cause.
GoldRulesPaperDrools , 17 minutes ago
Protesters == pavement apes
House of Cards , 17 minutes ago
Terrorists you mean
Watt Supremacissss , 16 minutes ago
Crybullies.
GoldRulesPaperDrools , 15 minutes ago
Redundant but accurate ... +100_000
Silver Savior , 17 minutes ago
Columbus was a dickhead anyway.
NumberNone , 9 minutes ago
So we tear apart the country for a guy that held a gun to a pregnant woman's stomach...if
you're gonna pass judgement and replace other people's icons you might want to make better
choices.
Blackdawg7 , 43 minutes ago
I've never been a fan of Christopher Columbus but witnessing these know-nothing
sanctimonious twits destroy public property while virtue signalling makes my blood boil.
Workdove , 44 minutes ago
Not worth the 10 years in jail...
vic and blood , 50 minutes ago
History's losers are terrorizing, and soon to be tyrannizing us because Caucasians are too
civilized and docile.
Every race and tribe is programmed by God to attempt to dominate.
As an adherent of the non-aggression principle, I don't care for the binary choice, but
accept it.
Either dominate or be dominated. Only cucks believe in co-existence. I assure you our
rivals do not believe in peaceful co-existence.
unionbroker , 1 hour ago
Christopher Columbus sails out into the unknown where no man has gone before. What the
**** has BLM done. Put the statues back up and throw BLM in the water
We can't keep coddling these stupid brats. It's time to start making their parents pay for
the mess and destruction that their ill raised offspring cause.
They probably can pus a smartphone instead of demolished monuments. Their view of police as a
brutal occupying force is naive, because police is just a muscle, and it is not "white supremacy"
that is behind them. They are fighting sypmtom, not the root case.
We all remember those shots. American troops are entering Baghdad. A tank stops somewhere in
the city, cautiously, in the vicinity of a Saddam Hussein monument. After a few minutes of
apparent inactivity, a crowd is beginning to form around the monument. The crowd is not all
that big. It rallies around the figure of Iraq's president. Soon an American soldier climbs the
monument and puts an American flag on it. An Iraqi intervenes, so the flag is replaced with the
Iraqi one. And then, then some individuals begin to climb the statue, a crane arrives from
somewhere, a steel rope is attached to the monument and the crane drives slowly back, taunting
the line and gradually slanting the president's image to its feet. Eventually the figure drops
to the ground and the cheering people dance around it, deliver it kicks and carry some of the
pieces that fell off in the process away.
The alien forces have conquered the capital city of the enemy and performed an age-old
ritual that victors used to perform in the presence of the vanquished: Americans demolished the
material symbol of the enemy's sovereignty and by doing it they also humiliated the routed
nation.
In the nineties of the 20th century we could all see angry Russians in Moscow, but also
angry Poles in Warsaw and equally angry residents of other European capitals tearing down
monuments from the communist era, especially those of Comrade Felix Dzerzhinsky, the notorious
head of the Cheka (from:
Всероссийская
чрезвычайная
комиссия, i.e. Vserossiyskaya chrezvychaynaya
komissiya = The All-Russian Extraordinary Commission).
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.392.0_en.html#goog_1134708888 NOW
PLAYING
Americans Are Growing More Anxious Over Spread of COVID-19 as Cases Continue to Rise
US sets global record with 53,000 coronavirus cases in one day
Trump Reportedly Flew into Rage When He Was Briefed on Negative Russian Intelligence, So
Officials Stopped Briefing Him
Trump Says New Left Wing Revolution Is Designed To Overthrow America
Trump vows Mount Rushmore will 'stand forever'
'The White House put on a con,' Pelosi on bounty report intelligence
Donald Trump: We're doing very well in dealing with Covid-19 crisis
Bolton: 'Fickle' Trump would sell out Israel for photo op with Iran's leaders
Since the dawn of history monuments would be put up and torn down. Either act reflected a
huge political, social, religious or demographic change. Monuments are erected by common
consent of the majority of a given (national, social, religious, political) community, in which
case they are wanted as a tribute to or a memory of the community's most cherished heroes or
values, or they are enforced by occupying forces, in which case they are hated by those against
whose will they have been put up.
Monuments are only desecrated, defaced, toppled or destroyed by the enemies of those who
built them. Americans in Iraq and a part of Iraqi nation was against Saddam Hussein; a rather
large part of the Russian nation nurtured bitter memories concerning the henchmen of their
ancestors like Felix Dzerzhinsky, so they vented their anger on his images the moment an
opportunity presented itself. The divide between those who put up the monuments and those who
hated the sight of them was in each case insurmountable. What was dear to the former, was
abhorrent to the latter.
Recently a huge wave of monument desecration and monument removal has swept the United
States and to a much lesser extent Europe. It is mostly the heroes of the American South
– generals of the Army of the Confederate States – that are targeted, but not only.
Also abolitionists, 1) fighters for
American independence of other nationalities, 2) Christian
missionaries 3) and even Jesus
Christ himself. 4) John Wayne may
not be spared the same fate either 5) so much so that
a monument to a Portland elk – his ancestor was presumably a slave owner and the elk
– a confirmed racist – fell victim to the rage of American iconoclasts.
6)
All this is taking place amid riots caused by the death of a frequent prison inmate who was
caught by the police while suspected of paying with counterfeit money. The activists of the
Black Lives Matter movement, supported by Antifa 7) and heavily
sponsored by the powers that be and spurned on by the democrats performed the usual acts of
protest: burning cars and looting shops. This time two qualitatively new elements have been
added: one is the toppling or desecration of monuments and the other is forcing the police
officers to knee to the rioters. All this is happening because it is wanted by at least a
significant part of the establishment, democrats in the first place, who having failed to
impeach Donald Trump, having stopped America's and the world's economies due to the so called
pandemic now are playing another trump card in yet another effort to thwart the president
incumbent from being elected for the second term.
https://lockerdome.com/lad/13084989113709670?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13084989113709670-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com&rid=www.zerohedge.com&width=890
Shamelessness as a revolutionary act ( which see )
The democrats have decided to use American blacks to create chaos and make a distressing
impression on US citizens who should come to the conclusion that Donald Trump is not capable of
running the country. History provides ample examples when a part of the elites willing to
topple the current ruler would resort to the help of the masses in order to force the ruler's
abdication or resignation. Such was the case in France in the run-up to the French Revolution,
such was the case in Russia in the run-up to the Russian revolution. In France it was the
so-called third class that was used for the purpose, in Russia it was the proletariat, now in
the United States it is the easily excitable blacks. History teaches us that a genie let out of
the bottle cannot be put back at a moment's notice. Either the democrats have not been
attentive during their history classes or their hatred of Donald Trump is so intense that they
don't care.
What is happening now in the Land of the Free makes the whole world wonder. It fits the
definition of a cultural revolution – modelled on its Chinese or Bolshevik predecessors
– or a colour revolution known from the streets of Belgrade, Tunis, Cairo, Tbilisi, Kiev
and many other places. If the latter is the correct interpretation then the question arises
whether this time the process was initiated – as usual – by the CIA or whether it
is the boomerang hitting back the thrower. Be that as it may – power struggle apart
– the events reveal a few important things.
[1] Americans are not a uniform, coherent nation and never will be: it is always blacks
against whites, though the discrimination laws are a thing of the past, how much more slavery.
Assimilation or integration – so much propagated in Europe in view of the influx of the
people from the Third World – does not work in the least. The two races share the same
terrain, language and religion and still remain far part.
[2] Monument desecration and removal is a fight against memory. Memoriae damnatio or the
Orwellian black hole is a well-known historical phenomenon. Invaders of Egypt necessarily
obliterated the images of pharaohs; Arab conquerors smashed images of ancient heroes or
Christian saints; Christians would destroy pagan idols; Byzantine iconoclasts raised their
hands against paintings depicting Jesus Christ and saints; protestants would do the same a
couple of centuries later in northern and western Europe; French revolutionaries would even
stoop down to extracting corpses of the long-dead French kings – Capetians, Valois,
Bourbons – and desecrating them; Bolsheviks in Russia would do the same with the remnants
of the tsarist past; even worse: factions of Bolsheviks would delete from very recent memory
yesterday's comrades.
[3] The BLM movement is racist to the core. It is aimed against whites and whites alone. It
is strong because it is supported by the democratic party and its adherents and a number of
foundations. That it is anti-white is evident. White actors have been discouraged from
impersonating or even voicing characters of colour, which, however, is not the case when it
comes to black actors who are increasingly frequently cast in typically white roles. It is only
and exclusively whites who are accused of being racist.
[4] Humiliation of the white population and especially of the police. The pictures of white
people kneeling to blacks and of the policemen – armed to their teeth – to the
rioters have been spread worldwide. It is an act of humiliation pure touted of course as an act
of interracial reconciliation and mutual respect.
[5] As usual, whenever a black gets killed in a squabble or a scuffle African-Americans,
Antifa and the mainstream media are quick to pass judgement without waiting for the court
sentence, which runs counter to the well-established procedure that no one is deemed guilty
until proven. The pressure exerted by the rioters and the media without doubt negatively
affects the decision of the judges who later deal with the case.
[6] What is happening is certainly wanted by a large part of the establishment or else it
wouldn't have been happening. Black rioters know that they can enjoy a lot of leeway and they
act accordingly, looting and burning and showing disrespect for the law and the police. Many a
mayor or police chief – usually a democrat and a black – under the pretext of
deescalating the conflicts withdraws the law enforcement units from parts of the city that they
are in charge of. Consider the so-called autonomous zones in Seattle and New York held for a
time by rioters. The powers that be could suppress the riots within 24 hours if they only
wanted to. As it is, they are using irascible black communities (agitated by Antifa activists)
to create turmoil and thus to achieve political goals. Just picture to yourself a rally of
genuine Nazis raising their hands in the Roman salute: how long would they hold a public
space?
Welcome to the DSA: the Dis-United States of America!
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS
MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
People occupying parts of the city called autonomous zones remind the Kiev Maidan
protesters. They spend days and nights doing nothing, but somehow they do not go hungry. In
both cases the police are either inactive or indolent. The Maidan riots in Kiev brought about
the change of the government. The powers that be must be counting on the same in the Dis-United
States of America.
How do we know that the riots are instigated, sponsored and used by the powers that be?
Precisely because of the inactivity and indolence of the police, because of the inactivity and
indolence of local; authorities, because of the media's condoning tone towards the events.
Lastly, history teaches us that revolutions, are made by means of popular protests and these
protests are paid by very rich individuals. Professional revolutionaries whose task it was to
destabilize Russia at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th centuries were in the
pocket of Alexander Parvus (born: Israel Gelfand) and Jacob Schiff. Individuals that later
became the driving forces of the coup d'etat – Leon Trotsky (born: Lev Bronstein),
creator of the Red Army – did not have to bother about their living.
The deletion of historical memory and the renunciation of the heroes of the past paves the
way for replacing the United States of America with something new. Maybe the Union of Soviet
States of America? At present it is the images, effigies, and monuments that are beheaded,
trampled upon, kicked and drowned. Tomorrow it may very likely be people. Such are the dynamics
of any revolutionary movement.
You can be fired for criticizing BLM, because in essence this is apolitical movement run by regular Dem NGOs careerists.
Immunity from criticism is a sign of totalitarism.
Imagine for a moment that you're on a sports team that has never won a championship game,
that only rarely wins a game at all, that comes in near or dead last in the rankings season
after season after season. And imagine you want to win for once – not just a few games,
but a winning season, making it through playoffs and into the finals, and maybe even take home
the championship, something your team has never done before. But looking at your team, most of
the players aren't that great, those that are don't work together well, they fight amongst
themselves more than the other teams, each of them tries to steal the glory from the other
players only to fail spectacularly when they do. Your current coach, who's been coaching the
team for decades, tells the players it's not their fault that they keep losing, the refs are
just biased against them, the game is rigged, and everyone deserves an equal number of points
regardless of how well they play. When refs make a call against them, they start a fight
instead of accepting the call and playing better to overcome the setback. Instead of focusing
on improving as players or as a team, they're taught to complain about the rules of the game
itself. Don't hate the player, hate the game. But along comes a new coach offering a new style
of management. The new coach wants to kick the worst players off the team while making the
remaining players train harder to improve their skills and organize around supporting the best
players on the team. They're expected to show good sportsmanship even if the refs sometimes
make a bad call, and channel any anger or frustration over those calls into playing harder. If
you were on the team and wanted to actually win once in a while, which coach would you want
leading you?
As black Americans riot, loot their neighborhood stores, and burn down black owned
businesses over the death of a methhead who likely died because of an overdose of multiple
drugs and not because of the knee on his neck
[1] https://www.unz.com/article/or-did-george-floyd-die-...rdose/ (fentanyl overdoses are
known to cause breathing problems and Floyd had no serious injuries to his neck or elsewhere
from the officers who arrested him) who cared so little about black lives he once threatened to
shoot a pregnant black woman during a robbery/home invasion and his own black kids didn't even
recognize him on tv, we must ask what is so different about the black community that they could
be trolled by the media into destroying their own cities to protest the death of a man who
contributed nothing to the black community. That they would do this at a time when the media
has warned against any and all mass gatherings aside from these protests due to fears of
coronavirus, which blacks are dying from at a higher rate than whites, even as the media tells
white conservatives to avoid mass gatherings such as the recent Trump rally in Tulsa, should
make the left wing media's total disregard for black lives obvious even as they heap lip
service on the Black Lives Matter movement and organization, but blacks across the country have
chosen to ignore the warnings about a disease that has killed tens of thousands of black
Americans so far this year in order to protest the death of about ten unarmed blacks per year
by police.
Blacks have never been the most successful race in America (and are even less successful in
most of the rest of the world), but American blacks, who have a significantly higher average IQ
than their African cousins, aren't usually as collectively stupid as they have been so far in
2020 as they destroy their own communities and risk death by a disease much deadlier than the
police to protest the death of a man who would likely have died from the drugs in his system
regardless of whether or not the police arrested him (though they did overwhelmingly vote to
re-elect Barack Obama in 2012 after his disastrous war in Libya screwed up a once prosperous
African nation so badly that you can now openly buy black slaves there, effectively
re-establishing the African slave trade thanks to America's first black President).
If black Americans want to improve their situation, they need honest and constructive
criticism of their current problems as a group and the underlying causes of those problems.
As hundreds of millions of dollars are being donated by corporate interests to the
Soros-affiliated Black Lives Matter organization behind the protests that turned to riots
that have destroyed their small business competition and are preventing the reopening of the
economy in the wake of the coronavirus shutdown, it's hard to see how any of that money will be
spent in ways that actually improve the quality of life or economic prospects of the average
black American, let alone make up for the destruction of so many local and black owned
businesses caused by the riots.
It's unclear how the money BLM has raised is actually being spent aside from the few
million paid to the organization's staff and consultants and the 6% of their funds that have
gone to the local chapters that they claim are supposed to be running the show, and many
activists have raised questions about just where the money is going.
[2] https://dailycaller.com/2020/06/18/black-lives-matte...tants/ The pseudo-socialist
elites like Soros who are funding the movement for their own purposes likely do not have the
best interests of the black population at heart, and the millions raised in previous years do
not seem to have been used to help the black community prosper and improve.
Nor have the variety of socialist programs that blacks have voted for through the Democratic
Party improved their community much. The average black household is more than twice as likely
to receive some form of welfare than the average white household and three times as likely to
receive direct cash assistance.
[3] https://www.amren.com/features/2015/10/welfare-whos-...s-not/
But despite the fact that whites, who pay more in taxes to find these programs, have large
portions of our wealth redistributed every year to blacks through socialist programs like, EBT,
Section 8, Medicaid, and TANF, no amount of free food and shelter seems to be enough to help
black Americans rise economically.
Rather, the opposite seems to be true, as blacks learn to settle for free stuff and a
welfare lifestyle rather than pushing themselves to succeed. Nor do the affirmative action
programs that exist in admissions to most colleges help blacks, as they appear to actually
lower academic performance and graduation rates among black students as they increase the
number of black students in the colleges that practice affirmative action.
[4] https://web.archive.org/web/20130511043833/http://ww...AL.pdf
And despite the claims that the high crime rates in black communities – some of which
exceed the crime rates of even the most violent third world countries – are caused by
poverty and a lack of opportunity, no amount of free stuff to alleviate poverty or affirmative
action to provide opportunity has brought the crime rate in the black community down to
anywhere near the low level in the white community.
Crime has dropped since the early 1990s due to the removal of lead from gasoline
[5] https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2018/02/an-up...-2018/ , but the massive gap in
crime rates between blacks and whites has remained even as levels of lead exposure among blacks
have dropped massively and can no longer be used to explain away their high crime rates.
Despite being only 13% of the population, blacks commit more than half the murders in the
US, and a solid majority of their victims are black (though they kill hundreds more whites and
members of other races each year than the other way around). If BLM actually cared about
black lives, the thousands of extra blacks murdered by other blacks beyond the number who would
be murdered if they had the same murder rate as whites would be a higher priority than the
dozen or so unarmed black men killed by police each year (many of whom were engaged in violent
crime or, like George Floyd, didn't die strictly due to police violence). But they're not, and
the progressive left will never so much as admit that blacks have a higher violent crime rate
for reasons other than poverty, let alone find a solution to it.
Nor can historical racism explain the difference in outcomes between blacks and whites. East
Asians were considered colored under Jim Crow laws in many southern states (their segregation
from whites was upheld in the 1927 Supreme Court case Lum v. Rice), while lighter skinned
immigrants from Mexico and south and central America were generally considered white and given
the privileges that came with that status.
The Japanese specifically were put into internment camps during WWII, facing even stricter
legal discrimination than blacks during that time. And yet, if you're the descendant of
Japanese Americans who lived here through internment and segregation, odds are you make more
money than the average white American, while Hispanic/Latino Americans whose ancestors were
often considered white during that time have a lower average income.
Black immigrants from Africa and the Caribbean also have a higher average income (though
this may be due in part to selection bias), as do immigrants from India, while the Jews, who
regularly claim to be the most oppressed group in history, have a much higher average income
than white Americans and are roughly 20 times as likely to be billionaires as the average
American after running our central bank for most of the past century.
Black Americans are doing significantly better than blacks in any other part of the world,
including the descendants of the black Africans who sold most black Americans' ancestors into
slavery. If historical discrimination and multigenerational trauma were as big a part of the
reason for the American black community's problems as leftists like to claim, Jews should be
among the poorest people in the world, while blacks in places that spent very little time under
colonial rule, such as Ethiopia and Haiti, should be among the most prosperous black
communities in the world. Instead, the opposite appears to be true.
This isn't to say that no systemic racism exists – after all, we have a media that
tells blacks it's important to have mass gatherings during a pandemic while telling white
conservatives to avoid mass gatherings, so if the Wuhan Flu is anywhere near as dangerous as
the media says, our left wing media is actively attempting to kill thousands of blacks by
encouraging them to increase their risk of contracting the virus while telling white
conservatives to avoid any possibility of contracting the virus (unless they actually believe
the virus is a hoax or the threat is overblown, in which case they're just suppressing
conservative voices as usual). We also have a drug war which was escalated in part by Nixon,
whose staff has since admitted that part of the reason for his push to increase drug arrest was
to suppress blacks who had mostly switched to voting Democrat by that point. But while there is
some evidence of racial bias in arrests for drug crimes, where blacks make up a larger
percentage of drug arrests than drug users, there does not seem to be any anti-black bias in
enforcement of violent crimes, where blacks are much more likely to commit rape, assault, and
robbery according to victimization studies and crime reports, and the racial breakdown of
people accused of violent crime is much closer to the racial breakdown of people arrested for
violent crime than it is for drug crimes. According to the National Crime Victimization Survey
from the Bureau of Justice, blacks are more than twice as likely to be offenders of violent
crime as to be victims, bigger than the difference between men and women, while whites and
Asians are more likely to be victims than perpetrators of violent crime.
[6] https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/rhovo1215.pdf table 12
Whites commit about 2.3 times as many total violent crimes as blacks (while making up about
5 times as much of the population) according to the NCVS, and according to the FBI's Uniform
Crime Report, 2.5 times as many whites as blacks are arrested for violent crimes
[7] https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2018/crime-in-t...ble-43 , so whites seem more
likely to be arrested than blacks after adjusting for their crime rate (though this may be
affected by differences in racial classification between the two and may vary by specific
crime; the NCVS hasn't provided a racial breakdown for specific crimes since 2006).
There's also evidence that police are equally if not more likely to use excessive and deadly
force against white suspects than black suspects according to a study by a black Harvard
professor.
[8] https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/11/no-...-prof/ So the claims of systemic
bias by police against black Americans seem largely exaggerated, and if blacks are targeted
more by police, it probably has more to do with the fact that police are called on to deal with
black suspects far more often than to protect black victims.
But simply pointing out how wrong the left's assessment of both the black community's
problems and their proposed solutions to those problems is isn't – and shouldn't be
– enough. The rioting the left continually provokes black Americans into will likely
worsen every election year until a real solution to the black community's problems of poverty
and crime can be found. If the Trump right wants to win over a sizable number of black votes,
or if the far right wants to avoid being trolled into a costly race war by globalist elites who
want to destabilize our country and instead turn all races against the rootless elites who have
been playing us all for fools, we will have to offer the black community a real solution to
their plight, a lasting and long term solution that gives them the opportunity to rise above
their current problems.
The first step is to acknowledge that the differences in outcomes between white and black
Americans have less to do with systemic factors that affect blacks and whites differently and
more to do with cultural and genetic differences that cause whites and blacks to behave
differently. There are significant genetic differences between different races. About 5% of the
genes that differ between humans are exclusive to particular geographically bounded hereditary
groups
[9] https://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/20/us/gene-study-ide...y.html – what most of us
would refer to as races, but what university academics must be careful to differentiate from
race with technical mumbo jumbo in order to not have their research defunded by the
socialist/progressive/social justice left.
Even if social conceptions and divisions of race from 50+ years ago were not based in
genetics, we can divide people into clear genetic hereditary groups that correspond closely
enough to the racial groups most people are familiar with – Europeans/Caucasians,
Sub-Saharan Africans, East Asians, South Asians/North Africans, and Native Americans have
similarities within their groups and differences from other groups that make them distinct
groups that can be identified by their genes.
In addition to the portion of our genome that's exclusive to particular racial hereditary
groups, there are millions of genes that are more common in certain racial and ethnic groups
than others. For example, the MAOA gene affects the development of neurotransmitters in your
brain, and one particular variant/allele of that gene (known as the two repeat allele) makes
you more prone to impulsive and violent behavior.
[10] https://pastebin.com/w5c8ftd4 That allele is recessive and exists on the X chromosome,
meaning a woman must have two copies of the allele while men only need one copy for the gene to
express itself and result in impulsive and violent behavior, making men more likely to display
such behavior than women.
About 5% of black men have that particular allele, as compared to 0.1% of white men. That
gene is not a perfect predictor of violent behavior, but it is a contributing factor to the
significantly higher violent crime rate seen among black men in particular.
Another gene, the ADRA gene, affects empathy and emotional memory. The ADRA2b allele is
associated with a greater ability to remember emotions and what causes them, affecting your
ability to predict other people's emotions and understand how your actions affect others.
[11] https://www.unz.com/pfrost/a-genetic-marker-for-empathy/ That gene appears to be about
5 times as common in Caucasians as in full blooded Africans, but closer to twice as common in
American whites as American blacks, and even more common in certain Asians than in Europeans.
The ADRA2b allele may partially explain why Asian and European communities seem to be more
cooperative and peaceful on average than African and African American communities.
Just as there are genes that impact our personality traits, there are also genes that impact
intelligence. Over 1000 genes have been identified that impact intelligence. Considering that
intelligence is estimated to be somewhere between 50-80% genetic, and that there have been
significant differences in average IQ between blacks, whites, yellows, reds, browns, and
whatever other racial or ethnic groups don't want to consider themselves part of one of those
categories that have remained fairly stable for decades even as environmental, social, and
economic factors changed significantly, it's likely that most of the difference in average
intelligence between different racial and ethnic hereditary groups is due to genetic
differences. Intelligence has a significant impact on both educational attainment and career
success that likely explains a lot more of the difference in attainment between the average
member of different races than discrimination.
In order to understand the difference in outcomes between different races, we have to
understand the genetic differences that cause them. No one gene completely determines a
person's personality or intelligence – heck, 1000 genes don't completely determine either
of those things, but they do have a strong enough impact on them that they can't be ignored,
particularly when talking about group averages and large scale societal trends such as violent
crime rates and average incomes. People who want to see blacks succeed beyond where they're at
today often reject the genetic argument for our different levels of success because admitting
that the differences between us are genetic makes them seem inherent and unchangeable, making
it unacceptable within their worldview. But the opposite is true – we live in an
evolutionary world where humanity has changed immeasurably just in the past few thousand years
and is continuing to change. Populations are shaped by their environment and evolve to adapt to
their environment very quickly.
How quickly can people adapt? It depends, but one indicator is the fox domestication
experiment that took place in Russia. Russian researchers took a species of fox that had never
been domesticated and selectively bred them to see how many generations it would take to
domesticate them. The first generation behaved largely hostile to the researchers, often
reacting with fear and anger and attempting to attack their handlers even when being fed. But
some of the foxes were more hostile than others, and some were more passive and showed
occasional signs of friendliness. The ones who showed more friendliness and less hostility were
selected to breed more while the ones who showed the most hostility to their handlers were not
allowed to breed. It took 6 generations for the first fox who behaved like a mostly
domesticated animal – showing affection to humans, only attacking their handlers when
provoked, making noise and movements to attempt to communicate with their handlers – was
born. Within 10 generations about 18% behaved like domesticated animals. At 20 generations,
over a third did, and by 30 generations about three fourths did.
[12] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyudmila_Trut Today, after over 40 generations, nearly
all of the foxes born behave like fully domesticated animals.
If 40 generations is at least enough time to cause as major a change as going from a wild,
hostile animal to a friendly domesticated animal, something which involves a significant
population wide shift in a large number of genes affecting personality, it's likely that 40
generations would be more than enough time to close the gap between blacks and whites –
assuming the right kind of selective pressure. 40 generations in humans is about 1000 years,
which may seem like a long time, but significant shifts in behavior would be seen within just a
few generations. American blacks have already been adapting to white society for centuries, and
it's likely the harsh selective pressure of the slavery and Jim Crow eras, as well as the
mixing of some European DNA into most American blacks during that time, helped accelerate the
process and explains why American blacks are doing so much better than blacks in Africa and
places like Haiti where they did not intermix and did not face the same levels of selective
pressure from whites. And if the differences between blacks and whites are not as big as the
differences between domesticated and wild animals, then we can expect it to take less time to
catch black Americans up to white Americans – provided they face harsher selective
pressure to remove the worst members of their population from their gene pool and encourage the
best to breed more.
No serious evolutionary biologist believes selective pressure would not work to cause
significant changes in a population. Of course the tens of thousands of years of evolutionary
separation between different racial hereditary groups living in different environments,
particularly after the development of organized civilizations which came with their own forms
of selective pressure, caused us to develop different traits, and of course we are continuing
to evolve and adapt to our ever changing environment. Noted evolutionary biologist Richard
Dawkins has even stated that eugenics obviously would work, and that any objections to it (of
which he has many) must be made on ethical grounds because the scientific evidence solidly
supports the idea that you can change the traits of a human population over time through
selective pressure, just as you can for any other species.
[13] https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/feb/17/ric...eugen/ So the question for the
black population, once they've accepted the scientific evidence that they are more prone to
violent crime and less capable of attaining economic success due to genetic differences, is not
whether or not they can change this fact – of course they can. The question is whether or
not they should, and if so, how they should and what the selective pressure needed to cause the
changes they want to make to their people should look like. Is it more unethical for blacks to
selectively remove the most aggressive, impulsive, unteachable, and crime prone members of
their community to improve the community as a whole, or to continue to be mired in poverty and
crime, unable to rise above their current station in life, to remain the butt of every racist
joke for generations to come?
Even if blacks choose not to use eugenic selection to improve as a people, there are many
ways biological realism can help them. Even if you reject the idea that race is genetic and not
just skin color, skin color matters more than people like to admit. Darker skin makes it harder
to produce enough vitamin D from sunlight, so black people need to live in areas with more
sunlight (closer to the equator) to get an adequate amount of vitamin D, and may be healthier
working outdoors rather than adopting the indoor office work lifestyle of lighter skinned
whites and east Asians who need less sunlight to be healthy.
This may help to explain why northern cities that never had Jim Crow laws and outlawed
slavery far earlier often have even higher violent crime rates among the black population than
southern cities where historical oppression supposedly affected blacks there more. Perhaps
blacks in northern cities like Detroit, Chicago, and New York would be better off moving south
to sunnier climates where they can be healthier, and perhaps whites in the deep south –
particularly Florida, the sunniest state in the country and the one state where there seems to
be an abundance of crazy white people – should move further north to climates where they
don't get too much sun.
Environment can affect people in a lot of ways, both the natural environment and the social,
political, and economic environment, but often those effects are the exact opposite of what the
left likes to claim. Take gun control, for example. White leftists claim greater availability
of guns increases violent crime. The exact opposite seems to be true. Blacks and Hispanics have
about half as high a gun ownership rate as whites, and yet commit far higher rates of violent
crime.
[16] https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/07/15/the...holds/ Blacks are also much
more likely to be arrested for gun control and weapons law violations according to FBI arrest
rate stats, making up about 43% of those arrested but only about 6% of gun owners, one of the
few areas of crime (along with drug laws, another victimless crime) where blacks actually are
disproportionately far more likely to get arrested relative to whites after adjusting for
differences in behavior between blacks and whites, and in this case it's because of the
policies of Democrat politicians that blacks overwhelmingly vote for.
Part of the reason why violent crime is higher in black and brown communities than in white
communities is likely that in white communities where gun ownership rates are high, violent
crime is much more likely to result in the criminal's death. This creates an environment where
criminals (and therefore people who are more crime-prone) are regularly removed from the gene
pool, resulting in much lower crime rates in the long run, while in black and brown
neighborhoods criminals are much more likely to survive and benefit from their criminality,
resulting in the genes that make them crime prone being more likely to be passed on. Modern gun
control may only have been around for a few generations, long enough to make small changes in
the frequency of genes that contribute to criminality but not long enough to explain the full
difference. Historically, whites have practiced selective removal of criminals for large
portions of their history – the Romans used crucifixion for hundreds of years to remove
criminals and anti-social types from the European gene pool, and hangings and public executions
of criminals were common for much of later European history, long enough to have a significant
impact on their gene pool, while the African populations American blacks are descended from
typically did not have organized or codified legal systems that sought to remove bad actors
from their populations until after contact with Eurasian peoples. If blacks want to catch up in
removing criminals from their communities but don't want to use direct eugenics to remove
people with specific genes from their gene pool, perhaps rolling back gun control and
encouraging the more responsible members of their community to own and learn to use guns so
they can defend their communities from the criminals who prey on them would be a good step in
that direction, though whites (particularly white urban leftists) who live near their
communities will be understandably wary of the most violent people in America wanting higher
rates of gun ownership, even if they will go to great lengths to hide that fact and conceal
their racism by arguing for gun control on other grounds.
If black Americans want to improve their situation, they will need to change their strategy,
both culturally and politically. Welfare programs enable the least capable among them to
survive at the expense of the most capable, preventing them from evolving to be more capable,
and eliminates the need for stable families. Gun control enables the survival of criminals at
the expense of the innocent. Many of the policies blacks are tricked into voting for by white
leftists are terrible for their community; even the most virulent racists who want to lynch
black criminals would be better for their community than white leftists who want to make
criminality thrive in the black community, and the meritocratic portion of the conservative
movement and Republican Party that prides itself on valuing individual ability over group
identifiers would likely do far more good for the black community than the progressive movement
and Democratic Party that have tricked blacks into destroying their own families and
communities for decades. Simply leaving the Democrat plantation for the Trump Republicans will
be enough to get the black community started on the path towards a better future. But it may
not be enough in the long run. Blacks do have some genetic strength, such as higher rates of
genes like the 577R allele of the ACTN3 gene that makes your muscle fibers more powerful and
makes those who have it capable of running faster, and they seem to have plenty of musical
talent if their history of inspiring jazz, rock, rap, and other new genres of music is any
indication. Preserving those strengths as they try to remove their weaknesses may not be easy,
and in the case of their strength and speed it may not even be necessary as we head towards a
more automated and tech-centric future where intellect will likely matter even more and
physical ability even less than they do now in our modern era where intellectual work generally
pays far more than physical work. Blacks will need to do some soul searching as a community to
determine what direction their people need to head in to survive and thrive in the future and
how best to get there.
A sports and game metaphor written by someone who is totally unaware of the history of gaming
and sports in the US.
"When refs make a call against them, they start a fight instead of accepting the call and
playing better to overcome the setback. "
You have got to kidding. Any attempt to pin bad sportsmanship on blacks is just scatter
gunned with whites having apoplectic fits not only over the rules, but why=o makes the rules,
why are there rules . . .
The founders had a life essentially paid for by the British people. Thy free press, free
speech, trial by jury, common law, capital markets, a stable currency, basically unfettered
access to the world's oceans, representative government here an abroad -- though the one
complaint that made some sense was having representation in Great Britain proper.
Th British people secured paid for protection of the colonies, provided cheaper goods than
foreign providers, even permitted the colonies slaves . . .
n yet the founders were constantly whining about not being free. They got wealthy off of
Great Britain's protection, but they complained about taxes and having to food to the
military that served their interests . . . in fact they complained about everything. They
even complained that Parliament wanted the treaties with the native Americans respected,
Danial Boone and company weren't having it.
trying to make a case of poor sportsmanship in light of who we are as a people and a
nations -- -
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- –
Perfect example of the kind on nonsense is the above statement.
"If 40 generations is at least enough time to cause as major a change as going from a
wild, hostile animal to a friendly domesticated animal, something which involves a
significant population wide shift in a large number of genes affecting personality, it's
likely that 40 generations would be more than enough time to close the gap between blacks and
whites – assuming the right kind of selective pressure."
That's 40 generations denied access to the same tools and even the rules muchless the
playing field. You make that astounding above observation in the same article you grant out
"Jim Crow"
Laughing . . . Jim crow is the founders making up rules that benefit them -- getting as
much s they could minus the need to compete with several millions. Laugh. But by all means
let's not talk about bending the rules.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Black were not tricked into anything. Generally they were by and large rejected by the
party with whom they share the most in common regarding ideology and as result, sided with
the party who would at least consider their issues. There was no trick. If there was it was
the belief that the party of Lincoln would best represent them as equal citizens and if not
equals at least would not support policies and processes that undermined their hard work and
value.
uhhh no Mr. glen Beck, the blacks who made it though the gate of white acceptance probably
didn't spend their time addressing issues of color by way of complaint -- those issue were
front and center and they set about dealing with them as they were -- as well as the business
at hand. In fact a look at the record is that whites were obsessed with issues of color.
no mixing laws
no walking in the side walk laws
no shopping without permission laws
no being out a lone laws
no venturing into the wrong neighborhood laws
no talking back laws
only certain type of employment laws
no using the pool laws
no promotions over white people laws
no going to school going to school with whites laws
no going to school period
. . .
and of course no sending in the police when called by blacks laws (though largely
unwritten)
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
List for me the number of alleles associated with any cognitive aspect of of our biology
and explain how they operate. Further note the distinct differences between said structures
as they are among the varying people on the planet.
Laughing; it's a strange twist to read about changing the game via some manner of
biological manipulation, though the author has absolutely no idea what aspect of biology to
change to acquire x behavior. But why should that stop him from his unmoored
rationalizations.
"American blacks are descended from typically did not have organized or codified legal
systems that sought to remove bad actors from their populations until after contact with
Eurasian peoples. "
Utter and compete nonsense. The african civilizations are myriad and those that retained a
verbal orals history operated in some of the complex social high context systems that ever
existed. I have a a few more responses, but you are out in left field in ball park that is
playing a game that is made from whole cloth cotton seed. what you mean o say is that the mot
of the african civiliations we are aware on did not have a written system, that we are are
aware if. That is some thing miles a light years different than they did have one. . No the
oral traditions are chocker block loaded with codes and rules of social order -- ij fact high
context societies, such as existed in the continent have a system o social order that
deferred to the benefit of the group. Which in many respects made them ideal slaves and why
whites were not inclined to invite them to read about the society in the west with its
individual demands, because it would have made slavery even more a problem from the tensions
surrounding the society in which they were enslaved -- speaking of playing by the rules
--
we believe all men are born as to equal standing -- the country setting up the rules and
then . . .
"but don't tell the slaves that . . . " Laughing
There's not enough wool here to fill a small zip lock bag muchless be pulled over one's
eye's.
Now let's compare your metaphor to what happens when whites aren't bending the rules and
crying foul and having a temper tantrum every time a black moves in net door or taking the
ball and running away.
Dominant players in track and field.
Dominant players in Basketball
Dominant players in baseball
Dominant players in Football
Wait a minute that's all genetics in your mind. Laugh. The point is that when allowed to
play and play by the same rules – blacks do fairly well and much much more.
But I am going to skip rope back to early US history and see blacks how blacks operated
when the gate keepers of by sheer force of will , chance and the grace of God blacks did get
into the system.
And let's start with Mr. Beck's gambit that backfired to his intentions.
It is interesting that if some blacks embrace socialism, they would reject private property,
because all property is theoretically owned by the state under that system.
And the necessary implication is that under that system the individual is owned by the
state. In reality, people own themselves. A person's body is their property. Their eyes,
their hair. The fruits of their labor, their tools, their property are their property.
So if some blacks accept socialism, they must necessarily accept slavery. They are then
slaves to the state. Ironic. In this age of nonsense and deception, freedom is slavery.
"Today, America's tumbrils are clattering about, carrying toppled statues, ruined careers,
unwoke brands. Over their sides peer those deemed racist by left-wing identitarians and
sentenced to cancelation, even as the evidentiary standard for that crime falls through the
floor But who are these cultural revolutionaries? The conventional wisdom goes that this is
the inner-cities erupting, economically disadvantaged victims of racism enraged over the
murder of George Floyd. The reality is something more bourgeoisie. As Kevin Williamson
observed last week, "These are the idiot children of the American ruling class, toy radicals
and Champagne Bolsheviks, playing Jacobin for a while, until they go back to graduate
school".
Is that so? I well recall listening in the Middle East to other angry young men who, too,
wanted to 'topple the statues'; to burn down everything. 'You really believed that Washington
would allow you in', they taunted and tortured their leaders: "No, we must burn it all down.
Start from scratch".
Did they have a blueprint for the future? No. They simply believed that Islam would
organically inflate, and expand to fill the void. It would happen by itself – of its own
accord: Faith.
Professor John Gray has noted "that in
The God that failed, Gide says: 'My faith in communism is like my faith in religion. It is a
promise of salvation for mankind'' . "Here Gide acknowledged", Gray continues, "that communism
was an atheist version of monotheism. But so is liberalism, and when Gide and others gave up
faith in communism to become liberals, they were not renouncing the concepts and values that
both ideologies had inherited from western religion. They continued to believe that history was
a directional process in which humankind was advancing towards universal freedom ".
So too with the wokes. The emphasis is on Redemption; on a Truth catharsis; on their own
Virtue as sufficient agency to stand-in for the lack of plan for the future. All are clear
signals: A secularised 'illusion' is metamorphosing back into 'religion'. Not as Islam, of
course, but as angry Man, burning at the deep and dark moral stain of the past. And acting now
as purifying 'fire' to bring about the uplifting and shining future ahead.
Tucker Carlson, a leading American conservative commentator known for plain speaking,
frames the movement a little differently:
"This is not a momentary civil disturbance. This is a serious, and highly organized
political movement It is deep and profound and has vast political ambitions. It is insidious,
it will grow. Its goal is to end liberal democracy and challenge western civilization itself
We're too literal and good-hearted to understand what's happening We have no idea what we are
up against These are not protests. This is a totalitarian political movement" .
Again, nothing needs to be done by this new generation to bring into being a new world,
apart from destroying the old one. This vision is a relic – albeit secularised – of
western Christianity. Apocalypse and redemption, these wokes believe, have their own path;
their own internal logic.
Mill's 'ghost' is arrived at the table. And with its return, America's exceptionalism has
its re-birth. Redemption for humankind's dark stains. A narrative in which the history of
mankind is reduced to the history of racial struggle. Yet Americans, young or old, now lack the
power to project it as a universal vision.
'Virtue', however deeply felt, on its own, is insufficient. Might President Trump try
nevertheless to sustain the old illusion by hard power? The U.S. is deeply fractured and
dysfunctional – but if desperate, this is possible.
The "toy radicals, and Champagne Bolsheviks" – in these terms of dripping disdain from
Williamson – are very similar to those who rushed into the streets in 1917. But before
dismissing them so peremptorily and lightly, recall what occurred.
Into that combustible mass of youth – so acultured by their progressive parents to see
a Russian past that was imperfect and darkly stained – a Trotsky and Lenin were inserted.
And Stalin ensued. No 'toy radicals'. Soft became hard totalitarianism.
play_arrow
N2M , 22 minutes ago
Vision? What vision that might be?
"'Freedom' is being torn down from within"
What freedom? Could be "Freedom" they decide how, when and where you can express your
thoughts? There is only one true freedom that exists and that is human free will to tell the
truth.
Today vision of Freedom is a joke, this game was never about freedom for in a world of
ideology, there is always lurking a deceits of lies and control.
There are 3 types of Americans.
A sharp ones and well tune to what has been going on and those I had a chance to talk
to and become friends when I was in U.S.A
The imbeciles of totally clueless generation of people who will listen to any wave of
information in propaganda as true and must be and their government is so beloved, no others
can even compete and they only have good intentions /s /c
And there is this group, shrewd, conniving, self-moral, warmongering, evil to a core
psychopaths who only follow different orders to impose their will on other nations to makes
sure they follow what? USD.
So when author speaks about vision it must separate few things!
Washington is running around imposing sanctions, destroying relationship/interest with
nations, trying all this regime changes at a cost of death of millions of people and then
dropping "Freedom bombs' almost every 8 to 9 minutes somewhere in this world, because these
freaks vision is way different, then some regular people either be in South America or other
continents that these regular people have.
Real vision is based on corporation, and U.S.A had that before, however after being
hijack, now they trying to start a war of unimaginable proportions so few fat bosses in one
Chamber can feel as super masters of the world and everyone as slaves.
I would like to remind some people about vision – Marx had a vision to, and rest is
history.
Becklon , 1 hour ago
It's a lack of shared purpose, I think. Without a common focus, such as an external threat
(as once provided by the USSR) groups tend to fracture and turn on themselves and each
other.
It's got nothing to do with any one religious or political group having more power than
others. It's to do with homo sapiens - and maybe entropy.
1 play_arrow
David Wooten , 1 hour ago
Well, if all this is true, there is far, far more at stake than the US being unable to
"Re-Impose Its Civilisational Worldview" (which I would be fine with).
"... This lady is sitting there lying trying to prove a point. I have been in enough arguments to kow when someone is just arguing to keep the discussion going ..."
The bottom line is, they want to take away any problem solving skills that might build character, because someone might get
hurt! Victimhood culture run amuck.
Mathematics is the cornerstone of all forms of trade, communications, home economics and every other aspect of life. Truth
is they're dumbing everyone down to control populations!
I have Master's Degree in Mechanical Engineering and I'm 62-years old. I have never once cared about the history of mathematics,
other than a curiosity. Knowing the history of mathematics never helped me once to solve an ordinary second order differential
equation.
When a person lies while giving an interview they should be shocked or something. This lady is sitting there lying trying
to prove a point. I have been in enough arguments to kow when someone is just arguing to keep the discussion going. She has
already lost the argument deflected and differed responsibility when confronted with the legitimacy of the paper.
Go exercise healthy body makes a healthy mind not the other way around.
THE YEAR WAS 2081, and everybody was finally equal.
They weren't only equal before God and the law. They were equal every which way. Nobody was
smarter than anybody else. Nobody was better looking than anybody else. Nobody was stronger or
quicker than anybody else. All this equality was due to the 211th, 212th, and 213 th Amendments
to the Constitution, and to the unceasing vigilance of agents of the United States Handicapper
General.
Some things about living still weren't quite right, though. April for instance, still drove
people crazy by not being springtime. And it was in that clammy month that the H-G men took
George and Hazel Bergeron's fourteen- year-old son, Harrison, away.
It was tragic, all right, but George and Hazel couldn't think about it very hard. Hazel had
a perfectly average intelligence, which meant she couldn't think about anything except in short
bursts. And George, while his intelligence was way above normal, had a little mental handicap
radio in his ear. He was required by law to wear it at all times. It was tuned to a government
transmitter. Every twenty seconds or so, the transmitter would send out some sharp noise to
keep people like George from taking unfair advantage of their brains.
George and Hazel were watching television. There were tears on Hazel's cheeks, but she'd
forgotten for the moment what they were about.
Dostoyevsky had a good definition of the political correctness of his day, from his very
prescient novel "The Possessed" [by devils]. He defined it as "a combination of self
righteousness, and the unwillingness to hold an independent opinion." (They were then as now
called "liberals," the "resistance" then to Tsar Aleksandr II, who had just freed 23 million
serfs, created a court system with trial by jury, and instituted elected local and regional
governments. Elements of the resistance assassinated him en route to proclaim an elected
national parliament, the proclamation physically on his person.)
The BLM-Antifa Marxist revolution under the cover of ending "systemic racism" is controlled
by the ruling elite through foundations, progressive think tanks, wealthy liberals - and
corporate CEOs you'd think know better.
Success depends on the help of opportunistic Democrat politicians who believe raising a
clenched fist and parroting BLM will get them elected or re-elected, thus perpetuating a system
of crony capitalism and endless war behind a kinder and gentler Democrat facade that is now
falling away.
If one understands that socialism is not a share-the-wealth program, but is in reality a
method to consolidate and control the wealth, then the seeming paradox of superrich men
promoting socialism becomes no paradox at all. Instead it becomes the logical, even the
perfect tool of power-seeking megalomaniacs. Communism, or more accurately, socialism, is not
a movement of the downtrodden masses, but of the economic elite.
The ruling elite, the financial class that has profited so mightily from riots and violence,
will not allow Marxists and black hoodie nihilists to spawn a violent revolution.
Chocura750 , 4 minutes ago
I doubt very much that there is any significant ideological thinking in 99% of the BLM
protestors. Imagine for a minute that George Floyd wasn't murdered, do you think that the BLM
organizers could get 100 people to protest capitalism and rally for socialism.
ProsperD9 , 9 minutes ago
Looks like BLM is about to get canceled. They committed the biggest cardinal sin that can
ever be committed on this earth. They can shoot all white babies, they can take over a
nursing home and strangle all the old white people, they can paint the white house
black...but one thing they CANNOT do... .drum roll please ...criticize IsraHell. Looks like
they've done the deed and about to be canceled. Read about it
BLACK LIVES MATTER 'CANCELED' AFTER CRITICIZING ISRAHELL.
HenryJonesJr , 20 minutes ago
More doom **** .... This kind of hyper-ventilating nonsense might sell well in highly
urbanized, totally dependent regions of America, meaning cities. But the majority of
Americans - white, black and brown - despise the idiotic Left and all their violence and
insanity.
"... Speaking with Fox's Ainsley Earhard on Thursday, the conservative actor took aim at 'cancel culture,' dubbing it "like an early version of George Orwell's 1984" which would have barred the 90s-era character from uttering his iconic slogan. ..."
"... "I promise you that Superman – I wouldn't today be allowed to say: 'Truth, justice, and the American way,'" ..."
Actor Dean Cain, who portrayed Superman for a 1990s TV show, has set Twitter ablaze after arguing that modern 'cancel culture' would
have outlawed the superhero's catchphrase – "Truth, justice and the American way."
Speaking with Fox's Ainsley Earhard on Thursday,
the conservative actor took aim at 'cancel culture,' dubbing it "like an early version of George Orwell's 1984" which would have
barred the 90s-era character from uttering his iconic slogan.
"I promise you that Superman – I wouldn't today be allowed to say: 'Truth, justice, and the American way,'" Cain said,
responding to a recent op-ed in Time
Magazine calling for a "re-examining" of how superheroes are portrayed on screen.
"... "I'ma stab you, and while you're struggling and bleeding out, I'ma show you my paper cut and say, 'My cut matters too,'" she declared in the TikTok clip. ..."
"... Holding back tears, Janover said she'd "worked really hard" to receive a position at the company, and complained that her contract had been terminated even though Deloitte claims to "stand against systemic racism." ..."
A Harvard graduate has reportedly lost her job after posting a now-viral TikTok video in
which she vowed to assault anyone who didn't support the Black Lives Matter (BLM)
movement.
...
Claira Janover became an overnight sensation after several news outlets caught wind
of a video in which she threatened to attack anyone "entitled" enough to believe
that "all lives matter."
"I'ma stab you, and while you're struggling and bleeding out, I'ma show you my paper
cut and say, 'My cut matters too,'" she declared in the TikTok clip.
...Holding back tears, Janover said she'd "worked really hard" to receive a
position at the company, and complained that her contract had been terminated even though
Deloitte claims to "stand against systemic racism."
..."File under Schadenfreude or Karma," noted conservative firebrand
Michelle Malkin.
...Janover's firing is unusual as it marks a rare case of 'reverse' cancel culture.
Social-justice activists have typically been the ones using social media to attack anyone who
is suspected of holding politically incorrect views.
or about a month now, America's major cities have treated to nightly orgies of
old-fashioned, rope-and-torch iconoclasm. Statues of variously "problematic" historical figures
(including both Robert E. Lee and, for some reason, Ulysses S. Grant) are defaced, torn from
their rivets, and set on fire.
As cooler minds have always known, it was only a matter of time before these iconoclasts
moved out of the public sphere and into the private. But that day came much sooner than many of
us anticipated.
Enter Shaun King, one of the founders of Black Lives Matter and a doyen of the cultural
elite. Last Monday, Mr. King issued
gave his followers a rather disturbing order:
Yes, I think the statues of the white European they claim is Jesus should also come down.
They are a form of white supremacy. Always have been. In the Bible, when the family of Jesus
wanted to hide, and blend in, guess where they went? EGYPT! Not Denmark. Tear them down.
Yes. All murals and stained glass windows of white Jesus, and his European mother, and
their white friends should also come down. They are a gross form white supremacy. Created as
tools of oppression. Racist propaganda. They should all come down.
The Christian Post
identifies King as a "retired pastor," which is a pretty big stretch. In 2008, at the age
of 29, Mr. King founded a church in Atlanta called "Courageous Church" -- only to step down
four years later, aged 33, because his congregation didn't really like him. "I think in some
ways I moved people too quickly for their comfort and it just didn't work," he explained. "Some
people really loved the changes and transitions that I was proposing, but it didn't work." I
guess so. In fairness, destroying statues of Jesus and the saints went out of vogue with
Protestants a good four hundred years ago.
Every people are allowed to imaging Jesus in their own way.
So what's the issue exactly? That's right there is no issue. King simply wants to deprive
white people of their own self respect while elevating his. He's a Satanic figure.
Cue bono? Not black people (actually she is an Indian, which until recently was a caste
society). Is she a victim of "affirmative action" policy and occupies a position for which there
are more worthy academically candidates. University is not sinecure, at least it should not
be.
How good is she as an academic? Is she mentally stable?
The decision of Cambridge University to promote her after such an idiotic tweet creates
several additional questions.
Petition against Prof Priyamvada Gopal now off line. Additionally I noticed earlier today
that the comments given on the site voicing why they were signing had all been removed, but not
on other petitions. As of yesterday evening these comments were peaceful, and not personal,
just things like 'because it is racist' and 'do I even need to give a reason'?
The petition had nearly 25,000 signed supporters earlier today, and new signings were
flooding in at over 1/sec when I checked.
In addition in an affront to common decency the University/College promoted her whilst
they had stated earlier they were aware of the controversial nature of her tweets.
Her original tweet was deleted by Twitter as a breach of community guidelines. She also
reports that, in spite of senselessly provoking people at a delicate time with racist tweets,
that the extremely racist responses she got from some far right people was being looked at by
the Police.
All in all this establishes a systematic problem. Being deliberately vague means you cannot
use context as a defence, and the context of all her tweets shows some extreme patterns of
thinking against certain groups that casts very considerable doubts on the validity of such a
defense. Moreover, context hasn't been a defence when others have been prosecuted for far less.
Nobody, including Cambridge academics, should be above the law.
To those people that think that what she said was justified because she was trying to
defend BLM from supposed alternative movements, all she in fact did do was to achieve the
opposite of that.
If one wishes to convey complex ideas a teacher of English in her position *must know* that
this requires a long form medium to provide argumentation, and that Twitter is no such place to
do it due to its character count. But taking in all the other comments she has made, its very
clear the double standards and overall bias that really does amount to overt prejudice.
At the very least she is so contradictory, immature and incompetent as to make a mockery
of her college and for that reason at minimum, she should lose her job. I'm sorry to say that
as well.
But something about this whole episode feels like a jumping the shark moment. I don't think
this is going away all that easily.
Wikipedia: (born 1968) is a Professor in the Faculty of English at the University of
Cambridge, where she is a Fellow of Churchill College. Her main teaching and research interests
are in colonial and postcolonial literature and theory, gender and feminism, Marxism and critical
race studies.
"She's racist. I think we need to stop this dumbass spiel that minorities cannot be racist
because they absolutely can. She is racist and is getting away with because she's not white.
That's just the fact of the matter."
"please recognize that this is completely unacceptable and indefensible? How are her students
supposed to feel safe?"
More racist tweets by Cambridge University Professor Priyamvada Gopal have been unearthed,
including one in which she spoke about her urge to "kneecap white men."
Gopal caused controversy last week when she tweeted "white lives don't matter," prompting a
petition demanding she be fired. However, Cambridge University responded by promoting her to a
full professorship, despite the fact that the tweet was censored by Twitter for hate
speech.
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.392.0_en.html#goog_1310934887
NOW PLAYING
Beyoncé Dedicates BET Award To People Marching In BLM Protests
Viral Finland PM quote about US being under Russian control 'not true' | #TheCube
Twitter's Mislabels Useful Tweets About Coronavirus As They Try To Stop The Spread Of
Misinformation
Twitter's Mislabels Useful Tweets About Coronavirus As They Try To Stop The Spread Of
Misinformation
Judge in Loughlin Case: 'Disturbing' Defense Allegations
Hillary Clinton And John Legend To Honor America's Graduates In Star-Studded Podcast
Twitter Is Experimenting with a New 'Audio Tweet' Feature
California To Offer 150,000 Undocumented Workers Financial Relief Amid COVID-19 Outbreak
The media's reaction was to portray Gopal as the victim of bullying while feigning
infinitely greater outrage over a "white lives matter" banner that was flown over a soccer
match in Manchester.
More hateful tweets have now been discovered, including one discussion where Gopal states,
"I resist urges to kneecap white men every day. So, no **I** am the hero."
"Can @Cambridge_Uni please recognise that this is completely unacceptable and indefensible?
How are her students supposed to feel safe?" asked Emma Webb.
"She's racist. I think we need to stop this dumbass spiel that minorities cannot be racist
because they absolutely can. She is racist and is getting away with because she's not white.
That's just the fact of the matter," remarked Dominique Samuels.
https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-1&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=true&id=1277617338326679552&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fwhite-lives-dont-matter-academic-i-resist-urges-kneecap-white-men&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=9066bb2%3A1593540614199&width=550px
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
Maybe these messages will lead to another petition demanding Gopal's removal. The first one
was deleted by Change.org after receiving over 20,000 signatures.
Cambridge University has stood by Gopal despite previously dismissing Noah Carl after 500
academics signed a letter challenging Carl's research on race and intelligence.
The institution also previously rescinded its offer of a visiting fellowship to Jordan
Peterson after a woke mob complained about his stance on political correctness and after he
appeared in a photograph with a man wearing a t-shirt that said "I'm a proud Islamophobe."
* * *
My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me
disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL that you support me. Please sign up for the free newsletter
here . Donate to me on
SubscribeStar here . Support my sponsor –
Turbo Force – a supercharged
boost of clean energy without the comedown.
A few thoughts on America's smash-hit #1 guide to egghead racialism...
A core principle of the academic movement that shot through elite schools in America since
the early nineties was the view that individual rights, humanism, and the democratic process
are all just stalking-horses for white supremacy. The concept, as articulated in books like
former corporate consultant Robin DiAngelo's White Fragility (Amazon's #1 seller !)
reduces everything, even the smallest and most innocent human interactions, to racial power
contests.
It's been mind-boggling to watch White Fragility celebrated in recent weeks. When it surged
past a Hunger Games book on bestseller lists, USA Today
cheered , "American readers are more interested in combatting racism than in literary
escapism." When DiAngelo appeared on The Tonight Show, Jimmy Fallon
gushed , "I know everyone wants to talk to you right now!" White Fragility has been pitched
as an uncontroversial road-map for fighting racism, at a time when after the murder of George
Floyd Americans are suddenly (and appropriately) interested in doing just that. Except this
isn't a straightforward book about examining one's own prejudices. Have the people hyping this
impressively crazy book actually read it?
DiAngelo isn't the first person to make a buck pushing tricked-up pseudo-intellectual
horseshit as corporate wisdom, but she might be the first to do it selling Hitlerian race
theory. White Fragility has a simple message: there is no such thing as a universal human
experience, and we are defined not by our individual personalities or moral choices, but only
by our racial category.
If your category is "white," bad news: you have no identity apart from your participation in
white supremacy ("Anti-blackness is foundational to our very identities Whiteness has always
been predicated on blackness"), which naturally means "a positive white identity is an
impossible goal."
DiAngelo instructs us there is nothing to be done here, except "strive to be less white." To
deny this theory, or to have the effrontery to sneak away from the tedium of DiAngelo's
lecturing – what she describes as "leaving the stress-inducing situation" – is to
affirm her conception of white supremacy. This intellectual equivalent of the "ordeal by water"
(if you float, you're a witch) is orthodoxy across much of academia.
DiAngelo's writing style is pure pain. The lexicon favored by intersectional theorists of
this type is built around the same principles as Orwell's Newspeak : it banishes ambiguity,
nuance, and feeling and structures itself around sterile word pairs, like racist and
antiracist, platform and deplatform , center and silence, that reduce all thinking to a series
of binary choices . Ironically, Donald Trump does something similar, only with words like "
AMAZING !" and "
SAD !" that are
simultaneously more childish and livelier.
Writers like DiAngelo like to make ugly verbs out of ugly nouns and ugly nouns out of ugly
verbs (there are countless permutations on centering and privileging alone). In a world where
only a few ideas are considered important, redundancy is encouraged, e.g. "To be less white is
to break with white silence and white solidarity, to stop privileging the comfort of white
people," or "Ruth Frankenberg, a premier white scholar in the field of whiteness, describes
whiteness as multidimensional "
DiAngelo writes like a person who was put in timeout as a child for speaking clearly. "When
there is disequilibrium in the habitus -- when social cues are unfamiliar and/or when they
challenge our capital -- we use strategies to regain our balance," she says ("People taken out
of their comfort zones find ways to deal," according to Google Translate). Ideas that go
through the English-DiAngelo translator usually end up significantly altered, as in this key
part of the book when she addresses Dr. Martin Luther King's "I have a dream," speech:
One line of King's speech in particular -- that one day he might be judged by the content
of his character and not the color of his skin -- was seized upon by the white public because
the words were seen to provide a simple and immediate solution to racial tensions: pretend
that we don't see race, and racism will end. Color blindness was now promoted as the remedy
for racism, with white people insisting that they didn't see race or, if they did, that it
had no meaning to them.
That this speech was held up as the framework for American race relations for more than half
a century precisely because people of all races understood King to be referring to a difficult
and beautiful long-term goal worth pursuing is discounted, of course. White Fragility is based
upon the idea that human beings are incapable of judging each other by the content of their
character, and if people of different races think they are getting along or even loving one
another, they probably need immediate antiracism training. This is an important passage because
rejection of King's "dream" of racial harmony -- not even as a description of the obviously
flawed present, but as the aspirational goal of a better future -- has become a central tenet
of this brand of antiracist doctrine mainstream press outlets are rushing to embrace.
The book's most amazing passage concerns the story of Jackie Robinson:
The story of Jackie Robinson is a classic example of how whiteness obscures racism by
rendering whites, white privilege, and racist institutions invisible. Robinson is often
celebrated as the first African American to break the color line
While Robinson was certainly an amazing baseball player, this story line depicts him as
racially special, a black man who broke the color line himself. The subtext is that Robinson
finally had what it took to play with whites, as if no black athlete before him was strong
enough to compete at that level. Imagine if instead, the story went something like this:
"Jackie Robinson, the first black man whites allowed to play major-league baseball."
There is not a single baseball fan anywhere – literally not one, except perhaps Robin
DiAngelo, I guess – who believes Jackie Robinson broke the color barrier because he
"finally had what it took to play with whites." Everyone familiar with this story understands
that Robinson had to be exceptional, both as a player and as a human being, to confront the
racist institution known as Major League Baseball. His story has always been understood as a
complex, long-developing political tale about overcoming violent systemic oppression. For
DiAngelo to suggest history should re-cast Robinson as "the first black man whites allowed to
play major league baseball" is grotesque and profoundly belittling.
Robinson's story moreover did not render "whites, white privilege, and racist institutions
invisible." It did the opposite. Robinson uncovered a generation of job inflation for mediocre
white ballplayers in a dramatic example of "privilege" that was keenly understood by baseball
fans of all races fifty years before White Fragility. Baseball statistics nerds have long been
arguing about whether to put asterisks next to
the records of white stars who never had to pitch to Josh Gibson, or hit against prime Satchel
Paige or Webster McDonald. Robinson's story, on every level, exposed and evangelized the truth
about the very forces DiAngelo argues it rendered "invisible."
It takes a special kind of ignorant for an author to choose an example that illustrates the
mathematical opposite of one's intended point, but this isn't uncommon in White Fragility,
which may be the dumbest book ever written. It makes The Art of the Deal read like Anna
Karenina.
Yet these ideas are taking America by storm. The movement that calls itself "antiracism"
– I think it deserves that name a lot less than "pro-lifers" deserve theirs and am amazed
journalists parrot it without question – is complete in its pessimism about race
relations. It sees the human being as locked into one of three categories: members of oppressed
groups, allies, and white oppressors.
Where we reside on the spectrum of righteousness is, they say, almost entirely determined by
birth, a view probably shared by a lot of 4chan readers. With a full commitment to the program
of psychological ablutions outlined in the book, one may strive for a "less white identity,"
but again, DiAngelo explicitly rejects the Kingian goal of just trying to love one another as
impossible, for two people born with different skin colors.
This dingbat racialist cult, which has no art, music, literature, and certainly no comedy,
is the vision of "progress" institutional America has chosen to endorse in the Trump era. Why?
Maybe because it fits. It won't hurt the business model of the news media, which for decades
now has been monetizing division and has known how to profit from moral panics and witch hunts
since before Fleet street discovered the Mod/Rocker wars.
Democratic Party leaders, pioneers of the costless gesture, have already embraced this
performative race politics as a useful tool for disciplining apostates like Bernie Sanders.
Bernie took off in presidential politics as a hard-charging crusader against a Wall
Street-fattened political establishment, and exited four years later a self-flagellating,
defeated old white man who seemed to regret not apologizing more for his third house. Clad in
kente cloth scarves, the Democrats who crushed him will burn up CSPAN with homilies on
privilege even as they reassure donors they'll stay away from Medicare for All or the carried
interest tax break.
For corporate America the calculation is simple. What's easier, giving up business models
based on war, slave labor, and regulatory arbitrage, or benching Aunt Jemima? There's a deal to
be made here, greased by the fact that the "antiracism" prophets promoted in books like White
Fragility share corporate Americas instinctive hostility to privacy, individual rights, freedom
of speech, etc.
Corporate America doubtless views the current protest movement as something that can be
addressed as an H.R. matter, among other things by hiring thousands of DiAngelos to institute
codes for the proper mode of Black-white workplace interaction.
If you're wondering what that might look like, here's DiAngelo explaining how she handled
the fallout from making a bad joke while she was "facilitating antiracism training" at the
office of one of her clients.
When one employee responds negatively to the training, DiAngelo quips the person must have
been put off by one of her Black female team members: "The white people," she says, "were
scared by Deborah's hair." (White priests of antiracism like DiAngelo seem universally to be
more awkward and clueless around minorities than your average Trump-supporting construction
worker).
DiAngelo doesn't grasp the joke flopped and has to be told two days later that one of her
web developer clients was offended. In despair, she writes, "I seek out a friend who is white
and has a solid understanding of cross-racial dynamics."
After DiAngelo confesses her feelings of embarrassment, shame and guilt to the enlightened
white cross-racial dynamics expert (everyone should have such a person on speed-dial), she
approaches the offended web developer. She asks, "Would you be willing to grant me the
opportunity to repair the racism I perpetrated toward you in that meeting?" At which point
the web developer agrees, leading to a conversation establishing the parameters of
problematic joke resolution.
This dialogue straight
out of South Park – "Is it okay if I touch your penis? No, you may not touch my penis
at this time!" – has a good shot of becoming standard at every transnational corporation,
law firm, university, newsroom, etc.
Of course the upside such consultants can offer is an important one. Under pressure from
people like this, companies might address long-overdue inequities in boardroom diversity.
The downside, which we're already seeing, is that organizations everywhere will embrace
powerful new tools for solving professional disputes, through a never-ending purge. One of the
central tenets of DiAngelo's book (and others like it) is that racism cannot be eradicated and
can only be managed through constant, "lifelong" vigilance, much like the
battle with addiction . A useful theory, if your business is selling teams of high-priced
toxicity-hunters to corporations as next-generation versions of efficiency experts -- in the
fight against this disease, companies will need the help forever and ever.
NEVER MISS THE
NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
Cancelations already are happening too fast to track. In a phenomenon that will be familiar
to students of Russian history, accusers are beginning to appear alongside the accused. Three
years ago a popular Canadian writer named Hal Niedzviecki was
denounced for expressing the opinion that "anyone, anywhere, should be encouraged to
imagine other peoples, other cultures, other identities." He reportedly was forced out of the
Writer's Union of Canada for the crime of "cultural appropriation," and denounced as a racist
by many, including a poet named Gwen Benaway. The latter said Niedzviecki "doesn't see the
humanity of indigenous peoples." Last week, Benaway herself was denounced on Twitter for failing
to provide proof that she was Indigenous.
Michael Korenberg, the chair of the board at the University of British Columbia, was
forced to
resign for liking tweets by Dinesh D'Souza and Donald Trump, which you might think is fine
– but what about Latino electrical worker Emmanuel Cafferty, fired
after a white activist took a photo of him making an OK symbol (it was described online as a
"white power" sign)? How about Sue Schafer, the heretofore unknown graphic designer the
Washington Post decided to out in a 3000-word article for attending a Halloween party two
years ago in blackface (a failed parody of a different blackface incident involving Megyn
Kelly)? She was fired, of course. How was this news? Why was ruining this person's life
necessary?
People everywhere today are being encouraged to snitch out schoolmates, parents, and
colleagues for thoughtcrime. The New York Times wrote a
salutary piece about high schoolers scanning social media accounts of peers for evidence of
"anti-black racism" to make public, because what can go wrong with encouraging teenagers to
start submarining each other's careers before they've even finished growing?
"People who go to college end up becoming racist lawyers and doctors. I don't want people
like that to keep getting jobs," one 16 year-old said.
"Someone rly started a Google doc of racists and their info for us to ruin their lives I
love twitter," wrote a different
person, adding cheery emojis.
A bizarre echo of North Korea's "
three generations of punishment " doctrine could be seen in the
boycotts of Holy Land grocery , a well-known hummus maker in Minneapolis. In recent weeks
it's been abandoned by clients and seen
its lease pulled because of racist tweets made by the CEO's 14 year-old daughter eight
years ago.
Parents calling out their kids is also in vogue. In Slate, "Making a Mountain Out of a
Molehill" wrote to advice columnist Michelle Herman in a letter headlined, " I
think I've screwed up the way my kids think about race ." The problem, the aggrieved parent
noted, was that his/her sons had gone to a diverse school, and their "closest friends are still
a mix of black, Hispanic, and white kids," which to them was natural. The parent worried when
one son was asked to fill out an application for a potential college roommate and expressed
annoyance at having to specify race, because "I don't care about race."
Clearly, a situation needing fixing! The parent asked if someone who didn't care about race
was "just as racist as someone who only has white friends" and asked if it was "too late" to do
anything. No fear, Herman wrote: it's never too late for kids like yours to educate themselves.
To help, she linked to a program of materials designed for just that purpose, a " Lesson
Plan for Being An Ally ," that included a month of readings of White Fragility. Hopefully
that kid with the Black and Hispanic friends can be cured!
This notion that color-blindness is itself racist, one of the main themes of White Fragility
, could have amazing consequences. In researching I Can't Breathe, I met civil rights activists
who recounted decades of struggle to remove race from the law. I heard stories of lawyers who
were physically threatened for years in places like rural Arkansas just for trying to end
explicit hiring and housing discrimination and other remnants of Jim Crow. Last week, an Oregon
County casually exempted "people of color
who have heightened concerns about racial profiling" from a Covid-19 related mask order. Who
thinks creating different laws for different racial categories is going to end well? When has
it ever?
At a time of catastrophe and national despair, when conservative nationalism is on the rise
and violent confrontation on the streets is becoming commonplace, it's extremely suspicious
that the books politicians, the press, university administrators, and corporate consultants
alike are asking us to read are urging us to put race even more at the center of our
identities, and fetishize the unbridgeable nature of our differences.
Meanwhile books like The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and To Kill a Mockingbird, which are
both beautiful and actually anti-racist, have been banned, for
containing the "N-word ." ( White Fragility contains it too, by the way).
It's almost like someone thinks there's a benefit to keeping people divided.
In a brilliant New York
Times op-ed from 2017 , Thomas Chatterton Williams wrote that identity politics
ironically enough gives whiteness a near-mystical power to mold and control the course of the
world in such a way that "those deemed white remain this nation's primary actors." White people
act, black people are acted upon. This is the way it's been and, if you ask the likes of
Ta-Nehisi Coates, this is the way it's going to remain for a long, long time. It was
unfortunate that Jones fell into the same fatalistic way of thinking.
But what felt like an argumentative misstep then is now the law of the land on the left, by
which activists like the indignant white woman from the Twitter video above reveal their actual
racism. It's the same sentiment informing those horrid Facebook posts by your friends.
What will be left to the wayside as a result is any meaningful attempt to tackle the issues
of overly aggressive policing, unemployment, low growth, dwindling incomes, existential
despair, and the
skyrocketing homicide rate that's been haunting our cities since the recent riots and the
subsequent retreat of police forces. Black lives are getting lost at staggering rates, and no
one who holds the public microphone seems to care.
...things have degenerated toward ahistorical acts of iconoclasm against the
author of the Declaration of Independence or the
Union general and later president who brought the rebellion to its knees and then crushed
the KKK. The target in all this is not so much some perceived historical injustice that
occurred in the distant past but the belief that "whiteness" has wiggled its way through time,
swallowing and destroying all that has stood in its way. It's the stony memorials to this
mythic, all-pervasive whiteness that therefore need to be toppled first before
anything else can change . And voila, we're way past addressing the real problems affecting
our country.
(Perhaps, it's the advance guard of Joe Biden's presidency. After all,
didn't he promise a room full of megarich donors that under his administration "nothing
would fundamentally change"?)
...a compassionate plea to black Americans -- really, to all Americans -- not to feel like
the deck is forever stacked against them. True change requires us to engage in meaningful civic
activity in order to regain a sense of agency that our corporate-sponsored anti-racist
figureheads insist remains confined to the hearts of entitled white progressives.
Otherwise, "we'll be back here in ten years having the same conversation."
Gregor Baszak is a PhD candidate in English at the University of Illinois at Chicago and a
writer. His articles have appeared in The American Conservative, Los Angeles Review of Books,
Platypus Review, Public Books, Spectator USA, Spiked, and elsewhere. Follow Gregor on Twitter
at @gregorbas1.
The Clinton Crime bill was not a mistake. Anyone who's ever spent any amount of time on
the darker side of a major American city knows that "superpredators" are all too real. The
supreme irony over all this revisionist angst is that the mass incarceration of black
criminals is a massive boon to black communities, given that crime perpetrated by black men
overwhelmingly harms black people.
Superpredator? Sounds like a SciFi movie title. A swaggering, mean-talking street tough
who'll steal anything not nailed down or red hot doesn't qualify as Son of Godzilla.
No, "superpredator" was a term used by Hillary Clinton in 1993 to describe the hardcore
violent criminals who seemed so common at the time. Violent crime in America peaked in
1990. It was a major campaign issue beginning in 1968 and continuing through 1992, after
which crime decreased rapidly.
If there's any doubt as to BLM being A DNC pac, this email was sent to me by ActionNetwork.org today.
For weeks, we have watched the result of our rallying cries, organizing, and activism
materialize across the entire country. And as so many join this movement, it's important
that everyone has the resources they need to keep fighting.
Earlier this month, Black Lives Matter Global Network sent out a membership survey --
and the feedback has truly shown the widespread dedication to our movement. The fight for
Black liberation and an end to white supremacy is just getting started. Together, we will
continue to push for progressive, radical solutions that affirm that Black lives
matter.
So many new freedom fighters have joined this movement. Right now, people everywhere are
asking how to be better advocates for Black liberation and how to have conversations with
friends and family regarding ending white supremacy in America. Many simply just want to
know how to help.
And an overwhelming majority want to learn more about #DefundPolice. The Black Lives
Matter creative team is working on a series of resources, including videos, that break down
how we divest from the police and invest in Black lives.
Check out this graphic that walks through the steps of divesting and investing, and then
share on social media platforms so we can show the world what defunding the police actually
looks like.
#Here's how we #DefundThePolice
This graphic breaks down HOW we divest from policing and the steps that come after
that.
Remember, divestment leads to investment. Once we defund the police, we can make
structural change in our communities across the country through initiatives like hiring
more teachers and counselors, implementing restorative and mental health services, and
more.
Will you take a minute to share this graphic to show people how defunding our police can
make our communities safer?
The fight continues to defund the police, and the fight will continue long after
that.
@botazefa work sent out a membership survey -- and the feedback has truly shown the
widespread dedication to our movement. The fight for Black liberation and an end to white
supremacy is just getting started. Together, we will continue to push for progressive,
radical solutions that affirm that Black lives matter.
So many new freedom fighters have joined this movement. Right now, people everywhere are
asking how to be better advocates for Black liberation and how to have conversations with
friends and family regarding ending white supremacy in America. Many simply just want to know
how to help.
If there was any doubt that BLM sees their movement as race war, this should erase said
doubt
Every life unjustly killed deserves justice. In the cause to make things right, I will not
join a movement that has nearly everything wrong. More innocent lives have now been killed
(including cops) since these predominantly violent protests began over George Floyd's horrific
death. What about the black lives
killed in this nationwide chaos? Do they matter?
"Well, you don't have to agree with everything. Just pick out the good things in the
#BlackLivesMatter movement," I'm told. Really? Let's apply that same logic to another example.
I've been repeatedly approached to partner with New Black Panthers in anti-abortion billboard
campaigns. We agree on the violent injustice of abortion, and that's it. Our worldviews are
diametrically opposed. But, but, but they believe unborn lives matter ! That
doesn't matter. Their mission is not my mission. I cover all of this in-depth in my new
podcast, Life Has Purpose .
Yes, #BlackLivesMatter. But Truth matters. As a Christian, the Church should be leading on
these issues instead of sheepishly following a deceptive movement hostile to the Gospel.
The original BLM founders, the #BlackLivesMatter Foundation (BLMF), created it to
radically shift culture. The far-left Ford Foundation, the world's largest population control
organization, vowed in 2016 to raise
$100 million for the Movement for
Black Lives (MFBL) -- a nationwide coalition of BLM groups (including BLMF). MFBL released
a shocking manifesto of policy
positions that are deeply political and deeply disturbing.
Drawing mostly from those positions, here are the top 10 reasons why I will never
support the #BlackLivesMatter movement.
The premise isn't true. I hate racism. And I hate when it's used as a political weapon.
According to the FBI's latest
homicide statistics, I'm 11 times more likely to be killed by someone of my own
brown complexion than a white person. Also, a comprehensive 2019 study concluded: "White officers are not
more likely to shoot minority civilians than non-White officers." Every loss of life is tragic,
but Washington Post's database
on police-involved deaths puts things into further context. In 2020, among those killed were
(all males): 2 Native Americans, 9 Asians, 46 Hispanics, 76 blacks, 149 unlabeled individuals
and 149 whites (whose deaths don't get reported by national mainstream media). Only nine
black individuals were actually unarmed .
There is no goal of forgiveness or reconciliation. None. It's never mentioned on their
sites. You can't talk about the sins of the past and expect to move forward if there is no
intention of forgiveness. I'm tired of the deeply prejudiced oppressed/oppressor critical race
theory paradigm. It's not Gospel-centered. This should, immediately, be a deal-breaker for
Christians.
It's all about Black Power. It's plastered all over the MFBL website. BLMF founders explain their "herstory": "It became
clear that we needed to continue organizing and building Black power across the country." I
don't promote a colorblind society; I love all of our diverse hues of skin. But I'm so much
more than my pigmentation. Martin Luther King promoted " God's power and human power. " I'm with
him.
They completely ignore fatherhood. From BLMF : "We disrupt the
Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended
families and 'villages' that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the
degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable. " Well, every "village" that
has fatherless families is a village that suffers higher crime rates, higher drug usage, higher
abortion rates, higher drop-out rates, higher poverty rates, and so much more. #DadsMatter.
They demand reparations. Ok. Sooooo, I guess the white half of me will have to pay the black
half of me? If progressives want to push reparations, start with the Party of Slavery and Jim
Crow -- the Democrat Party! Let them ante up. But the #BlackLivesMatter movement bizarrely
demands :
"Reparations for full and free access for all Black people (including undocumented and
currently and formerly incarcerated people) to lifetime education retroactive forgiveness of
student loans, and support for lifetime learning programs." Uhhh, good luck with that.
They want to abolish prisons and police forces. And cue utter chaos. MFBL asserts : "We believe that prisons, police and all
other institutions that inflict violence on Black people must be abolished..."Defund and remove the police have been rallying cries. That would be anarchy in
any community. I advocate some needed police reforms and better community/police
relations, but this is just foolishness.
They are anti-capitalism. Oh the irony of this declaration made by a movement that is the result of
capitalism: "We are anti-capitalist. We believe and understand that Black people will never
achieve liberation under the current global racialized capitalist system." The videos that
make us aware of police brutality are captured on phones that are a result of capitalism. The
best way to elevate people out of material poverty? Capitalism. This system is why the United
States is the most
charitable nation.
Colin Kaepernick supports it. A " biracial" adoptee , Kaepernick is now
obsessed with his "blackness." He idolizes the late murderous Fidel Castro and Che Guevara and
worships Malcolm X (just see his social media feeds). Malcolm X was anti-integration,
pro-violence and a member of the virulently racist Nation of Islam (who forced him out).
Kaepernick makes millions from Nike -- a company whose entireExecutive Leadership Team is white (isn't
this white supremacy???) -- that makes its shoes in the most murderous regime in the
world. Kaepernick, of course, is completely silent on that. But you know,
#SocialJusticeWarrior.
Apparently, not all black lives matter. Pro-abortion BLMF declared : "We deserve and thus
we demand reproductive justice [aka abortion] that gives us autonomy over our bodies and our
identities while ensuring that our children and families are supported, safe, and able to
thrive." Aborted children don't thrive. BLM groups announced
"solidarity" with "reproductive justice" groups back in February 2015. You cannot
simultaneously fight violence while celebrating it.
"... This is a red herring, designed to divert one's eye from the real financial inequality (in all nations) and place it solely on race. No racial inequality in wealth between any X and Y households among the 99% comes anywhere near the wealth inequality between the 1% and the 99%. ..."
It's not surprising that the Black Lives Matter protests took place at the same time as the
lockdowns. The looting, rioting and desecration of statues provided the perfect one-two punch
for those who see some tactical advantage in intensifying public anxiety by exacerbating racial
tensions and splitting the country into two warring camps. Divide and conquer remains the modus
operandi of imperialists everywhere. That same rule applies here. Here's more background from
an article at the Off-Guardian:
"It is no coincidence that another Soros funded activism group Black Lives Matter has
diverted the spotlight away from the lockdown's broader impact on the fundamental human
rights of billions of people, using the reliable methods of divide and rule, to highlight the
plight of specific strata's of society, and not all.
It's worth pointing out that BLM's activity spikes every four years . Always prior to the
elections in the US, as African Americans make up an important social segment of Democrat
votes. The same Democrats who play both sides like any smart gambler would. The Clintons, for
example, are investors into BLM"s partner, the anti-fascist ANTIFA. While Hilary Clinton's
mentor (and best friend) was former KKK leader Robert Byrd.
BLM is a massively hyped, TV-made, politicized event, that panders to the populist and
escapist appetite of the people. Blinding them from their true call to arms in defense of the
universal rights of everyone . Cashing in on the youths pent-up aggression . And weaponising
the tiger locked in a rattled cage for 3-months, and unleashed by puppet masters as the
mob
As a general rule of thumb, it is safe to assume that if a social movement has the backing
of big industry, big philanthropy or big politics, then its ideals run contrary to citizen
empowerment." (" The Co-opting
of Activism by the State ", Off-Guardian)
Black Lives Matter protests provide another significant diversion from the massive
destruction of the US economy. This basic plan has been used effectively many times in the
past, most notably in the year following the invasion of Iraq. Some readers will remember how
Iraqis militants fought US occupation forces following the invasion in 2003. The escalating
violence and rising death-toll created a public relations nightmare for the Bush team that
finally settled on a plan for crushing the resistance by arming and training Shia death squads.
But the Bushies wanted to confuse the public about what they were really up to, so they
concocted a narrative about a "sectarian war" that was intended to divert attention from the
attacks on American soldiers.
In order to make the narrative more believable, US intel agents devised a plan to blow up
the Shia's most sacred religious site, the Golden Dome Mosque of Samarra, and blame it on Sunni
extremists. The incident was then used to convince the American people that what was taking
place in Iraq was not a war over foreign occupation, but a bitter sectarian conflict between
Sunnis and Shia in which the US was just an impartial referee. The killing of George Floyd has
been used in much the same way as the implosion of the mosque. It creates a credible narrative
for a massive and coordinated protests that have less to do with racial injustice than they do
with diverting attention from the destruction of the economy and sowing division among the
American people. This is a classic example of how elites use myth and media to conceal their
trouble-making and escape any accountability for their actions.
Whitney is not wrong in that neoliberal elites use identity politics as a diversion even as
they increase their share of the pie at the expense of everyone else. To distract people, they
incite one group against another through their media outlets.
That said, the extreme racial inequality in wealth between black and white households are
impossible
to ignore . The Federal Reserve of San Francisco released a report a few years ago on
racial wealth inequality in the Los Angeles area which found shocking differences. Even some
Asian groups like Vietnamese or Koreans did badly. Only Asian Indians and Chinese had higher
wealth than whites but those groups are very elite with a large share of recent immigrants.
So, those who are correct in saying idpol are used to incite the masses must nevertheless
grapple with these feudal conditions at the heart of the modern American economy. They will
fuel unrest unless nothing is done and throwing up your hands isn't an option, it's an
admission of intellectual defeat.
,,,The media hyping this one death to high heaven, the instantaneous protests, the statues,
calling Trump "authoritarian" (thats the regime change signal, when they call you
'authoritarian').
Classic CIA coup. It hasnt worked, but it aint over till November.
What we can glean from this incident, is that there is a vast secret state operating
within the government, media and the DNC, that does not accept our system of government, does
not accept the results of elections and will lie, cheat and steal to achieve their nefarious
objectives. That's the lesson of Russiagate that has to be applied to both the lockdowns and
the Black Lives Matter protests. They are just the next phase of the ongoing war on the
American people.
What is that state? Who is that state? Who has that kind of power? Who had the power to pull
off the 9/11 inside job and put America into endless wars in the Mideast?
...And just because the rich are taking advantage of this crisis doesn't mean the crisis
isn't real. To believe that would be to believe a logical fallacy. Talib will set you
straight.
...How many are neocons? How many are liberal internationalists? How many of them toe the
pro-Israel, pro-war, pro-open borders, pro-multi-cult, anti-white, anti-"deplorables",
invade-the-word, invite-the-world line that is a hallmark of international Zionism?
The percentage fluctuates as fortunes and enterprises wax and wane, but about 1/3 of
Billionaires are Jews. Based on where they donate their money and the causes and politicians
they support, overall perhaps 90-95% are neocons/liberal internationalists (functionally
speaking, really the same thing). Those are after all the policies that help them accumulate
vast power and riches.
Yes, feudal conditions created by 30 years of mass migration to the United States, in
numbers unparalleled in World history, by Third World populations. American blacks have
suffered the most from this elite project to destroy the white middle-and-working classes.
Blacks have been given every opportunity to pull themselves up. The money and programs that
have been thrown their way have been unbelievable. Some have taken it; most have not. Not
having kids before you get married is another good piece of advice.
The best thing that could happen to the Blacks would be to strip away their dependency. No
more welfare, no more food stamps, no more getting into universities when you didn't earn it.
Let them grow up, own it. Making them into dependents has crippled them, and they wear their
victimhood well. (And there are lots of Whites in that bucket too.) All the do-gooders in the
world can't help those who don't help themselves.
That said, things are now going to change, and not for the better.
No amount of protest or government policy can change the racial income inequality. As Thomas
Sowell, and Walter Williams among many others have said for years, Blacks have to start by
creating stable families, desire for education and a strong work ethic. I can only imagine what
the future is gonna look like for anyone lacking those things. And I'd imagine that the
Democratic tolerance for these "protests" is going to decrease once they assume federal
power.
This is a red herring, designed to divert one's eye from the real financial inequality
(in all nations) and place it solely on race. No racial inequality in wealth between any X and
Y households among the 99% comes anywhere near the wealth inequality between the 1% and the
99%.
If you aren't already living in the castle or the manor house, you are the serfs. Welcome to
the new world, same as the really old world. That 700 year experiment in increasing prosperity
and freedoms for the masses is a genie they've been trying to put back in the bottle for some
time already.
Blacks are poorer because of lower IQ and poor impulse control. In the US they only
average an IQ of 85 which is a one standard deviation below whites. In Africa, it's closer to
70. They commit more crimes which means they end up in jail more often and on more serious
charges. Either get a clue or shut up.
Everybody knows the challenges Blacks face. You mentioned some. Why do you have to so
angrily throw it in their faces?
Blacks have never presented any collective risk to whites. Not when when whites bought them.
Not when in shackles. Never. They are the punching bag for every uncivilized low/average IQ
piece of white trash who needs someone to blame.
Making a fetish of IQ is just another way of throwing up your hands and saying nothing can
be done. I remember when I worked in a prison I noticed the blacks I saw on average smarter
than the average white. Then I look up their IQs (everyone is tested) and the scores didn't
correspond well with actual intelligence. It occurred to me that if you are illiterate, and
antisocial, it would be almost impossible to accurately gauge intelligence. If your numbers
were right , there would be millions of blacks walking around with 65 IQs, not able to find
their way home much less break into your house.
Saying that Lincoln is the "symbol of white supremacy" has about as much foundation as
saying Harvey Milk is the symbol of militant heterosexuality. Both were great leaders who were
killed at the height of campaigns for equality. As I discuss below, there are aspects of
Lincoln's legacy that are worthy of condemnation but even John Wilkes Booth would dispute the
claim of Lincoln as the embodiment of white supremacy.
America is in the midst of one of the great moral panics in our nation's history.
If we don't stand up
for our nation's core values, the situation could get even worse – and soon. If you've spent any time on social
media in the last three weeks, you've probably noticed the organized campaigns to get college and even
high
school
students expelled or denied admission based on their political views. You've also seen gleeful mobs
celebrating as Americans lose their jobs for running afoul of someone's momentary political obsessions.
In every sector of American society, people are having their careers destroyed to the pitiless baying of the
"woke" masses.
It's happening in business. CrossFit CEO Greg Glassman spent 20 years building the fitness
brand into a multi-billion dollar company, only to be
thrown
out
of the empire he built for declining to go along with the "racism is a public health crisis" dogma.
It's happening in journalism. New York Times editor James Bennet, a liberal, was
fired
for
publishing an op-ed by a sitting Republican senator advocating for a military response to nationwide rioting -- a
position the majority of Americans
agreed
with.
The same fate befell Philadelphia Inquirer editor Stan Wischowski, who was terminated for approving an article
that condemned looting and arson.
It's happening in
entertainment
,
in
academia
,
and pretty much anywhere someone can be found who is not sufficiently supportive of the Black Lives Matter
movement.
It's even happening to people who didn't do anything at all.
An L.A. Galaxy soccer player was forced to
resign because
his
wife
tweeted that rioters should be shot. A lawyer in San Francisco was fired because
his
wife
was rude to a man she
thought
was
spray-painting BLM propaganda on a building that wasn't his (it was). On Thursday, this Stasi-esque trend reached
another level when a company called Equity Prime Mortgage
fired
the
stepmother
of
the officer charged in the controversial shooting of drunk driver Rashad Brooks after he fought with and fired a
taser at police. The stepmother was apparently fired for no reason other than family loyalty.
On Monday, the panic reached what one can only hope will be its peak when a San Diego Gas and Electric employee
lost
his
job for "making a white supremacist hand gesture." We've
long
since debunked the notion that the OK sign is somehow racist -- that was just a fiction perpetrated by internet
trolls -- but in this case, this man lost his livelihood
despite the fact
he
wasn't even making an OK sign
. He was apparently cracking his knuckles as he drove.
What America is going through right now is not merely another, more intense round of "cancel culture." We're now
in the midst of a full-force, totalitarian remolding of our society, one that seeks to place the petty resentments
of an outraged minority of leftist activists above everything else in American life.
Because of their willingness
to riot, loot, and assault anyone they perceive to be insufficiently sympathetic to their cause, leftists are able
to bully ordinary people into submission. As a result, television shows such as "
Cops
" and
"
Live
PD
," classic films such as "Gone With the Wind," and iconic brands such as
Aunt
Jemima
,
Mrs.
Buttersworth
, and
Uncle
Ben's
rice are consigned to the "dustbin of history."
I used to speak frequently to nervous conservatives who were convinced that if we only allowed the left to tear
down Confederate war memorials, they would be satisfied. How quickly events have disproved that wishful thinking.
From Christopher
Columbus
,
George
Washington
,
Thomas
Jefferson
,
and the western
pioneers
,
activists are now coming after cartoon
sports
mascots
and college
fight
songs
.
Everything
--
from the core of our country's history to the values and norms undergirding American culture -- must be
uprooted to appease the mob.
They are tearing down dozens of statues and facing no consequences whatsoever for vandalizing our public spaces --
including memorials to our nation's greatest heroes. When private citizens try to do the job the government won't
and protect our culture, our history, and our public property from destruction, local officials step in and
remove
the
statues on behalf of the vandals, lest they injure themselves while imitating Iraqis celebrating the fall of
Saddam Hussein.
These people are not seeking change at the margins. They are demanding a total cultural revolution, and cowardly
public officials are giving it to them.
If you look at this national outpouring of hatred and
recrimination with horror verging on despair, I assure you that you are not alone. Tens of millions of Americans
feel exactly the same way.
President Trump is doing exactly what an American president should do in a crisis like this. He is working to
maintain law and order and prevent cowed local officials from allowing political violence to flare again. He
issued an executive order to add to his legacy of reform and address legitimate concerns about law enforcement in
this country. He also issued a separate executive order targeting the systemic bias in Silicon Valley's censorship
offices, which has allowed our social media platforms to become echo chambers for left-wing extremism and "cancel
culture."
The only thing that could make the situation worse at this moment would be handing the White House to a doddering
and unprincipled establishment politician beholden to the "cancel culture" mob.
Presumptive Democratic
nominee Joe Biden would immediately delegate
de
facto
control over the vast justice, civil rights, and regulatory apparatus of the federal government to the
loudest voices in his coalition: the woke activist class.
At this moment, there is a veritable army of lawyers and bureaucrats who have spent the last three and a half
years subsisting on resentment and salivating at the prospect of regaining power.
Things are bad enough
now, but conditions will become much worse if the "cancel culture" born on social media is augmented with the
force of law and given the full attention of Biden appointees imbued with the sweeping powers of the federal
bureaucracy.
Dark forces have been unleashed in this country. Even now, we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg.
If
we don't want to find out how much damage it can inflict on the ship of state, we must prevent those forces from
taking control of the federal government.
Delay
,
5 minutes ago
FTA: there is a veritable army
of lawyers and bureaucrats who have spent the last three and a half years subsisting on resentment and
salivating at the prospect of regaining power.
They are not merely subsisting, they have paid themselves well and have accumulated substantial tangible
wealth. Their homes are similar to oases in a desert of despair. The army of lawyers and bureaucrats
think they have all their problems under control by giving tax money to their black servants. The fact is
Latinos, Chinese, Moldovans and even their viziers say to themselves, "When you see an amazing
opportunity for looting, but you are not sure you can do it, just do it."
Secret Weapon
,
53 minutes ago
BLM/Antifa is a replay of Mao's Red guards. They revved up the college students and set them loose upon the
countryside. It worked in China. Will it work here? Second Amendment is the wild card in the deck. Funny
thing was, once Mao was done with the Red Guard, he had all of them executed. He did not trust them.
Blondefire
,
1 hour ago
The cancel culture is emboldened because they are, for the most part, getting away with it. They saw
Hillary's classified email debacle go unpunished, the Uranium One sale go unpunished, Fast and Furious go
unpunished, Benghazi go unpunished, the attempted coup go unpunished, and they realized they can
literally get away with anything. Now vandalism, theft, riot, arson and anarchy are not only unpunished
but glorified in the msm while police officers are being led away in handcuffs. Tomorrow is not the day to
regain control, Q isn't going to release some new documents next week and save us. We need to act today,
right now, with overwhelming force, against all enemies foreign and domestic.
CNN
10.1M subscribers
SUBSCRIBE
Ethan Wayne, son of actor John Wayne, reacts to calls to remove his father's name from John Wayne Airport after
inflammatory quotes resurfaced from an interview the actor did in Playboy Magazine in 1971.
#CNN
#News
I went to school in Mexico for a while and I loved it. I think that we need to invade Mexico and take the land that they are
selfishly trying to keep for themselves.
John
Wayne was a figment of America's imagination. He served in the imaginary military ( not in the real military) and countless
imaginary battles from the Alamo to Viet Nam. He was nothing but a propagandist for the military and right wing conservatives.
His name shouldn't be on anything but his tombstone.
I still like John Wayne's movies but I never listened to his personal speak. He tried to be political but he should have
stayed out of it. He was an actor. Yes, he sounds like a racist and white supremists
|
Seth Smith, a UC Berkeley student, was shot and
killed the other day in what appears to be a random act of violence. Police are trying to
solve the murder. Smith was a white man. UC's chancellor Carol Christ e-mailed to faculty,
staff, and students a note of condolence that included this paragraph:
We realize this is a difficult time for those of you who knew Seth. It is important to
know that individuals may express their grief differently and we need to respect the
different ways people react and support each other in the days and weeks ahead. Many of you
may have had a close relationship with Seth and are feeling a sense of loss and disbelief.
Others, like many of us, are experiencing stress, grief and anxiety related to the
coronavirus pandemic and the recent murders of George Floyd, Riah Milton, and other Black
Americans.
This is sickening. There is nothing that cannot and will not be racialized and
politicized by our ruling class.
They have specific workouts named after dead black people. For example:
MONIKA DIAMOND
Monika Diamond, a 34-year-old Black transgender woman, business owner and LGBT+ activist,
was tragically killed in Charlotte, North Carolina on March 18, 2020. Diamond's death is
believed to be the fourth violent death of a transgender or gender non-conforming person in
2020.
From the Human Rights Campaign: "These victims were killed by acquaintances, partners or
strangers, some of whom have been arrested and charged, while others have yet to be
identified. Some of these cases involve clear anti-transgender bias. In others, the victim's
transgender status may have put them at risk in other ways, such as forcing them into
unemployment, poverty, homelessness and/or survival sex work. Sadly, 2020 has already seen at
least 15 transgender or gender non-conforming people fatally shot or killed by other violent
means. We say at least because too often these stories go unreported -- or misreported."
Before the workout, follow @humanrightscampaign and read their article: A National
Epidemic: Fatal Anti-Transgender Violence in the United States in 2019
Last week the Supreme Court ruled that LGBTQ+ people are protected from employment
discrimination, however there are still few explicit federal legal protections for
transgender or gender-expansive people. After the workout, check out Freedom For All
Americans and follow @freedom4allusa.
The Monika Diamond Memorial Workout is on YouTube or Instagram.
Here is the workout memorializing a dead black trans woman. It includes "double pushup
burpees," because there's really no better way to honor a dead black trans woman than by doing
double pushup burpees. You cannot make this up:
https://www.youtube.com/embed/cGvuNdW6PJU
The man arrested for shooting Monika Diamond is Prentice Bess , a black man who knew
Diamond (born Jeremy Whitted). I have searched online and seen no reason to believe that the
murder was a bias crime, much less a racially motivated one, as both alleged killer and victim
are black. But let's not let pass a moment to exploit the dead for social justice purposes.
These stupid workouts are "I love my dead gay son" (from the black
comedy Heathers ) level virtue signaling.
This passage from Live Not By Lies reveals what these totalitarians are up to:
One of contemporary progressivism's commonly used phrases -- the personal is
political -- captures the totalitarian spirit, which seeks to infuse all aspects of life
with political consciousness. Indeed, the Left pushes its ideology ever deeper into the
personal realm, leaving fewer and fewer areas of daily life uncontested. This, warned
[Hannah] Arendt, is a sign that a society is ripening for totalitarianism, because that is
what totalitarianism essentially is: the politicization of everything.
Infusing every aspect of life with ideology was a standard aspect of Soviet
totalitarianism. Early in the Stalin era, N. V. Krylenko, a Soviet commissar (political
officer), steamrolled over chess players who wanted to keep politics out of the game.
"We must finish once and for all with the neutrality of chess," he said. "We must condemn
once and for all the formula 'chess for the sake of chess,' like the formula 'art for art's
sake.' We must organize shockbrigades of chess-players, and begin immediate realization of a
Five-Year Plan for chess."
This is not innocent, this stuff. Everything in life must be subject to this ideology.
Everything.
Run by veteran "non-profits careerists" movement is highly suspect
Notable quotes:
"... The black revolution is much more than a struggle for the rights of Negroes. It is forcing America to face all its interrelated flaws -- racism, poverty, militarism, and materialism. It is exposing evils that are rooted deeply in the whole structure of our society. It reveals systemic rather than superficial flaws and suggests that radical reconstruction of society itself is the real issue to be faced. ..."
"... much of what passes for popular and progressive, grass-roots activism has been co-opted, taken over and/or created by corporate America, the corporate-funded " nonprofit industrial complex ," and Wall Street's good friend, the Democratic Party , long known to leftists as "the graveyard of social movements." This " corporatization of activism " (University of British Columbia professor Peter Dauvergne's term) is ubiquitous across much of what passes for the left in the U.S. today. ..."
"... What about the racialist group Black Lives Matter, recipient of a mammoth $100 million grant from the Ford Foundation last year? Sparked by the racist security guard and police killings of Trayvon Martin, Mike Brown and Eric Garner, BLM has achieved uncritical support across the progressive spectrum, where it is almost reflexively cited as an example of noble and radical grass-roots activism in the streets. That is a mistake. ..."
"... I first started wondering where BLM stood on the AstroTurf versus grass roots scale when I read an essay published three years ago in The Feminist Wire by Alicia Garza, one of BLM's three black, lesbian and veteran public-interest careerist founders. ..."
"... Why the prickly, hyperidentity-politicized and proprietary attachment to the "lives matter" phrase? Garza seemed more interested in brand value and narrow identity than social justice. Did she want a licensing fee? Wouldn't any serious, leftist, people's activist eagerly give the catchy "lives matter" phrase away to all oppressed people and hope for their wide and inclusive use in a viciously capitalist society that has subjected everything and everyone to the soulless logic of commodity rule, profit and exchange value? Who were these "charismatic Black men many are rallying around" in the fall of 2014? ..."
"... I couldn't help but wonder about the left-progressive credentials of anyone who gets upset that others would want to have a "conversation" (as Garza put it) about how their lives matter too. Is there really something wrong with a marginalized Native American laborer or a white and not-so "skin-privileged" former factory worker struggling with sickness and poverty wanting to hear that his or her life matters? For any remotely serious progressive, was there anything mysterious about the fact that many white folks facing foreclosure, job loss, poverty wages and the like might not be doing cartwheels over the phrase "black lives matter" when they experience the harsh daily reality that their lives don't matter under the profits system? ..."
"... My concerns about BLM's potential service to the capitalist elite were reactivated when I heard a talk by Garza's fellow BLM founder, Patrisse Cullors (another veteran nonprofit careerist). Cullors spoke before hundreds of cheering white liberals and progressives in downtown Iowa City in February. "We are witnessing the erosion of U.S. democracy," she said, adding that Donald Trump "is building a police state." Relating that she had gone into a "two-week depression" after Hillary Clinton was defeated by Trump, Cullors said she wondered if BLM had "done enough to educate people about the differences between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton." She described Trump as a fascist. ..."
The black revolution is much more than a struggle for the rights of Negroes. It is
forcing America to face all its interrelated flaws -- racism, poverty, militarism, and
materialism. It is exposing evils that are rooted deeply in the whole structure of our society.
It reveals systemic rather than superficial flaws and suggests that radical reconstruction of
society itself is the real issue to be faced. -- Martin Luther King Jr., 1968
You don't have to be one of those conspiratorial curmudgeons who reduces every sign of popular
protest to "George Soros money" to acknowledge that much of what passes for popular and
progressive, grass-roots activism has been co-opted, taken over and/or created by corporate
America, the corporate-funded "
nonprofit industrial complex ," and Wall Street's good friend, the Democratic Party , long known to
leftists as "the graveyard of social movements." This "
corporatization of activism " (University of British Columbia professor Peter Dauvergne's
term) is ubiquitous across much of what passes for the left in the U.S. today.
What about the racialist group Black Lives Matter, recipient of a mammoth $100 million
grant from the Ford Foundation last year? Sparked by the racist security guard and police
killings of Trayvon Martin, Mike Brown and Eric Garner, BLM has achieved uncritical support
across the progressive spectrum, where it is almost reflexively cited as an example of noble and
radical grass-roots activism in the streets. That is a mistake.
I first started wondering where BLM stood on the AstroTurf versus grass roots scale when I
read an essay published three years ago in The Feminist Wire by Alicia
Garza, one of BLM's three black, lesbian and veteran public-interest careerist founders. In
her "Herstory of the #BlackLivesMatter Movement," Garza wrote:
"Black lives. Not just all lives. Black lives. Please do not change the conversation by
talking about how your life matters, too. It does, but we need less watered down unity and a
more active solidarities with us, Black people, unwaveringly, in defense of our humanity. Our
collective futures depend on it."
Denouncing "hetero-patriarchy," Garza described the adaptation of her clever online
catchphrase ("black lives matter") by others -- "brown lives matter, migrant lives matter,
women's lives matter, and on and on" (Garza's dismissive words) -- as "the Theft of Black Queer
Women's Work."
"Perhaps," she added, "if we were the charismatic Black men many are rallying around these
days, it would have been a different story."
From a leftist perspective, this struck me as alarming. Why the prickly,
hyperidentity-politicized and proprietary attachment to the "lives matter" phrase? Garza seemed
more interested in brand value and narrow identity than social justice. Did she want a licensing
fee? Wouldn't any serious, leftist, people's activist eagerly give the catchy "lives matter"
phrase away to all oppressed people and hope for their wide and inclusive use in a viciously
capitalist society that has subjected everything and everyone to the soulless logic of commodity
rule, profit and exchange value? Who were these "charismatic Black men many are rallying around"
in the fall of 2014?
And how representative were Garza's slaps at "hetero-patriarchy" and "charismatic Black men"
of the black community in whose name she spoke? Would it be too hetero-patriarchal of me, I
wondered, to suggest that maybe a black male or two with experience of oppression in the nation's
racist criminal justice system ought to share some space front and center in a movement focused
especially on a police and prison state that targets black boys and men above all?
I defended the phrase "black lives matter" against the absurd charge that it is racist, but
I couldn't help but wonder about the left-progressive credentials of anyone who gets upset
that others would want to have a "conversation" (as Garza put it) about how their lives matter
too. Is there really something wrong with a marginalized Native American laborer or a white and
not-so "skin-privileged" former factory worker struggling with sickness and poverty wanting to
hear that his or her life matters? For any remotely serious progressive, was there anything
mysterious about the fact that many white folks facing foreclosure, job loss, poverty wages and
the like might not be doing cartwheels over the phrase "black lives matter" when they experience
the harsh daily reality that their lives don't matter under the profits system?
My concerns about BLM's potential service to the capitalist elite were reactivated when I
heard a talk by Garza's fellow BLM founder, Patrisse Cullors (another veteran nonprofit
careerist). Cullors spoke before hundreds of cheering white liberals and progressives in downtown
Iowa City in February. "We are witnessing the erosion of U.S. democracy," she said, adding that
Donald Trump "is building a police state." Relating that she had gone into a "two-week
depression" after Hillary Clinton was defeated by Trump, Cullors said she wondered if BLM had
"done enough to educate people about the differences between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton."
She described Trump as a fascist.
Muhammad Ali's only biological son says his father would have despised the "racist" Black Lives Matter movement and endorsed all
races, never singling "anyone out." ''My father would have said, 'They ain't nothing but devils.' My father said, 'all lives matter,'"
Muhammad Ali Jr. told the New York Post.
The 47-year-old son of the legendary boxer, who is often noted as a cultural trailblazer for black Americans, did not stop at
connecting his father to the "all lives matter" position. He also said Ali would have supported President Donald Trump --
the late athlete endorsed both Democrat Jimmy Carter and Republican Ronald Reagan when they were running for the presidency.
Ali Jr. himself blasted the Black Lives Matter movement as "racist."
"It's not just black lives matter, white lives matter, Chinese lives matter, all lives matter, everybody's life matters. God
loves everyone -- he never singled anyone out. Killing is wrong no matter who it is," he said.
Ali Jr. also pushed back against anti-police sentiments and defended officers against accusations of systematic racism.
"Police don't wake up and think, 'I'm going to kill a n****r today or kill a white man,'" he said. "They're just trying
to make it back home to their family in one piece."
He did acknowledge, however, that Derek Chauvin, the former officer now infamous for video showing him with his knee on the late
George Floyd's neck while he said he couldn't breathe, was "wrong" and corrupt cops should be "locked up."
Ali Jr., who lives in Florida, also singled out Antifa, the group recently recognized by Trump as a terrorist organization.
"They're no different from Muslim terrorists. They should all get what they deserve. They're f**king up businesses, beating
up innocent people in the neighborhood, smashing up police stations and shops. They're terrorists – they're terrorizing the community.
I agree with the peaceful protests, but Antifa, they need to kill everyone in that thing," he said.
Some conservatives have embraced Ali Jr.'s rebuttal of BLM and celebrated his blunt words on social media.
You want to talk about a well-thought-out and spot-on rebuttal to Black Lives Matter?.... Check this out from Muhammad Ali
Jr. -- so many people are WAKING UP 👊🏿 https://t.co/w9XgSnMGtT
-- ✭ Wayne Dupree ✭ (@WayneDupreeShow)
June 20, 2020
The official Muhammad Ali Twitter account, run by his estate, has shown support for the Black Lives Matter movement and posted
generally supportive messages from some of the boxer's other children.
Demonstrations across the nation over the death of George Floyd have continued devolving into chaos in recent days with protesters
pulling down numerous historical monuments, vandalizing property, and turning to violence in places like the activist-run Capitol
Hill Autonomous Zone, also called CHAZ, in Seattle.
"... In the memo, Barr identified members of the right-wing "Boogaloo" movement and the anti-fascist movement known as Antifa as the top targets of the task force. ..."
"... The task force's mission will be to develop information about "extremist individuals, networks, and movements," share data with local authorities and provide training to local prosecutors on how to wage cases against anti-government extremists. ..."
"... people associated with Antifa. ..."
"... "There are some groups that don't have a particular ideology, other than anarchy. There are some groups that want to bring about a civil war -- the Boogaloo group has been on the margin of this as well," he said earlier this month , adding that the Justice Department would find "constructive solutions." ..."
y Tal Axelrod -
06/26/20 08:13 PM EDT
1289 Comments Attorney General William Barr on Friday directed the Justice
Department to form a task force dedicated to combating "anti-government extremists," according
to a memo obtained by
The Washington Post , raising the stakes in the government's response to nationwide
protests.
Barr argued in the memo that anti-government agitators had infiltrated peaceful
demonstrations against police brutality and systemic racism and "engaged in indefensible acts
of violence designed to undermine public order."
"Among other lawless conduct, these extremists have violently attacked police officers and
other government officials, destroyed public and private property, and threatened innocent
people," Barr wrote. "Although these extremists profess a variety of ideologies, they are
united in their opposition to the core constitutional values of a democratic society governed
by law. ... Some pretend to profess a message of freedom and progress, but they are in fact
forces of anarchy, destruction and coercion."
In the memo, Barr identified members of the right-wing "Boogaloo" movement and the
anti-fascist movement known as Antifa as the top targets of the task force.
Craig Carpenito, the U.S. attorney for New Jersey, and Erin Nealy Cox, the U.S. attorney for
the Northern District of Texas, will head the task force, which will also include
representatives from the FBI and other prosecutors' offices.
The task force's mission will be to develop information about "extremist individuals,
networks, and movements," share data with local authorities and provide training to local
prosecutors on how to wage cases against anti-government extremists.
"The ultimate goal of the task force will be not only to enable prosecutions of extremists
who engage in violence, but to understand these groups well enough that we can stop such
violence before it occurs and ultimately eliminate it as a threat to public safety and the rule
of law," Barr wrote.
The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Hill
regarding the memo.
Barr said in
an interview with NPR on Thursday that the Department of Justice has launched
"approximately 300 investigations" nationwide, including into some people associated with
Antifa.
Barr has sought to take a tough posture on anti-government groups since some early protests
over George Floyd's death in Minneapolis turned violent.
"There are some groups that don't have a particular ideology, other than anarchy. There are
some groups that want to bring about a civil war -- the Boogaloo group has been on the margin
of this as well," he
said earlier this month , adding that the Justice Department would find "constructive
solutions."
"... Statues of Confederate generals have been taken down or vandalized, and President Donald Trump has responded with an executive order promising harsh punishments for those who continue committing the acts. ..."
Democrats are calling for John Wayne Airport in Orange County to be renamed in protest of the
long-dead actor's alleged racism, making him the latest historical figure being judged by today's
cultural standards.
"There have been past efforts to get this done and now we're putting our name and our backing into
this to make sure there is a name change,"
said Ada Briceńo, chairperson of the Democratic Party
of Orange County, following a resolution being passed calling for the airport to be be given the
simple name: Orange County Airport.
Wayne's specific transgression are
"racist and bigoted
statements"
made during a Playboy interview in 1971, eight years before The Duke passed away at
the age of 72. The airport was named after the actor the year he died.
In the infamous interview with Playboy, Wayne made comments that have long been controversial,
though admittedly harsher and more extreme than in other public conversations.
"I believe in white supremacy until the Blacks are educated to a point of responsibility. I
don't believe in giving authority and positions of leadership and judgment to irresponsible people,"
the 'True Grit' star said at one point.
If we're looking to name airports only after people who were without sin,
then we'd better drop all their names and let them be known simply by their three-letter IATA
codes. John Wayne was no saint, but he still contributed in a positive way to American pop
culture history. https://t.co/l5KD5kXuGg
The Western star also made derogatory comments about Native Americans.
"I don't feel we did wrong in taking this great country away from them. [O]ur so-called
stealing of this country from them was just a matter of survival," he said.
"There were great
numbers of people who needed new land, and the Indians were selfishly trying to keep it for
themselves."
The resolution from Democrats fully acknowledges the removal of Wayne's name is part of a larger
effort to axe
"white supremacist symbols and names [that are] reshaping American institutions,
monuments, businesses, nonprofits, sports leagues, and teams."
As protests against police brutality and racism rage across the nation in the wake of George
Floyd's death, more and more historical figures with monuments and landmarks memorializing them have
been targeted.
Statues of Confederate generals have been taken down or vandalized, and President Donald Trump has
responded with an executive order promising harsh punishments for those who continue committing the
acts.
As has been the case with other figures of the past being held to today's standards, some
questioned the logic of targeting Wayne decades after his death.
"Of course, John Wayne was racist. By the hyper sensitive standards of today, just about every
person who has ever lived was racist,"
conservative journalist John Hawkins
tweeted
.
The truth is that it is Maidan -- a legitimate protest which was turned to nefarious goals by Neoliberal Dems and financed by
usual suspects (Soros, Ford Foundation and other CIA influenced outlets)
Notable quotes:
"... The idea of the protests as an "American Maidan" was reflected in the Komsomolskaya Pravda ..."
"... Several elements of the pro-Kremlin English-language ecosystem are based in the US. Fort-Russ News, another frequent contributor to the EUvsDisinfo database , is also ready to describe the protests in the US as staged by the Democratic Party: ..."
South Front has a
clear picture of the protests: it's a colour revolution, a fake popular uprising, set up
by "Globalist Corporations" targeting Donald Trump.
The situation is such that typically, it was a standoff of US President Donald Trump
and the US national industry, in a standoff against the globalist and the non-mainstream
corporations.
Today's fires which have spread across America in the wake of George Floyd's murder at
the knee of Minnesota police officer Derick Chauvin has presented America with the chance to
do some serious soul searching. It has also presented certain Deep State opportunists, color
revolutionaries and anarchism-financing billionaires a chance to unleash what some are
calling an "America's Maidan" in the hopes of accomplishing what four years of Russiagate
failed to do.
The idea of the protests as an "American Maidan" was reflected in the Komsomolskaya Pravda , Russia's largest
daily, with a circulation that puts it in top-20 in Europe. An openly racist version of the
text was spread by Margarita
Simonyan , the editor-in-chief of RT and Sputnik, as reported by the
EUvsDisinfo . The text, endorsed by Ms. Simonyan, ends:
Send runners everywhere, call to the World. Be assured – in this very minute a
slow coup d'etat is played out by the bureaucrats in the White House. If the Americans will
take my advice into consideration, I hope we can see the United States becoming a real
Ukraine. Good luck, friends! The entire progressive humankind is with you! Beat the whites
until they turn black.
Several elements of the pro-Kremlin English-language ecosystem are based in the US.
Fort-Russ News, another frequent contributor to the EUvsDisinfo database , is
also
ready to describe the protests in the US as staged by the Democratic Party:
This color revolution is a DNC coup against constitutional government.
A particularly special outlet is the US-based, Russian nationalist site Russia Insider.
EUvsDisinfo reported on the site's
decision to adopt an openly anti-Semitic editorial policy in 2018, and it is a frequent
contributor to the disinformation database. The site has no visible connections to Russian
state structures, but is demonstratively loyal to key Kremlin priorities. Russia Insider has
gone fully racist on the protests, giving room for white supremacists:
Why is Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, who is Jewish, actively encouraging the mobs
burning down his police department's precinct? Why is the President of the United States
reduced to impotently begging
Yoel Roth to let him tweet? Why has Trump decided to letMinneapolis burnas he cowers under his desk inside theWhite House, all while the NYPD under "woke" Bill De Blasioviciously
brutalizespeople protesting for the same cause? Traditional understandings of how
power is brokered and administrated do not apply.
[ -- ]
All white people are targets, no white person can expect either of the existing parties
to the rescue. When November comes around, we must vote no-confidence. This is America, and
its system is out to destroy you.
This is not Kremlin policy. It is impossible to claim that the Kremlin has an explicitly
racist agenda, but the pro-Kremlin disinformation network reaches out to a great variety of
audiences, with which it seeks to find distinct avenues of appeal. Sites affiliated with state
structures share content and contributors with sites without any visible connections to the
Kremlin. A Red, White and Blue All-American Maidan.
Supporting and Attacking Antifa
Creating rapport with white supremacists works just as well as reaching out to leftist,
anti-capitalist groups and individuals; like here :
It is entirely believable that the current violence is largely instigated. The media
obediently relayed Attorney General Barr's claim that rioting was led by the anti-fascist
groups known as 'Anti-Fa', until proof was uncovered of a deliberate White House/White
Nationalist plan to provoke violence by unsuspecting protesters who long ago forgot if they
even knew it, that Donald Trump's most powerful backers in 2016 ranged from David Duke, the
Grand Wizard (sic) of the Ku Klux Klan, to the white nationalist millionaire hedge fund owner
Robert Mercer, who hand-picked several of Trump's initial cabinet.
So while one part of the pro-Kremlin network defends the Antifa movement, the
above-mentioned Russia Insider
vehemently attacks it :
Antifa, the extreme anarchist-communist movement, has rioting down to an art. The first
broken window is the blood in the water for looters to move in. When the looting is done,
those carrying flammable chemicals start fires to finish the job. Footage recorded in
Minneapolis and other cities show militants dressed in black bloc -- the antifa uniform --
wielding weapons like hammers or sticks to smash windows. You see their graffiti daubed on
smashed up buildings: FTP means 'Fuck the Police'; ACAB stands for 'All Cops Are Bastards';
1312 is the numerical code for ACAB.
Was Floyd chokehold it staged at least partially, but then went wrong because Floyd has high level of fentanyl in his blood ?
Autopsy shows
George Floyd had COVID-19, meth & fentanyl in his - NBC2 News (The autopsy, which was performed the day after his death, showed
11 ng/mL of fentanyl and 19 ng/mL of methamphetamines, in addition to 86 ng/mL of morphine and other substances.)
Notable quotes:
"... It would be hard to choreograph a film scene more likely to provoke a backlash against police than the killing of George Floyd. White Minneapolis cop Derek Chauvin was filmed kneeling on the handcuffed black man's neck for an excruciating eight minutes, all but smirking directly into the camera as if he knew it was his big moment of stardom. Ever since, public opinion of the police has been pummeled by a non-stop stream of on-camera brutality, and cries to defund police forces across the country are reaching fever pitch. ..."
"... With so much public outrage against police abuses, one might think that police departments would be hurrying to clean house and get rid of their " bad apples. " Accountability – punishing the truly bad cops in court with prison sentences rather than desk duty or dismissal from the force – would seem to be the only alternative to defunding. Incremental reforms, like the rollout of body cameras and New York Governor Andrew Cuomo's move to outlaw chokeholds that were already banned by the NYPD in 1993, are clearly not having the desired effect. But police departments have resoundingly failed to hold their officers accountable, and so – with a handful of exceptions – have courts. Instead, the violence has only gotten more alarming. ..."
"... It's worth asking why these officers engage in such disturbing acts of violence, knowing they'll be on social media and probably the nightly news, providing a glowing advertisement for police abolition. Surely they aren't all the racist sociopaths Black Lives Matter has, with its " All Cops Are Bastards " slogan, dubbed them? ..."
"... cops in the past have gone to great (and possibly illegal) lengths to stop civilians from filming them in the act of abusing their authority. The man who filmed the 2014 police chokehold killing of Eric Garner even sued New York City two years later over alleged retaliation by the cops, claiming he was arrested on trumped-up charges for documenting the brutal act. ..."
"... Yet 2020's over-the-top bad cops seem unconcerned with amateur cinematographers. One might expect officers to be on their best behavior post-George Floyd, not auditioning for a spot on the now-cancelled COPS reality show. ..."
Over-the-top gratuitous violence against unarmed protesters, shockingly racist conversations, all of
it somehow recorded for posterity (and maximum virality) – are American police TRYING to get their
profession abolished?
While police brutality has been an ugly reality for as long as the US has had police, the cartoonish
levels of on-camera police violence circulating on social media in the last month are truly
mind-boggling. Suddenly, there is no better advertisement for the police-abolition movement than the
police themselves.
Defenders of the police tend to blame the "
few bad apples
" who shoot
fleeing suspects, choke innocent men, or pepper-spray peaceful demonstrators for cops' bad reputation.
But that absolves from responsibility the supposed "
good apples
" who have repeatedly closed
ranks around those same problem officers, even as their unconscionable assaults are caught on film and
broadcast to the world.
It would be hard to choreograph a film scene more likely to provoke a backlash against police than
the killing of George Floyd. White Minneapolis cop Derek Chauvin was filmed kneeling on the handcuffed
black man's neck for an excruciating eight minutes, all but smirking directly into the camera as if he
knew it was his big moment of stardom. Ever since, public opinion of the police has been pummeled by a
non-stop stream of on-camera brutality, and cries to defund police forces across the country are
reaching fever pitch.
With so much public outrage against police abuses, one might think that police departments would be
hurrying to clean house and get rid of their "
bad apples.
" Accountability – punishing the
truly bad cops in court with prison sentences rather than desk duty or dismissal from the force –
would seem to be the only alternative to defunding. Incremental reforms, like the rollout of body
cameras and New York Governor Andrew Cuomo's move to outlaw chokeholds that were already banned by the
NYPD in 1993, are clearly not having the desired effect. But police departments have resoundingly
failed to hold their officers accountable, and so – with a handful of
exceptions
– have courts. Instead, the violence has only gotten more alarming.
It's worth asking why these officers engage in such disturbing acts of violence, knowing they'll be
on social media and probably the nightly news, providing a glowing advertisement for police abolition.
Surely they aren't all the racist sociopaths Black Lives Matter has, with its "
All Cops Are
Bastards
" slogan, dubbed them?
It's hard in 2020 to find a public place where there isn't at least one camera on the scene -
though that didn't stop Louisville cops from shutting off their body cameras before local barbecue
owner David McAtee was shot, allegedly with a National Guard bullet, earlier this month, an incident
that remains under investigation. But cops in the past have gone to great (and possibly illegal)
lengths
to stop civilians from filming them in the act of abusing their authority. The man who
filmed the 2014 police chokehold killing of Eric Garner even sued New York City two years later over
alleged retaliation by the cops, claiming he was arrested on trumped-up charges for documenting the
brutal act.
Yet 2020's over-the-top bad cops seem unconcerned with amateur cinematographers. One might expect
officers to be on their best behavior post-George Floyd, not auditioning for a spot on the
now-cancelled COPS reality show.
Even nonviolent policing incidents seem designed to incite popular outrage. The bizarre arrest of a
CNN reporter covering the early unrest in Minneapolis – in which sheepish-sounding officers
apologetically informed correspondent Omar Jimenez that he was under arrest while live on the air –
elicited predictable cries of free speech suppression and a groveling apology from Minnesota Governor
Tim Walz.
And were the three North Carolina cops – referred to as "
veteran officers
" of the
Wilmington Police Department and fired earlier this week after their disturbingly racist chats were
recorded via "
accidental activation
" of a dashboard camera – really unaware those cameras
could be inadvertently triggered? Why indulge in multiple in-car hatefests when you know you're under
surveillance?
None of this adds up. Even as more communities seem to warm to the notion of "
defunding the
police
," it remains unclear what will replace them. Are we looking at a future of empowered
community snitches
, each snooping on the next in the hope of being rewarded by local government
for catching a crime in progress? Or are the rich merely going to hire Blackwater-style mercs to guard
their compounds while the poor rob and kill each other in the streets? Americans deserve some answers
– preferably before our police departments are dissolved.
Like this story? Share it with a friend!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are
solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
It's all hypocracy, fakery, flim flam and bamboozle. As some old sage once said, you can fool
some of the people all of the time. It's all about the money. ( It always is )
I'm not a conservative, no way; I am not a supporter of the current regime. I think that a
revolution – even the fake one, organized by Soros out of the GayLib crowd, lightly
sprinkled with Africans for colour – will do some good for America and the world. The
American troops are already leaving
Germany after only 75 years of occupation. There are more than 100 major bases overseas
that can be evacuated if the revolution persists. Fine and dandy.
But, Mr Hopkins, do not tell Trump that he has chosen the right survival strategy. As if
everyone will respect his authority if he doesn't get provoked. Let's be frank, comrade. Tell
Trump: if his main consideration is first of all not to be called a 'bloody tyrant' by a
liberal site, there is a place for him in hospitable Rostov, next to Yanukovych. Let him
decide. He can buy a villa over there for a good price.
Alternatively, let him try to regain some ground, and if he is called Hitler by some freaks,
let him answer with 'no more Mr Nice Guy', like the protagonist in Mel Brooks' film The
Producers . Let him defeat the colour Revolution of Masks, before it devours him.
Our colleague Andre VItchek
suggested we should not describe the process going on in the US, as a 'colour revolution'.
Firstly, the protesters shouldn't be discouraged, let alone ridiculed. Secondly, all these
revolutions are different, he says. These are weak arguments. First, I endeavour to understand
and explain events, and I leave encouragement to others. Second, colour revolutions are
revolutions made for the benefit of oligarchy. They remove the ruler who is too strong-willed
or social-minded for the billionaires' liking. And they utilise legitimate grievances of the
people. They ride on the people like a rider rides a horse. It means that a colour revolution
can shift and turn into the real thing, like a horse can throw down the rider and gallop away,
but this is not the usual turn of events.
The Mask Revolution in the US has too strong a support from corporations to be anything else
but a colour revolution. "Black Lives Matter Receives $100 Million from Foundations, in
addition to more than $33 million in grants to the Black Lives Matter movement from George
Soros through his Open Society Foundations", says Policemag
(the article was removed but can be accessed via archives.com.)
It can't be decoupled from the Covid pandemic, or rather, from the lockdowns. These unusual
means of disease control are deadly for small businesses and for free-lancers. Big corporations
survive and even grow fat; small ones die. Control over the population increases. Free-lancers
are forced to join the regular labour force and work for a large corporation; or die. The
actors of the revolution will be destroyed by the success of their enterprise. We shall know
the revolution became a real one, when the revolutionaries fight the corporations. Likewise,
the enemies of the colour revolution should not fight Blacks and minorities; they should fight
the corporations that use the Blacks as their cannon fodder.
Because of this connection between lockdowns and the Mask Revolution, Trump should end the
lockdowns. If there is one thing we have learned from first half of the year it is that
lockdowns do not help. We have to live with the virus, even if it that means dying. If you have
no lockdown, you'll have no second wave. The Swedes did it; everybody can do it. Those who want
to lock us down would lock us down forever.
And now, another reason why I disagree with Vltchek. It is not that BLM or DNC are better or
worse than Trump's warriors. DNC and BLM are close to a hegemonic power. They are loved by the
media, by the Masters of Discourse. If the Democratic candidate wins the 2020 elections, the
West will be united behind him. He will humiliate China, Russia, Venezuela, Iran; the
Deplorable will be deplored; European nationalists will be eliminated; the New World Order will
proceed at double speed. No, thank you, Andre. It is better to have America and the West
divided under Trump rather than united under the DNC.
No matter what Trump and the Republicans do to all of these coping plan-trusters (including
Shamir), they will never be held to account, never be questioned for their serial betrayals
of the base, because "Democrats worse."
Foreign observers are welcome to their relatively uninformed opinions but those of us
who've grown up and been forced to live under generations of kosher sandwich U.S. politics
– two parties for Jews, none for us – have had enough.
Trump loses in November, bigly. The legitimacy of every American institution has been
exhausted and the faith of the people in the entire American project is at a modern,if not
all time low.
Even in the Civil War, patriots of both sides believed in their respective governments. A
strong majority of Americans left and right have nothing left to believe in at all –
except ourselves.
Trump should have listened to his own speeches from his own election campaign 2016, and
follow them to the letter.
If he had done that, he could fill five stadiums and would be on the way to a big election
victory. However, the reality was different. He went back on his promises and betrayed his
team – so his base (what's left of it) rightly no longer trusts him. Fool me once.
Anyway, 2020 US elections will probably be an exercise in chaos, since the whole BLM, SJW,
CHAZ flag burning, violence and statue toppling has moved out onto the streets.
Black Lives Matter Receives $100 Million from Foundations, in addition to more than $33
million in grants to the Black Lives Matter movement from George Soros through his Open
Society Foundations
How long before they blow through all that loot? Or more likely, have it all stolen by their
(((accountant)))? We all know blacks can't count, especially with so many zeros behind a
number.
Do not bother with racism or anti-racism. It is a faux-agenda, like gay or homophobe, like
fem or trans, like toilet gendering. Real people aren't interested in this sort of nonsense.
Blacks are not interested in anti-racism, either. It is mainly White Wokes that are, and they
will follow whatever the newspaper tells them to follow. Seattle has very few blacks but many
Wokes, that's why it is the centre of the 'anti-racist' campaign. Even if Trump went around
kissing the sneakers of black youngsters, he wouldn't change anything. Blacks are not hostile
to him, not at all, but people who speak for them, the Dem Wokes, definitely are.
TBH, I have grown to hate the GOP even more than I hate the DNC.
The only thing on our menu is the kosher sandwich.
trump has done virtually nothing for white people. In fact I could make a good argument that
things were better under Obama.
Things are so bad now I can barely go to sleep at night and I can barely get up in the
morning.
The rioting and burning and looting and killing was bad enough, but the destruction of our
statues is like daggers stabbing me in the back. And to think that the entire fucking GOP sits
and WATCHES and does NOTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The United States government is no longer legitimate. They can't even protect the citizens
and this is the very LEAST that we ask of those bastards. Idiots give trump a pass because it's
"Democrat cities being destroyed." Well ..I live in a Democrat city and my life matters
too.
Fuck trump. trump is part of the deep state. trump is a swamp creature. The idea that he
would actually do something against Antifa is absurd. Antifa and BLM are shock troops for the
jews.
trump WORKS for the jews, does the bidding of the jews.
Antifa attacks white men, nothing happens.
White men defend themselves against Antifa, white men go to jail.
Fuck trump.
We now live in an apartheid state where whites have no rights yet must follow the law, while
non-whites can do whatever the fuck they want.
I can't however decipher the following: "If the Democratic candidate wins the 2020
elections, the West will be united behind him. He will humiliate China, Russia, Venezuela,
Iran; the Deplorable will be deplored; European nationalists will be eliminated; the New World
Order will proceed at double speed. "
Why would the DNC puppet humiliate China when the DNC puppeteers made of China what it is
today. Aside from industrializing China (while the West, especially the US, was
deindustrialized) and the decade-long of technology transfer (read: theft) from the West to
China, the City of London (who paradoxically also waged successive phases of opium wars on
China*) has backed the Chinese Yuan since 1913 (coincidentally, the same year they created the
US Fed).
The same goes for Iran, it would be inaccurate to think of it as a monolithic entity. Iran
is divided between the Rouhani clan (who support the Muslim Brotherhood (a British intelligence
creation modeled on the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry) and who hoped Hillary came to power)) and
the Revolutionary Guards.
_____
* The British Empire's drug money launderer in Hong Kong, Jardines, still bears the opium
poppy flower as its logo. https://www.jardines.com
Very sensible stuff, Shamir. Thanks. High time we all jumped off the phony racism express. A
Pew poll shows 46% of the BLM/Antifa mob are White, fewer than 20% Black. Who are those
anti-White, anti-Tradition Whites? Could they be exactly what they look like -- affluent
anti-Trump suburbanites fanning arson and riots with copious financing from Soros and the
various other oligarchic foundations built by stateless corporate interests? I sure do agree
with you that this is a fresh attempt to putsch Trump out of office and get his deplorables
back under lock, key and mask.
And, yes, the problem with Trump is that he's all bark and no bite. He was elected because
his bark resonated with the concerns of millions of sane, normal Americans who have had a
snootful of globalism, deindustrialization, open borders and forever wars. Then he packed his
government with their enemies and got a knife in the back from each one of them. Trump framed
the issues but forgot to lead.
A quick look at the economic desolation left by the lockdown hoax and the physical chaos
left by the racism hoax is now persuading even Black leaders to wash their hands of this
nonsense. Thousands of Black soldiers and cops would gladly join them. They are the natural
allies of the Deplorables against the wealthy interests tearing the country apart. But who is
going to lead them? Our welfare-warfare regime leaves no alternative to Trump's bark. But when
is he going to bite?
Trump is a minion of the Deep State something the author and many other Trump apologists
fail to understand.
Even this is giving Orange Buffoon too much credit. I never sensed guile, just a man with no
real plan. That the atrocious kushner continues to infest the WH is proof-positive Trump can't
separate family from the aloneness required for leadership.
Follow RT on
All the riots, toppled statues and attacks on American history will not end in the Year Zero the
protesters want. It's going to achieve precisely the opposite, as the silent majority of Americans
will show in November.
The silent majority is one of the biggest X factors in American politics. Possibly even the biggest.
Not all Americans are the type to shout everything from the high heavens, even though we have a
reputation for being brash and loud. Many of us would rather let our actions do the talking than our
words.
With the presidential election less than 150 days away, the left needs to reconsider where
it's going and what it's enabling. And whether it wants the nation to dump Trump, as its supporters
say they're passionate about achieving.
The poll numbers are hardly surprising. Biden tends to range anywhere from 42 to 56, whereas Trump
is anywhere from 37 to 48 percent,
according to Five Thirty Eight
.This is no different to how it was in 2016, when the
polls
showed Hillary Clinton routinely holding double-digit leads over Trump.
After he won (albeit with a smaller number of votes than Clinton secured), there was a lot of
pondering about how exactly the polls got it wrong, and it all came down to the same conclusion: the
silent majority. That large swath of Americans who weren't vocal about who they were going to vote
for, but weren't pleased with how the country was going and let their actions speak for themselves.
During the course of the past four years, the political left in America has learnt zero lessons
from their loss in 2016. If anything, they've become even less. CNN personality Don Lemon
has even gone to bat for Antifa
.
There are constant statements in the liberal press that there's some sort of deep-seated racism
that's inherent to the United States. So much so that the Pulitzer Prize honoring journalism and the
arts went to The 1619 Project,
a historically inaccurate
and easily debunked piece about the history of slavery in the United
States. Then came the death of George Floyd.
Since that moment, the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement has been working to enact a sort of Year
Zero, targeting monuments across the country to deface or destroy them. This, of course, comes after
the mass riots agitated by Antifa that saw many cities in flames. And then there's the creation of the
CHAZ/CHOP autonomous area in Seattle, which is
reportedly
about to be shut down by the mayor.
Where is the condemnation from the Joe Biden camp? Where is the condemnation from the left in
general? Where is their support for the police? Why aren't any of them calling for BLM – an avowedly
Marxist group, the aims of which include the overthrowing of capitalism – to stop encouraging this or
for Antifa to be declared a terrorist group, or declaring how bad an idea an autonomous, police-free
zone is? The answer? They're nowhere. In fact, Nancy Pelosi tried to place the murder of George Floyd
at the feet of Republicans
.
Here is what the left does not understand. Its unwillingness to call out these Marxist groups and
their actions doesn't go unnoticed. There's a reason Trump rallies sell out the way they do. There's a
reason why he won in 2016 and could just as easily have a poll-defying victory again. That reason is
simple: Americans take notice of what's around them and realize who's in charge and who's failing.
It's been speculated that the 2016 election was an indictment of HIllary Clinton, but I'm not sure
I agree. I think it was an indictment of the left in general. During the Barack Obama presidency,
"flyover country" was constantly demeaned as being racist and backwards. With Hillary Clinton, it was
no different, and people were sick of it. Now, it's gone far beyond that. Not only are there groups
that actually believe America is a deeply racist and oppressive nation (the opposite of reality), but
they want to destroy it and create something new. If you look at CHAZ/CHOP, it's rather obvious that
they can't even plant a crop, let alone run a country.
The United States does not want a Year Zero. Ours is a nation with a heritage most Americans are
proud of, and we're proud of the oppression we've defeated over the years. Erasing that history only
means we'd be doomed to repeat it.
As such, the polls are likely going to remain the same until the election. At that point, the
silence will be deafening. Americans will pull the cord for Republicans, and we'll have another 2016
on our hands. All because the left would not stand up to the radicals who want to destroy the nation.
Can leftists and conservatives of our modern era peacefully coexist within the same
society?
If someone asked me this question only ten years ago I would have said "Sure, it's
possible".
Today, the answer is a resounding "No way".
The political divide has become so vast that there is simply no chance for the two sides to
reconcile or come to reasonable terms, and make no mistake, this is not a two-sided disaster;
the majority of the damage is being done by one side of this equation.
Back in 2016 I wrote numerous articles discussing the issues and dangers of the political
divide that was developing within the US, and many of these articles focused on who actually
benefits. In my article
'Order Out Of Chaos: The Defeat Of The Left Comes With A Cost' I stated:
" When I mentioned in my last article the crippling of social justice, I did not mention
that this could have some negative reverberations. With Trump and conservatives taking
near-total power after the Left had assumed they would never lose again, their reaction has
been to transform. They are stepping away from the normal activities and mindset of cultural
Marxism and evolving into full blown communists. Instead of admitting that their ideology is
a failure in every respect, they are doubling down.
When this evolution is complete, the Left WILL resort to direct violent action on a larger
scale, and they will do so with a clear conscience because, in their minds, they are fighting
fascism. Ironically, it will be this behavior by leftists that may actually push
conservatives towards a fascist model. Conservatives might decide to fight crazy with more
crazy."
The transformation I described in 2016 is now happening in 2020. The left is going full
communist, with a little help of course. Currently, the Cultural Marxists are seeking to clean
house within their own ranks. They are terrorizing long time Democrats and "allies" of the
movement into subscribing to ALL the tenets of the new social justice religion. No deviation is
allowed; all progressives must declare fealty and signal their virtue and submission or they
are systematically targeted and destroyed. It is essentially coercion by cancel culture.
After this phase is over and they have organized the political left into an army of mindless
drones, they will fully turn their attention to conservatives.
To be clear, social justice movements are not the primary threat, they are merely a symptom
of the disease - A cancer called "globalism". These people are being used as a weapon of
expediency, nothing more. There is an open and admitted organized effort on the part of a tiny
minority of power brokers and money elites in our society that seek to manipulate the public
into accepting the notion of total centralization and the end of personal liberty and national
sovereignty in the name of an arbitrary "greater good". This is not "conspiracy theory", this
is conspiracy fact.
As Richard N. Gardner, former deputy assistant Secretary of State for International
Organizations under Kennedy and Johnson, and a member of the Trilateral Commission,
wrote in the April, 1974 issue of the Council on Foreign Relation's (CFR) journal Foreign
Affairs (pg. 558) in an article titled 'Hard Road To World Order':
" In short, the 'house of world order' will have to be built from the bottom up rather
than from the top down. It will look like a great 'booming, buzzing confusion,' to use
William James' famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty,
eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal
assault."
It is my view, according to the evidence, that the social justice left is a cultivated
threat, a product of the gatekeepers of Cultural Marxism that has been gestated over decades
to the stage we now see today – a mass movement of useful idiots, insane narcissists
and sociopaths obsessed with identity politics and the destruction of the "old world".
It was globalist institutions like the Rockefeller Foundation and the Ford Foundation that
funded different elements of the feminist movement and "gender studies" movements from the
late 1960's onward. This included the Rockefeller Foundation's large donations to 'The
Feminist Press' and the Ford Foundation's programs to indoctrinate teachers into injecting
social justice talking points into their curriculum. This is openly admitted in Alison R.
Bernstein's book
'Funding The Future: Philanthropy's Influence On America's Higher Education' . Bernstein
is the vice president of Education at the Ford Foundation and the former Associate Dean of
Faculty at Princeton.
That's right folks, social justice activism was paid for and encouraged by the so-called
"patriarchy". This is the reality, and it never stopped. Even today SJW groups are funded by
globalists.
For example, as the mainstream media often tries to dismiss or ignore, Black Lives Matter
was initially funded by the
Ford Foundation and George Soros and his Open Society Foundation . BLM coffers were
flooded with over $100 million from uber rich white elites. Again, this is a FACT that even
the dishonest spin doctors at Snopes were not able to deny. Instead, they attempt to use
strawman arguments and sophistry to distract from the implication of extreme-left mobs
receiving seed money from elitist billionaires.
As noted, the political left is being weaponized, but to what end? To understand the end
game we have to understand the concept of the Hegelian Dialectic and "problem - reaction -
solution".
If there is one behavior that stands out above all others as a defining trait of the social
justice left, in my opinion it is their obsession with exploiting tragedy and crisis for their
own personal and political gain. The George Floyd incident, a terrible event to be sure, should
have been held up as a prime example of police abuse, yet it was immediately twisted by BLM
into an issue of "systemic racism". There is no proof of systemic racism. There's not even any
proof that George Floyd was killed because he was black.
Police abuse is something which concerns every American equally, not just black Americans.
But the BLM has obscured the real issue of police accountability and made it about the delusion
of "white supremacy" and an attack on basically every element of American heritage and
tradition. This will alienate millions of Americans who would have otherwise agreed to certain
points and arguments. The narrative was hijacked by the political left and they reveled in the
death of George Floyd as a means to push numerous unrelated agendas forward as quickly as
possible.
These agendas include a vast array of censorship in social media and the firestorm of cancel
culture, threatening anyone who does not agree with the prevailing leftist narrative. People
are losing their platforms, their jobs, and their reputations are being dragged through the
mud, and the mainstream media is helping to make this happen.
Now, as a true conservative, I respect the boundaries of private property, and to be sure, a
website is indeed private property. A social media company has the right to remove people and
content they don't like, just as any person has the right to remove someone they don't like
from their home. That said, there are some exceptions to this.
For example, when a company has a monopoly over a certain means of communication, then
censorship becomes a legal and moral problem and that company must be either limited or broken
up. Monopolies are not natural functions of a free market, they are attempts by elites to
subvert free markets. Corporations in general receive their charters from government, along
with the protections of limited liability and corporate personhood. They are not a natural part
of the economy, they are aberrations created by government. They are children of socialism, not
"capitalism".
If we are to solve the current problem in the long term, corporations must either be
regulated or abolished and replaced with classical limited partnerships. Joint stock companies,
as corporation used to be called, were never intended to become permanent power structures
within free market societies, and now we are witnessing why.
That said, the danger of monopolies does not only extend to corporations. There can also be
such a thing as a political or ideological monopoly as well. When a particular minority of
ideologues take over a vast majority of mass communication outlets and actively seeks to
squeeze out any dissenting voices so that only one point of view is presented to the public,
what else do we call this but a monopoly?
I see where the cancel culture is going and it is quickly going to a very ugly place. While
google's removal of ad revenue from conservative websites like Zero Hedge is a legal grey area,
the attacks will eventually go far beyond monetization. One day soon, I predict there will be
an attempt to influence website host providers to remove "offending" sites altogether. One
might argue that handing government the power to nationalize the internet would help to protect
free speech, but I doubt that. Government is run by the same ghouls that are funding the social
justice cult. Why should we trust them to police the web fairly?
The political left is not only asserting control over speech on the web, but also pushing
restrictions in major population centers (to be fair, Trump and his cabinet of elites including
Anthony Fauci are also culpable in encouraging medical tyranny). If you lived in a major US
city during the first pandemic lockdowns, then you have seen the extreme lengths politicians,
mostly on the left, will go to to assert dominance.
Why are Americans in these cities being admonished from even going outside? You do know that
viruses are far less communicable in open areas than indoors, right? No one catches a virus
from jogging through a park or walking on a beach. Such rules seem like they stem from a severe
ignorance of how viruses survive and function, but it's not ignorance; it's deliberate. These
draconian rules are not about saving lives, they are about control, and many conservatives are
fed up with it.
Add to this the fact that city governments like Seattle are actively encouraging civil
unrest and rioting by Antifa and BLM, and something has to give.
The insanity of the left is triggering a balkanization of the US, but I'm not so sure this
is a bad thing.
It is clear that SJWs cannot live with or get along with anyone who respects liberty or
logic. They are a destructive force in society and they have no comprehension of the
non-aggression principle. They believe that they have the right to enforce their ideology and
beliefs on others. They infest every aspect of our culture with the sole intent of destroying
what we have previously built so that our history can be erased and replaced. It is only
natural that reasonable and free-thinking people would want to get as far away from them as
possible.
There has been much talk in the mainstream lately about the
growing exodus from major cities into suburban and rural areas is due to the pandemic. I
disagree. In my own state of Montana, there has been a surge of new residents buying
properties, and the word is the majority of them are conservatives trying to find like-minded
people. They are trying to escape from the madness of the political left, they are not only
concerned about the pandemic.
A great migration is coming, and it will be from leftist stronghold states like California,
New York, Illinois, etc., as well as from major cities. People are going to seek out and move
to places where their ideals and principles are respected or protected. There has not been a
division like this in the US since perhaps the Civil War.
I'm not sure it's avoidable, and even if it was I'm not sure it should be avoided. There is
something to be said for conservatives and leftists balancing each other out in a community,
but when one side becomes aggressive while also being protected, we have limited options.
Conservatives are the primary pillar of support propping up these otherwise broken states and
communities. Perhaps it's time for producers and liberty advocates to seek out greener pastures
and go where they are appreciated? And maybe it's time for progressives and socialists in
America to finally stand on their own and be allowed to fail.
The global elites have a different scenario in mind, I think. They certainly want a civil
war, but one that they can mold and control on both sides. They are using the left to strike
fear into the minds of conservatives and they want us to demand government action as the
solution. They want us to push the button on the Insurrection Act and to demand martial law. If
we separate and establish conservative strongholds then the temptation to beg for government
help will be diminished.
There will be numerous arguments made against this strategy - They will say the cities and
high population states are economically essential and leaving will be financially disastrous
for individuals. But, if producers are leaving in droves, then they can build an economy
anywhere they please. It's the leftists that need conservatives to feed off of their labor and
production; conservatives don't need leftists for anything. There will be others that claim
that when we leave blue states and counties we are abandoning the fight and leaving those
places to be completely taken over. I disagree with this mentality. By leaving and forming
conservative communities and economies and businesses we are changing the landscape of the
conflict. Instead of constantly contending with political obstruction we will be free to
actually build something lasting.
This is what the establishment is afraid of; they do not want conservatives to become
proactive. They want us to hide in our homes in fear and apathy waiting for someone else to
save the day.
I realize that there is such a thing as the false left/right paradigm, but this paradigm
applies to politicians and government. Politicians are only loyal to the establishment power
structure, and that structure desires tyranny. Common people have differing social and
political viewpoints, and this is natural. One would hope that ALL Americans regardless of
their beliefs would still have a respect for the fundamentals of the Bill of Rights and the
Constitution. But when one side or the other becomes openly hostile to those principles and
values of freedom, then they become my enemy and the enemy of any liberty minded person. We
cannot live together, so, we must live apart. Otherwise, we will have to go to war until one
side is removed from the equation.
* * *
If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on
advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The
Wild Bunch Dispatch . Learn more about it
HERE .
"Dear White People, Please Read 'White Fragility'," instructs
The Washington Post. In case you don't get the message, The New York Times, helpfully
reminds its
stupid white readers, "Dear White People: Being an Ally Isn't Always What You Think." Fortune – a magazine that usually deals
with the affairs of big business – also piles in with its words of wisdom: "Dear White People, The Work Takes Time."
Not to be outdone, the usually frivolous Glamour Magazine assumes the grave persona of a Sunday School Preacher and
warns : "White people, here's how
we can try to be better allies and proactively anti-racist." And just to show that new-fangled American theology has also absorbed
the condescending "Dear White People" mantra, Evangelicals for Social Action are ready to
remind
the world: "Dear White People: Being an Ally Is More Than a Performance."
As you would expect, the banal rhetoric of "Dear White People" is now institutionalised in higher education. The website
of the prestigious Imperial College of London, has a
page called "How To Be A White
Ally." Its main message to dear white people is "Acknowledge your Privilege." That's another way of saying confess your
sin, which is symbolised by your skin tone.
The University of Nevada leaves little to chance. It offers dear white people a 10-point plan that will help "white allies"
to redeem themselves. Most of the guidance is devoted to explaining that dear white people should know their place, which is
at the bottom of a newly constructed racial hierarchy. To realise this objective, it
embraces a version of a Maoist self-critical
struggle ritual and states "When Criticized or Called Out, Allies Listen, Apologize, Act Accountability, and Act Differently."
Most of the guidance directed at dear white people is ostensibly directed at turning individuals possessing "privilege"
into allies. Historically, the struggle against racism demanded solidarity from people of all races. Sadly, things have changed and
the language of solidarity has been replaced by a quasi-religious rhetoric of acknowledging your guilt.
Dear White People are not invited to work as equal participants in the struggle against racism. They are instructed to know their
place. "Our anger isn't yours. It doesn't belong to you," notes a memo to would-be allies. One
toolkit , titled "Guidelines for Being
Strong White Allies" insists, "Support the leadership of people of color."
Without a hint of irony, a manual
that instructs dear white people how to behave on demonstrations is titled, "Proper Protest Etiquette for Allies." And
as you would expect, its rule number one is, "Know Your Place." It explains:
"Before you show up to your first protest, it's important to know and recognize your place. You are going into someone else's
home, so it's vital that you check your privilege at the door before barreling up the stairs."
The exhortation to know your place is usually combined with the call to "Listen To Black Leaders" and to behave as you
are told. Anyone familiar with 19th century Victorian manuals produced for servants will be struck with its similarity in tone with
contemporary dear white people literature.
The Dear White People narrative assumes that its audience are composed of infantilised and disoriented adults who are clearly
morally inferior to its authors. The use of the term Dear, that prefixes white people expresses the attitude of barely disguised
irritation and contempt. Its scolding air signals the expectation that allies are expected to crawl abjectly on the ground with their
faces downwards.
It is worth noting that a lot of the Dear White People communiques are written by white people rather than black authors. In numerous
schools and universities, white race entrepreneurs insist that studying the book White Fragility is more or less mandatory. This
cohort of "super allies" have assumed that they have the moral authority to impose their views on their moral inferiors.
Unfortunately, whatever their intention, these race entrepreneurs are complicit in racializing everything. Their programme of
race humiliation will do nothing to undermine real racism. Worse still, by attempting to re-create a "fairer" form of racial
hierarchy they undermine the possibility of genuine solidarity.
Frank Furedi's Why Borders Matter: Why Humanity Must Relearn The Art of Drawing Borders is published by Routledge on 13 July.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those
of RT.
BLM are not Marxists. they are Maoists and toppling statues is a natural thing for them, much like it was for "Red Guards" during
China "cultural revolution"
Notable quotes:
"... "gross form of White Supremacy." ..."
"... The Last Supper ..."
"... "No one would seriously argue that the Pieta or the Last Supper should be torn down or painted over," ..."
"... "Shaun King is just being ridiculous and provocative, and writing an article about his mad claims is just legitimising them," ..."
"... Like this story? Share it with a friend! ..."
Guy Birchall, British journalist covering current affairs, politics and free speech issues. Recently published in The Sun and
Spiked Online. Follow him on Twitter
@guybirchall
Guy Birchall, British journalist covering current affairs, politics and free speech issues. Recently published in The Sun and
Spiked Online. Follow him on Twitter
@guybirchall
24 Jun, 2020 07:35
Get short URL
A leading activist's remarks that all "statues, murals, and stained glass windows of white Jesus, and his European mother" represent
"gross white supremacy" shows that radical, racialised politics has no limit to its targets.
The problematic statues row has now taken a turn from political iconoclasm to literal iconoclasm with depictions of "white Jesus"
next on the hit list for some of Black Lives Matter's more hardcore proponents.
Activist Shaun King has called for all the statues,
murals, stained glass windows and paintings depicting the Messiah as having European features to come down because they are a
"gross form of White Supremacy."
To illustrate his point, King makes the perceptive observation that when Jesus, Mary and Joseph
went into hiding while Herod engaged in a spot of infanticide in 1 AD Judea, the family hid in Egypt, not Denmark, so they would
"
blend in.
"
This is exactly the sort of mission creep many people worried about when the whole statues issue started to pick up steam last
month. It began with slave owners, and one can see the argument there for taking them down, but it is worth noting that the statues
themselves were not erected for their services to the Transatlantic slave trade.
Then in America, they moved onto their national heroes, like Washington and Jefferson, again because they owned slaves. Again,
one can understand the argument that they shouldn't be venerated because of this fact, but they aren't praised for being slave owners
but for founding the United States of America.
Before we knew it, we were at Ulysses Grant, who lead the Union Armies in the Civil War to end slavery, but because he married
into a slave owning family, he too must be torn down. Defeating the Confederacy wasn't enough to save him. Then Theodore Roosevelt
was next on the list because of white supremacy, (although he wasn't the Roosevelt who actually interred Americans in camps based
on their race in World War II, that was FDR).
But even with the pace with which this movement has declared former icons persona non-grata, to jump from Teddy Roosevelt to Jesus
is extraordinary. Were Mr. King's demands to be met, and "all statues of the White European they claim to be Jesus" to come down,
that would amount to the destruction of some of the finest works of art in existence.
Michelangelo's Pieta, gone, Da Vinci's Last Supper, erased, Raphael's Transfiguration, wiped, Donatello's Crucifix, torn down,
and that would be just if we targeted artists who share their names with turtles who know karate. And the Sistine Chapel? Razed to
the ground, along with the smashing of the stained-glass windows of virtually every church and cathedral in Europe.
This erasure of history would make the destruction of the Reformation and the dissolution of the monasteries in 16th-century England
look like child's play.
The simple fact of the matter is that Jesus has, throughout history, been portrayed as looking like any number of races, and those
usually reflect the race of the artist. Black artists have portrayed him as having African features, Asian artists have done something
in their image, and so European artists obviously portrayed him as looking European. Which is kind of the point of Jesus: all his
followers are supposed to be able to see themselves in him. As a result of living in the Western world, that means, to Western eyes,
he has more often been portrayed as looking like a white European.
Yes, I think the statues of the white European they claim is Jesus should also come down. They are a
form of white supremacy. Always have been. In the Bible, when the family of Jesus wanted to hide, and blend in, guess where
they went?EGYPT!Not Denmark.Tear them down.
Yes. All murals and stained glass windows of white Jesus, and his European mother, and their white friends
should also come down. They are a gross form white supremacy. Created as tools of oppression. Racist propaganda. They should
all come down.
There is also the fact that for a large chunk of history, Europe is where Christianity blossomed. In the Middle East, where yes,
Jesus was born, a very different religion, with a very different view on depicting religious figures arose, which perhaps goes some
way to explaining the paucity of paintings of Christ in this part of the world. The fact that Jesus plays second fiddle to Mohammed
in Islam and is regarded as a false prophet in Judaism, might explain why there are fewer depictions of him in the immediate vicinity
of the Sea of Galilee.
One also has to have quite a conspiratorial mind to conclude that 'white supremacy' was top of the agenda for the likes of Da
Vinci and Raphael. Couldn't they just be artists painting and sculpting their interpretation of what Christ looked like? Could the
depictions of him as looking more European not just be down to those being the kind of people they hung around with?
I mean, if we're getting into the weeds about this, it's probably quite unlikely that the historical Jesus had a rippling six
pack and sinewy biceps as he is so often shown as having. Can art not just be appreciated as art without having the artist's motivation
impugned four, five or six centuries after the fact? Given that the Transatlantic slave trade didn't begin until the 17th century,
it seems baffling to tear down art made in the centuries before.
It also raises the question of how exactly is it acceptable to depict Jesus from now on then? Given that he was a Palestinian
Jew, it seems equally unlikely that he looked like the African man he was portrayed as in Madonna's
Like a Prayer
video,
as he would look like the dirty blonde haired European in Da Vinci's
The Last Supper
. (Gosh, it's painful equating these
two very different pieces of culture in the same sentence).
This may seem like a fringe issue that is never going to happen, and it could easily be dismissed as the ramblings of someone
on the extreme left.
"No one would seriously argue that the Pieta or the Last Supper should be torn down or painted over,"
some might say.
"Shaun King is just being ridiculous and provocative, and writing an article about his mad claims is just legitimising
them,"
they may add.
This may be true, but ask yourself – in 2010, how much money would you have put on statues of Washington and Jefferson being torn
down in America? What odds would you have got on the bookies of Churchill's statue having to be boarded up in London? I don't think
you'd have even put a quid on it.
There has to come a point where a civilisation just says "enough, stop," otherwise these movements pick up steam. Several American
states have shown themselves incapable of defending their founding fathers. With Christianity dwindling year by year in the West,
how long will we be able to make a defence for these priceless works of art if they too are decided to be contrary to the prevailing
ideology of the day?
Ugly civilisations torch their history, others learn from them. Let us not become the former, just because the other side is shouting
louder than we are.
Like this story? Share it with a friend!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and
do not necessarily represent those of RT.
What fun, what entertainment. And rare: One seldom sees the collapse of a landmark society
in a rush of wondrous idiocy. Would I could sell tickets. Don't look at it as a loss, but as a
show, an unwanted but grand amusement.
The coup de grace in our ripening decadence is the current uprising purportedly, though
implausibly, over racism. But never mind. The causes don't matter. The deal is done.
Still, it is interesting to recognize that the protesters are, perhaps deliberately,
confusing the incapacity of blacks with systemic racism. In truth, America has made the
greatest effort ever essayed by one race to uplift another. Reflect: In 1954 an entirely white
Supreme Court unanimously ended segregation. Later it found the use of IQ tests by employers
illegal because blacks scored poorly, then found "affirmative action," racial discrimination
against whites, legal (hardly oppression of blacks, this). An overwhelmingly white Congress
passed the Civil Rights Act in 1964, the Voting Rights Act the next year. A white President
sent troops to Little Rock to enforce desegregation. There has been an enormous flow of charity
to blacks: Section Eight Housing, AFDC, Head Start, hiring quotas, set-asides, sharply lowered
standards in police and fire departments. We now have free breakfasts for black children, then
free lunches, in addition to outright welfare. In aggregate they resemble a distributed
guaranteed basic income. Which is interesting.
These measures sprang from the best of intentions. Most I think should continue. I for one
do not want to evict blacks from public housing or have their children go hungry. Yet none of
these programs has had its desired effect. The crucial academic gap has not closed, crime
remains horribly high, illegitimacy verges on universal. This is a great shame. Blacks are
decent enough people, likable if they don't hate you, and phenomenally talented. But it hasn't
worked.
Nothing has worked. There is no indication that anything will. The great black cities are in
something approaching custodial care.
You cannot solve a problem without knowing what it is. This we dare not know. Democracies,
however approximate, cannot deal with chronically underperforming minorities.
They cannot even try. Anything that might help is politically impossible, and anything
politically possible won't help.
So, after the riots:
Social division will worsen after the riots. Racial hostility from blacks will not
decrease because their conditions will not change. The rioters are getting their way now, and
rule, but at the price of sowing hatred. At best we will have many decades of ugly rancor. At
worst, we are winding the spring for another outburst.
Multiculturalism has not worked, quite apart from race, and will not. White Americans
are not one people. The poor communications and bad roads that once allowed them to live almost
separately no longer exist. In its writ-large form, trying to force West Virginia to accept the
culture of Massachusetts will produce only anger.
The likelihood of amity between races is proportional to their agreement on values important
to them. For example, the Chinese share (what once were) the white values of study, work,
courtesy, and obedience to the law. That they eat with chopsticks and celebrate New Year on the
wrong day doesn't matter.
However, again for example, a culture that believes in female genital mutilation and utter
subjection of women cannot live amicably with a culture that abhors these things. Black ghetto
culture and white are immiscible in so many fundamental values that they will not live well
together.
Some cultures can assimilate, for example East Asian and American white, Latino and American
white. But, in addition to sharply different cultures, too many blacks live in sprawling,
racially isolated urban centers with almost no contact with the outside world other than
television.
Censorship will intensify, not just of communications and office chitchat but of
books. Tom Sawyer will be pulled from bookshelves or -- Amazon being the continental
shelf -- or bowderlized to remove the Nigger Jim and Injun Joe The Nigger of the
Narcissus may survive because none of the blacks and few of the whites will ever have heard
of Conrad. At least for the foreseeable future, firings for anything imaginably redolent of
racism–saying "All lives matter," for example–will be snatched at in a mixture of
passive aggression and schadenfreude to result in firings. This is unlikely to have a happy
ending.
Schooling : Watching great universities become sandboxes for unpleasantly righteous
dimwitted brats galls, or does if one lets it. I don't. Most of the protesters seem recently to
have erupted from the drains of an educational system that has been in sharp decline for
decades They, including the intelligent among them, appear historically not just ignorant but
carefully misinformed, culturally pathetic, and intellectually laughable. (For example, a
protestress interviewed by a British reporter as to what she thought of Churchill said she
couldn't really say because she hadn't met him. How many in BLM can spell "Confederacy"? A
statue of Ulysses Grant was pulled down in the belief that he was a Confederate general. May
God preserve us.)
The, uh, redaction of culture will not stop with books. Classical music is too white, the
sciences too white, mathematics a tool of oppression (meaning that blacks cannot understand it)
and so on. We have created a nation of pampered and imbecile peasants.
Schooling will continue its plummet. Science departments probably will not be
abolished. However, because they are too white, schools will recruit hopelessly unqualified
black students and professors, standards will fall yet more, and mathematics will be played
down even in astrophysics (this is being done). Extirpating racism will replace scholarship,
already degraded by the retirement or death of those professors who knew what education meant.
This will inevitably result in lowered American technological competitiveness and prosperity.
There is no hope of preventing this.
The replacement of learned professors by aging detritus from the Sixties antagonistic
to scholarship is not surprising. America has had strong anti-intellectual undercurrent since
its inception. The degradation will not be noticed by the young as they have never lived in a
world different from their own, with Harry Potter and Toni Morrison thought to be literature. A
liberal education was once the mark of the cultivated, being deep in languages, literature,
philosophy, the sciences, history, mathematics,. Universities once had, at least among the
better students, a love of open minded curiosity, thought, and debate. No more. Future
historians will notice the shift, but those within it will not. We are left with a nation of
morons who will not know they are morons.
This too cannot be prevented. Jejune herdthink is now warmly espoused throughout the academy
with children in grade school being primed for it.
The most -- I dare not say "entertaining" for fear of lynching, but, well, perhaps
"interesting" reforms will be those of the police, whether abolition, defunding to shift money
to youth outreach and rehab (which don't work) or replacement of police by warm and caring
adults, will result in increased crime. We need not concern ourselves with whether and to what
extent the police have been culpable in which cases. The changes will come anyway.
An intriguing question is what the nonviolent, non-racist, warm and fuzzy pseudopolice will
do when they encounter violent criminals. Counsel them on social justice? I would love to
watch.
Our system of governments has proved itself weak, feckless, and unable to govern. The
chaotic response to the coronavirus is a prime example, there being no national policy and the
states being told to do as they see fit. The other major example was the inability or
unwillingness to prevent looting and arson.The widespread destruction was unopposed, protected
by the media, and celebrated by the many corporations that have fallen over themselves to
truckle to the unwashed and to give them money. If our rampaging anthropoids can loot once,
there is no reason to think they cannot do it again.
Many cities are routinely out of control, with seven hundred homicides in Chicago and three
hundred in Baltimore every year. Increasingly criminals are released without bail and small
crimes, such as evading subway fares, are ignored when committed by minorities. The hordes of
derelicts grow, the New York subways become a homeless shelter. These are not problems seen in
civilized countries. Which America no longer is, to the astonishment and amusement of the
world.
Perhaps this was to be expected. The American practice of choosing its leaders every two,
four, or six years by popularity contest worked, after a fashion anyway, in a sprawling
continental country in which government had very little local influence. In a world far more
complex, with little ability to plan when those in charge change with paralyzing rapidity, and
everything intensely regulated by people unfamiliar with problems, results are poor. America's
competition with large countries having intelligently authoritarian and stable governance will
prove a losing proposition proposition. The inevitable decline in standard of living, already
well underwater, will promote unrest. Here we go again.
We have done what Marx couldn't: Achieved communism, a true dictatorship of the proletariat,
of a rabble jacquerie of much noise and no wit, the rule of the unfit. It is a rule only of the
culture. The moneyed would not grant it power over anything else. Yet rule it is. We shall hear
much of the authenticity of the illiterate, the purity of ghetto urges, the wisdom of the
people, the need to lay low the pretensions of the mansion.
Yet the catastrophe has its consolations. It is amusing for those amused by the end of
empires. The Soviet Union spoke of the dictatorship of the proletariat, but lived under the
dictatorship of a gray aristocracy. America speaks of the rule of the people, a horrible idea,
and seems to be getting there.
Think of it as the Cultural Revolution by suburban hobbyists. There are the same raging
untermenschen, the same desire to destroy anything they do not know, or cannot understand, or
be bothered to learn.
As a philosophic emollient one may reflect that all empires and civilizations must end, and
ours is. America will remain as a place, a military bastion, a large if declining economic
force. It will never again be, even by the low standards of humanity in such things, a
relatively free and vigorous society. The world will not again credit its charades of moral
leadership. The rot, the tens of thousands of derelict people living on the sidewalks, the
looting and fire setting, the censorship, are now visible to the entire earth. Oh well. It was
a good thing while it lasted.
Write Fred at [email protected] Put the letters pdq anywhere in the subject line to avoid
autodeletion. All read, not always answered due to volume.
Amazon review: "Essays on America, life, politics, and just about everything. The author
chronicles among other adventures an aging stripper in Austin, dressed in a paper-mache horse,
who had with her a cobra and a tarantula like a yak-hair pillow with legs and alternately
charmed and terrified a room full of cowboys sucking down Bud and . Fred was an apostle of the
long-haul thumb during the Sixties and saw many things. He tells of standing by the big roads
across the desert, rockin in the wind blast of the heavy rigs roaring by and the whine of tires
and dropping into an arroyo at night with a bottle of cheap red and watching the stars and
perhaps smoking things not approved by the government. He tells of..well, that's what the book
is for. Join him."
The American system worked decently enough when, and only when, a quarter of the adult
population was eligible to vote. That was when democracy was a thing and not "our" thing.
'America's competition with large countries having intelligently authoritarian and stable
governance will prove a losing proposition proposition.'
I might still generally agree with this, but our insane 'lockdown' policy in response to
an epidemic that posed no real serious threat was copied from the Chinese!!
As a result I felt upbeat enough to feel like ordering your 'Nekkid in Austin' paperback
from Amazon. $20 and change with tax. Hopefully at least some of that makes it into your
pocket.
Re: "In truth, America has made the greatest effort ever essayed by one race to uplift
another."
You say nothing about any other country on the planet. What the US has done without the
context of the rest of the world is somewhat empty. What about Canada? What about the UK?
There are countries outside of the US.
I see no mention of the black history of June Nineteenth or of Tulsa Black Wall Street. Is
that not consequential? It's a silent form of discrimination.
How many blacks can spell "confederacy." There is some implicit bias there. Did you think
about mentioning the lead content of public water in some inner cities and what affect that
might have on development of black children?
I'm not ever sure you fully understand the history of Ulysses S. Grant. You may not have
seen this earlier piece written from the UK.
They thought it was relevant because for those following the Black Lives Matter movement,
it's more than just about Black lives. There is an acronym floating around you also may not
be aware of. Black, Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC). For further information see:
https://www.nytimes.com/article/what-is-bipoc.html
Sad to see America and the west in general turning out like this, what frustrates me is how
hard it is to get normal based white people to organize, the left can get nearly 100,000
people in several cities across America and Europe tearing down statues, shouting abuse at
western European culture and it's defenders and the right barely manages to get a couple of
thousand people to gather in central London while thousands of left anarchists were scrawling
graffiti on Churchill and other monuments. I know left wingers have the advantage of living
IN the major cities but most are still surrounded by millions of ordinary middle class people
who i am sure are aghast at what is happening. The fact that it is so hard for them to get of
their asses and drive 100-200km to meet one another is depressing.
Only Fred Reed could opine that the biggest threat facing higher ed is the dumbing down of
curricula.
There's a little flu going around that's going to remake all of higher ed, with the
prospect of hundreds of schools filing for bankruptcy or eliminating whole departments now
very real.
Reed's so out of touch with America that it's just laughable. But I can see why he doesn't
mention Covid, since Mexico is now in a full-blown pandemic, just as I predicted 2 months
ago. (How'd the "siesta and a cerveza" policy from AMLO work out?) The deaths are increasing,
curves aren't being flattened and the sick little buggers are scurrying like rats across the
border to get hooked up to gringo ventilators at our expense.
Evidence continues to mount that spikes in Covid cases in U.S. border states are due to
successive waves of infected people fleeing Mexico's dysfunctional and overwhelmed
hospitals to get American medical care. https://t.co/aifN8575IW
-- Center for Immigration Studies (@CIS_org) June 24,
2020
Yep, Mexicans seem to be causing the new wave of infections in Southwest border
states.
A two minute conversation with a typical American will quickly show you that their thoughts
never dwell on anything noble. Rather, their thoughts are adrift in emotional nonsense. We
have a vast underclass of 160 million immigrants from failed-3rd world countries and their US
born children, since 1965. The new Americans and our black underclass don't like white people
and the old America. We are now a nation of George Floyds, Homer Simpsons, and an obese
Walmart shoppers. There is nothing noble in America. It's not a pretty picture. Who cares if
it fails? There isn't anything worth saving.
This is funny. We are looking at what a deeply corrupt, predatory system of government (look
at the Dem-Woke-Rats) has achieved, the rule of the super-rich, which has achieved huge
levels of homelessness, a country that has zero hospitals, zero medics, except for the rich,
that is unique in that, and no education except for the rich, saddling the rest with deep
debts, this mad rule of the rich waging economic war against countries that outstandingly
look after their people, such as Cuba, a system wholly about predation and so with
astronomical military expenditure but that forcing the poor to pay for it -- and here we have
an article about the resulting anarchy, prattling on about side effects but ignoring the
cause.
And comments on the rule of the people versus the dictatorship of the proletariat! When
there is no such thing as a Congress critter who is not a millionaire but still must pander
to supermillionaires.
@Charlemagne Is
democracy even a good thing? Last summer I read "The End of Democracy" by a Belgian named
Christophe Buffin de Chosal, and I'm now convinced that it is not.
When the Soviet Union ended it could fall back into various nation states, America has no
such thing. This makes its collapse incredibly more dangerous, all those nuclear weapons it
has, what is going to happen to them?
"Reflect: In 1954 an entirely white Supreme Court unanimously ended segregation. Later it
found the use of IQ tests by employers illegal because blacks scored poorly, then found
"affirmative action," racial discrimination against whites, legal (hardly oppression of
blacks, this). An overwhelmingly white Congress passed the Civil Rights Act in 1964, the
Voting Rights Act the next year. "
Except that did not end segregation nor did it shift the imbalance of educational
resources as whites have been the most benefited population from these supposed investments.
There isn't a measure that whites have not managed to accrue the major benefits from.
And I think, I could down your list and demonstrate just how failed those supposed
remedies ave been applied to the black population of US citizens, if not for the redundancy
of effort.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -
I am not sure how to respond to nonsense such as Section * housing as if section * housing
was a program unique to blacks. I would love o bemoan the ignorance of anyone who dis not
know General/President Grant was a Union officer and a intense advocate for equity, at least
for a while, when the person decrying their ignorance thinks that the Civil Rights era was
unique for black citizens.
One might expect some level of ignorance for Pres. Grant by the uneducated, but the level
of ignorance on display by the educated is only compounded by the fact that same individual
making the complaint wants to continue more immigrants, who are the second largest winners of
the civil rights changes but have managed o to convince people like Mr. Reed that
Cinco De Mayo should be celebrated as a US Holiday.
When Fred wades into Multiculturalism he speaks of FGM being incompatible with our values.
But, as most Americans do, he neglects the other half of the story. MGM, aka circumcision,
sanctioned by our backward society, is an equally barbaric crime.
Recently, I briefly touched on why I think the United States of America is done and dusted
after almost 244 years of existence. Fred Reed, who is so much more eloquent with words than
I, thinks so as well in A Country Not Salvageable!
IT IS INTERESTING AT THE OUTSET TO OBSERVE THAT THE MAIN REASON THE UNITED STATES FINDS
ITSELF IN AN IRREDEEMABLE DIVE IS BECAUSE IT IS IN THE DNA OF THEIR CITIZENS. YEP –
THAT'S RIGHT – THEIR DNA!
[MORE]
FOR MANY DECADES, IF NOT ALMOST 2 1/2 CENTURIES, THEY HAVE INCORPORATED RACISM, SEXISM,
BULLYING, WAR MONGERING AND THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS IN THEIR DNA TO MENTION BUT A FEW. THE
ONLY WAY TO FIX THIS PROBLEM IS AS FOLLOWS:
After almost 244 years in existence, 221 of which have been spent at war, the United
States of America can no longer find a way to extricate itself from a situation which has
been many decades in the making. It has become painfully clear that the 3 branches of
government (executive, legislative and judicial) so proudly exhibited as effective and
meaningful checks and balances no longer works. The military/industrial complex, now joined
by the political/media complex, has made it impossible for anyone to Make America Great
Again!
No one can see the United States extricating themselves from this unbelievable mess
without dropping nuclear bombs on themselves and other nations around the world. Cutting off
one's nose to spite one's face is not a solution as they have discovered on many, many
occasions throughout their history. But there is one solution, and probably only one, which
could work given help from other nations.
As everyone knows, everywhere one looks and everything one looks at in America is in
serious difficulty – most of which will never be corrected without major and prolonged
surgery. Take a few examples only such as debt, education, infrastructure, immigration,
constant war mongering, racism, irreparable political divisions, a disappearing middle class,
sexism, wealth in fewer and fewer hands, debilitating unemployment, a dismal trade imbalance,
gun control along with associated deaths and injuries, a non performing and dishonest
judiciary, catering to one country in the Middle East, lobbying, a weakened electorate, an
out of control media, a dangerous religious fervor, a bullying approach to everything, prison
incarceration rates, non stop political campaigning, a rapidly falling life expectancy,
obesity due to fast foods along with a couch potato syndrome and a constant interference in
the affairs of other sovereign nations, little or no respect for the ravages of climate
change and dropping out of signed agreements and treaties. And this is to only name a very
few issues as they now have managed in addition to become the absolute laughingstock of the
world. A very dangerous and emotional one to be sure – but a laughingstock nevertheless
for which a few people now feel pity.
So let's cut to the chase even if it brings on yet another civil war. And this is where
the help of other nations will be most critical. It is time to employ some 'outside the box'
thinking which could bring benefit to the entire North American continent, let alone the
world. The citizens of the United States of America and the world have become frustrated at
the lack of progress on any and all of the issues in play – and there are a whack of
them.
Guess what? The reasons for the American Civil War (1861-1865) point the way to the
solution and eventual benefits to everyone concerned. As you undoubtedly recall, the reason
for the Civil War in the first place was the South's insistence on the continuation of
slavery with secession from the Union. That's right – the USA needs to be divided along
roughly the same lines demanded by the secessionists some 150 years ago! In other words, the
North made a serious error in not letting them secede and the entire country has been paying
for it ever since.
The proposal is a very simple one in reality. Take all of the what we will call the RED
states, which are really the most southerly ones, and give them to Mexico. The country could
be renamed RED-NEXICO as in rednecks and Mexico. Into this melting pot of death, destruction,
convoluted thinking, religious fervor, gun addicts, right wing societies (NRA, Born Again
Morons, white nationalists, etc.) pro-life ning nangs, Nascar addicted, arrogant, stupid and
the hopeless people of America, most of the unemployable, poorly educated folks, rapists,
paedophiles, violent criminals, most rednecks and other ne'er-do-wells will number about 300
million people when all is said and done. It is a perfect fit if one looks at what
constitutes the current country of Mexico (that is, soon-to-be RED-NEXICO) because they will
get back all of the territory they claimed was stolen by the U.S. from them and then some.
Almost all illegal immigrants speak Spanish as do the folks in the U.S. south and the
Mexicans. Throw in California which will soon fall into the Pacific Ocean in any event and we
have a us a convoy!
Now what should be done about the remaining northern states or what we will refer to the
green states? Quite simple really. Give them all to Canada and rename the country
CAN-AMERICA. With them go the wealthier states with better employment figures and
opportunities along with most of the top class universities which will go undergo a seismic
change over the next quarter century, no world wide income tax, a corporate tax on
profitability or flat tax which must be paid, no lobbyists, severe penalties for moving
manufacturing offshore, lower teen pregnancies, racism and sexism to be dealt with severely,
no sub prime mortgages, most of the fresh water, an abundance of hydro electric power,
sufficient oil and gas reserves to last well into the next century, minerals galore, oodles
of room, strict and honest banking regulations, bilingualism, much less violence, severe
firearm controls, more attention to global climate change and other similar world problems,
no Nascar, lower divorce rates, domestic violence and so on. Think about it for a moment. The
list of benefits are inexhaustible.
It is a win/win for both sides of the equation except for one vital but missing
ingredient. With it comes the most important caveat – all citizens in CAN-AMERICA will
have the right to vote in person or by post/internet in a national referendum which could
affect them. The political power will rest with the people and not the politicians, one of
the clearest failings of the United States form of republic.These referendum issues could
include, but are not necessarily limited to, a declaration of war, debt, immigration,
expulsion of criminals, complete gun control, mosques, military, industrial, political and
media complexes, trade, currency, prisons, joining and contributing to stem winding world
organizations, infrastructure repairs, a mandatory health system at lower cost and
effectiveness, reducing military expenditures by 90%, etc. etc. This will blunt political
power and politicians at every turn when they try to do anything – and they always will
– which is not in the best interests of the new country.
CAN-AMERICA can really make an impression on the rest of the world with +/- 250 million
people by taking a much more critical view of whether to belong to various groups or
organizations which have clearly outlived their usefulness. NATO, the United Nations, the
World Bank and the International Monetary Fund immediately come to mind but there are many,
many others which increase the income tax burdens of people unnecessarily.
Many naysayers will insist that such a geographical and political division in North
America will not work but Europe is a showcase of how it does. In fact, many could foresee
the eventual fusion of CAN-AMERICA into a worldwide economic trading block of which it would
be a dominating member along with China, Russia, India, etc. On the political side, it will
see the demise of the two party system along with the republicans and democrats under their
new regimes.
Now for the clincher which is an updated version of the current U.S. president's call for
a wall dividing countries both south and north of the U.S. border. There will be a strip of
land measuring 100 kilometres wide separating RED-NEXICO and CAN-AMERICA. It will be electric
fenced to 10 metres on all sides and be patrolled electronically 24/7 and by drones. Dense
forests will be planted which, with proper husbandry, will flourish eventually to the benefit
of both countries. Anyone entering or caught within these 100 kms will be eliminated
immediately whether they come from CAN-AMERICA or RED-NEXICO. The cost of building,
maintaining and patrolling no woman or no man's land will be shared equally between the the
two countries. Any immigration from one country to another will have to go through official
channels as there will be no borders to cross except for the 100 kms which means no one would
make it. It would kill tourism between the new countries for many years but who really wants
to travel to RED-NEXICO in particular!
Unknown to many Americans who are living in the U.S. at the moment is the fact that many
of their fellow citizens are surrendering their American nationality in disgust. It has moved
from a trickle 25 years ago to where it has become a flood today. Most embassies are
inundated with requests – so much so that waiting periods of up to 2 years are not
uncommon and growing more expensive every year. Of course, anyone wanting to do so must have
another passport to fall back on as well.
This is a very abridged version of a much more detailed proposal but the drift is clear
– the United States is slipping quickly and inexorably into third world country and
'shit hole' country status to utilize the current president's description. In many opinions,
it is already there! Let's all jettison this cancer in the world so the rest of us can get on
with our lives!
EVEN IF THIS SEPARATION/SECESSION SHOULD BE ACCEPTED (AS IN FORCED DOWN THEIR THROATS),
THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO GUARANTEE THAT THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CAN BE SAVED IN THE
PROPOSED FORMAT GIVEN THE LIST OF ISSUES WHICH HAVE ACCUMULATED SINCE THE END OF WORLD WAR II
75 YEARS AGO!!!
P.S. Any input which will enhance any aspect of this proposal which is more than a matter
of detail is sorely welcomed as implementation will be something requiring great skill!
Criticisms are also warmly encouraged as long as they are not simply more bleating about how
unfair it would be, how civil war will break out, how the 300 million guns will be used to
shoot their way out of this, how the political slop will stop it and so on. America is doomed
as it is now and saving the best parts is paramount.
IN THE WELL KNOWN LYRICS OF THE SCAR STRANGLED BANNER, IT USED TO BE KNOWN AS "THE LAND OF
THE BRAVE AND THE HOME OF THE FREE!" NOW IT IS KNOWN AS "THE LAND OF THE FAT AND THE HOME OF
THE FEARFUL!"
Recently, I briefly touched on why I think the United States of America is done and dusted
after almost 244 years of existence. Fred Reed, who is so much more eloquent with words than
I thinks so as well in A Country Not Salvageable!
IT IS INTERESTING AT THE OUTSET TO OBSERVE THAT THE MAIN REASON THE UNITED STATES FINDS
ITSELF IN AN IRREDEEMABLE DIVE IS BECAUSE IT IS IN THE DNA OF THEIR CITIZENS. YEP –
THAT'S RIGHT – THEIR DNA!
[MORE]
FOR MANY DECADES, IF NOT ALMOST 2 1/2 CENTURIES, THEY HAVE INCORPORATED RACISM, SEXISM,
BULLYING, WAR MONGERING AND THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS IN THEIR DNA TO MENTION BUT A FEW. THE
ONLY WAY TO FIX THIS PROBLEM IS AS FOLLOWS:
After almost 244 years in existence, 221 of which have been spent at war, the United
States of America can no longer find a way to extricate itself from a situation which has
been many decades in the making. It has become painfully clear that the 3 branches of
government (executive, legislative and judicial) so proudly exhibited as effective and
meaningful checks and balances no longer works. The military/industrial complex, now joined
by the political/media complex, has made it impossible for anyone to Make America Great
Again!
No one can see the United States extricating themselves from this unbelievable mess
without dropping nuclear bombs on themselves and other nations around the world. Cutting off
one's nose to spite one's face is not a solution as they have discovered on many, many
occasions throughout their history. But there is one solution, and probably only one, which
could work given help from other nations.
As everyone knows, everywhere one looks and everything one looks at in America is in
serious difficulty – most of which will never be corrected without major and prolonged
surgery. Take a few examples only such as debt, education, infrastructure, immigration,
constant war mongering, racism, irreparable political divisions, a disappearing middle class,
sexism, wealth in fewer and fewer hands, debilitating unemployment, a dismal trade imbalance,
gun control along with associated deaths and injuries, a non performing and dishonest
judiciary, catering to one country in the Middle East, lobbying, a weakened electorate, an
out of control media, a dangerous religious fervor, a bullying approach to everything, prison
incarceration rates, non stop political campaigning, a rapidly falling life expectancy,
obesity due to fast foods along with a couch potato syndrome and a constant interference in
the affairs of other sovereign nations, little or no respect for the ravages of climate
change and dropping out of signed agreements and treaties. And this is to only name a very
few issues as they now have managed in addition to become the absolute laughingstock of the
world. A very dangerous and emotional one to be sure – but a laughingstock nevertheless
for which a few people now feel pity.
So let's cut to the chase even if it brings on yet another civil war. And this is where
the help of other nations will be most critical. It is time to employ some 'outside the box'
thinking which could bring benefit to the entire North American continent, let alone the
world. The citizens of the United States of America and the world have become frustrated at
the lack of progress on any and all of the issues in play – and there are a whack of
them.
Guess what? The reasons for the American Civil War (1861-1865) point the way to the
solution and eventual benefits to everyone concerned. As you undoubtedly recall, the reason
for the Civil War in the first place was the South's insistence on the continuation of
slavery with secession from the Union. That's right – the USA needs to be divided along
roughly the same lines demanded by the secessionists some 150 years ago! In other words, the
North made a serious error in not letting them secede and the entire country has been paying
for it ever since.
The proposal is a very simple one in reality. Take all of the what we will call the RED
states, which are really the most southerly ones, and give them to Mexico. The country could
be renamed RED-NEXICO as in rednecks and Mexico. Into this melting pot of death, destruction,
convoluted thinking, religious fervor, gun addicts, right wing societies (NRA, Born Again
Morons, white nationalists, etc.) pro-life ning nangs, Nascar addicted, arrogant, stupid and
the hopeless people of America, most of the unemployable, poorly educated folks, rapists,
paedophiles, violent criminals, most rednecks and other ne'er-do-wells will number about 300
million people when all is said and done. It is a perfect fit if one looks at what
constitutes the current country of Mexico (that is, soon-to-be RED-NEXICO) because they will
get back all of the territory they claimed was stolen by the U.S. from them and then some.
Almost all illegal immigrants speak Spanish as do the folks in the U.S. south and the
Mexicans. Throw in California which will soon fall into the Pacific Ocean in any event and we
have a us a convoy!
Now what should be done about the remaining northern states or what we will refer to the
green states? Quite simple really. Give them all to Canada and rename the country
CAN-AMERICA. With them go the wealthier states with better employment figures and
opportunities along with most of the top class universities which will go undergo a seismic
change over the next quarter century, no world wide income tax, a corporate tax on
profitability or flat tax which must be paid, no lobbyists, severe penalties for moving
manufacturing offshore, lower teen pregnancies, racism and sexism to be dealt with severely,
no sub prime mortgages, most of the fresh water, an abundance of hydro electric power,
sufficient oil and gas reserves to last well into the next century, minerals galore, oodles
of room, strict and honest banking regulations, bilingualism, much less violence, severe
firearm controls, more attention to global climate change and other similar world problems,
no Nascar, lower divorce rates, domestic violence and so on. Think about it for a moment. The
list of benefits are inexhaustible.
It is a win/win for both sides of the equation except for one vital but missing
ingredient. With it comes the most important caveat – all citizens in CAN-AMERICA will
have the right to vote in person or by post/internet in a national referendum which could
affect them. The political power will rest with the people and not the politicians, one of
the clearest failings of the United States form of republic.These referendum issues could
include, but are not necessarily limited to, a declaration of war, debt, immigration,
expulsion of criminals, complete gun control, mosques, military, industrial, political and
media complexes, trade, currency, prisons, joining and contributing to stem winding world
organizations, infrastructure repairs, a mandatory health system at lower cost and
effectiveness, reducing military expenditures by 90%, etc. etc. This will blunt political
power and politicians at every turn when they try to do anything – and they always will
– which is not in the best interests of the new country.
CAN-AMERICA can really make an impression on the rest of the world with +/- 250 million
people by taking a much more critical view of whether to belong to various groups or
organizations which have clearly outlived their usefulness. NATO, the United Nations, the
World Bank and the International Monetary Fund immediately come to mind but there are many,
many others which increase the income tax burdens of people unnecessarily.
Many naysayers will insist that such a geographical and political division in North
America will not work but Europe is a showcase of how it does. In fact, many could foresee
the eventual fusion of CAN-AMERICA into a worldwide economic trading block of which it would
be a dominating member along with China, Russia, India, etc. On the political side, it will
see the demise of the two party system along with the republicans and democrats under their
new regimes.
Now for the clincher which is an updated version of the current U.S. president's call for
a wall dividing countries both south and north of the U.S. border. There will be a strip of
land measuring 100 kilometres wide separating RED-NEXICO and CAN-AMERICA. It will be electric
fenced to 10 metres on all sides and be patrolled electronically 24/7 and by drones. Dense
forests will be planted which, with proper husbandry, will flourish eventually to the benefit
of both countries. Anyone entering or caught within these 100 kms will be eliminated
immediately whether they come from CAN-AMERICA or RED-NEXICO. The cost of building,
maintaining and patrolling no woman or no man's land will be shared equally between the the
two countries. Any immigration from one country to another will have to go through official
channels as there will be no borders to cross except for the 100 kms which means no one would
make it. It would kill tourism between the new countries for many years but who really wants
to travel to RED-NEXICO in particular!
Unknown to many Americans who are living in the U.S. at the moment is the fact that many
of their fellow citizens are surrendering their American nationality in disgust. It has moved
from a trickle 25 years ago to where it has become a flood today. Most embassies are
inundated with requests – so much so that waiting periods of up to 2 years are not
uncommon and growing more expensive every year. Of course, anyone wanting to do so must have
another passport to fall back on as well.
This is a very abridged version of a much more detailed proposal but the drift is clear
– the United States is slipping quickly and inexorably into third world country and
'shit hole' country status to utilize the current president's description. In many opinions,
it is already there! Let's all jettison this cancer in the world so the rest of us can get on
with our lives!
EVEN IF THIS SEPARATION/SECESSION SHOULD BE ACCEPTED (AS IN FORCED DOWN THEIR THROATS),
THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO GUARANTEE THAT THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CAN BE SAVED IN THE
PROPOSED FORMAT GIVEN THE LIST OF ISSUES WHICH HAVE ACCUMULATED SINCE THE END OF WORLD WAR II
75 YEARS AGO!!!
P.S. Any input which will enhance any aspect of this proposal which is more than a matter
of detail is sorely welcomed as implementation will be something requiring great skill!
Criticisms are also warmly encouraged as long as they are not simply more bleating about how
unfair it would be, how civil war will break out, how the 300 million guns will be used to
shoot their way out of this, how the political slop will stop it and so on. America is doomed
as it is now and saving the best parts is paramount.
IN THE WELL KNOWN LYRICS OF THE SCAR STRANGLED BANNER, IT USED TO BE KNOWN AS "THE LAND OF
THE BRAVE AND THE HOME OF THE FREE!" NOW IT IS KNOWN AS "THE LAND OF THE FAT AND THE HOME OF
THE FEARFUL!"
@john cronk Fred's
right, it's too late, but two things spelled our country's doom: colleges became factories
for feminist propaganda which discouraging bright women from marrying and having children
while they were young and fertile; then welfare was used as a tool to outsource childbearing
and rearing to the poor. What could go wrong? Stir the pot for 75 years, voila! the evening
news.
@ASimpleHistory Of
course its hopeless just read what you posted that's the drivile that got us where we
are,Canada's history with the Native Tribe are worse then worse, as the schools use the young
native girls for their own pleasure.If blacks can't spell simple words then they are only to
blame for they don't want to learn, for they learned how to play the blame game and the rest
is history .
@Gordon K. Shumway
Maybe, but why is little Willie tampered with for no reason. And without the owner's consent.
Now don't come back with penile hygiene, penile cancer and other yesterday arguments.
Countries with soap and water can keep little Willie clean and cancer free without chopping
off its skin. Circumcision is an American tradition just as FMG is of others. Let us call a
spade a spade.
@Daemon Be kinder
to our women. Circumcision is not on the level of female genital mutilation. Losing some skin
is not comparable to losing the sexual sense organ. Just another SJW trying to impose their
values on others.
It is also true that the things we take completely for granted – harnessed electricity,
clean potable running water, OTC medicines (to name a few) – will become less common,
then rare, then un-heard-of. The people we see rioting cannot build, create, or maintain,
they can only destroy. But we cannot KNOW the future. As absurd as it may seem (and its very
absurdity makes me think it's possible), what if the Old World comes to the rescue, so to
speak, of the New? Yeah I know, we're much more likely to be colonized by China, but still
@Gordon K. Shumway
I am against FGM, but how do you know African women don't enjoy sex? I read few days ago in
the Cosmopolitan magazine that the g-spot doesn't exist. It concludes that intimacy is what
makes women happy. Also it's not clear who enjoys sex more: the circumsized man or the
uncircumcised.
@LCBozo Being
against circumcision doesn't mean I'm automatically for FGM, you know. And no, considering
90% of the nerve endings are "inside" the part of the foreskin removed (and removed for the
EXPLICIT purpose of denying pleasure from intercourse) – it is exactly the same as FGM.
And watch the video, the host debunks the supposed "health benefits" of cutting off a
natural piece of your body. It's literally bronze age blood sacrifice for the modern era.
if these people are so hostile to supremacism, why aren't they attacking Israeli
consulates, protesting ADL & AIPAC, burning Israeli flags, and denouncing the Zionist
'genocide' of Palestinians?
Why aren't they denouncing Trump, Pelosi, Schumer, and others for their support of
supremacist state of Israel?
I hear that this is an attack by the 'left'. If so, why is this 'left' so silent about the
plight of Palestinians and other victims of US imperialism that is directed by Jews?
It's not about the Left. It's about punks and hoodlums serving as Janissary to Jewish
Supremacist Power.
@follyofwar It's
mad, totally mad, to call the American system of government a democracy. The rule of the
super-rich is not the rule of the people, only the rule over the people.
@Ann Nonny Mouse
Few democracies actually reflect the will of the voting public in the way they they are
administered. The power elite runs the show.
Human society is inherently hierarchical, unless we revert to the hunter-gatherer lifestyle.
@neutral Not to
worry. Most likely, very few of the US nukes are still operational. However, we lack the
testing capacity to determine which are still functional and which are duds. Deterrence is
based on fear, uncertainty and doubt.
@Charlemagne Agree
that universal suffrage voting is crazy-town. Women, on average, are not evolved for
protecting the frontiers, and vote with emotion. There are always exceptions of course.
Minority races tend to vote as a block.
Mosley seems to have come up with a solution that is lost to history:
Basically, voters vote on subjects they are qualified for. Corporate state does not mean
corporatocracy, which is what we have now in the U.S.
Governments are elected on the strength of their appeal to passion or to sentiment. Once
in office they promptly resign their effective power in favour of the great interests within
the State, but yet superior to the State, who exercise their power in secret. The
increasingly technical nature of all problems in an economic age has made it difficult or
impossible to explain the real issues to the electorate as a whole. The division between
daily politics and the reality of Government has become ever greater.
The technician has become ever more enchained by the passion, the prejudice and the folly
of uninstructed politics. By such a system as we advocate, the technician, who is the
architect of our industrial future, is freed for his task. He is given the mandate for that
task by the informed franchise of his colleagues in his own industry. A vote so cast will be
the result of experience and information. Is not this in fact rationalised democracy? Is not
this system preferable to the solemn humbug of present elections, which assumes that the
most technical problems of modern government, ranging from currency management to the
evolution of a scientific protective system, can be settled by a few days' loose discussion
in the turmoil of a General Election?
The ordinary man would greatly resent such treatment of the facts of his daily industry
and life. If someone strolled into an engineering shop and, after five minutes' cursory
examination of an intricate process which the engineer had studied all his life, proceeded to
tell him how to do it, the engineer would quickly tell the intruder he was a presumptuous
ass . Yet these are the methods which our present electoral system applies to that most
intricate and technical of processes, the government of a civilised State.
Rationalised democracy, as well as rationalised industry, has become an imperative
necessity. The Corporate State provides the only known solution to the problem. Our
electoral system has become a farce, worse even than in the days of bribed elections and
pocket boroughs. As it is organised at present, our system of government lacks the calibre to
carry us out of trade depression and set Britain again on top of the world.
In its writ-large form, trying to force West Virginia to accept the culture of
Massachusetts will produce only anger.
Who the hell is suggesting that? A tour of the radio dial would show that the
influence goes the other way. Where are the Arthur Fiedlers and Leroy Andersons when we need
them?
Good column Fred, but blacks are "phenomenally talented" is an interesting statement. Aside
from some basic talent with song & dance and athletics blacks are in general dismal.
I'll give them this: they know suffering mostly self-inflicted. It's a tragic situation
for them and us.
@SteveK9
I must disagree with the concept that the US lockdown was "copied from the Chinese".
While in no way do I support the current thoughts gaining popularity that "democracy
doesn't work" (works well enough in sane places like Japan, Korea, Slovakia, and such), this
precise example–the handling of the novel coronavirus–showed Beijing in a quite
OK light.
(The complaints how "they should have sounded the alarm half an hour earlier this would
have changed everything are only voiced by place that were too moronic to react properly in
time, unlike all of East Asia, which did)
What China did is lockdown ONE city (Wuhan), and sever connections between various other
cities and counties, in order to check the spread. And thus, they checked the spread. In 90%
places there was even never no "mandatory social distancing" or "mandatory mask wearing",
what people did they did because they felt they should, through grassroot peer pressure.
The whole Eastern Asian approach, China included, was:
1) Clamp down instantly on hot spots
2) Sever connections between suspect counties
3) After 1-2 viral cycles open up again
What the US and UK did was first go with the "nothing to see here" model, and then go into
"incompetent overreacting mode" when it was already far too late. This is NOT "the Chinese
model" that we saw.
But we're importing all the spiffy Latinos that Fred loves so much. We should be getting
better!
These headlines are hyperbole. America isn't going to "collapse". It still has far more
power than any other country. I don't know what will happen in the future and the state of
White Americans is a problem. But the country isn't going anywhere.
"""Our system of governments has proved itself weak, feckless, and unable to govern. The
chaotic response to the coronavirus is a prime example, there being no national policy and
the states being told to do as they see fit. """"
What's wrong with that? The FF took states rights for granted. That's why they wrote the
tenth amendment and that's why the federal constitution says the federal govt cannot by
itself amend its constitution. Only the states can.
@Ann Nonny Mouse
""It's mad, totally mad, to call the American system of government a democracy. The rule of
the super-rich is not the rule of the people, only the rule over the people.""
Democracy is dead not because of the rich but because of the Supreme Court. Those 9
unelected old goats appointed for life have granted themselves final say on every issue in
america. They write the laws even though the constitution says "All legislative powers herein
granted shall be vested in a congress of the united states."
The world will not again credit its charades of moral leadership. The rot, the tens of
thousands of derelict people living on the sidewalks, the looting and fire setting, the
censorship, are now visible to the entire earth. Oh well. It was a good thing while it
lasted.
The biggest contrast between the US and successful societies seems to involve the concept
of citizens rights and obligations.
If Americans had a strong concept of citizenship it could guide them through many
difficult issues. For example the world's longest running democracy (Switzerland) puts a
heavy list obligations on its citizens, such as military service, active regular
participation in local meetings/ issue based elections, and makes it clear to them that they
are a part of a historical society with no opt outs.
Americans have few or no obligations towards their founding history. They aren't required
to study it, respect it, or see themselves as part of it – in fact, to contribute in
any way at all. Rather, the Jewish media encourages them to demean it, and they are defined
as "consumers" (something that feeds and shops) rather than citizens.
Agreed that the US continues on its fast downward track, and it will involve more serious
financial and social crises.
On a basic level, US society is hopelessly uncompetitive with places like modern China
(great unified national projects in education, industry, infrastructure and national
development) while it papers over the cracks with debt, and pushes its ZioGlob SJW
agenda.
Yes, there may be no future for this society in white European terms. But it can still be a
magnificent place for people of color. The African population is expected to swell to more
than 45 billion in the coming years. Why not open up this unoccupied land and these existent
cities to these populations? There is a similar population spike ahead in Mexico and areas of
central and South America. These individuals are skilled farmers and they can make the U.S.
flourish with new crops.
If these new immigrants can build on the wonderful democratic ideals of the disappearing
white population, we may see a terrific future for mankind, also womankind.
The author seems to think the actions of rabble arise spontaneously. But they are just chess
pieces in a campaign to destroy the traditional Christian America. Money c0ntrols our
politics by owning the media and in effect the political parties and academe. The flow and
flux of opinions is in the hands of very bright people who unfortunately hate us.
What fun, what entertainment. And rare: One seldom sees the collapse of a landmark
society
Imagine thinking you're not standing in line to the slaughter.
I wonder if you'll still be thinking this once BLM militarizes. And they will, just look
at the sort of "donations" they are getting from the fortune 500. BLM is bigger than both
parties, and they are gearing up for a 1917. That means red terrors, the abolished police
replaced by NKVD style outfits that will abduct, torture, and murder the people you love, it
means mass executions,
The writing's on the wall; the anti-white hate speech, 1619, the statues being toppled,
the kneeling and appeasing, the more demands, the more fanaticism, the more hatred in this
racial rendition of marxism the proletariat are non-whites and the bourgeoisie are whites.
Watch out. There will be ZERO mercy if you're white. No matter how much you kneel, it will
never be enough.
It's not hard to imagine; a second wave of clownvirus to scare white people into
lockdowns, a chinese cyber attack to black out everything, then suddenly a red terror of
crazed and armed BLM mobs universally activated to slaughter the white sitting ducks in an
Esther style genocide which the jewish media will absolutely love. Interestingly this covid
hoax was launched around Purim.
"America speaks of the rule of the people, a horrible idea, and seems to be getting
there."
Do not think anyone can know
Their speech is restricted so we cannot know what they think
Their freedom to associate is restricted so they cannot organize with those of a like
mind
Their freedom to live as they will is restricted by federal legislation and nine
judges
They are forced to pay for others bad decisions and to bail them out
They are robbed of their money to be told how they can spend it and with whom
The rule of a free people would cause others to rise to the level of those who do best to
out do them if they were free to do so. It is the lack of freedom to do so, not that a people
being free does not make the best rule
Worldwide the depths of ignorance amongst the dark races is mind blowing. In South Africa
after 25 years of black rule which includes the control of state run schools and their
curricula, an acceptable pass rate is now 30%! Knowing 3 out of every 10 things is
acceptable. I mentioned to one of the anthropoids the other day about the excesses of the
Ottoman empire in Eastern Europe and Greece to be told "I don't care what Otto did", there is
literally no hope. The barbarians are in the city.
countries that outstandingly look after their people, such as Cuba
I can say from extensive first hand experience and the testimonials of family, friends,
etc. that not one country in Latin America looks after its people.
@Daemon Well, you
still replied to a comment opening, in our time of violently, unworthily, cultural legal and
social female privilege, with "Be kinder to our women."
Putting the foot down would work. I think the hand outs are at least partly responsible for
the uselessness of the blacks. Enabling is a pretty dangerous thing when done over 8 decades.
Take away the gravy train, it just might force them out of their stupor.
But who knows. It might also push all blacks into open revolt.
I think George Carlin described this the best "the owners aren't interested in people
capable of critical thinking – it's not in their interest. They only want obedient
workers "
The problem in America is not black people, it's white people. Take a look at current pop
culture which is basically homos and race-mixing 24/7. Take a look at the issues that worry
Americans (nooses and bathrooms for transexuals). Look at American celebrities, the
Kartrashians. Look at whom they want to vote, Senile Joe Biden or Trashy Trump (which is the
less bad alternative). Look at all the morbidly obese people moving around in scooters to buy
even more sodas and fast food.
It's not about the Left. It's about punks and hoodlums serving as Janissary to Jewish
Supremacist Power.
Exactly!
And Fearless Freddie knows it. Of course when Fred sees this pointed out to him he
pretends not to notice -- like with so many others, it's much safer for him to go after the
puppets, not the (((puppet-masters))).
(Although Janissaries were highly respected elite troops -- not exactly what we see
here.)
I keep thinking of an old cartoon by Leunig showing a family visiting the museum of lost
manners. The boy is interested in a diorama of a man giving up his chair for a lady. I feel
the same could happen to all of the toppled statues, the only difference is that they will
end up in a museum for lost causes. Every weekend families will visit and sadly reminisce of
a past lost.
@Charlemagne
Universal suffrage is a problem, turning into a popularity contest where only the rich can
compete, but it's that, that it's so easily corrupted, and is, that's the problem.
With election by lot there would have been no world wars.
When the Soviet Union ended it could fall back into various nation states
Soviet Union did not "fall back into nation states", because no such states even existed
before USSR. Soviet Union disintegrated in line with its administrative division, the
equivalent would be America's 50 states going their separate way.
The author forgot about Flynt and other such cities. Also, is it the dictatorship of the
proletariat bombing other nations, notably Arab nations, not quite black, yet close, into
oblivion.
Very interesting article, thanks.
However it has one great deceit aand deficit.
quote
'The Soviet Union spoke of the dictatorship of the proletariat, but lived under the
dictatorship of a gray aristocracy.'
No Fred.
It was not a 'gray' aristocracy.
It was a Jewish one.
The jews created and controlled the USSR for years.
Murdering millions of actual Russians.
Read Solzhenitsyn .
Imprisoning them, torturing them and enslaving them.
The falling of the Berlin wall freed the Russian people more than anyone else, it can be
argued.
It kept the Russians IN – in one almighty Jewish controlled prison.
But even then – a druncken corrupt Yeltsin was placed in charge – a USA/Jewish
puppet.
And the takaway plunder of Russia and its people began – obscene plunder which Putin is
reclaiming as he can.
Many jews then fled.
Not only Fred, did you miss the Jewish connection with Russia – you have managed to
ignore the Jewish connections with BLM and the current racial turmoil.
You seem to have a poor opinion of minorities fair enough – most of us would agree with
what you write.
But you are very coy about the minority with all its financial power and dual citizenships
behind the USSR, and the corruption and breaking of western nations today.
Why?
Um!
Excuse me, I feel the need for a quibble:
" a true dictatorship of the proletariat,". The rioters etc are not the "proletariat", they
are the "Lumpen-proletariat". The Proletariat are working people. They usually have families,
mortgages, car payments. They struggle with health insurance. They may even dream of their
kids going to college. The ultimate challenge with these people is to encourage them towards
class consciousness -- which means roughly, a consciousness of their own interests as a
group.
The "Lumpen-proletariat" are basically social riff-raff. They are the odds & sods. They
tend to live outside or unevenly connected to the "everyday" world. They may not be "bad"
people. Indeed, they may be "respectable". However, they will rarely have a consciousness of
social & political realities, even as they apply to themselves.
@Oliver Elkington
We cannot organize as every time we do the SPLC labels anything white as racist and in comes
the corrupt federally bums of in cognition to throw whites in prison. The writer is correct,
We Are Doomed.
But you are very coy about the minority with all its financial power and dual
citizenships behind the USSR, and the corruption and breaking of western nations today.
Why?
Because behind Fred's leather-jacket-Brando-Wild-One alter-ego, he's just plain
scared.
@SteveK9 The
Chinese response toCovidwas not insane, it was rational.
Having experienced several suspicious plagues among their food animals in recent months,
the Chinese feared they were facing bio-warfare, and made the only rational response. With
recent flareups, they probably fear they're facing phase 2 – and they probably are.
America, on the other hand, destroyed its economy to preserve the banks – setting
fire to the house to keep the furniture warm. And now the rabble, fantastically talented at
burning things, are burning the furniture.
@bluedog Canada is
gone. No glue. Started downhill about the same time as the U.S. – in the 70's/80's.
Yes, they treated the natives terribly, but from what I read at Unz and elsewhere, the
natives did their fair share of raiding and slaving. Such is man, unfortunately.
@Gordon K. Shumway
Unfortunately, the American people are the only people so stupid as to have opened their
doors wide to an influx of immigrants to the point they'll soon become a minority in their
own country. What used to be our core culture is fast disappearing. English is no longer the
lingua franca, but we are now a bi-lingual English and Spanish speaking country. Say bye-bye
America and go back to sleep. It's over, thanks to our "leaders'–an unbroken line of
dumbshit, sellouts!
@Felix Keverich
Russia and the Baltic states existed before, the stans had some clearly identifiable ethnic
groups they belonged to. I don't want to go into the usual impenetrable and pointless debates
about Belarus and Ukraine, but for most part the states that came out of the Soviet Union
were more natural nation states that came out of the Africa post colonialism, the US states
are not close to anything like nation states from the USSR.
@Oliver Elkington
I think it is simply all down to levels of comfort on both sides. For the left, they are
protesting and rioting because the state supports them. There will be no consequences and
ultimately they can return back to their lives as the smoke clears problem free. For the
right, they too are also comfortable and do not want to lose this comfort over fighting back
for what is right. Instead they'd rather 'protest' on the internet. It will take dwindling
levels of comfort to get the right to truly start organising.
@Oliver Elkington
A few years ago some locals in my community had organized a family picnic for residents to
come and celebrate a day of European heritage. All were invited to celebrate, there were
certainly no color restrictions or anything of the sort. This area is heavily Italian,
Polish, Irish and Welsh, all descendants of immigrants who came over to work in the coal
mines. We're talking a day of middle-aged people enjoying ethnic European foods and games for
the kids, tomato casseroles, pierogis and kielbasa.
Then all the Jewish gestapo groups suddenly appeared, denounced it as a day of white
supremacy, SPLC of course weighed in against it, the local politicians caved to the pressure
and finally saw that the park permit for the picnic was pulled. At the time, I found all the
negative reactions to this picnic hard to believe.
But here we are now, denied the right to peaceful assembly while anti-white forces have
full freedom to promote hatred, physical violence, looting and arson.
I don't know what will happen in the future and the state of White Americans is a
problem. But the country isn't going anywhere.
The US is circling the drain. The last I heard over a billion dollars was donated openly
to BLM by big corporations as a reward for instigating riots and looting across the country.
The rulers aren't even bothering to pretend to care about the future of the US.
@Freda Lipshitz
Brilliant, Freda! I found myself laughing out loud on reading your Red-Nexico.
You are right. Good idea. Let the South secede.
Except, why shoul they fuse with Mexico? They could be independent of both.
The basic American problem is the rule of the rich, which is predatory rule, and the gift
America gives them, a tiny few, is vast wealth all in one country. If that wealth was divided
up, part in the Confederacy as an independent country, part in New England as an independent
country, part CA and a few of the nearby states ditto, part WA ditto ditto, Hawaii shunted
off, independent, flyover states picking the nearest of those others to join, the rule of the
rich would be over! Prey on what?
Think. The rule of the super-rich over Cuba? It that why Cuba has free health care? Free
education? No-one in debt? Though under beastly US sanctions for decades?
Split the US up into a few medium-sized countries and SO many problems would be
solved.
Is democracy even a good thing? Last summer I read "The End of Democracy" by a Belgian
named Christophe Buffin de Chosal, and I'm now convinced that it is not.
You need *some* method to get rid of failed politicians that doesn't involve large amounts
of physical destruction.
@IvyMike Racism is
not the problem, Mike. I always appreciate a writer that states the truth, and Mr. Reed has
done a bang-up job in stating the truth about the situation here. (It's the other 95% of his
columns in which he has lots of truth but always some piece of his stupidity thrown in, that
make me comment so much in the threads thereunder.)
About the only minor detail I disagree with in this one is that, even though it's true
that having a complete democracy* with anyone being able to vote HAS been a bad thing, that's
not the Communism. The proto-Commies are the antifa idiots pulling down the statues. The
world has seen this before just over a century ago in Russia, over 70 years ago in China,
etc. Many of us either don't know any history or don't want to open our eyes to recognize
this.
No, they haven't read Marx and Engles, and no, they don't have Mao's little red books.
Just the same, it's the exact same mentality of wanting to tear down traditional society
completely that makes these antifa the modern Commies. Don't get me wrong, they'll be
bulldozed into ditches later by the ones in charge just the same, if this effort is completed
in America, but they don't know that yet. Useful idiots abound right now.
.
* The country was originally organized as a Constitutional Republic, NOT a democracy.
The Zionist Plan or Deep State Plan or NWO Plan { take your pick } is working 100%. The
populace is confused and programmed, and the "NWO Plan " has gotten filthy filthy Rich ,
while leaving the people so dumbed down – that they are blaming one another or some
puppet government people for all the shit going down. The Plan started over 100 yrs ago and
we can look back and see it – 1913 Federal Reserve, Politicians in their back pocket,
WWI , WW II, CIA founded, 1965 Open and Unlimited immigration , JFK and others assassinated,
the Wars, 9/11, . We know who is even doing it – but Nobody is left to Stop Them. The
Top people in the Federal Gov. and the State Govs. are mostly – all in – it can
only runs its course – now. Just like a Virus,
@Red Pill Angel
True, RPA, and what Fred somewhat described, but with not much detail, is that this is part
of the Long March through the institutions that has been going on since the middle 1960s. The
marchers reached their destination, total control, probably 10 years ago.
The European-American is still the majority, so if America falls, whose fault is it?
European-Americans are the majority in a government whose top priorities are themselves,
corporations and a foreign apartheid government. European-Americans have the majority vote
and continually vote for parties and representatives who seem to have little interest in
American prosperity.
European-Americans are the ones who idly stood by in silence within the herd and watched as
their government facilitated Jim Crow, welfare and targeted mass incarceration against the
Black African-American community, and then not understand why there is inequality
Apparently, too many European-Americans don't read history or are not interested in American
heritage, because they don't seem to understand the importance of the first and second
amendments, and that whosoever targets to eliminate these rights is an enemy.
Talk about IQ. Many European-Americans actually believe the propaganda of the Covid-19 hoax
or that erasing one of the most important events in American history will resolve the media
hyped racial tension.
And there are many European-Americans who do not seem to understand that the medical response
to the "epidemic", and the policing against rioting is the responsibility of the State, not
the federal government.
Why is it, that so many European-Americans do not understand that the United States is a
democracy based upon freedom, moral principles and common sense, not a Marxist communist
ideology.
If America fails, it is because too many Europeans don't think and act like they're
Americans.
@ASimpleHistory
Those water systems that only send the lead contamination to our helpless black wards? Must
be in the hundreds. Special valves and pipes yo!
Examples please.
Fred supplies examples of a flood of good will and mawkish stupidity showered on the
diversity and you counter with some penny ante hiccup in the scheme of things to sustain the
fantasy of "In it `Orrid?"
American Africans butt crackers and our precious progressive pansies will soon enough sift
through the rubble and garbage of an amazing experiment and never understand the truth of the
saying that the best is the enemy of the good. Or that a bird in hand is worth two in the
Bush. Thinking white!
Fred you're back in rare form! The irony that the country that has done the most to uplift
the white mans burden, is also the most racist seems well Words can't describe.
The more blacks get, the more racist we are. Time to toss em off the gravy train. Then at
least if we are to be called racist, we are'nt pissing dollar after dollar down the
river!
How bout we try leaving then to their own devices, since you know, blacks are the greatest
builders of civilizations in the history of man kind.
Fred you have accurately and succinctly put into words what pisses sane whites off the most,
the more we give, the bigger the black middle finger at us gets.
@Bragadocious If
someone is sick with Covid, that usually entails a breathing problem. I don't see how people
with breathing difficulties are going to march through the desert for days to show up at a US
emergency room.
There are still plenty of nice peaceful places to live in America. Most of the idiocy we're
witnessing is in the the large urban areas. We lose sight of the geographical immensity of
the US. Even in Southern California, where I live, there are huge sparsely populated areas,
and even more in the north. The first amendment was supposed to allow for freedom of
association, (as interpreted by the Supreme Court) and that includes who we live with and
amongst, in private life. So much for that.
I see the problem more as a political organization issue. The U.S. moved away from a
republic to an empire, and bled the country of resources to maintain that empire to
enormously enrich the few. When the ability to plunder resources diminished, the ruling class
switched to counterfeiting money on a grand scale to steal the wages of labor of the poor
here, and abroad.
So it's a twofold problem. One is the collapse of the global empire, both by resistance of
others (namely China and Russia), overreach, unaffordability, and incompetence. The other is
the social, economic, and cultural collapse at home, caused by years of political, economic
and social engineering, and outright theft by the ruling class.
In the real world (nature) entropy is a bitch. The reality is all our terms for society
are the humanities terms for thermodynamics. Complex systems require a lot of energy and
design to keep intact, let lone expand. The bigger the system the more required, and the more
fragile it gets – particularly when run exclusively from the center. Running an empire
from Washington in the modern world is about as complex as can be imagined. Far more than
Rome had to deal with, and look what happened there.
To me the solution, is a redesign of America's political organization. Forget the empire
and Republic, they're done. Design an organization similar to Switzerland, which is probably
the only true confederation on the planet. Let's return political power back to the states,
eliminate or drastically reduce the powers of the center (ie. Washington), and let the people
in each state decide how they wish to be governed there, and not by Washington. We might find
that there are states that don't want to belong to any larger political unit. Fine. Smaller
is better anyway. Let the pieces fall and let's see what combinations come out of it.
@Grahamsno(G64)
Proof?.
Claiming they went to the moon fifty years ago .
And now they have to buy tickets on Russian rockets .
Something has seriously deteriorated in the US space race.
Of course – a 'claim' is meaningless when you have Kubrick standing by.
Look what can be done with a few sets of boxcutters LOL
" In truth, America has made the greatest effort ever essayed by one race to uplift another.
Reflect: In 1954 an entirely white Supreme Court unanimously ended segregation. Later it
found the use of IQ tests by employers illegal because blacks scored poorly, then found
"affirmative action," racial discrimination against whites, legal (hardly oppression of
blacks, this). An overwhelmingly white Congress passed the Civil Rights Act in 1964, the
Voting Rights Act the next year." etc etc
Fred, has it ever occurred to you that this was all PLANNED, that it was all ON PURPOSE?
Who in their right mind would sign a mass immigration bill? US, or World, Government would.
Why? Social unrest. Cultural genocide. Divide and conquer. Chaos amongst the rabble.
And the rabble, as we clearly can see now, truly are rabble–unintelligent, thuggish,
and all that. Many of their grandparents, if not all, were measured in speech and action,
humble and perhaps even quite intelligent. No more. Now a great indicator of lack of if not
intelligence then common sense–and true intelligence embraces common sense–is the
modern university graduate.
As I've said for years, Beware the white female masters or doctorate holder!
But Fred, surely you can figure out that all these things don't just happen. Lay your cards
on the table, dude.
@Ann Nonny Mouse
Gov't shouldn't even attempt to look after its citizens.
It's when gov't becomes a social welfare scheme that things go awry. The average citizen
is supposed to be able to stand on his own two feet and compete in a free market. Gov't is
supposed to protect that free market from interference. What we have today is gov't
suffocating the free market and fostering dependency by the millions of stupid voters they
pander after.
Cut off the welfare, 'free stuff' social programs, and get back to basics to change
course, but at this stage that's impossible. The solution is to get rid of the entire Fed Gov
to make the real cancers in the society evaporate. Get rid of the Pelosi's, Schumer's,
Trump's, the Federal Reserve, laws that actually cause discrimination, etc, etc,etc.
Allow the states to become countries and start 50 experiments on how to govern. I predict
that the conservative entities will rapidly fare best and the liberal holes will depopulate
via voting with their feet. Within 2 years, some areas will be humming along nicely while the
rest will have to reexamine their ridiculous policies when infinite funny money is no longer
available to create the fantasy world they wanted to live within.
@Smithsonian_2
"The way to get rid of corruption in high places is to get rid of high places." – Frank
Chodorov
As long as there's some asshat 'ruler' there will be corruption and eventual total decay
as the US is now experiencing. I, for one, need no 'leader'. Anarchism!
Fred, what is it about you? You write an article about the decline of America but the
Americans posting comments on your article are talking about circumcision, foreskin donors
and 'Willie-tampering'. That has to be your fault, something you are doing. It cannot be
attributed to the pathetic imbecility of most Americans even though you point out that the
dumbing-down of education will result in the pathetic imbecility of most Americans, so that
means . . . Oh, forget it. You win, I lose.
This is an aside but, if I may masquerade for a moment as a pathetically-imbecilic
American, I would note that god (or even, God) made an agreement with some of my people that
in return for unlimited but undefined blessings (other than a glass of milk and honey which
tastes like hell if you want to know the truth) they would circumcise all the males so he
could recognise his "children". This 'raises' questions. I would have thought even a minor
god (much less a God) could recognise his children without earthly assistance, especially
that kind of assistance and, unless the people are all naked, how would he know? Would he
say, "Unzip your pants so I can assess your degree of faithfulness?" I once had a girlfriend
who was so inclined, but never a god (much less a God).
I know I risk divine retribution for daring to ask, but what the hell would a god have in
his mind that he would choose THIS method of identifying his faithful? If I were a god
(forget about God here), and wanted a way to recognise my followers, I'm not sure that
'Willie-tampering' would be my ID of choice. A tramp stamp might be okay for the girls, but
for boys I think I might suggest something simple and more publicly-entertaining like
castration with piano-wire and a runaway horse. But let's not lose the main point which is
that any god who chooses to identify his (American and other) faithful by the contents of
their pants, is somebody I want to stay far away from. As with Hillary Clinton, and for much
the same reasons.
If America does fall who is gonna be Israel's henchman? Who's gonna keep stirring the Mid
East pot and the world with wars? And who's gonna protect poor Israel from their proclaimed
"nemesis" Iran?
I can't believe they would let the US self-destruct (actually cause the US to collapse)
because that would leave Israel all alone to defend itself.
@ASimpleHistory
Because middle-Americans don't travel and regard a country on the border of Michigan as a
foreign country, many posters have no clue about Canada. I grew up 40 miles from Ontario and
know it well.
Natives in Northern Canada are so dangerous that you would not want to walk around a small
Northern Ontario town. Going into a bar would be like going into a South Chicago project.
Natives in Canada don't have access to firearms or you would have 700 shootings a year. The
Canadian bush is actually more dangerous than Canadian cities. They're no different than
Aztecs in Phoenix, really.
Canada also has underclasses the US doesn't have. The idea of being mugged by an East
Indian in America would seem absurd. In Brampton it is not uncommon.
[MORE]
Worse yet, Canadian syndicates-like the IRA once was-are linked to political terrorism. Tamil
Tigers and Sikh Separatists flooded Canada in the seventies and eighties and used drug
dealing to fund their movements back home-which created a horrendous problem with middleman
money laundering.
Chinese have assumed control of Vancouver. They've flooded the streets with heroin from
China and East Vancouver has the highest rate of AIDS in North America.
Because most Americans don't travel to UK I'll run down the situation there. Pakistanis
are ruthless and their gangs as bad as Bloods or Crips. Guns and grenade launchers and M-14's
are common in UK and unlike the US, British criminals are more likely to shoot a police
officer.
The idea that there are no guns in Canada or UK is a joke. The cities of Toronto and
London are full of gun-toting ethnic cartels. Albanians and Russian pimping syndicates are
armed to the teeth in UK with firearms which would make a Crip green with envy.
Crime in London and Canada is more multicultural. In the US, blacks and Mexicans rule the
streets. No other gang can get into street level crime. In Canada and UK there are dozens of
street-level gangs of thugs battling it out for drug sales territory, while the Albanians
handle the high-class pimping.
I don't know why, but Pakistanis in America just cannot get into the grooming game. Maybe
its police response time. Tahir hangs around a middle school in the US and the cops are there
in 30 seconds. Or possibly little white girls in the US are culturally programmed to like the
black Alpha pimp-stud and some greasy Pakistani doesn't appeal.
Similarly, gypsies in the US go straight because on the street the blacks would simply
rape the begging little gypsy girls downtown to death. Or they would be shot.
Another aspect is prison. US prisons are so appalling that about 30 years ago the classic
white offenders-cat burglars, chop shop operators, bank robbers-simply stopped committing
crime because of the sexual torture by blacks in prison. Any probation officer will tell you
this.
In Australia, the Italian syndicates in Melbourne are actually more violent and brazen
than in New Jersey. In the US, the Italians are no longer really into violent crime. They're
into white-collar crime. Down Under, some of the Italians still are.
But the bottom-line is that UK blacks are Afro-Caribbean and West African. While it has
been noted that many of the Jamaicans are bad and riots have occurred, there is not the
density of black crime of the US inner-cities in UK. Its bad, of course, but mostly in
London.
Its been theorized that US blacks interactions with macho Irish and Scottish sheepherders
in the US South somehow made them more culturally worse than Africans, but this is only a
theory.
Similarly, Canada has also always had Afro-Caribbean crime. Haitians and Jamaicans brought
pimping and AIDS to Canada.
It was not actually the small number of US blacks who immigrated to Canada who brought the
scourges of pimping and crime but actually the Afro-Caribbeans.
Stryker knows the streets of the world. I've been on all of them.
Interestingly, Spain is a nice country. Much is made of its purported Arab influence, but
it seemed like France to me. Nothing like the Cholos of Phoenix.
Anyhow, for American posters who are so unworldly that they have not been to Canada that
is the rundown.
"When the Soviet Union ended it could fall back into various nation states, America has no
such thing. This makes its collapse incredibly more dangerous . . ."
Yes, although not primarily due to the left-over nuclear missiles. There is something much
more fundamental here. You touched on it, but I'm not sure how well you appreciate your
insight.
The issue is this: If France dissolves, the French people are still French. If America
dissolves, Americans are nothing.
So why saying generally right things about toppling of statures this billionaire wants
reparations. As any billionaire is a potential criminal who obtained his wealth at the expense of
common people what share of his wealth he will contribute?
And slavery in the USA was not the unique exception in the world in XIX century. Arab
countries get rid of slavery only in XX century and no completely. It was reinstalled in Libya
recently thanks to the USA topping of the regime of Colonel Gaddafi .
It's
not going to give a kid whose parents can't afford college, money to go to college. It's not
going to close the labor gap and it's not going to take people off welfare or food stamps
."
It's tantamount to rearranging deck chairs on a racial Titanic. It absolutely means
nothing.
Johnson took a similarly dim view of removing shows like " The Dukes of Hazzard " or
films like " Gone with the Wind " from circulation and firing professors for saying "
all lives matter " instead of " black lives matter ," suggesting these moves are
" an attempt by white Americans to assuage guilt by doing things that make them feel
good " and don't help black people at all.
" Black people laugh at white people who do this ," the BET founder said, pointing
out that black viewers likely made up a significant portion of the viewing audiences of the
canceled shows because " they watch more TV ."
Calling performative apologetics from white celebrities on social media " the silliest
expression of white privilege that exists in this country ," Johnson suggested privileged
white people instead ask black people what they want and listen to their responses. "
Embrace being white and do the right thing, and then you don't have to worry about being sad
because you're white! "
" White Americans seem to think that if they just do sort of emotionally or drastic
things that black people are going to say 'Oh my god, white people love us because they took
down a statue of Stonewall Jackson' ," Johnson said before repurposing a famous quote from
the now-verboten Gone with the Wind: " Frankly, black people don't give a damn.
"
Johnson, who became America's first black billionaire in 2001, has plenty of ideas about
what black people want. He recently called for a $14 trillion reparations package for
descendants of slaves, which works out to about $358,000 for every black American, and believes
such a massive financial boost – not self-flagellating demonstrations from privileged
white people – is what most black people would like to see emerge from the current
climate of racial reckoning.
" Now is the time to go big ," he declared earlier this month, floating the massive
number as protests and riots raged across the US following the police killing of George Floyd.
But while a few of the Democratic presidential candidates had paid lip service to making
reparations part of their platforms early in the race, presumptive nominee Joe Biden has not
climbed aboard that bandwagon – yet.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
An upstate woman and two Brooklyn lawyers were indicted Friday on federal explosives and
arson charges for allegedly tossing Molotov cocktails at NYPD vehicles during George Floyd
protests in New York City.
Samantha Shader, 27, of Catskill, is accused of hurling the makeshift explosive at an
NYPD vehicle occupied by four police officers on early Saturday morning, May 30.
Prosecutors allege Shader bit one of the officer's legs when she was being taken into
custody.
Around the same time, Brooklyn lawyers Urooj Rahman, 31, and Colinford Mattis, 32, were
accused of tossing their own Molotov cocktail at an unoccupied police vehicle in Brooklyn
during a separate attack.
Throw the book at them. This was premeditated, murderous, and seditious.
An
agent provocateur is an undercover agent, sometimes a police officer, who's deployed to join a
protest to provoke protesters into illegal acts or violence so the protest can be discredited
and those protesting are liable for prosecution. It's a classic strategy, and Anders Lee
explores its place in history, both in the recent George Floyd uprisings, and in many instances
of domestic terrorism in the US.
The Venezuelan Embassy protectors have had their felony charges dropped over their protests
defending the international diplomatic order, US law enforcement has targeted journalists
covering the George Floyd uprising, the Biden campaign continues to become more of a carnival
as it lets the Democratic National Committee's candidate continue to talk in public, and
more.
Natalie McGill reports on where the bailout money aimed at hospitals went. Unsurprisingly,
it turns out that already wealthy, predatory metropolitan institutions scooped more funding
than struggling rural hospitals, and McGill wants to know how we can get that money back.
Anders Lee sits down with Lee Camp to talk about Trump's move to criminalize Antifa, the case
of an assassinated former Swedish president that's not only been reopened but potentially also
solved, and more. YOUTUBE Channel Redacted Tonight
Today, in the context of the Black Lives Matter protests, TomDispatch regular Andrew Bacevich considers the all-American version of "extreme
materialism" that Martin Luther King called out more than half a century ago. And when it
comes to the overwhelming urge to get one's hands on the goods, among the looters of this
moment two groups are almost never mentioned: the Pentagon and the police.
Yet, in 1997, the Department of Defense set up the 1033 program as part of the National
Defense Authorization Act to provide thousands of domestic police forces with "surplus"
equipment of almost every imaginable militarized kind. Since then, thanks to your tax
dollars, it has given away $7.4
billion of such equipment, some of it directly off the battlefields of this country's
forlorn "forever wars."
For items like grenade launchers, mine-resistant armored vehicles, military rifles,
bayonets, body armor, night-vision goggles, and helicopters
, all that police departments have to fork over is the price of delivery. The Pentagon has,
in fact, been so eager to become the Macy's of
militarized hardware that, in 2017, it was even willing to "give $1.2 million worth of
rifles, pipe bombs, and night vision goggles to a fake police department," no questions
asked. That "department" proved to be part of a sting
operation run by the Government Accountability Office (GAO). "It was like getting stuff
off of eBay," a GAO official would
say . Only, of course, for free.
The militarization (or, thought of another way, the commercialization) of the police has
been remarkably on pace these last 23 years, while the Pentagon's
ever-soaring budgets for its ever-sinking wars could be thought of as the great American
commercial success story of this century. With more and more taxpayer dollars in its
wallet, it's been on a remarkable looting spree. Ask yourself: has there been a weapons
system it couldn't have, a military base it couldn't establish, a war expense Congress
wouldn't fund even while cutting back on crucial aspects of the domestic budget like
infrastructure
programs or
disease-prevention spending ? No wonder the Pentagon could supply all those police
departments with a cornucopia of goods with which to turn themselves into over-armed
occupying forces in this country.
It's never thought of that way, but the Pentagon and the police have essentially been
looting the coffers of the American taxpayer for a long time now and, in the Trump era, the
process has only intensified .
Nonetheless, as Bacevich points out, even with protests over racism filling the streets of
America, protests over defunding the Pentagon have yet to surface in any significant way.
Perhaps it's finally time. ~ Tom
Martin Luther King's Giant Triplets
By Andrew Bacevich
In the wake of the police killing of George Floyd, Americans are finally – or is it
once again? – confronting the racism that afflicts this country and extends into just
about every corner of our national life. Something fundamental just might be happening.
Yet to state the obvious, we've been
here before. Mass protests in response to racial inequality and discrimination, including
police brutality, have been anything but unknown in the United States. Much the same can be
said of riots targeting black Americans, fomented and exploited by white racists, often
actively or passively abetted by local law enforcement officials. If Jamil Abdullah Al-Amin,
formerly known as H. Rap Brown, was correct in calling violence "as American as
cherry pie," then race-related urban unrest is the apple-filled equivalent.
The optimists among us believe
that "this time is different." I hope events will prove them right. Yet recalling
expectations that Barack Obama's election in 2008 signaled the dawn of a " post-racial America
," I see no reason to expect it to be so. A yawning gap, I fear, separates hope from
reality.
Let me suggest, however, that the nation's current preoccupation with race, as honorable
and necessary as it may be, falls well short of adequately responding to the situation
confronting Americans as they enter the third decade of the twenty-first century. Racism is a
massive problem, but hardly our only one. Indeed, as Martin Luther King sought to remind us
many years ago, there are at least two others of comparable magnitude.
MLK Defines the Problem
In April 1967, at New York City's Riverside Church, Dr. King delivered a sermon that
offered a profound diagnosis of the illnesses afflicting the nation. His analysis remains as
timely today as it was then, perhaps more so.
Americans remember King primarily as a great civil rights leader and indeed he was that.
In his Riverside Church address, however, he turned to matters that went far beyond race. In
an immediate sense, his focus was the ongoing Vietnam War, which he denounced as "madness"
that "must cease." Yet King also used the occasion to summon the nation to "undergo a radical
revolution of values" that would transform the United States "from a thing-oriented society
to a person-oriented society." Only through such a revolution, he declared, would we be able
to overcome "the giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism, and militarism."
The challenge confronting Americans was to dismantle what King referred to as the
"edifice" that produced and sustained each of those giant triplets. Today's protesters,
crusading journalists, and engaged intellectuals make no bones about their determination to
eliminate the first of those giant triplets. Yet they generally treat the other two as, at
best, mere afterthoughts, while the edifice itself, resting on a perverse understanding of
freedom, goes almost entirely ignored.
I'm not suggesting that members of the grand coalition of Americans today fervently
campaigning against racism favor extreme materialism. Many of them merely accept its reality
and move on. Nor am I suggesting that they consciously endorse militarism, although in
confusing "support" for the troops with genuine patriotism some of them do so implicitly.
What I am suggesting is that those calling for fundamental change will go badly astray if
they ignore Dr. King's insistence that each of the giant triplets is intimately tied to the
other two.
Defund the Pentagon?
The protests triggered by the recent murders of George Floyd and other black Americans
have produced widespread demands to "defund the police." Those demands don't come out of
nowhere. While "reform" programs undertaken in innumerable American cities over the course of
many years have demonstrably
enhanced police firepower , they have done little, if anything, to repair relations
between police departments and communities of color.
As an aging middle-class white male, I don't fear cops. I respect the fact that theirs is
a tough job, which I would not want. Yet I realize that my attitude is one more expression of
white privilege, which black men, regardless of their age and economic status, can ill afford
to indulge. So I fully accept the need for radical changes in policing – that's what
"defund" appears to imply – if American cities are ever to have law enforcement
agencies that are effective, humane, and themselves law-abiding.
What I can't fathom is why a similar logic doesn't apply to the armed forces that we
employ to police huge chunks of the world beyond our borders. If Americans have reason to
question the nation's increasingly
militarized approach to law enforcement, then shouldn't they have equal reason to
question this country's thoroughly militarized approach to statecraft?
Consider this: on an annual basis, police officers in the United States kill approximately
1,000 Americans , with blacks
two-and-a-half times more likely than whites to be victimized. Those are appalling
figures, indicative of basic policy gone fundamentally awry. So the outpouring of protest
over the police and demands for change are understandable and justified.
Still, the question must be asked: Why have the nation's post-9/11 wars not prompted
similar expressions of outrage? The unjustified killing of black Americans rightly finds
thousands upon thousands of protesters flooding the streets of major cities. Yet the
loss of thousands of
American soldiers and the physical and psychological wounds sustained by tens of thousands
more in foolhardy wars elicits, at best, shrugs. Throw in the hundreds of
thousands of non-American lives taken in those military campaigns and the
trillions of taxpayer dollars they have consumed and you have a catastrophe that easily
exceeds in scale the myriad race-related protests and riots that have roiled American cities
in the recent past.
With their eyes fixed on elections that are now just months away, politicians of all
stripes spare no effort to show that they "get it" on the issue of race and policing. Race
may well play a large role in determining who wins the White House this November and which
party controls Congress. It should. Yet while the election's final outcome may be uncertain,
this much is not: neither the American
propensity for war, nor the
bloated size of the Pentagon budget, nor the dubious habit of maintaining a sprawling
network of military bases across much of the planet will receive serious scrutiny during
the political season now underway. Militarism will escape unscathed.
At Riverside Church, King described the U.S. government as "the greatest purveyor of
violence in the world today." So it unquestionably remains, perpetrating immeasurably more
violence than any other great power and with remarkably little to show in return. Why, then,
except on the easily ignored fringes of American politics, are there no demands to "defund"
the Pentagon?
King considered the Vietnam War an abomination. At that time, more than a few Americans
agreed with him and vigorously demonstrated against the conflict's continuation. That today's
demonstrators have seemingly chosen to file away our post-9/11 military misadventures under
the heading of regrettable but forgettable is itself an abomination. While their sensitivity
to racism is admirable, their indifference to war is nothing short of disheartening.
In 1967, Dr. King warned that "a nation that continues year after year to spend more money
on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death." During
the intervening decades, his charge has lost none of its sting or aptness.
America's National Signature
Given their size and duration, the protests occurring in the wake of the murder of George
Floyd have been remarkably peaceful. That said, some of them did, early on, include rioters
who resorted to looting. Smashing windows and ransacking stores, they walked off not with
milk and bread for the hungry, but with shopping bags filled with
high-end swag – designer shoes and sneakers, purses, clothing, and jewelry lifted
from
stores like Prada and Alexander McQueen. Also stolen were smart phones,
handguns , even automobiles . In-store
surveillance systems recorded
scenes reminiscent of Black Friday doorbuster sales, though without anyone bothering to
pass through a checkout counter. Some looters quickly attempted to monetize their hauls by
offering to sell purloined items online.
Certain right-wing commentators wasted no time in using the looting to tar the protest
movement as little more than an expression of nihilism. Tucker Carlson of Fox News was
particularly
emphatic on this point. Americans taking to the streets in response to George Floyd's
murder, he said, "reject society itself."
"Reason and process and precedent mean nothing to them. They use violence to get what they
want immediately. People like this don't bother to work. They don't volunteer or pay taxes to
help other people. They live for themselves. They do exactly what they feel like doing On
television, hour by hour, we watch these people – criminal mobs – destroy what
the rest of us have built "
To explain such selfish and destructive misconduct, Carlson had an answer readily at
hand:
"The ideologues will tell you that the problem is race relations, or capitalism, or police
brutality, or global warming. But only on the surface. The real cause is deeper than that and
it's far darker. What you're watching is the ancient battle between those who have a stake in
society, and would like to preserve it, and those who don't, and seek to destroy it.
This is vile, hateful stuff, and entirely wrong – except perhaps on one point. In
attributing the looting to a deeper cause, Carlson was onto something, even if his effort to
pinpoint that cause was wildly off the mark.
I won't try to unravel the specific motives of those who saw an opportunity in the
protests against racism to help themselves to goods that were not theirs. How much was
righteous anger turned to rage and how much cynical opportunism is beyond my ability to
know.
This much, however, can be said for certain: the grab-all-you-can-get impulse so vividly
on display was as all-American as fireworks on the Fourth of July. Those looters, after all,
merely wanted more stuff. What could be more American than that? In this country, after all,
stuff carries with it the possibility of personal fulfillment, of achieving some version of
happiness or status.
The looters that Tucker Carlson targeted with his ire were doing anything but "rejecting
society itself." They were merely helping themselves to what this society today has on offer
for those with sufficient cash and credit cards in their wallets. In a sense, they were
treating themselves to a tiny sip of what passes these days for the American Dream.
With the exception of cloistered nuns, hippies, and other vanishing breeds, virtually all
Americans have been conditioned to buy into the proposition that stuff correlates with the
good life. Unconvinced? Check out the videos from last year's Black Friday and then consider
the intense, if unsurprising, interest of economists and journalists in tracking the
latest
consumer spending trends . At least until Covid-19 came along, consumer spending served
as the authoritative measure of the nation's overall health.
The primary civic obligation of US citizens today is not to vote or pay taxes. And it's
certainly not to defend the country, a task offloaded onto those who can be enticed to enlist
(with minorities vastly
overrepresented ) in the so-called All-Volunteer Military. No, the primary obligation of
citizenship is to spend.
Ours is not a nation of mystics, philosophers, poets, artisans, or Thomas Jefferson's
yeomen farmers. We are now a nation of citizen-consumers, held in thrall to the extreme
materialism that Dr. King decried. This, not a commitment to liberty or democracy, has become
our true national signature and our chief contribution to late modernity.
Tearing Down the Edifice
At Riverside Church, King reminded his listeners that the Southern Christian Leadership
Conference, which he had helped to found a decade earlier, had chosen this as its motto: "To
save the soul of America." The soul of a nation corrupted by racism, militarism, and extreme
materialism represented King's ultimate concern. Vietnam, he said, was "but a symptom of a
far deeper malady within the American spirit."
In a tone-deaf
editorial criticizing his Riverside Church sermon, the New York Times chastised
King for "fusing two public problems" – racism and the Vietnam War – "that are
distinct and separate." Yet part of King's genius lay in his ability to recognize the
interconnectedness of matters that Times editors, as oblivious to deeper maladies then
as they are today, wish to keep separate. King sought to tear down the edifice that sustained
all three of those giant triplets. Indeed, it is all but certain that, were he alive now, he
would call similar attention to a fourth related factor: climate change denial. The refusal
to treat seriously the threat posed by climate change underwrites the persistence of racism,
militarism, and extreme materialism.
During the course of his sermon, King quoted this sentence from the statement of a group
that called itself the Clergy and Laymen Concerned About Vietnam: "A time comes when silence
is betrayal." Regarding race, it appears that the
great majority of Americans have now rejected such silence. This is good. It remains an
open question, however, when their silent acceptance of militarism, materialism, and the
abuse of Planet Earth will end.
The anti-rascist identity of the recent protests rests on a much larger base of class warfare waged over the past 40 years
against the entire population led by a determined oligarchy and enforced by their political, media and militarized police retainers.
This same oligarchy, with a despicable zeal and revolting media-orchestrated campaign–co-branding the movement with it's usual
corporate perpetrators– distorts escalating carceral and economic violence solely through a lens of racial conflict and their
time-tested toothless reforms. A few unlucky "peace officers" may have to TOFTT until the furor recedes, can't be helped.
Crowding out debt relief, single payer health, living wages, affordable housing and actual justice reform from the debate that
would benefit African Americans more than any other demographic is the goal.
The handful of Emperors far prefer kabuki theater and random ritual Seppuku than facing the rage of millions of staring down
the barrel of zero income, debt, bankruptcy, evictions and dispossession. The Praetorians will follow the money as always.
I suppose we'll get some boulevards re-named and a paid Juneteenth holiday to compensate for the destruction 100+ years of
labor rights struggle, so there's that..
While appearing on Fox News
Wednesday, Greater New York Black Lives Matter president Hawk Newsome told host Martha
MacCallum that if America doesn't bend over and cave to his group's demands, they will burn
down the system and replace it.
He justified his insurrection by citing the American Revolution and claiming that the United
States is founded on violence and spreads violence around the world.
According to Fox News (Emphasis added):
"You have said that violence is sometimes necessary in these situations," host Martha
MacCallum told Newsome. "What exactly is it that you hope to achieve through violence?"
"Wow, it's interesting that you would pose that question like that," Newsome responded,
"because this country is built upon violence. What was the American Revolution, what's our
diplomacy across the globe?
"We go in and we blow up countries and we replace their leaders with leaders who we like.
So for any American to accuse us of being violent is extremely hypocritical."
MacCallum clarified that her question was based off comments she had heard Newsome utter
in various interviews.
"I said," Newsome told the host, " if this country doesn't give us what we want, then we
will burn down this system and replace it . All right? And I could be speaking figuratively.
I could be speaking literally. It's a matter of interpretation.
"Let's observe the history of the 1960s, when black people were rioting," he went on. "We
had the highest growth in wealth, in property ownership. Think about the last few weeks since
we started protesting. There have been eight cops fired across the country."
Newsome never said what he wanted to replace the United States with, but given the
Marxist background of BLM, we have a pretty good idea
He refused to condemn the rioting and later claimed to be a Christian, calling Jesus Christ
a black revolutionary who was assassinated by the government.
"I love the Lord and my Lord and savior," Newsome said. "Jesus Christ is the most famous
black radical revolutionary in history. And he was treated just like Dr. King. He was arrested
on occasion and he was also crucified or assassinated. This is what happens to black activists.
We are killed by the government."
If you haven't checked out and liked our Facebook page, please go
here and
do so. You can also follow us on Twitter at @co_firing_line . Facebook, Google and other members
of the Silicon Valley Axis of
Evil are now doing everything they can to deliberately stifle conservative content online,
so please be sure to check out our MeWe page here , and check us out at
ProAmerica Only .
If you appreciate independent conservative reports like this, please go here and support us on Patreon and get your
conservative pro-Trump gear here .
While you're at it, be sure to check out our friends at Whatfinger News , the Internet's conservative front-page
founded by ex-military!
Analysis carried out by the Pew Research Center has revealed that just one in six protesters
turning out at BLM demonstrations in the US are actually black.
The research notes that the plurality of those present at the gatherings have been white
people.
The full breakdown reveals that just 17 percent of protesters were black, while 46 percent
were white.
A further 22 percent were Hispanic, with eight percent being Asian, the analysis highlights.
Perhaps even more telling is the demographic breakdown in terms of political affiliation.
Almost four out of every five "protesters" identified as Democrats or Democrat-leaning, with
fewer than 17 percent identifying as Republicans.
The findings dovetail with comments made by BET Founder Robert Johnson yesterday, who noted
that most black Americans "laugh" at white people attempting to bring down monuments and cancel
everything they deem to be "racist". Johnson said that white people "have the mistaken
assumption that black people are sitting around cheering for them saying 'Oh, my God, look at
these white people. They're doing something so important to us. They're taking down the statue
of a Civil War general who fought for the South."
"You know, black people, in my opinion, black people laugh at white people who do this the
same way we laugh at white people who say we got to take off the TV shows." Johnson said in an
interview with Fox News.
"Look, the people who are basically tearing down statues, trying to make a statement are
basically borderline anarchists, the way I look at it," he continued, adding "They really
have no agenda other than the idea we're going to topple a statue."
"It's not going to give a kid whose parents can't afford college money to go to college.
It's not going to close the labor gap between what white workers are paid and what black
workers are paid. And it's not going to take people off welfare or food stamps." Johnson
urged.
"It's "tantamount to rearranging the deck chairs on a racial titanic. It absolutely means
nothing." Johnson asserted.
At the start of French Revolution, Bertrand Barère declared, "The revolutions of a
barbarous people destroy all monuments, and the very trace of the arts seems to be effaced. The
revolutions of an enlightened people conserve the fine arts, and embellish them [ ]"
Soon after, though, thousands of French statues were wrecked, and many heads tumbled into
baskets. Barère, "The tree of liberty grows only when watered by the blood of tyrants."
The Anacreon of the Guillotine was lucky to escape with his own noggin.
Again, the defeated must watch impotently as their heroes are decapitated or come crashing
down. At least they still have their own necks, for the moment, at least.
Washington, Jefferson, Grant and Francis Scott Key have been toppled, and even a likeness of
Cervantes had red paint splashed on its eyes. "BASTARD" was scrawled on its pedestal. The woke
vandal didn't know that here was no conquistador or slave owner, but a slave of five years, not
to mention a seminal writer in the Western canon.
Ah, but "seminal," "Western" and "canon" are evil words now, you see, so maybe he did know,
for this is, at bottom, an assault on every pillar, brick, cornice and baseboard of Western
civilization. Burn it all down, for it is uniquely racist, sexist, genocidal and transphobic. I
mean, for thousands of years, evil whites absolutely resisted the installation of all-gender
shit holes.
Shut up already, and listen to Susan Sontag, "If America is the culmination of Western white
civilization, as everyone from the Left to the Right declares, then there must be something
terribly wrong with Western white civilization. This is a painful truth; few of us want to go
that far . The truth is that Mozart, Pascal, Boolean algebra, Shakespeare, parliamentary
government, baroque churches, Newton, the emancipation of women, Kant, Marx, Balanchine
ballets, et al, don't redeem what this particular civilization has wrought upon the world. The
white race is the cancer of human history; it is the white race and it alone -- its ideologies
and inventions -- which eradicates autonomous civilizations wherever it spreads, which has
upset the ecological balance of the planet, which now threatens the very existence of life
itself."
Later, Sontag regretted offending cancer patients with her poor choice of metaphor.
It's essential that we be exorcised from "dead white men." I remember when this idiotic term
started to circulate. I had just dropped out of art school. While drinking Rolling Rock in
smoky McGlinchey's
in Philadelphia, I told another art fag that he should know his art history, for how can you do
anything if you have no idea what's been achieved? Leering, this cipher smugly growled,
"They're just dead white men, man!"
In 2015, I taught for a semester at Leipzig University, so nearly each day, I'd walk by a
hideous building that crudely approximated the destroyed Paulinerkirche. Built in 1231, this
church survived all the vicissitudes, upheavals and wars down the centuries, only to be
dynamited by Communists in 1968. So what if Martin Luther had officiated there, and Bach was a
musical director? Of course, its rich history only made it more delicious to blow up, for
iconoclasm is the orgasm of "progressives," and that's why I've never identified as one.
There's one Leipzig neighborhood, Connewitz, that's famous across Germany as the center of
progressive politics, most notably the antifa movement, and guess what? It is thoroughly
defaced
with graffiti
that are often anti-cop
or anti-Germany
. During clashes with police that Connewitzers instigate, shop windows are gleefully broken not
just at multinationals, but mom-and-pops, because, you know, once you go berserk, it's hard to
stop. Reflecting on this in 2015, I knew it would only escalate and spread beyond Germany, and
it has. Seeing photos of Seattle's Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone, I immediately thought of
Connewitz
.
When I wrote recently about the need for liberated zones, I meant, first of, the defense of
your own communities, as happened in Philadelphia's Fishtown and Italian Market, where locals
banded together to block an invasion of vandals and looters.
Here in South Korea, local monuments and mores are safe. Here in Busan, there's a huge
statue honoring General Jeong Bal, who was killed by Japanese invaders in 1592. Losing with
dignity is worthy of remembrance, though some contend he actually ran away. Historical debates
are healthy.
More interesting to me are five sculptures of war refugees by Lee Hyun-woo, near the 40-Step
Stairway. It was a shanty town during the Korean War, when Busan was a temporary capital after
Seoul was overrun by Chinese and North Korean troops.
Depicted without hokiness, these are admirably realistic figures of a mother breastfeeding
her baby while her naked son stood by, crying; two girls carrying
water , one with a shoulder pole and the other with a jar on her head; two boys covering
their ears as a man makes popcorn with a bomb-like
contraption; a fedora-wearing accordionist
, sitting on a bench; and two exhausted porters at
rest . As public sculptures, they're perfect, for they're gracefully inserted into the
environment as they dignify local history. Informative and fortifying, these bronze ghosts
mingle with contemporary Koreans.
Across a Japanese-built bridge not far away, there's a statue of Hyeon
In . You can sit on a stone bench next to the smiling, suited singer, and hear his songs
eternally broadcast from a bible-sized speaker.
In 1949, he made every man, woman, child and dog sob with his rendition of "Seoul's Night
Music." "Walking through Chungmuro under a spring rain / Tears flowing down the window panes."
Oh, stop, stop! You're murdering me! I can't take it! A true legend.
As a refugee in Busan, Hyeon In wrote "Be Strong, Guem-soon." It's a message to his sister
to stay strong until they meet again.
ORDER IT NOW
There is a street
dedicated to the painter Lee Jung-soeb
. He's known for gestural paintings of bulls, and playful drawings of boys hugging fish
and crabs pinching penises
. Educated in Tokyo, his brief career started just after World War II and lasted through the
Korean War.
Living all over, he starved, suffered from schizophrenia, drank too much and died in 1956 of
hepatitis, at age 40 and alone, in a Red Cross Hospital. His wife and kids had been sent to
Tokyo to escape the fighting. Although peripheral to art history, Jung-soeb matters to Koreans,
and that's enough. Meaning is local
, above all.
Honoring their own culture and history, South Koreans also appreciate the finest from
elsewhere. There are upcoming concerts of Saint
Saen , Brahms, Beethoven and Vaughan
Williams .
Rather bizarrely, Jin Ramen has a Joan Miro edition, and this made no sense to me until I
noticed the Miroesque zigzags, wiggly lines and goofy shapes floating on its bright yellow
packaging .
The objective is not to present convincing facsimiles of great paintings, but merely to
pique interest for further investigation. It's similar to a street being named after a writer,
painter, composer or scientist, as happens quite routinely in Paris, for example, but almost
never seen in America, a country with a long, aggressive streak of anti-intellectualism.
We're no longer talking about joe sixpacks sneering at pretentious bullshit, however. Thanks
to Howard Stern, Jerry Springer, Rush Limbaugh, Honey Boo Boo, gangsta rap and antifa, etc.,
there is now a pandemic of cocksure loutishness, with frequent eruptions into violent
barbarism. Ironically, the most militant driver of American anti-intellectualism is the
academy, for nowhere else has thinking ceased more completely.
If we're in a revolution, it's one of enlightened barbarism, or woke savagery, carefully
engineered down the decades. Yo massas enjoy the spectacle of y'all clawing at each other.
At Unz, there is a recent article by the Nation of Islam Research Group, "How Farrakhan
Solved the Crime and Drug Problem And How the Jews Attacked
Him ." Whatever its flaws or biases, it is a fascinating expose of how Jews sabotaged an
effort of blacks to help themselves. Immediately, I thought of the Jewish campaign against
Craig Nelse
n, who, against all odds, is desperately trying to save the most troubled, and even suicidal,
white youths.
Ordinary people don't have any extraordinary vision, yet they shape the nation with their
votes. They see the world with a jumble of inane emotional thought. The arts, sciences and
philosophy mean nothing to them. Their thoughts are adrift in emotional nonsense, like our
nation.
"... He pointed out that knocking over a statue will not "close the wealth gap," "give a kid whose parent's can't afford a college money to go to college," "close the labor gap between what white workers are paid and what black workers are paid" or "take people off welfare or food stamps." ..."
"... Johnson said that whites who seek to "assuage guilt by doing things that make them feel good" would be much more reluctant to support payments for blacks. ..."
"... Referring to actions such as "changing names, toppling statues, [and] firing professors because they said all lives matter," Johnson explained that "it just shows to me that white America is continually ... incapable of recognizing that black people have their own ideas and thought about what's in their best interests." ..."
"... "Give us the belief that you respect our opinion. You go out and do something and destroy something, fire somebody because you think it hurts us. Why don't you ask us first if it hurts us before you go and say 'Oh, I gotta do something for the negroes to make them feel better.' Well ask us if we want you to do that to make us feel better," he said. ..."
"... Johnson likened white people's actions attempting to make black people "feel good" to "rearranging the deck chairs on a racial Titanic. It absolutely means nothing," he said. ..."
BET founder Robert Johnson during a Wednesday interview with Fox News
described people toppling statues as "borderline anarchists" and pushed back against the idea
that black people support such behavior, suggesting instead that they "laugh" at those who
knock down the statues.
"You know black people, in my opinion, black people laugh at white people who do this, the
same way we laugh at white people who say we got to take off the TV shows," he said
mentioning the "Dukes of Hazard," a decades-old television program that has come under fire
for featuring a car emblazoned with a Confederate flag graphic.
He pointed out that knocking over a statue will not "close the wealth gap," "give a kid
whose parent's can't afford a college money to go to college," "close the labor gap between
what white workers are paid and what black workers are paid" or "take people off welfare or
food stamps."
Johnson said that whites who seek to "assuage guilt by doing things that make them feel
good" would be much more reluctant to support payments for blacks.
Referring to actions such as "changing names, toppling statues, [and] firing professors
because they said all lives matter," Johnson explained that "it just shows to me that white
America is continually ... incapable of recognizing that black people have their own ideas and
thought about what's in their best interests."
He suggested that black people should be consulted before people take actions like tearing
down statues or firing someone for a comment they have made.
"Give us the belief that you respect our opinion. You go out and do something and destroy
something, fire somebody because you think it hurts us. Why don't you ask us first if it
hurts us before you go and say 'Oh, I gotta do something for the negroes to make them feel
better.' Well ask us if we want you to do that to make us feel better," he said.
Johnson likened white people's actions attempting to make black people "feel good" to
"rearranging the deck chairs on a racial Titanic. It absolutely means nothing," he said.
Johnson's comments come as debates rage across the country in the aftermath of the death of
George Floyd -- in some cases protestors have defaced and toppled statues. President Trump has
come out against changing the names of military installations named after Confederate
leaders.
Another is the continuation of the CHOP or CHAZ in Seattle, which, I gather, will be ended
fairly soon one way or another. Initially sort of interesting, the area has been hit with
shootings over the last four nights, with one over the weekend killing 19-year old Lorenzo
Anderson.
These are apparently not the result of outside white boogaloo racists attacking them but
coming from inside this area.
There so far has been zero investigation of or effort to find Anderson's murderer and arrest
him. The only report I have seen is that Anderson was advocating people not to set off
fireworks due to a possible fire hazard. This appears to have what got him killed, although so
far there is little solid information. But, sorry, this experiment should not end and not be
repeated anywhere else.
"... It's because the Democrats think that kowtowing to BLM will give them the winning edge in the November balloting. That's what it's all about. That's why they draped themselves in Kente cloth and knelt for the cameras. They think their black constituents are too stupid to see through their groveling fakery. They think that blacks will forget that Joe Biden pushed through legislation "which eliminated parole for federal prisoners and limited the amount of time sentences could be reduced for good behavior." ..."
"... The stupidity of the Dems was shown this week when they agreed to three Biden/Trump debates. They should leave him in his basement and hope for the best. They feature political ads where Biden slurs his speech! These are professionals, so it tells me they spent all day and did 40 takes and this was the best he could do. The election will be great comedy, or perhaps ..."
"... Clinton is the best evidence that certain people agree to be blackmailed in exchange for power, as Andrew Anglin wrote this week. ..."
"This is not a momentary civil disturbance. This is a serious, and highly organized
political movement It is deep and profound and has vast political ambitions. It is insidious,
it will grow. It's goal is to end liberal democracy and challenge western civilization
itself. This is an ideological movement Even now, many of us pretend this is about police
brutality. We think we can fix it by regulating chokeholds or spending more on de-escalation
training. We're too literal and good-hearted to understand what's happening. But we have no
idea what we are up against. ..These are not protests. This is a totalitarian political
movement and someone needs to save the country from it." Tucker
Carlson
Tucker Carlson is right, the protests and riots are not a momentary civil disturbance. They
are an attack the Constitutional Republic itself, the heart and soul of American democracy. The
Black Lives Matter protests are just the tip of the spear, they are an expression of public
outrage that is guaranteed under the first amendment. But don't be deceived, there's more here
than meets the eye. BLM is funded by foundations that seek to overthrow our present form of
government and install an authoritarian regime guided by technocrats, oligarchs and
corporatists all of who believe that Chinese-type despotism is far-more compatible with
capitalism than "inefficient" democracy. The chaos in the streets is merely the beginning of an
excruciating transition from one system to another. This is an excerpt from an article by F.
William Engdahl at Global Research:
"By 2016, Black Lives Matter had established itself as a well-organized network .. That
year the Ford Foundation and Borealis Philanthropy announced the formation of the Black-Led
Movement Fund (BLMF), "a six-year pooled donor campaign aimed at raising $100 million for the
Movement for Black Lives coalition" in which BLM was a central part. By then Soros
foundations had already given some $33 million in
grants to the Black Lives Matter movement .. ..
The BLMF identified itself as being created by top foundations including in addition to
the Ford Foundation, the Kellogg Foundation and the Soros Open Society Foundations." (
"America's Own Color
Revolution ", Global Research)
$100 million is alot of money. How has that funding helped BLM expand its presence in
politics and social media? How many activists and paid employees operate within the network
disseminating information, building new chapters, hosting community outreach programs, and
fine-tuning an emergency notification system that allows them to put tens of thousands of
activists on the streets in cities across the country at a moment's notice? Isn't that what
we've seen for the last three weeks, throngs of angry protestors swarming in more than 400
cities across America all at the beck-and-call of a shadowy group whose political intentions
are still not clear?
And what about the rioting, looting and arson that broke out in numerous cities following
the protests? Was that part of the script too? Why haven't BLM leaders condemned the
destruction of private property or offered a public apology for the downtown areas that have
been turned into wastelands? In my own hometown of Seattle, the downtown corridor– which
once featured Nordstrom, Pottery Barn and other upscale retail shops– is now a
checkerboard of broken glass, plywood covers and empty streets all covered in a thick layer of
garish spray-paint. The protest leaders said they wanted to draw attention to racial injustice
and police brutality. Okay, but how does looting Nordstrom help to achieve that goal?
And what role have the Democrats played in protest movement?
They've been overwhelmingly supportive, that's for sure. In fact, I can't think of even one
Democrat who's mentioned the violence, the looting or the toppling of statues. Why is that?
It's because the Democrats think that kowtowing to BLM will give them the winning edge in
the November balloting. That's what it's all about. That's why they draped themselves in Kente
cloth and knelt for the cameras. They think their black constituents are too stupid to see
through their groveling fakery. They think that blacks will forget that Joe Biden pushed
through legislation "which eliminated parole for federal prisoners and limited the amount of
time sentences could be reduced for good behavior."
According to the Black Agenda
Repor t: "Biden and (South Carolina's Strom) Thurmond joined hands to push 1986 and 1988
drug enforcement legislation that created the nefarious sentencing disparity between crack and
powder cocaine as well as other draconian measures that implicate him as one of the initiators
of what became mass incarceration. " Biden also spearheaded "the attacks on Anita Hill when she
came forward to testify against the supreme court nominee Clarence Thomas". All told, Biden's
record on race is much worse than Trump's despite the media's pathetic attempts to portray
Trump as Adolph Hitler. It's just more bunkum from the dissembling media.
Bottom line: The Democrats think they can ride racial division and social unrest all the way
to the White House. That's what they are betting on.
So, yes, the Dems are exploiting the protests for political advantage, but it goes much
deeper than that. After all, we know from evidence that was uncovered during the Russiagate
investigation, that DNC leaders are intimately linked to the Intel agencies, law enforcement
(FBI), and the elite media. So it's not too much of a stretch to assume that these deep state
agents and assets work together to shape the narrative that they think gives them the best
chance of regaining power. Because, that's what this is really all about, power. Just as
Russiagate was about power (removing the president using disinformation, spies, surveillance
and other skulduggery.), and just as the Covid-19 fiasco was essentially about power
(collapsing the economy while imposing medical martial law on the population.), so too, the BLM
protest movement is also about power, the power to inflict massive damage on the country's main
urban centers with the intention of destabilizing the government, restructuring the economy and
paving the way for a Democratic victory in November. It's all about power, real, unalloyed
political muscle.
Surprisingly, one of the best critiques of what is currently transpiring was written by
Niles Niemuth at the World Socialist Web Site. Here's what he said about the widespread
toppling of statues:
"The attacks on the monuments were pioneered by the increasingly frenzied attempt by the
Democratic Party and the New York Times to racialize American history, to create a
narrative in which the history of mankind is reduced to the history of racial struggle. This
campaign has produced a pollution of democratic consciousness, which meshes entirely with the
reactionary political interests driving it.
It is worth noting that the one institution seemingly immune from this purge is the
Democratic Party, which served as the political wing of the Confederacy and, subsequently,
the KKK.
This filthy historical legacy is matched only by the Democratic Party's contemporary
record in supporting wars that, as a matter of fact, primarily targeted nonwhites. Democrats
supported the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan and under Obama destroyed Libya and Syria. The
New York Times was a leading champion and propagandist for all of these war." (
"Hands
off the monuments to Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln and Grant!, WSWS)
What the author is referring to is The 1619 Project, which is a racialized version of
American history that was published by the Times on August 19, 2019. The deliberately-distorted
version of history was cobbled together in anticipation of increasing social unrest and racial
antagonism. The rioting, looting and vast destruction of America's urban core can all be traced
back to a document that postulates that the country was founded on racial hatred and
exploitation. In other words, The 1619 Project provides the perfect ideological justification
for the chaos and violence that has torn the country apart for the last three weeks. This is an
excerpt from an article at the World Socialist Web Site:
"The essays featured in the magazine are organized around the central premise that all of
American history is rooted in race hatred -- specifically, the uncontrollable hatred of
"black people" by "white people." Hannah-Jones writes in the series' introduction:
"Anti-black racism runs in the very DNA of this country. "
This is a false and dangerous conception. DNA is a chemical molecule that contains the
genetic code of living organisms and determines their physical characteristics and
development . Hannah-Jones's reference to DNA is part of a growing tendency to derive
racial antagonisms from innate biological processes .where does this racism come from? It
is embedded, claims Hannah-Jones, in the historical DNA of American "white people." Thus, it
must persist independently of any change in political or economic conditions .
. No doubt, the authors of The Project 1619 essays would deny that they are predicting
race war, let alone justifying fascism. But ideas have a logic; and authors bear
responsibility for the political conclusions and consequences of their false and misguided
arguments." ("The New York Times's 1619
Project: A racialist falsification of American and world history", World Socialist Web
Site)
Keep in mind, this essay in the WSWS was written a full year before BLM protests broke out
across the country. Was Hannah-Jones enlisted to create a document that would provide the dry
tinder for the massive and coordinated demonstrations that have left the country stunned and
divided?
Probably, after all, (as noted above) the author's theory is that one race is genetically
programed to exploit the other. ( "Anti-black racism runs in the very DNA of this country. ")
Well, if we assume that whites are genetically and irreversibly "racist", then we must also
assume that the country that these whites founded is racist and evil. Thus, the only logical
remedy for this situation, is to crush the white segment of the population, destroy their
symbols, icons, and history, and replace the system of government with one that better reflects
the values of the emerging non-Caucasian majority. Simply put, The Project 1619 creates the
rationale for sustained civil unrest, deepening political polarization and violent
revolution.
The 1619 Project is a calculated provocation meant to exacerbate racial animosities and pave
the way to open conflagration. And it has succeeded beyond anyone's wildest imagination. The
nation is split into warring camps while Washington has devolved into fratricidal warfare. Was
that the objective, to destabilize the country in preparation for the dissolution of the
current system followed by a fundamental restructuring of the government consistent with the
identity politics lauded by the Democrats?
The Democrats, the Intel agencies and the media are all in bed together fomenting unrest
with the intention of decimating the economy, crushing the emerging opposition and imposing
their despotic one-party system on all of us. Here's a clip from a piece by Paul Craig Roberts
that sums up the role of the New York Times in inciting race-based violence:
"The New York Times editorial board covers up the known indisputable truth with their
anti-white "1619 project," an indoctrination program to inculcate hatred of white people in
blacks and guilt in white people.
Why does the New York Times lie, brainwash blacks into hatred of whites, and attempt to
brainwash whites into guilt for the creation of a New World labor force four centuries ago?
Why do Americans tolerate the New York Times fomenting of racial hatred in a multicultural
society?
The New York Times is a vile organization. The New York Times attempts to discredit the
President of the United States and did all it could to frame him on false charges. The New
York Times painted General Flynn, who honorably served the US, as a Russian agent and enabled
General Flynn's frame-up on false and now dropped charges. The New York Times spews hatred of
white people. And now the New York Times accuses the American military of celebrating white
supremacism.
Does America have a worse enemy than the New York Times? The New York Times is clearly and
intentionally making a multicultural America impossible . By threatening white people with
the prospect of hate-driven racial violence, the New York Times editorial board is fomenting
the rise of white supremacy." (
"The New York Times Editorial Board Is a Threat to Multicultural America ", The Unz
Review)
The editors of the Times don't hate whites, they are merely attacking the growing number of
disillusioned white working people who have left the Democratic party in frustration due to
their globalist policies regarding trade, immigration, offshoring, outsourcing and the
relentless hollowing out of the nation's industrial core . The Dems have abandoned these people
altogether and –now that they realize they will never be able to lure them back into
their camp– they've decided to wage a full-blown, scorched-earth, take-no-prisoners war
on them. They've decided to crush them mercilessly and fill their ranks with multi-ethnic,
bi-racial groups that will work for pennies on the dollar. (which will keep the Dems corporate
supporters happy.) So, no, the Times does not hate white people. What they hate is the growing
populist movement that derailed Hillary Clinton and put anti-globalist Trump in the White
House. That's the real target of this operation, the disillusioned throng of working people who
have washed their hands of the Democrats for good. Here's more background from Paul Craig
Roberts:
"On August 12 Dean Baquet, executive editor of the New York Times, met with the Times'
employees to refocus the Times' attack on Trump . The Times, Baquet said, is shifting from
Trump-Russia to Trump's racism. The Times will spend the run-up to the 2020 presidential
election building the Trump-is-a-racist narrative. Of course, if Trump is a racist it means
that the people who elected him are also racists. Indeed, in Baquet's view, Americans have
always been racist. To establish this narrative, the New York Times has launched the "1619
Project," the purpose of which is "to reframe the country's history."
According to the Washington Examiner, "The basic thrust of the 1619 Project is that
everything in American history is explained by slavery and race. The message is woven
throughout the first publication of the project, an entire edition of the Times magazine. It
begins with an overview of race in America -- 'Our democracy's founding ideals were false
when they were written. Black Americans have fought to make them true.'
The premise that America originated as a racist slave state is to be woven into all
sections of the Times -- news, business, sports, travel, the entire newspaper. The project
intends to take the "reframing" of the United States into the schools where white Americans
are to be taught that they are racist descendants of slave holders. A participant in this
brainwashing of whites, which will make whites guilty and defenseless, says "this project
takes wing when young people are able to read this and understand the way that slavery has
shaped their country's history." In other words, the New York Times intends to make slavery
the ONLY explanation of America.
At the meeting of the executive editor of the New York Times with the Times' employees to
refocus the Times' attack on President Trump, Baquet said: "Race in the next year is going to
be a huge part of the American story." (
"Is White Genocide Possible? ", The Unz Review)
Repeat: "Race in the next year is going to be a huge part of the American story." Either
Baquet has a crystal ball or he had a pretty good idea of the way in which the 1619 Project was
going to be used . I suspect it was the latter.
For the last 3 and a half years, Democrats and the media have ridiculed anyone who opposes
their globalist policies as racist, fascist, misogynist, homophobic, Bible-thumping,
gun-toting, flag-waving, Nascar boosting, white nationalist "deplorables". Now they have
decided to intensify the assault on mainly white working people by preemptively destroying the
economy, destabilizing the country, and spreading terror far and wide. It's another vicious
psy-ops campaign designed to thoroughly demoralize and humiliate the enemy who just happen to
be the American people. Here's more form the WSWS:
" It is no coincidence that the promotion of this racial narrative of American history by
the Times, the mouthpiece of the Democratic Party and the privileged upper-middle-class
layers it represents, comes amid the growth of class struggle in the US and around the
world.
The 1619 Project is one component of a deliberate effort to inject racial politics into
the heart of the 2020 elections and foment divisions among the working class. The Democrats
think it will be beneficial to shift their focus for the time being from the reactionary,
militarist anti-Russia campaign to equally reactionary racial politics." (" The New York
Times's 1619 Project: A racialist falsification of American and world history " WSWS)
Can you see how the protests are being used to promote the political objectives of elites
operating behind the mask of "impartial" reporting? The scheming NY Times has replaced the
enlightenment principles articulated in our founding documents with a sordid tale of racial
hatred and oppression. The editors seek to eliminate everything we believe as Americans so they
can brainwash us into believing that we are evil people deserving of humiliation, repudiation
and punishment. Here's more from the same article:
"In the months preceding these events, the New York Times, speaking for dominant sections
of the Democratic political establishment, launched an effort to discredit both the American
Revolution and the Civil War. In the New York Times' 1619 Project, the American Revolution
was presented as a war to defend slavery, and Abraham Lincoln was cast as a garden variety
racist
The attacks on the monuments to these men were pioneered by the increasingly frenzied
attempt by the Democratic Party and the New York Times to racialize American history, to
create a narrative in which the history of mankind is reduced to the history of racial
struggle . This campaign has produced a pollution of democratic consciousness, which meshes
entirely with the reactionary political interests driving it." (" The New York Times's 1619
Project: A racialist falsification of American and world history" , WSWS)
Ideas have consequences, and the incendiary version of events disseminated by the Times has
added fuel to a fire that's spread from one coast to the other. Given the damage that has been
done to cities across the country, it would be nice to know how Dean Baquet knew that "race was
going to play a huge part" in upcoming events? It's all very suspicious. Here's more:
" Given the 1619 Project's black nationalist narrative, it may appear surprising that
nowhere in the issue do the names Malcolm X or Black Panthers appear. Unlike the black
nationalists of the 1960s, Hannah-Jones does not condemn American imperialism. She boasts
that "we [i.e. African-Americans] are the most likely of all racial groups to serve in the
United States military," and celebrates the fact that "we" have fought "in every war this
nation has waged." Hannah-Jones does not note this fact in a manner that is at all critical.
She does not condemn the creation of a "volunteer" army whose recruiters prey on
poverty-stricken minority youth. There is no indication that Hannah-Jones opposes the "War on
Terror" and the brutal interventions in Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Somalia and Syria -- all
supported by the Times -- that have killed and made homeless upwards of 20 million people. On
this issue, Hannah-Jones is remarkably "color-blind." She is unaware of, or simply
indifferent to, the millions of "people of color" butchered and made refugees by the American
war machine in the Middle East, Central Asia and Africa." (" The New York Times's 1619
Project: A racialist falsification of American and world histor y", WSWS)
So, black nationalists like Malcolm X and the Black Panthers are excluded from the The 1619
Project's narrative, but the author boasts that blacks "are the most likely of all racial
groups to serve in the US military"?? How does that happen unless Hannah-Jones was coached by
Democrat leaders about who should and shouldn't be included in the text? None of this passes
the smell test. It all suggests that the storyline was shaped by people who had a specific goal
in mind. That isn't history, it's fiction written by people who have an ax to grind. The Times
even admitted as much in response to the blistering criticism by five of "the most widely read
and respected authorities on US history." The New York TimesMagazine editor in
chief Jake Silverstein rejected the historians' objections saying:
"The project was intended to address the marginalization of African-American history in
the telling of our national story and examine the legacy of slavery in contemporary American
life. We are not ourselves historians, it is true. We are journalists, trained to look at
current events and situations and ask the question: Why is this the way it is?"
WTF! "We are not ourselves historians"? That's the excuse?? Give me a break!
The truth is that there was never any attempt to provide an accurate account of events. From
the very onset, the goal was to create a storyline that fit the politics, the politics of
provocation, incitement, racial hatred, social unrest and violence. That's what the Times and
their allies wanted, and that's what they got.
The Deep State Axis: CIA, DNC, NYT
The three-way alliance between the CIA, the Elite Media, and the Democratic leadership has
clearly strengthened and grown since the failed Russiagate fiasco. All three parties were
likely involved in the maniacal hyping of the faux-Covid pandemic which paved the way for
Depression era unemployment, tens of thousands of bankrupt businesses and a sizable portion of
the US population thrust into destitution. Now, these deep state loyalists are promoting a
"falsified" race-based version of history that pits one group against the other while diverting
attention from the deliberate destruction of the economy and the further consolidation of
wealth in the hands of the 1 percent.
Behind the veil of the protest movement, the war on the American people is gaining pace.
Stopped reading the Times after the buildup to the Iraq War, when it was clear they were
lying. Everyone please stop reading the Times, and in particular stop referring to what they
are writing. Act like they don't exist. If enough do, they won't.
The stupidity of the Dems was shown this week when they agreed to three Biden/Trump debates.
They should leave him in his basement and hope for the best. They feature political ads where
Biden slurs his speech! These are professionals, so it tells me they spent all day and did 40
takes and this was the best he could do. The election will be great comedy, or perhaps
This is all planned. Biden will be forced to drop out and Bloomberg or even Clinton will
arise.
"Tucker Carlson is right, the protests and riots are not a momentary civil disturbance. They
are an attack the Constitutional Republic itself, the heart and soul of American democracy."
I am reminded of david horowitz and chrissy hitchens
And how they promoted Israeli interests after first pretending to be independent thinkers
to gain creed for the switch. Standard zionazi-gay psywar tactic.
The stupidity of the Dems was shown this week when they agreed to three Biden/Trump
debates.
This is all planned. Biden will be forced to drop out and Bloomberg or even Clinton will
arise.
Stupid and planned?
Clinton is the best evidence that certain people agree to be blackmailed in exchange for
power, as Andrew Anglin wrote this week. Why should DNC care if Trump is 're-elected'? And if
they don't care, who not take a stab at installing an intersectional DNC pinnacle fraudster
via the griftiest, most insulting, infuriating way possible? They can't lose.
Chicago officials report the city's highest number of shootings in a single weekend this
year. From Friday evening to Monday morning, 102 people were shot, 14 of whom have died, five
of those killed were minors.
Several teenagers died in alleys as a result of the rampant weekend violence. A toddler was
killed on Saturday evening when he was struck in the back by a bullet as someone fired into his
father's car in Austin , on the West Side of the city.
Two teenage boys were sitting outside on a porch on Saturday evening when once noticed a red
laser pointed at him and then gun shots began to ring out. Both were taken to Mount Sinai
hospital and are in good condition.
Chicago Police Superintendent David Brown said Sunday that violent offenders should be kept
in jail for longer because the home monitoring system is not working .
"Tears are a natural reaction to these tragic stories of violence," he said.
"But we need to do more than just cry. ... For God's sake, help Chicago cops protect our
precious children and our families."
Brown also said that he and Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot had a conversation over the weekend
and that they're "on the same page," about the city's violence and the absolute need for
strategic change in approaching the issue.
"Cops are working hard. We're just chasing our tails," Brown said.
"It's shocking that no one monitors people on home monitor."
The Father's Day weekend numbers are up considerably from last weekend, when 31 people
across the city were shot, and two killed.
Though, two weekends ago, Chicago experienced its deadliest weekend in modern history, as 24
people were killed and 61 others shot.
Failure
to blame all problems suffered by minorities on racism – failure to denounce loudly
and angrily American bourgeois society's allegedly inherent bigotry, greed, and rapaciousness
– failure to acknowledge that America today is a brutal and cruel place for all but the
elite, and hellish especially for blacks, women, and gay, bi, and transgender people – is
frequently interpreted as sympathy for dark-ages-like superstition and prejudices.
I have no doubt that some progressives at times overstate the role of race in generating
disparities between blacks and whites. (I also have no doubt that some progressives at times
understate the role of race. Social science is hard.) But it is difficult to see how this is
relevant to the demands of the people protesting the murder of George Floyd, unless you can show
that their demands are unwise or unjust.
likbez , June 23, 2020 2:14 am
> I have no doubt that some progressives at times overstate the role of race in
generating disparities between blacks and whites
Jay Gould formulated it much better: "I can hire one half of the working class to kill the
other half."
This is an official policy of Democratic Party. It is called "Identity Wedge" and designed
to suppress trade unions and the struggle for better jobs and the standard of living of the
lower 80% of population. Partially invented by OSS-connected individuals from Frankfurt School
as an alternative interpretation of Marxism.
The role of LGBT is similar. Like blacks, they are expendable pawns in a bigger game
directed against trade unions and working class as a whole. "Divide and conquer" by financial
oligarchy in its most evil form.
It's all about money. If everyone were on the same economic level the police would
treat everyone the same. I won't offer any arguments to buttress that -- it's just common
sense -- it's all who they identify with. Of course it helps slip into this vision if you
were raised in the most color blind part of America, the Bronx, NY -- where if
everybody's different, so nobody's different.
A labor market that is 94% labor union free is by definition, ipso facto, a
socially/economically/politically morbidly pathological situation. When I explained the
American labor market to my late brother John he came back with: "Martin Luther King got
his people on the up escalator just in time for it to start going down for everybody."
And we were not even talking about race.
Bert Schlitz , June 22, 2020 1:17 am
It's spouting dialectical nonsense. Like they are not "virtue signaling" themselves. BLM is
really a bourgeois movement. Centrist anger blowing up. It fails because it refuses to see
reality. More productive prime age whites are killed by cops than blacks, despite 18-54 range
racial % being more tighter than previous generations. This hurts BLM. It also hurts elites
that whites 18-54 80%+ want police reform due to the body counts they are taking.
"It's all about money. If everyone were on the same economic level the police would treat
everyone the same. I won't offer any arguments to buttress that -- it's just common sense --
it's all who they identify with."
divideand conquer 1. To gain or maintain power by generating tension among others, especially those less powerful,
so that they cannot unite in opposition.
Notable quotes:
"... In its most general form, identity politics involves (i) a claim that a particular group is not being treated fairly and (ii) a claim that members of that group should place political priority on the demand for fairer treatment. But "fairer" can mean lots of different things. I'm trying to think about this using contrasts between the set of terms in the post title. A lot of this is unoriginal, but I'm hoping I can say something new. ..."
"... The second problem is that neoliberals on right and left sometimes use identity as a shield to protect neoliberal policies. As one commentator has argued, "Without the bedrock of class politics, identity politics has become an agenda of inclusionary neoliberalism in which individuals can be accommodated but addressing structural inequalities cannot." What this means is that some neoliberals hold high the banner of inclusiveness on gender and race and thus claim to be progressive reformers, but they then turn a blind eye to systemic changes in politics and the economy. ..."
"... Critics argue that this is "neoliberal identity politics," and it gives its proponents the space to perpetuate the policies of deregulation, privatization, liberalization, and austerity. ..."
"... If we assume that identity politics is, first and foremost, a dirty and shrewd political strategy developed by the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party ("soft neoliberals") many things became much more clear. Along with Neo-McCarthyism it represents a mechanism to compensate for the loss of their primary voting block: trade union members, who in 2016 "en mass" defected to Trump. ..."
I've been thinking about the various versions of and critiques of identity politics that are around at the moment.
In its most
general form, identity politics involves (i) a claim that a particular group is not being treated fairly and (ii) a claim that
members of that group should place political priority on the demand for fairer treatment. But "fairer" can mean lots of different
things. I'm trying to think about this using contrasts between the set of terms in the post title. A lot of this is unoriginal,
but I'm hoping I can say something new.
You missed one important line of critique -- identity politics as a dirty political strategy of soft neoliberals.
To be sure, race, gender, culture, and other aspects of social life have always been important to politics. But neoliberalism's
radical individualism has increasingly raised two interlocking problems. First, when taken to an extreme, social fracturing into
identity groups can be used to divide people and prevent the creation of a shared civic identity. Self-government requires uniting
through our commonalities and aspiring to achieve a shared future.
When individuals fall back onto clans, tribes, and us-versus-them identities, the political community gets fragmented. It becomes
harder for people to see each other as part of that same shared future.
Demagogues [more correctly neoliberals -- likbez] rely on this fracturing to inflame racial, nationalist, and religious antagonism,
which only further fuels the divisions within society. Neoliberalism's war on "society," by pushing toward the privatization and
marketization of everything, thus indirectly facilitates a retreat into tribalism that further undermines the preconditions for
a free and democratic society.
The second problem is that neoliberals on right and left sometimes use identity as a shield to protect neoliberal policies.
As one commentator has argued, "Without the bedrock of class politics, identity politics has become an agenda of inclusionary
neoliberalism in which individuals can be accommodated but addressing structural inequalities cannot." What this means is that
some neoliberals hold high the banner of inclusiveness on gender and race and thus claim to be progressive reformers, but they
then turn a blind eye to systemic changes in politics and the economy.
Critics argue that this is "neoliberal identity politics," and it gives its proponents the space to perpetuate the policies
of deregulation, privatization, liberalization, and austerity.
Of course, the result is to leave in place political and economic structures that harm the very groups that inclusionary neoliberals
claim to support. The foreign policy adventures of the neoconservatives and liberal internationalists haven't fared much better
than economic policy or cultural politics. The U.S. and its coalition partners have been bogged down in the war in Afghanistan
for 18 years and counting. Neither Afghanistan nor Iraq is a liberal democracy, nor did the attempt to establish democracy in
Iraq lead to a domino effect that swept the Middle East and reformed its governments for the better. Instead, power in Iraq has
shifted from American occupiers to sectarian militias, to the Iraqi government, to Islamic State terrorists, and back to the Iraqi
government -- and more than 100,000 Iraqis are dead.
Or take the liberal internationalist 2011 intervention in Libya. The result was not a peaceful transition to stable democracy
but instead civil war and instability, with thousands dead as the country splintered and portions were overrun by terrorist groups.
On the grounds of democracy promotion, it is hard to say these interventions were a success. And for those motivated to expand
human rights around the world, it is hard to justify these wars as humanitarian victories -- on the civilian death count alone.
Indeed, the central anchoring assumptions of the American foreign policy establishment have been proven wrong. Foreign policymakers
largely assumed that all good things would go together -- democracy, markets, and human rights -- and so they thought opening
China to trade would inexorably lead to it becoming a liberal democracy. They were wrong. They thought Russia would become liberal
through swift democratization and privatization. They were wrong.
They thought globalization was inevitable and that ever-expanding trade liberalization was desirable even if the political
system never corrected for trade's winners and losers. They were wrong. These aren't minor mistakes. And to be clear, Donald Trump
had nothing to do with them. All of these failures were evident prior to the 2016 election.
If we assume that identity politics is, first and foremost, a dirty and shrewd political strategy developed by the Clinton wing
of the Democratic Party ("soft neoliberals") many things became much more clear. Along with Neo-McCarthyism it represents a mechanism to compensate for the loss of their primary voting block: trade union members,
who in 2016 "en mass" defected to Trump.
Initially Clinton calculation was that trade union voters has nowhere to go anyways, and it was correct for first decade or so
of his betrayal. But gradually trade union members and lower middle class started to leave Dems in droves (Demexit, compare with
Brexit) and that where identity politics was invented to compensate for this loss.
So in addition to issues that you mention we also need to view the role of identity politics as the political strategy of the
"soft neoliberals " directed at discrediting and the suppression of nationalism.
The resurgence of nationalism is the inevitable byproduct of the dominance of neoliberalism, resurgence which I think is capable
to bury neoliberalism as it lost popular support (which now is limited to financial oligarchy and high income professional groups,
such as we can find in corporate and military brass, (shrinking) IT sector, upper strata of academy, upper strata of medical professionals,
etc)
That means that the structure of the current system isn't just flawed which imply that most problems are relatively minor and
can be fixed by making some tweaks. It is unfixable, because the "Identity wars" reflect a deep moral contradictions within neoliberal
ideology. And they can't be solved within this framework.
Actually both nationalists and BLM are noted fighters with icons of the past. Especially
during "color revolutions"
They want their own version of history and can't accept any alternatives. That confirm the
saying that that history is the future overturned into the past.
Notable quotes:
"... And all over Britain, statues of forgotten politicians, merchants, generals, and admirals (and now the blue plaques that commemorate them) are being investigated, to see if they in some way celebrate a wicked past. Even the looming sculpture of Winston Churchill in Parliament Square has been first scrawled on by protestors (who also defaced a nearby monument to Abraham Lincoln) and then hidden in a box by Greater London's feeble authorities ..."
"... This is a good indication of the state of modern Britain, teetering on the edge of a cultural revolution so severe that its greatest modern figure has lost his power as a unifying force and memory ..."
"... IdPol is tolerated and even promoted because it does not make any substantive changes. It does not affect economic relations, much less take money out of rich people's pockets. ..."
Pulling statues down or calling for the removal of "problematic" portraits isn't motivated
by a desire to forget the past, Michel Foucault argued. It is a way of returning to it and
reigniting its conflicts . Blake Smith
in The Washington Examiner : "
What we are in the habit of calling 'identity politics,' and particularly political
movements based on (somewhat contradictory) appeals to racial solidarity and anti-racism,
depend on a 'certain way of making historical knowledge work within political struggle.' So
argued Foucault in Society Must Be Defended , a 1976 book based on a lecture series
about 'political historicism.'
Many on the American Right hold Foucault, along with his French postmodernist
contemporaries, partly responsible for the emergence of identity politics. It would be more
accurate to say that Foucault was one of the first, and sharpest, analysts of the way
identity-based political movements appeal to history and ignite what he called 'race war.' . .
.
Hiding their crimes with myths, the oppressors have made the oppressed forget who they are
and what they have suffered. But the signs of that historical violence are all around us -- in
statues, place names, and everyday language. Purging the culture of these signs is not so much
an ethical demand that the past conform to present values as it is a way of plunging the
present back into past conflicts, which the oppressed now stand a chance of winning."
Peter Hitchens makes a similar point in a short piece on iconoclasm in England in First Things :
"It is the Rhodes statue that is controversial. But this is no longer really about Rhodes.
In the last few days it has been under police guard. Not long ago a large demonstration,
wholly ignoring supposed rules about avoiding viral infection, gathered beneath it while
shouting about decolonization, as if Britain still had an empire. Perhaps they wish it was
so. People need enemies, and dismantled empires are nothing like as good for this purpose as
living, breathing ones . . .
And all over Britain, statues of forgotten politicians, merchants, generals, and
admirals (and now the blue plaques that commemorate them) are being investigated, to see if
they in some way celebrate a wicked past. Even the looming sculpture of Winston Churchill in
Parliament Square has been first scrawled on by protestors (who also defaced a nearby monument
to Abraham Lincoln) and then hidden in a box by Greater London's feeble authorities .
This is a good indication of the state of modern Britain, teetering on the edge of a
cultural revolution so severe that its greatest modern figure has lost his power as a unifying
force and memory ."
I don't know about France, but here it seems to be about normalizing a new process. Gangs
of thugs are being allowed and even encouraged to go into certain neighborhoods to
intimidate and attack those who live there, to break, burn, and deface other people's
property with impunity.
It combines Orwell's "two minute hate" with the kind of behavior we condemned when it
was done by the Ku Klux Klan.
If renaming parks and boulevards and appointing blue ribbon commissions were enough to fix
anything, you'd think that everything would be fixed by now.
IdPol is tolerated and even promoted because it does not make any substantive
changes. It does not affect economic relations, much less take money out of rich people's
pockets.
So many movements get sidetracked by purely symbolic actions on the one hand - "Let's
rename every avenue in Harlem, and 125th Street, too!" (the black New York city councilman
behind those resolutions was a joke in the local black activist community) - and corporate
and elite funding whitewashed through foundations and NGO's on the other. In the 70's,
affirmative action was used to build up and buy off the black middle class while working
class jobs for blacks were gradually disappearing, and today it's Diversity, Inc. jobs.
The Establishment is very good at buying off some, co-opting others, assassinating a
few, and marginalizing the rest, or at least waiting for them to get tired of kicking
against the pricks. Judging from its track record at surviving this long, the Establishment
also is very good at figuring out who gets which treatment.
Its how the activists of the Civil Rights Movement, many of whom once did genuinely
brave, even heroic things, were gradually co-opted into corrupt operators of political
machines. It's how fire-eating campus radicals were neutered into tenure-seekers and meek
supporters of "changing the system from within".
For that matter, the history of the Tea Party is also instructive.
Hey, this is America. Not Europe. In Europe at least it's about "ideas". In America it's
about------------MONEY!! And celebrity.
Only in America can a race hustler/shakedown artist (and part time FBI informant) like
Al Sharpton get a permanent gig on a major so-called "news network?" Only in America can a
real estate developer and "reality TV host" become president. Not that the office means
anything anymore (except to the Chattering Class) but, that's another story.
"Do Germans honor their ancestors who fought for the cause of the Nazis. No, they do not."
Where do you get "Nazis" from? Confederates weren't "Nazis".
Most of these statues are of Americans who saw more service in the US Army than the
Confederate one. Most weren't fighting to preserve slavery. The typical southern soldier
didn't even own any slaves. They were fighting an invasion, they did it bravely and
honorably. We're proud of them, and we built statues to their memories, in part as proxies
for the hundreds of thousands of southern soldiers and others who died during the worst war
in our history.
Every Christmas Eve, I light a candle on the grave of my grandmother's grandfather, who
fought for the Confederacy in the Battle of Port Hudson, and elsewhere. He owned no slaves.
He was fighting an invasion, as you say. I am glad that the South lost, because their cause
was unjust. But I honor the bravery of my ancestor.
What you do on Christmas Eve is your own business. That’s not the same as a monument
to stonewall Jackson erected in 1921 during the raise of the KKK or monuments erected in
the 50’s. Clearly lots of people who are southerners don’t like those statues,
particularly all those black people. They never liked them and wouldn’t have agreed
to erecting them if they had a say at the time of construction. Many of these statues are
now in majority black cities like the ones taken down in New Orleans. Those black people
are under no obligation to honor any confederate in the public spaces they occupy. From
what I’ve read, it sound like they always viewed it as a slap in the face.
"Race war" is a misnomer. Yes, there are plenty of black people in some of the mobs, but
regarding "iconoclasm", the videos of the monument vandals show mostly what look like rich,
overweight white kids from Scarsdale or the Upper West Side, probably using mommy's credit
card to fund their window-smashing, statue-toppling, and building-burning expeditions. The
toll of their destruction and violence is terrible, but I can't believe it's really that
hard to catch and imprison them.
Why are they still running amok? When will the authorities act to protect and defend the
people and property of their cities and states?
The people who are angry about the pulling down and desecration of Confederate statues are
the same people who cheered when statues of Lenin and other Soviet dignitaries were pulled
down and desecrated when the USSR fell or when statues of Saddam Hussein fell during the
Iraq War II. Hypocritical much??
"Earlier
today, police officers from the 75th Precinct responded to a call of a male shot in front of
334 Milford Street. When they arrived, they discovered a 35-year-old male with a gunshot wound
to the neck," the NYPD's Chief of Detectives Rodney Harrison tweeted , along with
video of the disturbing incident.
Earlier today, police officers from the 75th Precinct responded to a call of a male shot
in front of 334 Milford Street. When they arrived, they discovered a 35-year-old male with a
gunshot wound to the neck. pic.twitter.com/wkkzIiAdzu
-- Chief Rodney Harrison
(@NYPDDetectives) June 20,
2020
The footage shows a man wiping down the tire of his car when a passerby stops and fires a
shot into the back of his neck. The man washing his car falls, and the shooter proceeds to
continue his walk down the street. There is no known motive for the crime, and the killer is at
large.
It's not the only violent video coming out of the city to have received serious attention
online, as a clip of a seemingly random attack on an elderly woman has also gone viral.
The clip shows a young black man passing an older woman on the street when he turns and
pushes her. Her head narrowly misses a fire hydrant as she falls, and the attacker simply
continues his stroll down Third Avenue.
Rashid Brimmage, a 31-year-old sex offender, was identified by police as the man
in the video and was apprehended. He has been arrested over 100 times in the past.
The crimes are part of a larger trend in New York City, which has seen an increase in the
most violent crimes.
The crimes are part of a larger trend in New York City, which has seen an increase
in the most violent crimes.
Homicides for the month of May were up by a
whopping 79.1 percent from the same time last year. Shootings, meanwhile, increased over 60
percent. Auto theft and burglaries also went up.
The man who asked 'What's the Matter with Kansas?' now wonders what's the matter with
Democrats - The Washington Post
In 2004, Thomas Frank published "What's The Matter with Kansas," a book asking why so many
working-class and poor white Americans in the heartland had taken to voting for a party that in
both word and deed advanced policies of great value to the rich. In short, the question was:
Why were these folks Republicans when Republicans weren't with them?
Frank's book became a kind of cultural touchstone, or at least a shorthand reference for
what lots of political analysts, consultants and certainly Democratic politicians and their
staffers had talked out behind closed doors for years. "What's The Matter with Kansas" didn't
delve deeply into the white-identity politics, race-based sense of economic entitlement,
anxiety and resentment that seem to play such a prominent role in the 2016 campaign, but it
certainly gave a lot of people a lot to think about.
Now, Frank is out with a book called "Listen, Liberal" that seems about as confrontational
as that title sounds. This time, people on the other side of the political aisle -- Democrats
and self-described progressives -- face Frank's frank assessment.
Since the 1970s and even more markedly during President Bill Clinton's tenure in the
1990s, Democrats have played a central role in trade deals that sped up the departure of
manufacturing jobs from the United States and also in rolling back the social safety net.
Clinton proudly signed the biggest welfare reform package in decades, all based on the idea
that those on welfare, not that the program itself, was in dire need of reform.
Today, the share of people receiving cash welfare assistance has dropped precipitously, even
during the worst of the Great Recession. In other words, that's not because people's incomes
otherwise grew or they didn't need the help.
It's mostly because states have made it increasingly difficult to access cash assistance,
freeing state lawmakers to redirect the federal block grants dispatched to cover these benefits
to finance other state needs,
according to a 2015 analysis released by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities . In
2014, the report found, states spent more of their federal welfare block grants on these other
programs and costs -- often meaning they plugged various state budget gaps -- than they did
basic cash welfare assistance.
And those who are receiving cash aid are getting a lot less. After accounting for inflation,
cash welfare benefits slid 35 percent between 1990 and 2015 . And most year-to-year
increases in welfare benefits paid to families are so small it's hard to imagine the
mathematical basis on which they were set. For instance, in 2014 in South Carolina, a poor
family of three that met all program guidelines could receive up to $277 a month. In 2015, that
figure climbed all of $3 to $280.
That may sound like good news to those who want to shrink public budgets no matter the cost,
or philosophically object to the very existence of cash public assistance. But, in the past,
that did not include the bulk of Democrats, Frank argues. Democrats used to be the party that
defended the social safety net so that it might help those in need climb back toward
independence and solvency but also aggressively championed a wider array of policies protecting
American jobs, worker safety, wages and the like. That made unions a natural and central part
of Democratic coalition.
Democrats used to battle the primary drivers of economic inequality, Frank argues. Now
sometimes, they advance them.
In
a Q&A with In These Times' Tobita Chow published this week, Frank goes even further in
pinning the blame on Democrats who followed Clinton in the 1990s. Frank's is a critique that
certainly includes -- no, calls out -- the Obama administration, too. The Obama White House
would almost certainly counter that things like the recent reform in overtime pay rules and the
Affordable Care Act have been of great benefit to the middle and working classes as well as the
poor.
But Frank has some other complaints. Here's a sample from the worthwhile Q&A:
Q: The book is about how the Democratic Party turned its back on working people and now
pursues policies that actually increase inequality. What are the policies or ideological
commitments in the Democratic Party that make you think this?
A: The first piece of evidence is what's happened since the financial crisis. This is the
great story of our time. Inequality has actually gotten worse since then, which is a
remarkable thing. This is under a Democratic president who we were assured (or warned) was
the most liberal or radical president we would ever see. Yet inequality has gotten worse, and
the gains since the financial crisis, since the recovery began, have gone entirely to the top
10 percent of the income distribution.
This is not only because of those evil Republicans, but because Obama played it the way he
wanted to. Even when he had a majority in both houses of Congress and could choose whoever he
wanted to be in his administration, he consistently made policies that favored the top 10
percent over everybody else. He helped out Wall Street in an enormous way when they were
entirely at his mercy.
He could have done anything he wanted with them, in the way that Franklin Roosevelt did in
the '30s. But he chose not to....
There's so much interesting stuff in this Q&A, we are going to strongly suggest you give
it a read.
Just click here . Nina 1 5/25/2016 8:59 PM EDT [Edited]
Well, yes. The Democratic party and its representatives turned its back on working class
America and it was the bigger betrayal because working class America thought the Democrats
were better than that. Not too many people think income inequality just "happened" despite
the liberal government in power: there is no way it could have happened without the collusion
and cooperation of the government. The government, with big business, created this by
singular lack of policy to address it. And that is how you end up with Donald Trump. The
reasoning is, "How much worse could he be?"
"... Color Revolution is the term used to describe a series of remarkably effective CIA-led regime change operations using techniques developed by the RAND Corporation, "democracy" NGOs and other groups since the 1980's. They were used in crude form to bring down the Polish communist regime in the late 1980s. From there the techniques were refined and used, along with heavy bribes, to topple the Gorbachev regime in the Soviet Union. For anyone who has studied those models closely, it is clear that the protests against police violence led by amorphous organizations with names like Black Lives Matter or Antifa are more than purely spontaneous moral outrage. Hundreds of thousands of young Americans are being used as a battering ram to not only topple a US President, but in the process, the very structures of the US Constitutional order. ..."
"... F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine "New Eastern Outlook" where this article was originally published. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization. ..."
Color Revolution is the term used to describe a series of remarkably effective CIA-led
regime change operations using techniques developed by the RAND Corporation, "democracy" NGOs
and other groups since the 1980's. They were used in crude form to bring down the Polish
communist regime in the late 1980s. From there the techniques were refined and used, along with
heavy bribes, to topple the Gorbachev regime in the Soviet Union. For anyone who has studied
those models closely, it is clear that the protests against police violence led by amorphous
organizations with names like Black Lives Matter or Antifa are more than purely spontaneous
moral outrage. Hundreds of thousands of young Americans are being used as a battering ram to
not only topple a US President, but in the process, the very structures of the US
Constitutional order.
If we step back from the immediate issue of videos showing a white Minneapolis policeman
pressing his knee on the neck of a black man, George Floyd , and look at what has taken place
across the nation since then, it is clear that certain organizations or groups were
well-prepared to instrumentalize the horrific event for their own agenda.
The protests since May 25 have often begun peacefully only to be taken over by well-trained
violent actors. Two organizations have appeared regularly in connection with the violent
protests -- Black Lives Matter and Antifa (USA). Videos show well-equipped protesters dressed
uniformly in black and masked (not for coronavirus to be sure), vandalizing police cars,
burning police stations, smashing store windows with pipes or baseball bats. Use of Twitter and
other social media to coordinate "hit-and-run" swarming strikes of protest mobs is evident.
What has unfolded since the Minneapolis trigger event has been compared to the wave of
primarily black ghetto protest riots in 1968. I lived through those events in 1968 and what is
unfolding today is far different. It is better likened to the Yugoslav color revolution that
toppled Milosevic in 2000.
Gene Sharp: Template for Regime Overthrow
In the year 2000 the US State Department, aided by its National Endowment for Democracy
(NED) and select CIA operatives, began secretly training a group of Belgrade university
students led by a student group that was called Otpor! (Resistance!). The NED and its various
offshoots was created in the 1980's by CIA head Bill Casey as a covert CIA tool to overthrow
specific regimes around the world under the cover of a human rights NGO. In fact, they get
their money from Congress and from USAID.
In the Serb Otpor! destabilization of 2000, the NED and US Ambassador Richard Miles in
Belgrade selected and trained a group of several dozen students, led by Srđa Popović,
using the handbook, From Dictatorship to Democracy, translated to Serbian, of
the late Gene Sharp and his Albert Einstein Institution. In a post mortem on the Serb events,
the Washington Post wrote, "US-funded consultants played a crucial role behind the scenes in
virtually every facet of the anti-drive, running tracking polls, training thousands of
opposition activists and helping to organize a vitally important parallel vote count. US
taxpayers paid for 5,000 cans of spray paint
used by student activists to scrawl anti-Milošević graffiti on walls across
Serbia."
Trained squads of activists were deployed in protests to take over city blocks with the aid
of 'intelligence helmet' video screens that give them an instantaneous overview of their
environment. Bands of youth converging on targeted intersections in constant dialogue on cell
phones, would then overwhelm police. The US government spent some $41 million on the operation.
Student groups were secretly trained in the Sharp handbook techniques of staging protests that
mocked the authority of the ruling police, showing them to be clumsy and impotent against the
youthful protesters. Professionals from the CIA and US State Department guided them behind the
scenes.
The Color Revolution Otpor! model was refined and deployed in 2004 as the Ukraine Orange
Revolution with logo and color theme scarves, and in 2003 in Georgia as the Rose Revolution.
Later Secretary of State Hillary Clinton used the template to launch the Arab Spring. In all
cases the NED was involved
with other NGOs including the Soros Foundations.
After defeating Milosevic, Popovic went on to establish a global color revolution training
center, CANVAS, a kind of for-profit business consultancy for revolution, and was personally
present in New York working reportedly with Antifa during the Occupy Wall Street where also
Soros money was reported.
Antifa and BLM
The protests, riots, violent and non-violent actions sweeping across the United States since
May 25, including an assault on the gates of the White House, begin to make sense when we
understand the CIA's Color Revolution playbook.
The impact of the protests would not be possible were it not for a network of local and
state political officials inside the Democratic Party lending support to the protesters, even
to the point the Democrat Mayor of Seattle ordered police to abandon several blocks in the
heart of downtown to occupation by protesters.
In recent years major portions of the Democratic Party across the US have been quietly taken
over by what one could call radical left candidates. Often they win with active backing of
organizations such as Democratic Socialists of America or Freedom Road Socialist Organizations.
In the US House of Representatives the vocal quarter of new representatives around Alexandria
Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Rashida Tlaib and Minneapolis Representative Ilhan Omar are
all members or close to Democratic Socialists of America. Clearly without sympathetic
Democrat local officials in key cities, the street protests of organizations such as Black
Lives Matter and Antifa would not have such a dramatic impact.
To get a better grasp how serious the present protest movement is we should look at who has
been pouring millions into BLM. The Antifa is more difficult owing to its explicit anonymous
organization form. However, their online Handbook openly recommends that local Antifa "cells"
join up with BLM chapters.
FRSO: Follow the Money
BLM began in 2013 when three activist friends created the #BlackLivesMatter hashtag to
protest the allegations of shooting of an unarmed black teenager, Trayvon Martin by a white
Hispanic block watchman, George Zimmermann. Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors, and Opal Tometi
were all were connected with and financed by front groups tied to something called Freedom Road
Socialist Organization, one of the four largest radical left organizations in the United States
formed out of something called New Communist Movement that dissolved in the 1980s.
On June 12, 2020 the Freedom Road Socialist Organization webpage states, "The time is now to
join a revolutionary organization! Join Freedom Road Socialist Organization If you have been
out in the streets this past few weeks, the odds are good that you've been thinking about the
difference between the kind of change this system has to offer, and the kind of change this
country needs. Capitalism is a failed system that thrives on exploitation, inequality and
oppression. The reactionary and racist Trump administration has made the pandemic worse. The
unfolding economic crisis we are experiencing is the worst since the 1930s. Monopoly capitalism
is a dying system and we need to help finish it off. And that is exactly what Freedom Road
Socialist Organization is
working for ."
In short the protests over the alleged police killing of a black man in Minnesota are now
being used to call for a revolution against capitalism. FRSO is an umbrella for dozens of
amorphous groups including Black Lives Matter or BLM. What is interesting about the
self-described Marxist-Leninist roots of the Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO) is not
so much their left politics as much as their very establishment funding by a group of
well-endowed tax-exempt foundations.
Alicia Garza of BLM is also a board member or executive of five different Freedom Road front
groups including 2011 Board chair of Right to the City Alliance, Board member of School of
Unity and Liberation (SOUL), of People Organized to Win Employment Rights (POWER), Forward
Together and Special Projects director of National Domestic Workers Alliance.
The Right to the City Alliance got $6.5 million between 2011 and 2014 from a number of very
established tax-exempt foundations including the Ford Foundation ($1.9 million), from both of
George Soros's major tax-exempts–Open Society Foundations, and the Foundation to Promote
Open Society for $1.3 million. Also the cornflake-tied Kellogg Foundation $250,000, and
curiously , Ben
& Jerry's Foundation (ice cream) for $30,000.
Garza also got major foundation money as Executive Director of the FRSO front, POWER, where
Obama former "green jobs czar" Van Jones, a self-described "communist" and "rowdy black
nationalist," now with CNN, was on the board. Alicia Garza also chaired the Right to the City
Alliance, a network of activist groups opposing urban gentrification. That front since 2009
received $1.3 million from the Ford Foundation, as well as $600,000 from the Soros foundations
and again, Ben & Jerry's ($50,000). And Garza's SOUL, which claimed to have trained 712
"organizers" in 2014, when she co-founded Black Lives Matter, got $210,000 from the Rockefeller
Foundation and another $255,000 from the Heinz Foundation (ketchup and John Kerry family) among
others. With the Forward Together of FRSO, Garza sat on the board of a "multi-racial
organization that works with community leaders and organizations to transform culture and
policy to catalyze social change." It officially got $4 million in 2014 revenues and from 2012
and 2014, the organization received a total of $2.9 million from Ford Foundation ($655,000) and
other major
foundations .
Nigeria-born BLM co-founder Opal Tometi likewise comes from the network of FRSO. Tometi
headed the FRSO's Black Alliance for Just Immigration. Curiously with a "staff" of two it got
money from major foundations including the Kellogg Foundation for $75,000 and Soros foundations
for $100,000, and, again, Ben & Jerry's ($10,000). Tometi got $60,000 in 2014 to direct the group .
The Freedom Road Socialist Organization that is now openly calling for a revolution against
capitalism in the wake of the Floyd George killing has another arm, The Advancement Project,
which describes itself as "a next generation, multi-racial civil rights organization." Its
board includes a former Obama US Department of Education Director of Community Outreach and a
former Bill Clinton Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights. The FRSO Advancement Project
in 2013 got millions from major US tax-exempt foundations including Ford
($8.5 million), Kellogg ($3 million), Hewlett Foundation of HP defense industry founder ($2.5
million), Rockefeller Foundation ($2.5 million), and Soros foundations ($8.6 million).
Major Money and ActBlue
By 2016, the presidential election year where Hillary Clinton was challenging Donald Trump,
Black Lives Matter had established itself as a well-organized network. That year the Ford
Foundation and Borealis Philanthropy announced the formation of the Black-Led Movement Fund
(BLMF), "a six-year pooled donor campaign aimed at raising $100 million for the Movement for
Black Lives coalition" in which BLM was a central part. By then Soros foundations had already
given some $33 million in
grants to the Black Lives Matter movement . This was serious foundation money.
The BLMF identified itself as being created by top foundations including in addition to the
Ford Foundation, the Kellogg Foundation and the Soros Open Society Foundations. They described
their role: "The BLMF provides grants, movement building resources, and technical assistance to
organizations working advance the leadership and vision of young, Black, queer, feminists and
immigrant leaders who are shaping and leading a national
conversation about criminalization, policing and race in America."
The Movement for Black Lives Coalition (M4BL) which includes Black Lives Matter, already in
2016 called for "defunding police departments, race-based reparations, voting rights for
illegal immigrants, fossil-fuel divestment, an end to private education and charter schools, a
universal basic income, and
free college for blacks ."
Notably, when we click on the website of M4BL, under their donate button we learn that the
donations will go to something called ActBlue Charities. ActBlue facilitates donations to
"democrats and progressives." As of May 21, ActBlue had given $119 million to the campaign
of Joe Biden.
That was before the May 25 BLM worldwide protests. Now major corporations such as Apple,
Disney, Nike and hundreds others may be pouring untold and unaccounted millions into ActBlue
under the name of Black Lives Matter, funds that in fact can go to fund the election of a
Democrat President Biden. Perhaps this is the real reason the Biden campaign has been so
confident of support from black voters. What is clear from only this account of the crucial
role of big money foundations behind protest groups such as Black lives Matter is that there is
a far more complex agenda driving the protests now destabilizing cities across America. The
role of tax-exempt foundations tied to the fortunes of the greatest industrial and financial
companies such as Rockefeller, Ford, Kellogg, Hewlett and Soros says that there is a far deeper
and far more sinister agenda to current disturbances than spontaneous outrage would
suggest.
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your
email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in
politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics,
exclusively for the online magazine "New
Eastern Outlook" where this article was originally published. He is a Research Associate of
the Centre for Research on Globalization.
The burgeoning
'cancel culture' has forced Amazon to ax an ad campaign for a book by a Wall Street Journal
author which is critical of liberal views on transgender identity, its publishing company has
said.
People who post of Twitter are stupid by definition, but people who fire employees for
posting on Twitter are trying to replicate excesses of Stalinism (and, in way, McCarthysm) on a
farce level. As in Marx "history repeats: first as tragedy, the second as farce"
By classifying the (somewhat incorrect; Obama was elected not only because he was half black,
but also because he was half--CIA ;-) Twit below as the cry "fire" in crowded theater, we really
try to replay the atmosphere of Stalinist Russia on a new level.
Notable quotes:
"... Austin Symphony Trombonist Fired Over Racist Comments , The Violin Channel, June 1, 2020 ..."
Have you checked out the 1/2 black president swine flu H1N1, and EBOLA?
What has your 1/2 black president done for you??
The ONLY REASON he was elected was because he is 1/2 black.
People voted on racist principles, not on the real issues . The BLACKS are looting and
destroying their environment. They deserve what
they get. Playing the RACE CARD IS RACIST.
Symphony orchestra spokes-critter Anthony Corroa [ Email him
]announced the firing of Ms. Salas in the dreary schoolmarmish jargon of corporate wokeness:
This language is not reflective of who we are as an organization." And "there is no
place for hate within our organization."
Get short URL No sooner did Jacob Frey, the Mayor of Minneapolis, apologize
to the black community for the killing of George Floyd than everyone felt they had to say sorry for the sins of their fathers, erasing
the meaning of sincere apology. I've stopped counting the number of apologies issued by public figures, business institutions and
celebrities in recent weeks. It's sometimes difficult to avoid the conclusion that a public apology has become a public-relations
exercise. Why else would the Greene King pub chain and Lloyd's of London apologize for the links to the slave trade – a historical
event that occurred centuries ago? Moral cowardice and the easy way out
Moral cowardice is another of the driving forces fueling the proliferation of public apologies. Apology has become weaponized
to the point that very few politicians possess the strength of character to stand by their words. I remember when, last November,
the Mayor of Middlesbrough, Andy Preston, apologized 'unreservedly' to the mental-health charity Mind for calling a Facebook commenter
a ' nutter
'. There's something truly scary about a world in which people wish to censor others for using a word the vast majority of human
beings find unobjectionable. But what is even more chilling is that the mayor felt obliged to grovel and apologize.
The elites' addiction to apology has been evident since the 1990s. During that decade, the then US president, Bill Clinton, publicly
apologized to his nation's black community for slavery. Meanwhile, the former British prime minister Tony Blair turned public apology
into a veritable art form. He took it upon himself to apologize for Britain's role in the slave trade. He also issued an apology
in 1997 for his nation's responsibility for the Irish potato famine of the 19th
century
. It is evident that Western political elites are far better at apologizing for the 'bad old days' than inspiring the public
about their nation's past – or even present.
Knee-jerk knee-bending
Since the outbreak of the present wave of Black Lives Matter protests, the issuing of a public apology has become almost a routine
response to the mere hint that you should take the knee and grovel.
Typically, whenever an individual is called out and denounced for their language, an apology swiftly follows. But in the current
climate, there can be no 'mistakes', because your words will come back to bite you. Just about any gesture or statement can be branded
as not just insensitive but racist. Poor Karol G, the Colombian reggaeton singer, who, in response to the protest following George
Floyd's death, tweeted a now-deleted picture of her black-and-white coated dog with the caption 'The perfect example that Black and
White TOGETHER look beautiful', along with the hashtag #BlackLivesMatter. After she was denounced and ridiculed, she issued an immediate
statement of apology. "I want to make clear that my intentions were right in the photo I posted earlier. I meant to say that racism
is terrible and that I cannot begin to understand it," she
pleaded .
As Rachel Yang wrote recently on the arts website Entertainment Weekly, '2020 has turned out to be an unpredictable year, to say
the least, but one thing we can always count on is celebrities needing to issue apologies for their
behavior '.
Never enough
Experience shows that often an apology is not enough, as if those who demand them get ever more high in their addiction to humiliation
and, enjoying it, seek to up the dose. Take the case of LA Galaxy football player Aleksandar Katai. His club forced him to issue
an apology, not for anything that he did, but because his wife Tea posted a statement calling protestors "
disgusting cattle
" ! Poor Katai took the knee and pledged that both he and his family would "take the necessary actions to learn, understand,
listen, and support the black community." However, not even this act of self-abasement helped him. He was dropped from the squad
because of a statement made by his wife.
Western society's addiction to public apology is a reflection of the fact that its political and cultural elite does not believe
in itself – or at least it has no idea what to believe in. The speed with which individuals apologize for a statement they made a
few hours before exposes both their lack of firm conviction and their moral cowardice. When an apology is a response to a very public
ultimatum, it's almost never a genuine act of reflection and contrition. Rather, it has become an empty ritual that denudes their
apology of meaning.
As I write these lines, the UK's Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab is facing calls to apologize for stating that taking the knee
is a gesture copied from the TV drama 'Game of Thrones'. He added that he would take the knee for only two people: 'the Queen and
the Mrs, when I asked her to marry me '. After an outburst
of criticism, Raab tried to soothe the mob baying for his blood by indicating that he has "full respect for BLM campaigners,"
but didn't issue the now-mandatory apology.
It took just a few minutes for the all too readily offended Twitterati to pile in to demand an apology. The acting leader of the
Liberal Democrats, Ed Davey, led the way with a post on Twitter demanding that Raab issue a '
fulsome apology '.
Davey knows a thing or two about the meaningless issuing of an apology. Last June, he apologized for writing that his electoral
strategy was to "decapitate that blond head," referring to PM Boris Johnson.
Back in 1976, Elton John released a song titled 'Sorry Seems to be the Hardest Word'. A song titled 'The Hardest Word Not to Say
is Sorry' would be altogether more fitting for the 2020s.
Frank Furedi is an author and social commentator. He is an emeritus professor of sociology at the University of Kent in
Canterbury. Author of How Fear
Works : The Culture of Fear in the 21st Century. Follow him on Twitter
@Furedibyte
"... While not as overt in the 20th century, the distinction of black slave versus poor white man has kept the class system alive and well in the US in the development of a discriminatory informal caste system. ..."
"... a class level lower than the poorest of the white has kept them from concentrating on the disproportionate, and growing, distribution of wealth and income in the US. ..."
"... It was not the status or material wealth causing the harsh feelings; but, the feeling of being treated less than equal, having little status, and the resulting shame. ..."
"... In other words, by providing poor whites with a stratum of the population that has even lower social status, neoliberals manage to co-opt them to support the policies which economically ate detrimental to their standard of living as well as to suppress the protest against the redistribution of wealth up and dismantling of the New Deal capitalist social protection network. ..."
"... This is a pretty sophisticated, pretty evil scheme if you ask me. In a way, “Floydgate” can be viewed as a variation on the same theme. A very dirty game indeed, when the issue of provision of meaningful jobs for working poor, social equality, and social protection for low-income workers of any color is replaced with a real but of secondary importance issue of police violence against blacks. ..."
...A while back, I was researching the issues you state in your last paragraph. Was about ten pages into it and had to stop
as I was drawn out of state and country.
From my research.
While not as overt in the 20th century, the distinction of black slave versus poor white man has kept the class system
alive and well in the US in the development of a discriminatory informal caste system.
This distraction of a class level lower than the poorest of the white has kept them from concentrating on the disproportionate,
and growing, distribution of wealth and income in the US.
For the lower class, an allowed luxury, a place in the hierarchy and a sure form of self esteem insurance.
Sennett and Cobb (1972) observed that class distinction sets up a contest between upper and lower class with the lower social
class always losing and promulgating a perception amongst themselves the educated and upper classes are in a position to judge
and draw a conclusion of them being less than equal.
The hidden injury is in the regard to the person perceiving himself as a piece of the woodwork or seen as a function such as
"George the Porter."
It was not the status or material wealth causing the harsh feelings; but, the feeling of being treated less than equal,
having little status, and the resulting shame.
The answer for many was violence.
James Gilligan wrote "Violence; Reflections on A National Epidemic." He worked as a prison psychiatrist and talked with many
of the inmates of the issues of inequality and feeling less than those around them. His finding are in his book which is not a
long read and adds to the discussion.
A little John Adams for you.
"The poor man's conscience is clear . . . he does not feel guilty and has no reason to . . . yet, he is ashamed. Mankind
takes no notice of him. He rambles unheeded.
In the midst of a crowd; at a church; in the market . . . he is in as much obscurity as he would be in a garret or a cellar.
He is not disapproved, censured, or reproached; he is not seen . . . To be wholly overlooked, and to know it, are intolerable."
likbez June 19, 2020 1:25 pm
That’s a very important observation. Racism, especially directed toward blacks, along with “identity wedge,” is a perfect tool
for disarming poor white, and suppressing their struggle for a better standard of living, which considerably dropped under neoliberalism.
In other words, by providing poor whites with a stratum of the population that has even lower social status, neoliberals
manage to co-opt them to support the policies which economically ate detrimental to their standard of living as well as to suppress
the protest against the redistribution of wealth up and dismantling of the New Deal capitalist social protection network.
This is a pretty sophisticated, pretty evil scheme if you ask me. In a way, “Floydgate” can be viewed as a variation on
the same theme. A very dirty game indeed, when the issue of provision of meaningful jobs for working poor, social equality, and
social protection for low-income workers of any color is replaced with a real but of secondary importance issue of police violence
against blacks.
This is another way to explain “What’s the matter with Kansas” effect.
"... Some argued that complex historical figures require an honest judgment. "History is grey and while we should be thankful for Churchill's leadership during WW2 – he was far from perfect, and to many downright awful," ..."
People were left "speechless" after a photoshopped image of a statue of British wartime
leader Winston Churchill emerged online. The monument was vandalized during protests against
racism and police brutality last week. The statue outside the British Parliament building was
boarded up for protection against vandalism. Now an image has been circulating on social media
showing the words "Don't open, racist inside" written on the boards covering the
monument.
-- You're not meant to think the
statue thing is real (@rdouglasjohnson) June 12,
2020
While commenters online were quick to point out that the phrase was digitally added to the
original photo, there has been growing outrage over the treatment of the statue by protesters.
While some view Churchill as a symbol of colonialism, many regard him as one of the greatest
British statesmen, who led the nation to victory in WWII. "I'm speechless," one Twitter
user said, commenting on the photoshopped image. "This man is one of the reasons Britain and
most of Europe didn't end up under Nazi control, and this is how y'all thank him," another
wrote
.
Some argued that complex historical figures require an honest judgment. "History is grey
and while we should be thankful for Churchill's leadership during WW2 – he was far from
perfect, and to many downright awful," a person wrote online.
Officials also
defended the statue. Prime Minister Boris Johnson said that boarding it up was "absurd and
shameful," while Home Secretary Priti Patel called for the coverings to be removed. "We
should free Churchill, a hero of our nation, who fought against fascism and racism in this
country and Europe," she said.
@Ron (RC) Weakley (a.k.a., Darryl for a while at EV) June 16, 2020 4:00 pm
> the Democratic Party depends upon the problems of racial discrimination to win
elections. It is a Catch-22 dilemma.
Yes. Thanks you. This is clearly Catch-22 situation as the global crisis of neoliberalism
and neoliberal globalization is overlaid on the current racial riots and COVID-19 level of
unemployment.
I do not pretend that I see it right. Only time will tell. But here is my view:
IMHO the developments of neoliberalism in the US generated a social system radically
different from the neoliberal utopia of the benign rule of the financial oligarchy over
politically neutered by free-market ideology and brainwashed "homo homini lupus est"
neoliberal rationality population. Which should passively submit to the "depoliticized"
version of the National Security State and act strictly as a consumer and passive voter.
Kind of replay of the political reality of Stalinism (with the neoliberal deification of
"free market" and competition as the replacement of Marxism; in both case playing the role of
state-enforced secular religion questioning of which is a punishable heresy )
Unlike Stalinism, Neoliberalism enforces its secular-religious doctrine on a new "inverted
totalitarianism" level with minimal physical repression of dissidents. MSM brainwashing,
defunding, ostracism and shunning are the main tools.
The use of external enemy as the scapegoat is the same under both Stalinism and late
neoliberalism with the accusation of being a "foreign agent" as a natural part of the dirty
fight of various factions of oligarchy for power.
Despite Hayek's hope about politically neutered population ruled by financial oligarchy
neoliberalism intensified the rancorous resentment already present in modern culture.
Now we see a kind of return of the repressed under neoliberalism violent social protests
that the neoliberals always opposed, and which they deformed with the injection of a heavy
doze of identity politics.
As a result, we now have clear resurgence of the far-right nationalism and simultaneously
the rise of "woke" far left with its radical feminism, anarchism, LGBT, and a one-dimensional
"anti-racism" (strictly white vs black as it if is the only one in existence and black racism
a la South Africa or Rhodesia does not exists ).
In a way, this is a return to the very dangerous and unpredictable social situation that
existed in late 1920th on a new level, but without Marxists as a political player. A very
dangerous level with elements of Bradbury's "Fahrenheit 451.": Toppling of statues is not
that different from book burning.
Pelosi wearing an African scarf looks like a failed attempt of neoliberal Dems to get it
under control of a monster that they created via identity politics.
Neoliberal political culture and systemic impoverishment of the lower 80% of the
population create the economic conditions for enduring racism and glaring economic
inequality.
Add to this identity politics, used as the "divide and conquer" strategy for the political
isolation and partial cooptation (despite clear oppression on the part of neoliberals) of the
white working-class ("What's the matter with Kansas" effect ) and the mixture becomes clearly
explosive.
The US financial oligarchy is no less evil than either Italian or Kosher-Nostra mafia.
They are completely ruthless. And that means that they still might be able to swipe this
under the rug: one way, or another. Racial protests, or coming to power of radical far-right
does not threaten their power, but possible disintegration of the state in Ukrainian Maidan
fashion clearly does.
So how events will unfold in completely unclear. I just try to provide my 2c within the
adopted framework of analysis.
Recall, it was just days ago that
we pointed out Cornell professor and friend of Zero Hedge Dave Collum was publicly shamed
by Cornell for daring to express the "wrong" opinion about current events on social media. Now,
there's a second Cornell professor coming under fire for his critique of the Black Lives Matter
movement.
Cornell Law School professor William A. Jacobson has challenged any student or faculty
member to a public debate about the Black Lives Matter movement after he says liberals on
campus have launched a "coordinated effort" to have him fired from his job. At least 15 emails
from alumni have been sent to the dean, demanding that action be taken, according to Fox News
.
"There is an effort underway to get me fired at Cornell Law School, where I've worked since
November 2007, or if not fired, at least denounced publicly by the school,"
Jacobson wrote on Thursday . "I condemn in the strongest terms any insinuation that I am
racist."
Jacobson founded the website Legal
Insurrection and says he's had an "awkward relationship" with the university for years as a
result. The recent outrage comes as a result of two posts he recently made on his site:
"Those posts accurately detail the history of how the Black Lives Matters Movement started,
and the agenda of the founders which is playing out in the cultural purge and rioting taking
place now," Jacobson said.
He recently wrote on his blog: "Living as a conservative on a liberal campus is like being
the mouse waiting for the cat to pounce. For over 12 years, the Cornell cat did not pounce.
Though there were frequent and aggressive attempts by outsiders to get me fired, including
threats and harassment, it always came from off campus."
"Not until now, to the best of my knowledge, has there been an effort from inside the
Cornell community to get me fired," he says.
"The effort appears coordinated, as some of the emails were in a template form. All of the
emails as of Monday were from graduates within the past 10 years," he continued. Jacobson's
"clinical faculty colleagues, apparently in consultation with the Black Law Students
Association" drafted and published a letter denouncing 'commentators, some of them attached to
Ivy League Institutions, who are leading a smear campaign against Black Lives Matter.'"
Cornell
responded , backhandedly defending the Professor's right to his own opinion:
"...the Law School's commitment to academic freedom does not constitute endorsement or
approval of individual faculty speech. But to take disciplinary action against him for the
views he has expressed would fatally pit our values against one another in ways that would
corrode our ability to operate as an academic institution."
"This is not just about me. It's about the intellectual freedom and vibrancy of Cornell and
other higher education institutions, and the society at large. Open inquiry and debate are core
features of a vibrant intellectual community," he stated.
"I challenge a representative of those student groups and a faculty member of their choosing
to a public debate at the law school regarding the Black Lives Matter Movement, so that I can
present my argument and confront the false allegations in real-time rather than having to
respond to baseless community email blasts."
"I condemn in the strongest terms any insinuation that I am racist, and I greatly resent any
attempt to leverage meritless accusations in hopes of causing me reputational harm. While such
efforts might succeed in scaring others in a similar position, I will not be intimidated,"
Jacobson concluded.
So let's go back to the basics: corporations are about money, that is a truism. Yes,
sometimes corporations try to present a "human face", but this is nothing more than a marketing
trick destined to create consumer loyalty. Now I don't believe for one second that the
mega-corporations listed above expect to make much money from supporting the riots, at least
not in a direct way. Nor do I believe that these corporations are trying to impersonate a
conscience because they fear a Black consumer boycott (what was true in
Tuskegee in the late 1950s is not true today, if only because of the completely
different scale of the protests).
So if not money – what is at stake here?
Power.
Specifically, the US deep state – at a major faction within that deep state – is
clearly desperate to get rid of Trump (and not for the right reasons, of which there are
plenty).
Another victory of the "coalition of minorities" and another defeat for Trump
There are plenty of signs that illustrate that Trump is even losing control of the
Executive, including Secretary
Esper contradicting Trump on what is a key issue – restoring law and order
– or the
US Ambassador to South Korea voicing support for BLM (I consider that these actions by
top officials against their own Commander in Chief border on treason). Needless to say, the
pro-Dems
neo-libs at Slate immediately began dreaming about, and calling for, a military revolt
against Trump.
Last but not least, we now have a "free zone" in Seattle, the notorious Capitol Hill
Autonomous Zone, "CHAZ" aka "CHOP" where, among other "curiosities", Whites are told to give
10 bucks to a Black person . This means that until law and order are restored to what
is now the CHAZ, the United States has lost its sovereignty over a part of one of its cities.
That is a "black eye" for any US President who, after all, is the leader of the Executive
branch of government and the Commander in Chief of a military supposed (in theory only, of
course) to defend the United States against all enemies.
What do all of these developments have in common?
They are designed to show that Trump has lost control of the country and that all good and
decent people now stand united against him.
There are several major problems with this plan.
For one thing, this is all completely illegal. What began as a typical race riot is now
openly turning into sedition.
The second major problem of this plan is that it relies on what I call a "coalition of
minorities" to achieve its goal, it is therefore ignoring the will of the majority of the
people. This can backfire, especially if the chaos and violence continue to spread.
Next, there is the "Golem/Frankenstein" issue: it is much easier to launch a wildfire than
to contain or suppress it. Nancy Pelosi might be dumb enough to think that she and her gang can
control the likes of Raz
Simone , but history shows that when the state abdicates its monopoly on violence,
anarchy ensues.
By the way, it is important to note here that Trump, at least so far, has not taken the bait
and has not used federal forces to reimpose law and order in Seattle, Atlanta or elsewhere.
He must realize that liberating the so-called CHAZ might result in a bloodbath (there appear
to be plenty of weapons inside the CHAZ) and that the Democrats are dreaming about blaming him
for a bloodbath. Trump's strategy, at least so far, appears to let the lawlessness continue and
blame the Democrats for it.
ORDER IT NOW
While Trump's strategy makes sense, it also is inherently very dangerous because if the
state cannot reimpose law and order, then all sorts of "volunteers" might decide to give it a
shot (literally). Check out this headline " Bikers
For Trump Organizing to Retake Seattle On July 4th ". Whether these bikers will
actually try to take over the CHAZ or not, even the fact that they are preparing to do so
shows, yet again, that the state has lost its monopoly on violence.
"... These mobs of hating, condemning, moralizing, groupthink hypocrites are modern-day Nazis. They don't wear uniforms or have guns, but their weapon of online psychological abuse is proving frighteningly effective. ..."
"... Psychological abuse is one of their classic methods, as they exploit a person's fear of ending up alone against a crowd. Instead of a prison cell or a concentration camp, they put people in social isolation. They can even prevent the victim from being employed – classic state repression of an individual. ..."
"... Without work, the geniuses will fade into obscurity, and the new PC brigade will make them kneel in solidarity. Individually, members of these combat units of political correctness are often smart and sophisticated people, but when they close ranks in the fight for or against something, they turn into an ignorant and aggressive mob. ..."
"... China has been testing a new system in several provinces via which the citizens and their community are encouraged to assess the social behavior of individuals by assigning scores for respecting the rules and values practiced in this society. If you don't achieve a high score, your ranking is low and your prospects are limited. Isn't this just perfect for the new stormtroopers?! It's a modern reincarnation of the Munich gang, when a mediocre, covetous burgher pretends to be a civilized, progressive thinker. ..."
"... They put labels on everyone who disagrees. They love drama and straightforwardness. But they are incapable of engaging in rational argument. It's only natural that they began with declaring lofty values and ended with riots. They have started fires and justified arson. But you can't rein in the freedom to love or hate using a set of rules established by the new ethics committee. Today, being free means being outside this mob of attacking, hating, condemning, moralizing, angry hypocrites. ..."
These mobs of hating, condemning, moralizing, groupthink hypocrites are modern-day Nazis. They don't wear
uniforms or have guns, but their weapon of online psychological abuse is proving frighteningly effective.
Totalitarianism didn't disappear when the Nazis were defeated. It hid, stealthily, only to come back
later. The US and Europe intuitively built a new elaborate type of dictatorship. The state delegated the
functions of surveillance, persecution, isolation and judgment to society. Initially, it looked very
innocent: fighting against intolerance, defending the mistreated and the oppressed. Noble goals.
But
with time, these values turned into idols, while intolerance of evil transformed into intolerance of a
different opinion. And social media is making things worse. Public opinion is now a repressive machine
that gangs up on people, booing and destroying anyone who dares to challenge its value system and moral
compass.
The staff members of this repressive machine do not wear uniforms, they don't carry batons or tasers,
but they have other weapons, such as herd instinct and groupthink, as well as deep insecurities and a
desire to dominate – at least intellectually.
Psychological abuse is one of their classic methods, as they exploit a person's fear of ending up
alone against a crowd. Instead of a prison cell or a concentration camp, they put people in social
isolation. They can even prevent the victim from being employed – classic state repression of an
individual.
In a Nazi state, a creative type such as Lars von Trier could lose his job and life over his
"degenerate art." In the beautiful modern state that people with beautiful faces are building, a Lars von
Trier could lose his job, because he can be a politically incorrect troll who sometimes supports the
wrong value system. And a Robert Lepage won't get funding for his new theatrical production, because all
the parts in the previous one were played by white actors.
You no longer need to take their lives.
Without work, the geniuses will fade into obscurity, and the
new PC brigade will make them kneel in solidarity. Individually, members of these combat units of
political correctness are often smart and sophisticated people, but when they close ranks in the fight
for or against something, they turn into an ignorant and aggressive mob.
And there's no point arguing with them. They have only one criterion: are you with us or not? That's
an ideal tool for the new way of abusing individuals – it's not physical, it's psychological.
China has been testing a new system in several provinces via which the citizens and their community
are encouraged to assess the social behavior of individuals by assigning scores for respecting the rules
and values practiced in this society. If you don't achieve a high score, your ranking is low and your
prospects are limited. Isn't this just perfect for the new stormtroopers?! It's a modern reincarnation of
the Munich gang, when a mediocre, covetous burgher pretends to be a civilized, progressive thinker.
They put labels on everyone who disagrees. They love drama and straightforwardness. But they are
incapable of engaging in rational argument. It's only natural that they began with declaring lofty values
and ended with riots. They have started fires and justified arson. But you can't rein in the freedom to
love or hate using a set of rules established by the new ethics committee. Today, being free means being
outside this mob of attacking, hating, condemning, moralizing, angry hypocrites.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely
those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
Konstantin Bogomolov is an award-winning Russian theater director, actor, author and
poet.
The hatred against anything w hite is all prevalent and only getting worse. It will only lead to more anti w hite violence.
To look at your future, look at South Africa.
The book burners are at it again. Remember when Democrats keep telling us how the religious right was nothing but a
bunch of dangerous authoritarians. Well, this is certainly awkward.
If this was a Chinese admiral or diplomat, the tone of the comments here would be completely
different: "whistleblower", "Chinese totalitarianism collapsing", "we should support him", "the
Chinese should reform", "Xi Jinping should be removed from power" etc. etc.
...In general, USG is very happy if an ambassador is in blatant insubordination, e.g.
supporting a FAILED coup against his own government. Could it misled some ambassadors that it
is OK?
In short, there are good and bad types of hypocrisy, and USG should have some (online?)
courses, so passing quizzes in Hypocrisy.1, Hypocrisy.2 and Hypocrisy.3 would be a
prerequisite before granting a post (the higher the post, the more quizzes may be
needed).
Police in various American cities especially on the East and West coasts have stood down while fanatical mobs of
leftists unilaterally determine which public monuments and statues should be toppled, destroyed, and
in
some cases beheaded
--
as
in
the
recent "beheading" of a Christopher Columbus statue at a public park in Boston
.
It didn't take long for the woke mobs to
target
statues of the founding fathers and American Constitutional framers
in the past days.
In Portland
over
the weekend
, a large bronze Thomas Jefferson statue that was a central feature of Jefferson High School campus was
pulled down after Black Lives Matter protests there.
Like others across the nation, the Jefferson statue was further defaced with the words "slave owner" and "George Floyd"
spray-painted across the base.
But given that increasingly even Abraham Lincoln statues are being targeted, it reveals that neither the Confederacy nor
early colonial and American slaveholders are the targets, but all symbols of US history itself.
They make no distinction between Confederate and Union, abolitionist and pro-slavery, 15th-century figures and 20th.
They don't care when a monument was erected, who built it, or why.
They have not come to debate or persuade
their fellow citizens to relocate these statues to museums or private property.
They
believe the debate is over and that they have won.
Their target is not the Confederacy. It is the United States.
They mean to destroy symbols of American
history writ large, because to them all of American history is racist and genocidal. Their goal is not to cleanse a
nation they love of monuments to Confederate traitors who tried to secede, but to cleanse their consciences of ever
having loved such an evil and irredeemably racist country in the first place.
Rioters in Philly deface a statue of Matthias Baldwin, an early abolitionist who fought against
slavery 30 years before it ended.
Even leading abolitionist figures from history are targeted
,
astoundingly
:
That is why you see mobs defacing statues of abolitionists like Matthias Baldwin and Union war heroes like Adm. David
Farragut and Gen. George Thomas.
That is why the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier of the American Revolution in
Philadelphia
was
vandalized
this past weekend with the words "committed genocide." That is why statues of Christopher Columbus
were torn down or beheaded in three cities last week.
A
"peaceful"
protest took place
at Central Park in Whittier on Sunday, or so we are told. It appears that initially the statue
was safe, but by the end of it the Quaker abolitionist considered key in the 19th century movement for equal
rights wasn't spared by the 'woke' mob.
John Greenleaf, whose statue now sits damaged and vandalized, including with the spray-painted letters "BLM", was among
the
most prominent literary voices leading the fight to end slavery even decades before Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation
in 1863
.
If even memorials to famous abolitionists won't be spared, what will?
* * *
Many commentators have noticed that the statue-destroying leftist mobs in both the US and UK have something in common
with a certain Mideast terror group...
Before and after
: the 6th century Bamiyan Buddhas of Afghanistan were destroyed by the Taliban using dynamite in
2001.
Someone Else
,
16 minutes ago
The
President has always been a respected figurehead no matter who he was. There were many times in my 62
years that the guy I didn't support became President. But he WAS President. And he was treated with
respect and dignity.
You
can't look at a newspaper today without seeing a headline like "President Lies About Russia". "Fact
Checkers" call him a liar in real time before he can even finish a speech. The press openly mocks him
and holds him in contempt on every issue. It seems that the only "media outlet" that universally
endorses the President is fringical "Info Wars" and for it they are banned from Facebook and Twitter.
If
we can't show our current elected President the respect he deserves for simply BEING our elected
President - why are we surprised to discover people attack statues?
Refuse-Resist
,
7 minutes ago
He may be one of the only Americans in the entire edifice.
stuvian
,
22 minutes ago
peak stupidity has arrived
Someone Else
,
34 minutes ago
The mistake is in thinking that these riots are principled. This is not about slavery. This is about
destroying stuff.
They don't want reparations out of a sense of fairness. They want reparations out of a sense of monetary
gain, whatever the reason.
They don't attack Apple stores and Nike stores to strike out against evil corporatists. They do it
because they want free shoes, apparel and Mac Book Pros.
The
poor want to destroy the rich and to take their stuff. Don't look for anything noble or righteous
there. It doesn't exist.
Goodsport 1945
,
1 hour ago
This is not a movement about slavery or oppression. The intent is to destroy our nation. There will
never be a one world government until living standards in the US are brought down to that of the rest of
the world.
The
Globalists, Liberals, Socialists and Communists who fund, encourage and protect these criminals have
become the biggest threat to our freedom since the War of Independence.
Someday this will all become apparent to the majority, but by then it might be too late to avoid a civil
war.
Refuse-Resist
,
1 hour ago
YES. We must stand together for our children and grandchildren.
Failure to do so will end them up in a North American version of South Africa.
iadr
,
1 hour ago
IDK.
Statues have always seemed kind of icky to me.
They purport to honor the ideas/ideals of someone, but I can't see how that's true. It requires an
absurd and patently obviously immature association with the corporal form of someone to represent their
ideas. It was, and is, a dumb idea.
But
I don't think more than a few percent of "activists" currently can reason in the way of this analysis, or
even have the self knowledge to discern where their hate of power symbols arises from (an incredibly
complex topic).
So
there are statues and they are up. I'd leave them up, but I'm not really tied to the idea by more than
the thinnest thread.
If
we "win" in the long term.... do we, in 50 years leave up the statue of Rev Al Sharpton? do we leave up a
statue of some cross dressing idiot because it means something to some people? Do we leave up a statue of
some defender/symbol of financialization- a Ray Dalio or a Ken Griffin? Someone who represents the
concentration and corruption of power in the .1% in this era?, or another era (eg. Rockefeller)?
Of
current statuary, I know enough philosophy/sociology/history/ethics to rank by worthiness - in
my
value system
, of long term defence. Conversely I see how many of the "famous" of the past are
simply sociopaths who got lucky,
who
spotted their era's version of a cheat code
.
I
think the reactionary articles on the statue topic are way beneath the standard we have here at ZH, and
are tabloidish.
I
think the vandals should stop, yes. And that they are shallower *by far* than the people who put up the
statues, but also and lastly: that maybe there's a third way besides prostrating one's self in defence of
some flawed character from a wholly different era.
ItsAllBollocks
,
1 hour ago
They're not destroying your statues, they're destroying your history.
The crazy part is you're letting them.
The question is, why?
Scipio Africanuz
,
3 hours ago
As
averred, there'll always be saboteurs and provocateurs amongst any mass protest, it's a feature, not a
bug and why?
To
discredit the peaceful protesters is why.. In
this case however, you have sabotage and provocation combined with illiteracy to create a volatile mix..
It's easy to observe that vandalizing anti-slavery advocates, is either illiteracy, sabotage, or
provocation..
The
interesting thing however, is the energetic attempts to tar all the protesters as anti-white or anyi-America..
What's going on, are attempts by political forces to discredit the grievances of legitimate protesters,
and it's quite transparent too..
Unfortunately, since quite a lot of Americans no longer engage in critical thinking, they'll fail to ask
the obvious questions such as who benefits from vandalizing anti-slavery monuments..
Or
even that of Jefferson, from whom protesters draw the legitimacy of their protests..
Anyhow, the folks sowing the chaos on both sides, are going down hard, they've passed their best before
dates of utility..
Now, they're simply parasites..
Cheers...
Sick Monkey
,
3 hours ago
This is why we need law enforcement. Cull the parasites. We do it with predators when their numbers
climb and start attacking innocents. The alternative is chaos. Can't invest in a society that lets
predators roam free.
djez
,
2 hours ago
"Unfortunately, since quite a lot of Americans no longer engage in critical thinking, they'll fail to
ask the obvious questions such as who benefits from vandalizing anti-slavery monuments.."
Well said. I have just been explaining the meaning of critical thinking to my 13 year old daughter and
recommended she apply it the next time one of her teachers raises the BLM subject, rather than going
along with what she is being told that racism is a huge problem. It's not. We just had a black
president. The issue is not racism, it's the image that social media has developed that everybody else
is having a great time and long loads of assets. You sit there reading all day that everybody else has
a "lovely lunch with the girls" and dripping in Cartier or "rolling with my bitches in my Mercedes"
and you will crack up at why your life is so $hit.
So I say again, if they read books instead of Facebook the world would be a better place.
I have to disagree. Small minorities taking it upon themselves to topple and destroy statues is not democracy. You may conflate
the image of the toppled statue with a popular revolt but that is because we've never seen as disarmed and atomised population
as we have reached now who have as yet not begun a backlash against the unending mission creep we see in this movement.
In some cases, like in towns and cities that have developed significant black majority populations, the removal of confederate
monuments that was blocked by the state from happening democratically may have a case.
But the statues in Britain and elsewhere in Europe are often much older in general and not controversial. They are often prominent
parts of the public space that are well-loved. A statue's meaning can change with time and right now these statues are increasingly
being targeted not because they irredeemably cause offense but because they are tied to ethnic enemies of the core of these protests.
The Columbus statues are a good example. The one in Virginia was initially opposed in 1925 by Virginians of old stock Anglo
settler ancestry and prominently by a politician who turned out to be tied to the KKK, causing the situation to become a national
one in the US leading to pressure that lead to the statue being erected. To all parties involved this wasn't really a statue of
Columbus, it was an ethnic totem. Almost 100 years later and the context of the statue being an ethnic totem for Italian-Americans
is not visible to the protestors, to them it's a totem of white America and European colonisation. The context of the statue being
originally placed as an ethnic marker in opposition with America's existing identity (A kind of activism very similar to what
they're doing) was invisible to them. Who was right? Were the Anglos in the 1920s right? Were the Italian immigrants right? Were
the local Native American groups right? Were the BLM protestors right?
In 1925, Frank Realmuto (a Richmond barber) organized a campaign to donate a statue of Christopher Columbus to Richmond's
Monument Avenue; this campaign was supported by Richmond's approximately 1,000 Italian-American residents. In May 1925, the
Richmond City Council rejected a proposal to donate land for the statue alongside Monument Avenue on the basis that Columbus
was both a foreigner and a Catholic; most of the council members believed that putting Columbus near monuments to revered Confederate
figures would be inappropriate. This decision was widely criticized in newspaper editorials published across the United States,
especially when it came to light that an opponent of the statue who spoke at the meeting was a member of a coalition that included
the Ku Klux Klan. In June 1925, a committee of the Richmond city council decided to allocate land near Byrd Park for the statue.
Fundraising began in February 1926 while Ferruccio Legnaioli, an Italian immigrant to Richmond, was selected to design the
statue. Ground was broken in June 1926.
For decades, members Richmond's Italian-American community gathered near the statue on the eve of Columbus Day to celebrate
Columbus and their culture. During the 2010s, the statue was repeatedly vandalized; these vandalizations coincided with increased
opposition to Columbus Day and efforts to recognize indigenous peoples. On June 9, 2020, the statue was torn down, spray-painted,
set on fire, and thrown into a nearby lake by individuals protesting the May 2020 killing of George Floyd.
The destruction of these statues is basically a form of ethnic provocation and is not conductive to any kind of social solidarity
that Johnathan supports. So far I've seen zero mentions of Palestine in all the hubbub about racism. Indeed, with all the noise
about identity politics which often prominently includes Muslims and arabs and even a surprising number of people of Palestinian
descent in the US, I don't see any mention of Palestinians.
Churchill wasn't a very sympathetic man, yet the statue of him isn't about that. He is a personification of WW2 and Britain.
People who fully know all about his deficiencies and crimes walk past and feel fine or even a little comforted because it's not
a statue celebrating those things or perhaps even really the man himself but the idea of him. And that is partly why the protestors
want to destroy it. Nobody is really offended by it because nobody really thinks about those aspects of his character, not even
the protestors. I fear the protestors are attacking it because of what it does represent.
But it goes further because this is centering an effective non-English perspective about the English perspective. You can't
understand the notion of 'decolonisation' of London otherwise.
Ultimately the destruction of these statues feels very similar to the destruction of place names and monuments by the Israelis
after 1948. All of this is the greatest bonfire of social solidarity the West has ever seen and all it will lead to more victories
for oligarchy and neoliberalism. All of it will beat people down and make them hunker down.
Just the title – tearing down statues, is the same as burning books, or burying scholars.
History is history – deal with it or STFU. Honestly, debate is about considering what has been, what is now, and what will
or could be in the future. Without having signs to what has been, knowing what is now is difficult. And knowing how to forge the
future, is a lost cause.
Brits built statues to Churchill – he was a genocidal, forgerist, drunk maniac. Germans built statues to Hitler – he was an
aggressor, perhaps genocidal (to the Slavs). Russians built monument to Lenin – he wasn't genocidal, just indifferent to murdering
some decent fraction of any people's to get his goal.
But those people, whether in understanding, or in failure of understanding, built statues to them. Both serve as lessons –
either as a lesson to the power of propaganda, or herd behaviour. Even without those two, statues to moral decay shine a light
on that condition.
'the fool is not the one who doesn't know, but the one that does not want to know' – someone else (if anyone knows! )
Now that I've read it – it is as if the author believes that only positive lessons, pats on the back, can serve as lessons to
the individual or society.
In my experience however, error is what offers both progress. Or suffering – if the lesson from the error is not learnt.
Success is heady. Statues of heroes and heroes only bring pride, a deadly emotion. We must remember the faults of humanity,
and what better way than through the errors of our predecessors? Christians put up statues to slavers, rapists, murderers. Is
this not enough for reflection? Can't we stand around a statue of Churchil, and debate power by considering he wished to drop
10 million Anthrax bombs on Northern Germany in a drunken stupor? How would this be possible without the statues?
The author is a babe, an infant – that in shuttering his eyes with his hands, believes all the danger and evil disappears from
the experience that is in front of him.
It seems Bristol's political class today are little more responsive to the popular will than they were 200 years ago.
Bristol's political class today is full of minorities, including the mayor who is a negro, all of them much hated for their
corruption, incompetence, and favouritism to their own minorities. Bristolians love their trees, but minorities don't seem to
like leafy suburbs, so they have all the trees cut down. If they had cared a hoot about Colston's statue, they could have had
it moved to a museum any time they wished.
The people who threw Colston in the docks appear to be largely white children, probably at Bristol University, which has become
a cancer growing on the city, a vast and ravenous corporation buying up property using tuition fees from the wealthy ruling classes
of other countries. Their act of vandalism was motivated by empty and ignorant slogans, impatience with actual democracy, and
a total intolerance of opinion which differs from their own. Also by a pathetic urge to mimic what's going on in the US.
This lawlessness and its encouragement by the minority power holders will have been noted by hitherto law-abiding people. Nobody
should be surprised if the next figure to go into the docks is Bristol's black mayor, accompanied by some brown councillors.
"Tearing Down Statues Isn't Vandalism. It's at the Heart of the Democratic Tradition"
Hey Jonathan Cook:
Sure!
Let's tear down ALL statues glossing over historical crimes & hypocrisy -- prioritizing the most notorious hagiography of all
-- the ubiquitous idolatry of "Holocaust" industry shysters.
@Beavertales I have read several claims, seemingly credible, that George Soros funds BLM and supports their violent rioting.
It is also documented, rebellious Jewish sources, that the Jews collectively hate non-Jews and and are at war with, seek to subvert,
the societies in which they, the Jews, live. It happened historically, e.g. the Cyrene uprising in the 2nd century AD whose largely
successful objective was widespread massacres of Gentiles. There seems reason to believe organized subversions of society, BLM,
LGTQXYZ and more have that connection.
We have here the current article by the Le Pen woman pointing out that permanent victimhood is behind BLM and the like. But
that, being eternal victims and so eternally hating, is notoriously Jewish.
The Holocaust museums everywhere are central to that victimhood and it is not permitted to examine the truth of the Holocaust,
though some have dared and say it's largely devoid of credibility.
So yes, you are right. One of the answers to the current turmoil plus the other things you mention, USS Liberty etc., is that
the Holocaust museum in Washington should be stormed by Americans.
Disclaimer: I am not an American.
But the time is long overdue for fair and balanced and open and loud reaction to the eternal Jewish war against society.
Those who allow the tearing-down are projecting their own mindset of rationality and
compromise onto those doing the tearing-down. They are assuming that that the statue-removers
will be placated.
But exactly the opposite is true; they will be not placated, but rather, encouraged to
escalate to the next kind of tear-down. Among those making the error is Mr. Trump, a
dealmaker, who will think he has made a deal; that this is a "deal" situation. The statues
are just the tip of the iceberg.
"... Anti-racism as an ideology serves a perfect function for corporations that ultimately take workers for granted. ..."
"... Today, we find Lincoln statues desecrated . Neither has the memorial to the 54th Massachusetts Infantry , one of the first all-black units in the Civil War, survived the recent protests unscathed. To many on the left, history seems like the succession of one cruelty by the next. And so, justice may only be served if we scrap the past and start from a blank slate. As a result, Lincoln's appeal that we stand upright and enjoy our liberty gets lost to time. ..."
"... Ironically, this will only help the cause of Robert E. Lee -- and the modern corporations who rely on cheap, inhumane labor to keep themselves going. ..."
"... Before black slaves did this work, white indentured servants had. (An indentured servant is bound for a number of years to his master, i.e. he can't pack up and leave to find a new opportunity elsewhere.) ..."
"... But in the eyes of the Southern slavocracy, the white laboring poor of the North also weren't truly human. Such unholy antebellum figures as the social theorist George Fitzhugh or South Carolina Senator James Henry Hammond urged that the condition of slavery be expanded to include poor whites, too. Their hunger for a cheap, subservient labor source did not stop at black people, after all. ..."
"... Always remember Barbara Fields's formula: The need for cheap labor comes first; ideologies like white supremacy only give this bleak reality a spiritual gloss. ..."
"... Michael Lind argues in his new book The New Class War that many powerful businesses in America today continue to rely on the work of quasi indentured servants. Hungry for unfree, cheap workers, corporations in Silicon Valley and beyond employ tens of thousands of foreign workers through the H-2B visa program. These workers are bound to the company that provided them with the visa. If they find conditions at their jobs unbearable, they can't switch employers -- they would get deported first. In turn, this source of cheap labor effectively underbids American workers who could do the same job, except that they would ask for higher pay. ..."
"... We're getting turned into rats. Naturally, this is no fertile soil for solidarity. And with so many jobs precarious and subcontracted out on a temporary basis, there is preciously little that most workers can do to fight back this insidious managerial control. Free labor looks different. ..."
"... It's hard to come out of the 2020 primaries without realizing that the corporations that run our mainstream media will do anything to protect their right to abuse cheap labor. ..."
"... At this point in history, to the extent that black people suffer any meaningful oppression at all, its down to disproportionate poverty rates, not their racial background. ..."
"... I agree one hundred percent with your take on Biden. Let me add something else: he is a war hawk who not only voted for the Iraq war but used his position as the chairman of an important committee to promote it. ..."
"... Because of slavery alot of bad political policy was incorporated in the founding documents. If a police officer is about to wrongly arrest you because you are black , you do not care if his hatred stems from 400 years of discrimination against blacks. Rather you care that he won't kill you in this encounter because of his racism. ..."
"... Baszak believes racism has no life of its own, it exists only as a tool of the bosses. This is vulgar Marxism. At least since the decades after Bacon's Rebellion ended in 1677, poor whites have invested in white supremacy as a way of boosting their social status. Most Southern families owned no slaves, yet most joined the Civil War cause. ..."
"... They made a movie that beautifully touches this in the 1970s with Harvey Keitel and Richard Pryor called " Blue Collar ." ..."
"... "That's exactly what the company wants: to keep you on their line," says Smokey, the coolest and most strategically minded of the crew. "They'll do anything to keep you on their line. They pit the lifers against the new boys, the old against the young, the black against the white -- everybody -- to keep us in our place." ..."
"... The core thesis in this piece is the animating foundation of The Hill's political talk show "Rising." Composed of a populist Bernie supporter (Krystal Ball) and populist conservative (Saagar Enjeti) as hosts, they frequently highlight the purpose of woke cultural battles is to distract everyone for their neoliberal economic models ..."
Anti-racism as an ideology serves a perfect function for corporations that ultimately take workers for granted.
Former injured Amazon employees join labor organizers and community activists to demonstrate and hold a press conference
outside of an Amazon Go store to express concerns about what they claim is the company's "alarming injury rate" among warehouse
workers on December 10, 2019 in Chicago, Illinois. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)
On April 2, 1865, in the dying days of the American Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln wandered the streets of burnt out Richmond,
the former Confederate capital. All of a sudden, Lincoln found himself surrounded by scores of emancipated men and women. Here's
how the historian James McPherson describes the moving episode in his magisterial book
Battle Cry of Freedom :
Several freed slaves touched Lincoln to make sure he was real. "I know I am free," shouted an old woman, "for I have seen Father
Abraham and felt him." Overwhelmed by rare emotions, Lincoln said to one black man who fell on his knees in front of him: "Don't
kneel to me. That is not right. You must kneel to God only, and thank Him for the liberty you will enjoy hereafter."
Lincoln's legacy as the Great Emancipator has survived the century and a half since then largely intact. But there have been cracks
in this image, mostly caused by questioning academics who decried him as an overt white supremacist. This view eventually entered
the mainstream when Nikole Hannah-Jones wrote misleadingly in her
lead essay
to the "1619 Project" that Lincoln "opposed black equality."
Today, we find Lincoln statues
desecrated . Neither has the memorial
to the 54th Massachusetts Infantry , one of the first all-black units in the Civil War, survived the recent protests unscathed.
To many on the left, history seems like the succession of one cruelty by the next. And so, justice may only be served if we scrap
the past and start from a blank slate. As a result, Lincoln's appeal that we stand upright and enjoy our liberty gets lost to time.
Ironically, this will only help the cause of Robert E. Lee -- and the modern corporations who rely on cheap, inhumane labor
to keep themselves going.
***
The main idea driving the "1619 Project" and so much of recent scholarship is that the United States of America originated in
slavery and white supremacy. These were its true founding ideals. Racism, Hannah-Jones writes, is in our DNA.
Such arguments don't make any sense, as the historian Barbara Fields clairvoyantly argued in a
groundbreaking essay from 1990. Why would Virginia planters in the 17th century import black people purely out of hate? No, Fields
countered, the planters were driven by a real need for dependable workers who would toil on their cotton, rice, and tobacco fields
for little to no pay. Before black slaves did this work, white indentured servants had. (An indentured servant is bound for a number
of years to his master, i.e. he can't pack up and leave to find a new opportunity elsewhere.)
After 1776 everything changed. Suddenly the new republic claimed that "all men are created equal" -- and yet there were millions
of slaves who still couldn't enjoy this equality. Racism helped to square our founding ideals with the brute reality of continued
chattel slavery: Black people simply weren't men.
But in the eyes of the Southern slavocracy, the white laboring poor of the North also weren't truly human. Such unholy antebellum
figures as the social theorist George Fitzhugh or South Carolina Senator James Henry Hammond
urged that the condition of slavery be expanded to include poor whites, too. Their hunger for a cheap, subservient labor source
did not stop at black people, after all.
Always remember Barbara Fields's formula: The need for cheap labor comes first; ideologies like white supremacy only give
this bleak reality a spiritual gloss.
The true cause of the Civil War -- and it bears constant
repeating for all the doubters -- was whether slavery would expand its reach or whether
"free labor" would reign supreme. The latter was the dominant
ideology of the North: Free laborers are independent, self-reliant, and eventually achieve economic security and independence by
the sweat of their brow. It's the American Dream. But if that is so, then the Civil War ended in a tie -- and its underlying conflict was never really settled.
***
Michael Lind argues in his new book The New Class War
that many powerful businesses in America today continue to rely on the work of quasi indentured servants. Hungry for unfree, cheap
workers, corporations in Silicon Valley and beyond employ tens of thousands of foreign workers through the H-2B visa program. These
workers are bound to the company that provided them with the visa. If they find conditions at their jobs unbearable, they can't switch
employers -- they would get deported first. In turn, this source of cheap labor effectively underbids American workers who could
do the same job, except that they would ask for higher pay.
America's wealth rests on this mutual competition between workers -- some nominally "free," others basically indentured -- whether
it be through unjust visa schemes or other unfair managerial practices.
Remember that the next time you read a public announcement by the Amazons of this world that they remain committed to "black lives
matter" and similar identitarian causes.
Fortunately, very few Americans hold the same racial resentments in their hearts as their ancestors did even just half a century
ago. Rarely did we agree as much than when the nation near unanimously condemned the death of George Floyd at the hands of a few
Minneapolis police officers. This is in keeping with another fortunate trend: Over the last 40 years, the rate of police killings
of young black men declined by 79% percent .
But anti-racism as an ideology serves a perfect function for our corporations, even despite the evidence that people in this country
have grown much less bigotted than they once were: As a management tool, anti-racism sows constant suspicion among workers who are
encouraged to detect white supremacist sentiments in everything that their fellow workers say or do.
We're getting turned into rats. Naturally, this is no fertile soil for solidarity. And with so many jobs precarious and subcontracted
out on a temporary basis, there is preciously little that most workers can do to fight back this insidious managerial control. Free
labor looks different.
And so, through a surprising back door, the true cause for which Robert E. Lee chose to betray his country might still be coming
out on top, whether we remove his statues or not -- namely, the steady supply to our ruling corporations of unfree workers willing
to hustle for scraps.
It's time to follow Abraham Lincoln's urging and get off our knees again. We should assert our rights as American citizens to
live free from economic insecurity and mutual resentment. The vast majority of us harbor no white supremacist views, period. Instead,
we have so many more things in common, and we know it.
Another anecdote from the last days of the Civil War, also taken from Battle Cry of Freedom, might prove instructive here: The
surrender of Lee's Army of Northern Virginia to Ulysses S. Grant at Appomattox Court House on April 9, 1865 essentially ended the
Civil War. The ceremony was held with solemn respect for Lee, though one of Grant's adjutants couldn't help himself but have a subtle
dig at Lee's expense:
After signing the papers, Grant introduced Lee to his staff. As he shook hands with Grant's military secretary Ely Parker,
a Seneca Indian, Lee stared a moment at Parker's dark features and said, "I am glad to see one real American here." Parker responded,
"We are all Americans."
Gregor Baszak is a PhD Candidate in English at the University of Illinois at Chicago and a writer. His articles have appeared
in Los Angeles Review of Books, Public Books, Spectator USA, Spiked, and elsewhere. Follow Gregor on Twitter at @gregorbas1.
It's a bit off-topic but this is a big reason I supported Bernie Sanders in the Democratic Primary this year, he was the only
candidate talking about how businesses demand that cheap labor, illegal labor, replace American labor. For this, the corporate
media called him a racist, an anti-semite, a dangerous radical. None of his opponents aside from Elizabeth Warren had anything
to run on aside from pseudo-woke touchy-feely bs. And somehow, with the media insisting that Joe Biden was the only one who could
beat Trump, we ended up with the one candidate who was neither good on economics, good for American workers, or offering platitudes
about wokeness.
It's hard to come out of the 2020 primaries without realizing that the corporations that run our mainstream media will do anything
to protect their right to abuse cheap labor.
Racism is very real. If it weren't it couldn't be used to "divide and conquer" the working calss. we can walk and chew gum
and the same time: oppose racism, and also oppose exploitive labor practices.
What kind of polemic, unsupported statement is "black fast food workers are the ones who gave us the fight for $15"? How about
it was a broad coalition of progressives (of all colors)? Moreover, $15 minimum wage is a poor, one-size-fits-all band-aid that
I doubt even fits ONE scenario. Tackling the broader shareholder capitalism model of labor arbitrage (free trade/mass immigration),
deunionization, and monopolistic hurdles drafted by corporations is where it actually matters. And on that, we are seeing the
inklings of a populist left-right coalition -- if corporate-funded race hustlers could only get out of the way.
That's the problem. We CAN'T chew gum and walk at the same time. Every minute focusing on racial friction is a minute NOT talking
about neoliberal economics. What's the ratio of air time, social media discussion, or newspaper inches are devoted to race vis-a-vis
the economic system that has starved the working class -- which is disproportionately black and brown? 10 to 1? 100 to 1? 1000
to 1? If there are no decent working class jobs for young black and brown men, then it makes it nearly impossible to raise families.
Let's be clear: Systemic racism is real, but it is far less impactful than economic injustices and family dissolution.
Class really isn't the primary issue for black people.
That's a frankly ridiculous statement. At this point in history, to the extent that black people suffer any meaningful oppression
at all, its down to disproportionate poverty rates, not their racial background. No one--except a few neurotic, high-strung corporate
HR PMC types--cares about "microaggressions". Even unjust police shootings of blacks are likely down to class and not race--despite
the politically correct narrative saying otherwise.
Putting racial identity politics as an equal (or even greater) priority than class-based solidarity creates an absurd system
where an upper-middle class black woman attending Yale can act as if a working class white man is oppressing her by not acknowledging
his "white privilege", and not bowing to her every demand. It's utterly delusional to think that sort of culture is going to create
a more just or equal world.
Biden is a Rorschach test, people see whatever they want in a party apparatchik. Trump has been Shiva, the destroyer of the
traditional Republican party. How else do you explain the support among Multi-Billionaires for the Democratic party. Truly ironic.
I agree one hundred percent with your take on Biden. Let me add something else: he is a war hawk who not only voted for the
Iraq war but used his position as the chairman of an important committee to promote it. I understand that he still wants to divide
Iraq into three separate countries--a decision for Iraqis to make and not us. If we try to implement that policy, it would doubtless
lead to more American deaths--to say nothing of Iraqi deaths.
So not only is he not good for American workers, he is not good for the American soldier who is disproportionately likely not
to be from the elite classes but rather from the working and lower-middle class.
The only other Democratic candidate who opposed war-mongering besides Sanders was Tulsi Gabbard. I watched CNN commentary after
a debate in which she participated. While the other participants received lots of commentary from CNN talking heads. she got almost
nothing. She was featured in a video montage of candidates saying "Trump"; other than that, she was invisible in the post-debate
analysis.
I don't know how far it travelled outside of Democratic primary voters, but I recall Biden's campaign saying that they were
planning to be sort of a placeholder that would pass the torch to the next generation. He's insinuated that he only wants to serve
one term and saw jumping into the race as the only way to beat Trump. Not the most exciting platform for the Democrats to run
on.
As depressing as this primary was, it's good to see that the rising generation of Democrats was resistant to platitudes and demanded
actual policy proposals.
Shame the party elders fell for the same old tricks yet again. I just hope that once there are more of
us, we can have a serious policy debate in both major parties about free trade, immigration, inequality. The parties' voters aren't
all that far apart on economics, yet neither of us is being given what we want. Whichever party sincerely takes a stand for the
American working class stands to dominate American politics for a generation.
The problem with Biden's "placeholder" comments is that he specifically mentioned it for Pete Buttigeig, the McKinsey-trained
career opportunist who believes in his bones the same neoliberal economics and interventionist foreign policies as the last generation.
Same bad ideas, new woke packaging.
Kamala Harris and Susan Rice, both tops on the VP list, will do just fine in place of Buttigieg - he's slated to revive TPP
as the new USTR cabinet lead.
Because of slavery alot of bad political policy was incorporated in the founding documents. If a police officer is about to
wrongly arrest you because you are black , you do not care if his hatred stems from 400 years of discrimination against blacks.
Rather you care that he won't kill you in this encounter because of his racism.
To me, I have always thought that America's original sin was slavery. Its stain can not be completely wiped out.
And I further believe that if Native Americans would have enslaved the newly arrived Europeans, and remained the ruling majority,
white people would be discriminated against today.
So the problem is not that white people are inherently evil, or other races are inherently good. It is that because of slavery
black people are bad, white people are good.
As a nation we have never been able to wash out the stain completely. Never will. Getting closer to the promised land is the
best we are going to do. Probably take another 400 years.
In everyday encounters no one cares how discrimination began, just treat me like you want to be treated. Pretty simple.
"As a management tool, anti-racism sows constant suspicion among workers who are encouraged to detect white supremacist sentiments
in everything that their fellow workers say or do."
The author does not offer one smidgen of proof that any company uses antiracism to divide workers. It might be plausible that
it's happened, but Baszak has no data at all.
Over the last 40 years, the rate of police killings of young black men declined by 79% percent.
You think this is an accident? It came about through intense pressure on the police to stop killing Black people -- exactly
the sort of racial emphasis the author seems to be decrying. Important to note that the non-fatal mistreatment has remained high.
The need for cheap labor comes first; ideologies like white supremacy only give this bleak reality a spiritual gloss
Baszak believes racism has no life of its own, it exists only as a tool of the bosses. This is vulgar Marxism. At least since
the decades after Bacon's Rebellion ended in 1677, poor whites have invested in white supremacy as a way of boosting their social
status. Most Southern families owned no slaves, yet most joined the Civil War cause. The psychological draw of racism, its cultural
strength, are obviated by Barszak. And I bet Barbara Fields does not consider racism an epiphenomenon of economics.
They made a movie that beautifully touches this in the 1970s with Harvey Keitel and Richard Pryor called "Blue
Collar."
"That's exactly what the company wants: to keep you on their line," says Smokey, the coolest and most strategically minded
of the crew. "They'll do anything to keep you on their line. They pit the lifers against the new boys, the old against the young,
the black against the white -- everybody -- to keep us in our place."
The core thesis in this piece is the animating foundation of The Hill's political talk show "Rising." Composed of a populist
Bernie supporter (Krystal Ball) and populist conservative (Saagar Enjeti) as hosts, they frequently highlight the purpose of woke
cultural battles is to distract everyone for their neoliberal economic models -- a system that actually has greater deleterious
impact on black communities.
This video is one recent example of what you'll rarely see in mainstream media:
"... These elites have no intention of instituting anything more than cosmetic change. They refuse to ask the questions that matter because they do not want to hear the answers. They are systems managers. They use these symbolic gestures to gaslight the public and leave our failed democracy, from which they and their corporate benefactors benefit, untouched. ..."
"... The crisis we face is not, as the ruling elites want us to believe, limited to police violence. ..."
"... The problem is an economic and political system that has by design created a nation of serfs and obscenely rich masters. ..."
Once again, we see proposed legislation to mandate police reform -- more body cameras,
consent decrees, revised use-of-force policies, banning chokeholds, civilian review boards,
requiring officers to intervene when they see misconduct, banning no-knock search warrants,
more training in de-escalation tactics, a requirement by law enforcement agencies to report
use-of-force data, nationally enforced standards for police training and greater diversity --
proposals made, and in several cases adopted in the wake of numerous other police murders,
including those of Eric Garner, Michael Brown and Philando Castile. The Minneapolis Police
Department, for example, established a duty to intervene requirement by police officers after
the 2014 killing of Brown in Ferguson. This requirement did not save Floyd. ...
The public displays of solidarity are, as in the past, smoke and mirrors, a pantomime of
faux anguish and empathy by bankrupt ruling elites, including most Black politicians groomed by
the Democratic Party and out of touch with the daily humiliation, stress of economic misery and
suffering that defines the lives of many of the protesters.
These elites have no intention of instituting anything more than cosmetic change. They
refuse to ask the questions that matter because they do not want to hear the answers. They are
systems managers. They use these symbolic gestures to gaslight the public and leave our failed
democracy, from which they and their corporate benefactors benefit, untouched. What we
are watching in this outpouring of televised solidarity with the victims of police violence
is an
example of what Bertram Gross calls "friendly fascism," the "nice-guy mask" used to
disguise the despotism of the ultra-rich and our corporate overseers. Whatever you think about
Donald Trump, he is at least open about his racism, lust for state violence and commitment to
white supremacy.
The crisis we face is not, as the ruling elites want us to believe, limited to police
violence. It is a class and generational revolt. It will not be solved with new police
reforms, which always result, as Princeton professor Naomi Murakawa
points out in her book "The First Civil Right: How Liberals Built Prison America," in less
accountable, larger and more lethal police forces. The problem is an economic and
political system that has by design created a nation of serfs and obscenely rich masters.
The problem is deindustrialization, offshoring of manufacturing, automation and austerity
programs that allow families to be priced out of our for-profit healthcare system and see
nearly one in
five children 12 and younger without enough to eat. ...
The entrenched racism in America has always meant that poor people of color are the first
cast aside in society and disproportionately suffer from the most brutal forms of social
control meted out by the police and the prison system. But there will not be, as Martin Luther
King pointed out, racial justice until there is economic justice. And there will not be
economic justice until we wrest power back from the hands of our corporate masters. Until that
happens, we will go through cycle after cycle of brutal police murders and cycle after cycle of
the profuse apologies and promises of reform. We are trapped in an abusive relationship. When
we finally have enough, when we cry out in pain and walk out, our abuser comes after us with
flowers and apologies and promises to change. Back we go for more.
"... Old saying: A Recession is when your neighbor loses their Job. A Depression is when you lose your Job. ..."
"... A lot of mega wealthy people are cheats. They get insider info, they don't pay people and do all they can to provide the least amount of value possible while tricking suckers into buying their crap. Don't even get me started on trust fund brats who come out of the womb thinking they are Warren buffet level genius in business. ..."
"... There's a documentary about Wal-Mart that has the best title ever: The High Cost of Low Cost ..."
"... Globalism killed the American dream. We can buy cheap goods made somewhere else if we have a job here that pays us enough money. ..."
You can't just move to American cities to pursue opportunity; even the high wages paid in
New York are rendered unhelpful because the cost of housing is so high.
Martin Luther King, Jr. was vilified and ultimately murdered when he was helping organize
a Poor People's Campaign. Racial justice means economic justice.
A lot of mega wealthy people are cheats. They get insider info, they don't pay people and
do all they can to provide the least amount of value possible while tricking suckers into
buying their crap. Don't even get me started on trust fund brats who come out of the womb
thinking they are Warren buffet level genius in business.
Nailed it. As a millennial, I'm sick of being told to just "deal with it" when the cards
have always been stacked against me. Am I surviving? Yes. Am I thriving? No.
When the reserve status of the American dollar goes away, then it will become apparent how
poor the US really is. You cannot maintain a country without retention of the ability to
manufacture the articles you use on a daily basis. The military budget and all the jobs it
brings will have to shrink catastrophically.
...and sometimes you CAN'T afford to move. You can't find a decent job. You certainly
can't build a meaningful savings. You can't find an apartment. And if you have kids? That
makes it even harder. I've been trying to move for years, but the conditions have to be
perfect to do it responsibly. The American Dream died for me once I realized that no matter
the choices I made, my four years of college, my years of saving and working hard....I do NOT
have upward mobility. For me, the American Dream is dead. I've been finding a new dream. The
human dream.
This is a very truncated view. You need to expand your thinking. WHY has the system been
so overtly corrupted? It's globalism that has pushed all this economic pressure on the
millennials and the middle class. It was the elites, working with corrupt politicians, that
rigged the game so the law benefited them.
This is all reversible. History shows that capitalism can be properly regulated in a way
that benefits all. The answer to the problem is to bring back those rules, not implement
socialism.
Trump has:
- Ended the free trade deals
- Imposed Protective tarriffs to defend American jobs and workers
- Lowered corporate taxes to incentivize business to locate within us borders.
- Limited immigration to reduce the supply of low skilled labor within US borders.
The result? before COVID hit the average American worker saw the first inflation adjusted
wage increase in over 30 years!
This is why the fake news and hollywood continue to propagandize the masses into hating
Trump.
Trump is implementing economic policies good for the people and bad for the elites
Krystal Ball exposes the delusion of the American dream.
About Rising: Rising is a weekday morning show with bipartisan hosts that breaks the mold of
morning TV by taking viewers inside the halls of Washington power like never before. The show
leans into the day's political cycle with cutting edge analysis from DC insiders who can
predict what is going to happen.
It also sets the day's political agenda by breaking exclusive
news with a team of scoop-driven reporters and demanding answers during interviews with the
country's most important political newsmakers.
Got my degree just as the great recession hit. Couldn't find real work for 3 years, not
using my degree... But it was work. now after 8 years, im laid off. I did everything "right".
do good in school, go to college, get a job...
I've never been fired in my life. its always,
"Your contract is up" "Sorry we cant afford to keep you", "You can make more money collecting!
but we'll give a recommendation if you find anything."
Now I'm back where i started... only
now I have new house and a family to support... no pressure.
"... "The extraordinary destruction of white and Asian businesses in many instances wiping out a family's lifetime work, the looting of national businesses whose dumbshit CEOs support the looters, the merciless gang beatings of whites and Asians who attempted to defend their persons and their property, the egging on of the violence by politicians in both parties and by the entirely of the media including many alternative media websites, shows a country undergoing collapse. ..."
"... This is why it is not shown in national media . Some local media show an indication of the violent destruction in their community, but it is not accumulated and presented to a national audience. Consequently, Americans think the looting and destruction is only a local occurrence I just checked CNN and the BBC and there is nothing about the extraordinary economic destruction and massive thefts." ..."
"... Why has the media failed to show the vast destruction of businesses and private property? Why have they minimized the effects of vandalism, looting and arson? Why have they fanned the flames of social unrest from the very beginning, shrugging off the ruin and devastation while cheerleading the demonstrations as a heroic struggle for racial justice? Is this is the same media that supported every bloody war, every foreign intervention, and every color-revolution for the last 5 decades? Are we really expected to believe that they've changed their stripes and become an energized proponent of social justice? ..."
"... The scale and coordination alone suggests that elements in the deep state are probably involved. We know from evidence uncovered during the Russiagate probe, that the media works hand-in-glove with the Intel agencies and FBI while–at the same time– serving as a mouthpiece for elites. ..."
"... That hasn't changed, in fact, it's gotten even worse. The uniformity of the coverage suggests that that same perception management strategy is being employed here as well. Even at this late date, the determination to remove Trump from office is as strong as ever even though, in the present case, it has been combined with the broader political strategy of inciting fratricidal violence, obliterating urban areas, and spreading anarchy across the count ..."
"... This isn't about racial justice or police brutality, it's about regime change, internal destabilization, and martial law. ..."
"... What the Black Lives Matter movement does not understand is that they are being used by the billionaire white capitalists who are fighting to push the working class even lower ..."
"... The rightful grievance over racism against blacks is now used to get Trump since Russia Gate, Impeachment, the corona scandal ..."
"... The protests are merely a fig leaf for a "color revolution" that bears a striking resemblance to the more than 50 CIA-backed coups launched on foreign governments in the last 70 years ..."
"... "Use a grievance that the local population has against the system, identify and support those who oppose the current government, infiltrate and strengthen opposition movements, fund them with millions of dollars, organize protests that seem legitimate and have paid political instigators dress up in regular clothes to blend in." ..."
"... "The logistical capabilities of antifa+ are also impressive. They can move people around the country with ease, position pallet loads of new brick, 55 gallon new trash cans of frozen water bottles and other debris suitable for throwing on gridded patterns around cities in a well thought out distribution pattern. Who pays for this? Who plans this? Who coordinates these plans and gives "execute orders?" ..."
"... Antifa+ can create massive propaganda campaigns that fit their agenda. These campaigns are fully supported by the MSM and by many in the Congressional Democratic Party. The present meme of "Defund the Police" is an example. This appeared miraculously, and simultaneously across the country. I am impressed. Yesterday the frat boy type who is mayor of Minneapolis was booed out of a mass meeting of radicals in that fair city because he refused to endorse abolishing the police force. ..."
"... Colonel Lang is not the only one to marvel at Antifa's "logistical capabilities". The United States has never experienced two weeks of sustained protests in hundreds of its cities at the same time. ..."
"... it points to extensive coordination with groups across the country, a comprehensive media strategy (that probably preceded the killing of George Floyd), a sizable presence on social media (to put people on the street), and agents provocateur whose task is to incite violence, loot and create mayhem. ..."
"... This a destabilization campaign similar to the CIA's color revolutions designed to topple the regime (Trump), install a puppet government (Biden), impose "shock therapy" on the economy ..."
"... "The BLM represents the forefront of an effort to divide Americans along racial and political lines, thus keeping race and identity-based barbarians safely away from more critical issues of importance to the elite, most crucially a free hand to plunder and ransack natural resources, minerals, crude oil, and impoverish billions of people whom the ruling elite consider unproductive useless eaters and a hindrance to the drive to dominate, steal, and murder . ..."
"... The protest movement is the mask that conceals the maneuvering of elites. The real target of this operation is the Constitutional Republic itself ..."
"... that explains why anti-fa attack Yellow Vests in Germany. The Yellow Vests are the true people's movement and as shown in the video below it is not about the left and the right for the yellow vest but common people fed up with the system ..."
"... Watch every frame of this. It shows the government-media complex and their little thugs, ANTIFA, in perfect collusion to interfere with the regular Germans trying to stop the Satanic communist-Globo homo project. ..."
"... My bro is one of the few people flying, for work. He says the only people on the airlines are antifa thugs moving all around the country. ..."
"... Won't these riots create a wave of revulsion among the silent majority and consolidate Trump's support base? ..."
"... Is Antifa a group of deep state agitators? That's the question. In the Sunday edition of the New York Times– the official propaganda organ of US elites– an article is entirely devoted to creating "plausible deniability" that Antifa is behind the violence in the protests that have swept the country. ..."
"Revolutions are often seen as spontaneous. It looks like people just went into the
street. But it's the result of months or years of preparation. It is very boring until you
reach a certain point, where you can organize mass demonstrations or strikes. If it is
carefully planned, by the time they start, everything is over in a matter of weeks."
Foreign Policy
Journal
Does anyone believe the nationwide riots and looting are a spontaneous reaction to the
killing of George Floyd?
It's all too coordinated, too widespread, and too much in-sync with the media narrative that
applauds the "mainly peaceful protests" while ignoring the vast destruction to cities across
the country. What's that all about? Do the instigators of these demonstrations want to see our
cities reduced to urban wastelands where street gangs and Antifa thugs impose their own harsh
justice? That's where this is headed, isn't it?
Of course there are millions of protesters who honestly believe they're fighting racial
injustice and police brutality. And more power to them. But that certainly doesn't mean there
aren't hidden agendas driving these outbursts. Quite the contrary. It seems to me that the
protest movement is actually the perfect vehicle for affecting dramatic social changes that
only serve the interests of elites. For example, who benefits from defunding the police? Not
African Americans, that's for sure. Black neighborhoods need more security not less. And yet,
the New York Times lead editorial on Saturday proudly announces, " Yes, We Mean Literally
Abolish the Police–Because reform won't happen." Check it out:
"We can't reform the police. The only way to diminish police violence is to reduce contact
between the public and the police .There is not a single era in United States history in
which the police were not a force of violence against black people. Policing in the South
emerged from the slave patrols in the 1700 and 1800s that caught and returned runaway slaves.
In the North, the first municipal police departments in the mid-1800s helped quash labor
strikes and riots against the rich. Everywhere, they have suppressed marginalized populations
to protect the status quo.
So when you see a police officer pressing his knee into a black man's neck until he dies,
that's the logical result of policing in America. When a police officer brutalizes a black
person, he is doing what he sees as his job " (" Yes, We
Mean Literally Abolish the Police–Because reform won't happen" , New York
Times)
So, according to the Times, the problem isn't single parent families, or underfunded
education or limited job opportunities or fractured neighborhoods, it's the cops who have
nothing to do with any of these problems. Are we supposed to take this seriously, because the
editors of the Times certainly do. They'd like us to believe that there is groundswell support
for this loony idea, but there isn't. In a recent poll, more than 60% of those surveyed, oppose
the idea of defunding the police. So why would such an unpopular, wacko idea wind up as the
headline op-ed in the Saturday edition? Well, because the Times is doing what it always does,
advancing the political agenda of the elites who hold the purse-strings and dictate which ideas
are promoted and which end up on the cutting room floor. That's how the system works. Check out
this excerpt from an article by Paul Craig Roberts:
"The extraordinary destruction of white and Asian businesses in many instances wiping out
a family's lifetime work, the looting of national businesses whose dumbshit CEOs support the
looters, the merciless gang beatings of whites and Asians who attempted to defend their
persons and their property, the egging on of the violence by politicians in both parties and
by the entirely of the media including many alternative media websites, shows a country
undergoing collapse.
This is why it is not shown in national media . Some local media show an
indication of the violent destruction in their community, but it is not accumulated and
presented to a national audience. Consequently, Americans think the looting and destruction
is only a local occurrence I just checked CNN and the BBC and there is nothing about the
extraordinary economic destruction and massive thefts." (" The Real Racists", Paul Craig Roberts,
Unz Review)
Roberts makes a good point, and one that's worth mulling over. Why has the media failed to
show the vast destruction of businesses and private property? Why have they minimized the
effects of vandalism, looting and arson? Why have they fanned the flames of social unrest from
the very beginning, shrugging off the ruin and devastation while cheerleading the
demonstrations as a heroic struggle for racial justice? Is this is the same media that
supported every bloody war, every foreign intervention, and every color-revolution for the last
5 decades? Are we really expected to believe that they've changed their stripes and become an
energized proponent of social justice?
Nonsense. The media's role in concealing the damage should only convince skeptics that the
protests are just one part of a much larger operation. What we're seeing play out in over 400
cities across the US, has more to do with toppling Trump and sowing racial division than it
does with the killing of George Floyd. The scale and coordination alone suggests that elements
in the deep state are probably involved. We know from evidence uncovered during the Russiagate
probe, that the media works hand-in-glove with the Intel agencies and FBI while–at the
same time– serving as a mouthpiece for elites.
That hasn't changed, in fact, it's gotten
even worse. The uniformity of the coverage suggests that that same perception management
strategy is being employed here as well. Even at this late date, the determination to remove
Trump from office is as strong as ever even though, in the present case, it has been combined
with the broader political strategy of inciting fratricidal violence, obliterating urban areas,
and spreading anarchy across the country.
This isn't about racial justice or police brutality,
it's about regime change, internal destabilization, and martial law. Take a look at this
article at The Herland Report:
"What the Black Lives Matter movement does not understand is that they are being used by
the billionaire white capitalists who are fighting to push the working class even lower and
end the national sovereignty principles that president Trump stands for in America .
The rightful grievance over racism against blacks is now used to get Trump since Russia
Gate, Impeachment, the corona scandal and nothing else has worked. The aim is to end
democracy in the United States, control Congress and politics and assemble the power into the
hands of the very few
That sounds about right to me. The protests are merely a fig leaf for a "color revolution"
that bears a striking resemblance to the more than 50 CIA-backed coups launched on foreign
governments in the last 70 years. Have the chickens have come home to roost? It certainly looks
like it. Here's more from the same article:
"Use a grievance that the local population has against the system, identify and support
those who oppose the current government, infiltrate and strengthen opposition movements, fund
them with millions of dollars, organize protests that seem legitimate and have paid political
instigators dress up in regular clothes to blend in."
So, yes, the grievances are real, but that doesn't mean that someone else is not steering
the action. And just as the media is shaping the narrative for its own purposes, so too, there
are agents within the movement that are inciting the violence. All of this suggests the
existence of some form of command-control that provides logistical support and assists in
communications. Check out this excerpt from a post at Colonel Pat Lang's website Sic Semper
Tyrannis:
"The logistical capabilities of antifa+ are also impressive. They can move people around
the country with ease, position pallet loads of new brick, 55 gallon new trash cans of frozen
water bottles and other debris suitable for throwing on gridded patterns around cities in a
well thought out distribution pattern. Who pays for this? Who plans this? Who coordinates
these plans and gives "execute orders?"
Antifa+ can create massive propaganda campaigns that fit their agenda. These campaigns are
fully supported by the MSM and by many in the Congressional Democratic Party. The present
meme of "Defund the Police" is an example. This appeared miraculously, and simultaneously
across the country. I am impressed. Yesterday the frat boy type who is mayor of Minneapolis
was booed out of a mass meeting of radicals in that fair city because he refused to endorse
abolishing the police force.
Gutting the civil police forces has long been a major goal of
the far left, but now, they have the ability to create mass hysteria over it when they have
an excuse ."
("My take on the present situation", Sic Semper Tyrannis)
Colonel Lang is not the only one to marvel at Antifa's "logistical capabilities". The United
States has never experienced two weeks of sustained protests in hundreds of its cities at the
same time. It's beyond suspicious, it points to extensive coordination with groups across the
country, a comprehensive media strategy (that probably preceded the killing of George Floyd), a
sizable presence on social media (to put people on the street), and agents provocateur whose
task is to incite violence, loot and create mayhem.
None of this has anything to do with racial justice or police brutality. America is being
destabilized and sacked for other purposes altogether. This a destabilization campaign similar
to the CIA's color revolutions designed to topple the regime (Trump), install a puppet
government (Biden), impose "shock therapy" on the economy pushing tens of millions of Americans
into homelessness and destitution, and leave behind a broken, smoldering shell of a country
easily controlled by Federal shock troops and wealthy globalist mandarins. Here's a short
excerpt from an article by Kurt Nimmo at his excellent blog "Another Day in the Empire":
"The BLM represents the forefront of an effort to divide Americans along racial and
political lines, thus keeping race and identity-based barbarians safely away from more
critical issues of importance to the elite, most crucially a free hand to plunder and ransack
natural resources, minerals, crude oil, and impoverish billions of people whom the ruling
elite consider unproductive useless eaters and a hindrance to the drive to dominate, steal,
and murder .
It is sad to say BLM serves the elite by ignoring or remaining ignorant of the main
problem -- boundless predation by a neoliberal criminal project that considers all -- black,
white, yellow, brown -- as expliotable and dispensable serfs. " (" 2 Million Arab Lives
Don't Matter ", Kurt Nimmo, Another Day in the Empire)
The protest movement is the mask that conceals the maneuvering of elites. The real target of
this operation is the Constitutional Republic itself. Having succeeded in using the Lockdown to
push the economy into severe recession, the globalists are now inciting a fratricidal war that
will weaken the opposition and prepare the country for a new authoritarian order.
the media narrative that applauds the "mainly peaceful protests" while ignoring the vast
destruction to Hong Kong where there was neither police violence nor racial discrimination.
Look like the same organizing principles were used in both places.
Of course that explains why anti-fa attack Yellow Vests in Germany.
The Yellow Vests are the true people's movement and as shown in the video below it is not
about the left and the right for the yellow vest but common people fed up with the system, a
true grass roots movement of the people.
And Anti-fa, the Whores of the Satanic elites attack them. Why would anti-fascists attack the
common man?
Watch every frame of this. It shows the government-media complex and their little thugs,
ANTIFA, in perfect collusion to interfere with the regular Germans trying to stop the Satanic
communist-Globo homo project.
Few arguments in contra of the article. Can any-one conceive of there being a competition between BLM rioting organizing and
covertly supporting, and Corona-19, where the elites were very cohesive internationally in the face.
The target, Trump, the man with no policies, the implement nothing, is it such a worthy target to a fraction of the power
elites? That would speak for shallowness on their behalf. Creating back-ground noise to fade out the re-organizing of society,
regardless of actors as Trump could be an acceptable explanation. "Keep the surplus population busy. Keep the attention on the
streets".
There is a trade-off. The international elites see the exposure of the US internal policies, the expenditure of energy, do
they regard the situation as something to copy-paste, an interesting experiment, or as weakness to be taken advantage of?
Probably the first, then BLM covert support chains perfectly with Corona-19, and scales things up.
"Black neighborhoods need more security not less."
Police are not security, they're repression. Anybody of any color who thinks they're safer
with heavily armed bureaucrats blundering around is a moron.
And since when does reductions in guard labor equal austerity? There are several economic
rights that should not be derogated, but assholes with guns impounding cars is not one of
them. If the residents of a community are asking for more cops, that's one thing. They are
not. Law enforcement budgets are stuffed up the ass of residents and often municipalities.
Look into e.g. the MA "strong chief" enabling acts. States have massive unfunded pension
liabilities in large part because of police featherbedding. That's what's being pushed by the
"deep state" (you mean CIA.) The evident CIA use of provocateurs is aimed at justifying
further increases in repressive capacity.
OK bye! Don't let the door hit your fat ass on the way out! Stupid and delusional though pigs are, it's dimly dawning on them that America considers
them crooked loudmouthed violent assholes. Here's a typical one exercising what Gore Vidal
called the core competence of police, whining.
Boo hoo hoo, asshole, go home and beat your wife or eat a gun or whatever it is you dream
of doing in retirement, cause the states can't afford your crooked unions' pensions in this
induced depression. Cut these white man's welfare jobs.
Is Antifa a group of deep state agitators? That's the question.
In the Sunday edition of the New York Times– the official propaganda organ of US
elites– an article is entirely devoted to creating "plausible deniability" that Antifa
is behind the violence in the protests that have swept the country.
Why is the Times so concerned that its readers might have a different opinion on this
matter? Why do they want to convince people that the protests-riots are merely spontaneous
outbursts of anti-racist sentiment? Could it be because the Times job is to create a version
of events that suits the interests of the elites it serves? Here's a few excerpts from
today's piece titled "Federal Arrests Show No Sign That Antifa Plotted Protests":
While anarchists and anti-fascists openly acknowledged being part of the immense
crowds, they call the scale, intensity and durability of the protests far beyond anything
they might dream of organizing. Some tactics used at the protests, like the wearing of
all black and the shattering of store windows, are reminiscent of those used by anarchist
groups, say those who study such movements. (plausible deniability)
Anarchists and others accuse officials of trying to assign blame to extremists rather
than accept the idea that millions of Americans from a variety of political backgrounds have
been on the streets demanding change. Numerous experts also called the participation of
extremist organizations overstated. (plausible deniability)
"A significant number of people in positions of authority are pushing a false narrative
about antifa being behind a lot of this activity," said J.M. Berger, the author of the
book "Extremism" and an authority on militant movements. "These are just unbelievably large
protests at a time of great turmoil in this country, and there is surprisingly little
violence given the size of this movement.".. (plausible deniability)
In New York, the police briefed reporters on May 31, claiming that radical anarchists
from outside the state had plotted ahead of protests by setting up encrypted communications
systems, arranging for street medics and collecting bail funds.
Within five days, however, Dermot F. Shea, the city's police commissioner, acknowledged
that most of the hundreds of people arrested at the protests in New York were actually New
Yorkers who took advantage of the chaos to commit crimes and were not motivated by political
ideology . John Miller, the police official who had briefed reporters, told CNN that most
looting in New York had been committed by "regular criminal groups." (plausible
deniability)
Kit O'Connell, a longtime radical leftist activist and community organizer in Austin, said
that shortly after Mr. Trump's election, the group took part in anti-fascist protests in the
city against a local white supremacist group and scuffled separately with Act for America, an
anti-Muslim organization.
Why is the Times acting like Antifa's attorney? Why are the trying to minimize the role of
professional agitators? Why is the Times so determined to shape the public's thinking on this
matter?
Doesn't this suggest that Antifa and other groups operating within the protest movement
are actually linked to agencies in the deep state that are conducting another operation
against the American people?
@anonymous anonymous, I have been encouraging cops to quit for a long time. They are
protecting the wrong people, being used to protect people in the ruling class that hate and
despise cops just a little less than they hate and despise the rest of us civilians.
To the issue at hand, black people should only be policed, arrested, charged, prosecuted,
defended, judged, and (if found guilty) punished by other blacks. No white person should have
anything to do with it. Any white person policing negros in America is making a huge mistake,
and should immediately quit.
The pensions are not going to be paid, and the crazy, Soros paid for black people are
going to make it impossible for a white cop pretty soon anyway. Might as well walk before
they make you run.
Don't worry about BLM, which is corporate phoney bullshit protest, easter parades and
internet posturing. The blacks in the street don't fall for that shit. Look what happens when
coopted oreos try to herd everybody back to tame marching:
The provocateurs are not influencing them. The sellout house negroes are not influencing
them. They know what they want. The regime is shitting its pants. If they scapegoat Trump and
purge him, Biden will inherit the same problem only worse.
Won't these riots create a wave of revulsion among the silent majority and consolidate
Trump's support base?
That's what I am wondering too. It makes more sense to me that the elites driving these
BLM riots are those who support Trump. Terrify people and threaten the existence of police is
a good way to get elderly white voters out of their covid lockdowns on election day.
Doesn't this suggest that Antifa and other groups operating within the protest movement
are actually linked to agencies in the deep state that are conducting another operation
against the American people?
Do we really want to suggest the CIA is committing treason against the American people?
Isn't it more likely that the Times is agitating against the CIA for other reasons? Reasons
Carlos Slim could explain?
For those who haven't read Pepe Escobar's latsest on BLM, here's a couple clips:
Black Lives Matter, founded in 2013 by a trio of middle class, queer black women very
vocal against "hetero-patriarchy", is a product of what University of British Columbia's
Peter Dauvergne defines as "corporatization of activism".
Over the years, Black Lives Matter evolved as a marketing brand, like Nike (which
fully supports it). The widespread George Floyd protests elevated it to the status of a new
religion. Yet Black Lives Matter carries arguably zero, true revolutionary appeal. This is
not James Brown's "Say It Loud, I'm Black and I'm Proud". And it does not get even close to
Black Power and the Black Panthers' "Power to the People".
Black Lives Matter profited in 2016 from a humongous $100 million grant from the Ford
Foundation and other philanthropic capitalism stalwarts such as JPMorgan Chase and the
Kellogg Foundation.
The Ford Foundation is very close to the U.S. Deep State. The board of directors is
crammed with corporate CEOs and Wall Street honchos. In a nutshell; Black Lives Matter, the
organization, today is fully sanitized; largely integrated into the Democratic Party machine;
adored by mainstream media; and certainly does not represent a threat to the 0.001%.
an evident ham-handed attempt to make this all about race. The real threat to this police
state is racial and international solidarity against state predation – the stuff that
got Fred Hampton killed,
"when I talk about the masses, I'm talking about the white masses, I'm talking about the
black masses, and the brown masses, and the yellow masses, too We say you don't fight racism
with racism. We're gonna fight racism with solidarity. We say you don't fight capitalism with
no black capitalism; you fight capitalism with socialism."
or Angela Davis and the Che-Lumumba club. BAP is right back on this and the resonating
international demonstrations show that that's the right track. The whole world sees what this
is about, except for a few fucked-over US whites.
botazefa, of course the CIA is committing treason against the American people. Where were you
when they whacked JFK, then RFK? Where were you when they blew up OKC? Where were you when
they released anthrax on the Senate, infiltrated and protected 9/11 terrorists, assigned more
terrorists to MITRE to blind NORAD, blew up the WTC for the second time, and exfiltrated the
Saudi logisticians?
Anybody unaware that CIA has been pure treason from inception is (1) retarded XOR (2) a
CIA traitor.
Sorry. The assholes on this asshole site will not let you say that what is important is how
the super-billionaires control us. They are going to insist that it's niggerniggernigger all
the way home and that's all there is to it. You would think they were paid. Or really, really
stupid.
When Gina, she-wolf of Udon Thani, got busted for trying to overthrow the United States
government with Russiagate, she hung onto her job by rigging the succession with all the
Brennan traitors who ran the Russiagate coup.
So we should expect that Gina will now stage a couple massacres like Kent State and
Jackson State, because that's how CIA ratfucked Nixon when he didn't knuckle under.
Gina's extra motivated to stay on top because she's criminally culpable for systematic and
widespread torture:
@Mike Whitney Excellent article and I believe excellent analysis of the situation.
Where we may differ is with Trump's complicity in Deep State efforts. I believe Trump is a
minion of the Deep State. His actions and inactions can not be explained any other way.
Let's assume for a minute, that Pepe Escobar is correct when he says this:
"Black Lives Matter profited in 2016 from a humongous $100 million grant from the Ford
Foundation and other philanthropic capitalism stalwarts such as JPMorgan Chase and the
Kellogg Foundation .
The Ford Foundation is very close to the U.S. Deep State. The board of directors is
crammed with corporate CEOs and Wall Street honchos. In a nutshell; Black Lives Matter,
the organization, today is fully sanitized; largely integrated into the Democratic Party
machine; adored by mainstream media; and certainly does not represent a threat to the
0.001%.
If this is true–and I believe it is– then Black Lives Matter is no different
than USAID or any of the other NGOs that are used to incite revolution around the world. If
this is true, then there is likely a CIA link to these protests, the main purpose of which is
to remove Trump from office.
So Black Lives Matter= activist NGO linked to US Intel agencies= Regime Change
Operation
But there is something else going on here too, (that many readers might have noticed) that
is, the way social media has been manipulated to put millions of young people on the street
in order to promote the agenda of elites.
How did they manage that?
How did they get millions of young people to come out day after day (14 days so far) in
over 400 cities to protest an issue about which they know very little aside from the media's
irritating reiteration of "systemic racism", (a claim that is not supported by the data.)
IMO, we are seeing the first successful social media saturation campaign launched probably
by the Pentagon's Office Strategic Communications or a similar outfit within the CIA. Having
already taken control over the entire mainstream media complex, the intel agencies and their
friends at the Pentagon are now wrapping their tentacles around internet communications in
order to achieve their goal of complete tyrannical social control.
As always, the target of these massive covert operations is the American people who had
better pull their heads out of the sand pronto and come up with a plan for countering this
madness.
@anonymous The elephant in the room, that seems to be ignored by all is the simple fact
that Hispanics are working class heroes. And they outnumber the blacks, and hate their guts
for the most part. Not the scrawny punks withe Che t-shirts, but the actual working types
that are less than thrilled to deal with the weak. Notice how no Hispanic barrios have EVER
been f ** ked with, no matter when the race riot? There is an open fatwa from La Eme
regarding blacks that has never been rescinded. Has a lot to do with the kneegro exodus from
the LA area, which correlates with the lack of looting in the formerly black areas. Which the
MSM prefers to ignore. The happy idiots are mugging for the cameras on a daily basis in
Hollywood, but the Hispanic run Sheriff's office has no problem with popping gas and
defending businesses. Also note that the MSM only reports on areas when a local government
craters to the mob. LA County was under curfew for 7 days due to a mob of looters that
numbered perhaps 2000. If that Jew mayor (with the Italian surname) had not allowed the
looting, then we would have seen the kind of 36 hour turnaround like we had with Rodney King.
The ethnic group that ignores the MSM and stands up for its own people will win in the end.
Right now we are looking more toward the kind of Celtic/Meso-American alliance that is well
known in the penal system. These groups can exist side by side, with each ignoring the other.
Blacks, on the other paw seem to be unable to keep to themselves, at least on the ghetto
level, and will always be an issue for civilization. It's time we stop calling for a generic
and all-inclusive White establishment. The race traitors and weaklings forfeit that right.
When Celts, Italians, Germans, etc. were proud and independent, there was strength. It's time
to return to that ideal. Only the negroid actually lumps all whites together, which the Jews
use as a divisive tool. Strength should be idolized, rather than weakness exploited.
I'm saying that the NYT is not necessarily mouthpiece *only* for the Deep State. As for
your JFK assassination – Senate Anthrax – 9/11 etc, those are considered
conspiracy theories and I've never been persuaded otherwise. I've read up on the theories and
they are not strong.
I don't know what a retarded XOR is except as it relates to logic diagrams and I don't
work for the CIA.
Do Deep State Elements Operate Within the Protest Movement?
It's called Jewish lawfare for Antifa, Jewish control of media, and Jewish cult of Magic
Negro.
Even though Jews led the Gentric Cleansing campaigns against blacks by using mass
immigration, globo-homo celebration, and white middle class return to cities, the Jews are
now pretending be with the blacks and throwing the immigrants, white middle class, and homos
to the black mobs.
simple fact that Hispanics are working class heroes
Some are. Most aren't. And the 'not'% grows with selective Americanization (not
assimilation). Still, I'll take them over the blacks, even with their generally inferior (to
White) culture.
Whites are better with separation from them along with blacks. Whatever the prime driver,
both groups have poisoned America, likely beyond repair. Conquistador gonnna
conquistador.
M. Whitney in comment 21 clarifies his view of BLM as the impetus for this rebellion. That
does not square with the reports of people on the street.
BLM is exactly analogous to BDS: a controlled opposition of feckless halfassed gestures
designed to distract from the real movement. You hear BLM apparatchiks whining about getting
their movement hijacked because people in the streets show solidarity with oppressed groups
worldwide – and youe hear BLM getting booed by the people they're trying to corral.
BLM's mission is putting words in the protestors' mouths. You hear Democrat BLM spokesmodels
trying to distort calls for police abolition and no more impunity. And real protestors call
bullshit.
BLM works on dumb white guys: hating on BLM makes them feel very edgy and defiant. Black
Lives Matter! Blue Lives Matter! Black! Blue! Black! Blue! Catnip for dumbshits, courtesy of
CIA. Keeps them away from the really subversive stuff, which makes perfect sense for whites
too.
@ICD Look into whether the training of cops has been outsourced and privatized. Or simply
shortened to save money.
And ask why the police are even armed when in Communist China they are not, and
traditionally in the non-American West they were not, now are in imitation of America.
Ann Nonny Mouse, truer words were never spoken. Chinese cops have these cute little
nightsticks, and sometimes they will bop a guy and the guy just stands there and says Ow and
the cops continue to reason with him, no restraint, incapacitation, any of that shit. British
cops used to be that way, they used to reason with you. Now they're all American style
Assholes, if not Israeli concentration camp guards. Just nuke FOP HQ in Memphis.
Koch sees privatization as a future profit center and a chance to control the cops
himself. They're not trainable, they're too fucking stupid. We all did fine without pigs up
through most of the 19th century. Hue and cry works fine. Fire all the cops and replace them
with unarmed women social workers. That's all they are, prodigiously incompetent social
workers.
Too, those many businesses with all that unsold inventory sitting around gathering dust due
to Covid isolation will benefit from insurance payments covering their losses due to looting.
The cherry on top.
Are you just clueless or what? Did you notice the names of the Antifa leaders that have
been exposed? They are Amish Right? They are Jews and they will always be Jews! Soros and
other Jews have been running this game for a long time. Where have you been? SDS in Chicago
no Jews there right!
The CIA and the FBI overwhelmed with Jews can you count? All the professors who have been
destroying whites with their fake studies blaming everything wrong in the world on Whites and
Western Civilization. The entire Media owned by who?
Either you were dropped out of a spaceship a few days ago or you are a total idiot and
can't see the forest before trees.
Try this: The Percentage of all Ivy League Presidents, top adminstrators, deans etc take a
guess then go count them and see which group they belong to.
Does anyone believe the nationwide riots and looting are a spontaneous reaction to the
killing of George Floyd?
It's all too coordinated, too widespread, and too much in-sync with the media narrative
.
* * *
This a destabilization campaign similar to the CIA's color revolutions designed to
topple the regime (Trump), install a puppet government (Biden), impose "shock therapy" on
the economy pushing tens of millions of Americans into homelessness and destitution, and
leave behind a broken, smoldering shell of a country easily controlled by Federal shock
troops and wealthy globalist mandarins.
One must wonder: How could the CIA and the U.S. Democrat establishment foment and
coordinate all of the Black Lives Matter protests occurring in Canada, several nations of
South and Central America, the U.K., Ireland, throughout the European Union, and in
Switzerland, the Middle East (Turkey, Iran ), and in Asia (Korea, Japan .) and New Zealand,
Australia, and Africa?
Mr. Whitney: Neither magic nor bigotry-induced hallucinations can forge a tenable
conspiracy theory.
I think the primary reason the mainstream media doesn't want the general public, especially
those living outside the major cities, to understand the extent of the destruction and
violence that spread in a highly-coordinated fashion across America, is that this would be
cause for alarm among a majority of Americans who would demand more Law & Order, which
would redound to Trump's benefit.
Notice Trump is countering by tweeting "LAW & ORDER!"
Here is Trump tweeting "Does anyone notice how little the Radical Left takeover of Seattle
is being discussed in the Fake News Media[?] That is very much on purpose "
Does anyone notice how little the Radical Left takeover of Seattle is being discussed in
the Fake News Media. That is very much on purpose because they know how badly this weakness
& ineptitude play politically. The Mayor & Governor should be ashamed of
themselves. Easily fixed!
The outcome of the election in November could hinge on the urgency the public places on
the issue of Law & Order. Hence the media's all out effort to minimize the extent of the
Anarchy and Violence and the financial sponsorship, planning, and coordination behind it.
Please see my comment of June 15, 2020 at 1:38 am GMT (comment # 34). I must apologize for
that comment's insufficiency (owed to my posting that comment before I happened upon your
comment to which this comment replies). Had I encountered your comment earlier, my
June 15, 2020 at 1:38 am GMT comment (comment # 34) would have observed that you are
triumphantly illogical as you are a world class crackpot.
@ICD You said it. Police Departments country-wide are stuffed up the wazoo with more cash
than they can spend. But what do they cry? Poor us. Poor us. We ain't got no money.
This is what they, and by they, I mean all our owners and their overseers, always do. They
cry poverty when they are rolling in loot.
Do Deep State Elements Operate Within the Protest Movement?
Yes, and the left(unwittingly) will help them with their cause, and the right will
cowardly hide right behind the deep state as protection from the violent left.
@Priss Factor You are extremely unlikely to receive any of those things from a "Negro".
90% of Americans are unlikely to even see more than ten black people in their entire lives.
I wish you psychotic fucking female idiots on this website who are constantly blathering
about black people could realize how annoying you are to the 90% of white people who are not
living in or next to black ghettos. Please STFU and allow discourse to trend in more
pertinent directions, and move away from black people if you're so paranoid about them.
@Mike Whitney The (((media))) have an uphill battle in convincing us to deny the evidence
of our eyes -- black-hooded white punks throwing bricks through storefronts then inviting
joggers to loot.
That is why so many platforms, even "free speech" GAB, are wildly censoring
counter-narratives.
@Brian Reilly Stephen Molyneux said that police forces were originally geared to operate
under white Christian societies where there was a high level of trust and people were
law-abiding. I remember when I was a kid, we didn't even lock our doors. Our bikes were left
out on the front lawn, sometimes for days, weeks, and nobody took them. Nobody locked their
car doors. People just didn't steal other people's stuff. When a cop tried to pull you over,
you didn't hit the gas pedal and take off. You didn't run from the cops; you were polite to
them and they were polite to you.
Tucker Carlson said that Blacks are now asking for their own hospitals (I forget what city
this was) and their own doctors and nurses. Blacks schools, Black police forces.
Tribes don't mix. Their culture is different than our culture. Why should they change for
us, and why should we change for them?
It is a marriage that does not work. Either send them back to Africa (best solution) or
give them Mississippi and put up a big wall. Then let them pay for their own upkeep –
all of it. Good luck with that.
Yesterday the frat boy type who is mayor of Minneapolis was booed out of a mass
meeting of radicals in that fair city because he refused to endorse abolishing the police
force.
Mayor Jacob Frey got elected at his extremely young age by flanking on the Left with anti
police rhetoric, He is the the originator of this crisis; as soon as the video of Floyd's
death was public Frey publicly and literally called the four cops murderers and said
he was powerless to have them arrested. That was a false accusation of police impunity,
because the supposedly powerless Frey was able to order the police to vacate their own
station thus letting the demonstrators take over and burn it. Yet to draw back a bit the Deep
State if worried about other states.
That event Frey largely created was the key moment of this whole thing. Trump could have
nipped it in the bud by had sending in troops immediately the Minneapolis 3rd Precinct was
burnt down. Crushing the riots in that city and preventing the example infecting the
demonstrations in other cities. and turning them into cover for riots. Trump did not want to
be seen as Draconian although it would not have been at all violent, because no one is going
to challenge the army's awesome presence once it arrived on the streets,as worked in the
Rodney King riots.
The real target of this operation is the Constitutional Republic itself. Having
succeeded in using the Lockdown to push the economy into severe recession, the globalists
are now inciting a fratricidal war that will weaken the opposition and prepare the country
for a new authoritarian order.
George Floyd had foam visible at the corners of his mouth when the police arrived. Autopsy
tests revealed Fentanyl and COVID-19: both from Wuhan. I Can't Breath is America gearing up
to confront and settle accounts with Xi's totalitarian state.
Current events might seem to be a setback for the US, but provide the opportunity for a
re-set with the black community, with a potential outcome of resolving race tensions that
have been a cause of dissension and internal weakness, just as during the Cold War racial
integration was thought essential by anti communists like Nixon. America is gearing up to
settle accounts with China, which is a Deep State new Cold War. While it is a possibility
that whites could lose control of their society, and see it fall into the hands of an
explicitly anti -acist elite/ minorities alliance, the Deep State is not the same as the
hyper capitalist elite whose growing wealth depends on China.
Do Deep State Elements Operate Within the Protest Movement?
@Mike Whitney The Duran did an excellent video titled "Social Media 'Unchecked Power'"
where they talk about Trump and Barr going after the tech companies and their virtual
monopolies with an executive order.
At 33:45 they state that Microsoft (Bill Gates) invested $1 billion and the CIA invested
$16 million into Facebook when it was still operating as a university network. The CIA were
one of the first investors in Facebook.
Why the hell was the CIA investing $16 million to get Facebook off the ground? Hmmm. Could
it be because Facebook would be instrumental in controlling the narrative?
The young people, who have no experience and no real knowledge of history, are being taken
in by these social media companies who are playing on their emotions. Any dissenting opinions
are blocked or banned. Very dangerous.
@Loup-Bouc Well, the "deep state" is just an euphemism for the jewish power structure,
and all those places you named are run be jews. That jews cooperate in extended conspiracies
without regard of borders should be common knowledge for every observer of history and
current politics. I see nothing far-fetched. Honestly, my mind would boggle if I should
explain, how the Antifa gets away with those things it always gets away with, if it wasn't
controlled by the "deep state". And I couldn't explain the international cooperation either.
As Pepe' Escobar said – Americans looting is a natural thing – just look at how
the US Military has stolen the gaz and oil from Iraq, Syria, Libya, etc. and is trying like
hell for the Venezuelan oil fields. Not to mention where all their gold, silver and billions
of dollars have gone. The list of the USG looting criminal record is unprecedented . It's a
Family Tradition. Enjoyed the article !
@MrFoSquare The Capitol Hill area of Seattle that has been taken over as an "autonomous
zone" by the protesters is really rather laughable.
One of the first things they did was put up what they called "light fencing". Oh, so when
THEY put up walls, that's perfectly fine. When Trump tries to do it, that's evil and racist.
Borders are A-okay when they're doing it.
They've colonized an area for themselves. I thought the Progressive Left was against
colonialism, taking someone else's property. Isn't that what they've done? They've taken over
whole neighborhoods.
And they've got armed patrol guards checking people as they enter. If you're not in
agreement with their ideology, you're not allowed to enter. So apparently it's okay to have
border controls when they're running the world.
They're doing everything they profess to be against. Hilarious.
@Brian Reilly "anonymous, I have been encouraging cops to quit for a long time."
Dude, why? I don't want to get jacked by some thug or some immigrant policeman from
Honduras. And I can't defend myself because it would be a hate crime.
There are underlying motives, or "hidden agendas", beneath the authentic struggle for
justice. The greatest motive is for power: either to retain it or gain it. The need or desire
for power can be identified in every conflict in history. https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/
@Realist So you think that everything they've done to Trump has been one big show and
he's been in on it? The pussy tape, Stormy Daniels, spying on his campaign, the leaking, the
Steele Dossier, Russiagate, Ukrainegate, his impeachment, lying to the FISA Courts by the
FBI, CIA's involvement, Mueller Report, DNC server, Clinton and Loretta Lynch on the tarmac,
fake news media, sanctuary cities, courts disobeying his executive orders, Covid-19, protests
– all of it has been a ruse to fool us into thinking that Trump is a legitimate
opposition?
What, it's better to have the citizens split politically 50/50? That way there's never a
majority who start throwing their weight around and making trouble for the elite looters?
Keep the people fighting among each other and divided?
Trump has gone through all of this, but he's just faking it? Are we Truman from the Truman
Show?
I guess you could be right, but what if you're not? What if Trump is actually an outsider?
He's never really ever been part of the elite, not really. If he is truly an outsider, then
these people have been a party to an attempted coup against a duly-elected President.
And if so, then that's sedition and they should hang.
@PetrOldSack Trump is just a puppet, well maybe a bit more, of the part of the MIC and
Deep State that apparently has a different agenda. This is not to say that they are "good
people" but they seem to want to keep the US as a functioning republic and a major power.
Maybe they have some plans re the other group(s) in the elites that are extremely dangerous
for those groups. Which would explain why those groups ("globalists") want to remove those
elements of influence people behind Trump get from the fact that he is the president. This
explains why fake Covid-19 was so pumped by the media and when that apparently did not work
they moved on to BLM "color revolution". It is interesting how all of this plays out, as it
will decide the fate of the world. Ironically, Xi, Putin and other leaders that represent
groups wanting to maintain (some) sovereignty of their states have a common enemy, even as
their states are in competition, namely "globalist" elements within their own power
structures.
One of the goals of the British security service, MI5, is to control the leader or deputy
leader of any subversive organisation larger than a football team. The same is likely true in
every country.
The typical criticism of MI5 is that it is too passive, and does not use its knowledge to
close down hostile groups. In Algeria, the opposite happened: the Algerian security service
infiltrated the most extreme Islamist group in the 1990s and aggravated the country's civil
war by committing massacres, with the goal of creating public revulsion for the
Islamists.
This range of possibilities makes it hard to figure out what the Deep State and other
manipulators are doing.
@Sean Frey is a weak Leftist. The equally weak Governor (another Leftie) needed to handle
the situation. He didn't. Trump told him that the feds would help if he asked; he didn't.
This is all on the state and local governments. They did nothing except to tell the cops
to stand down while the city got looted and burned.
If Trump had sent in the military, they would have screamed blue murder. They probably
would have called for his impeachment. Of course, that's what they wanted Trump to do. Thank
goodness Trump didn't fall for their trap.
So the NYT has joined the vanguard af the American People's Revolution?! People change sides
and not all organisations are uniform, even the CIA. There has to be some organisation to
these protests and whoever is providing it, I doubt the protesters are complaining, but want
even more of it, and for it to be more effective, widespread and to grow. And finding
protesters is no problem now or in the future considering the state of the economy, business
closures, rising unemployment, expensive education. What are all these young people supposed
to do? Sit at home playing video games, surfing porn, watching TV? Or go on a holiday? Now in
these circumstances? I guess they're bored with all that so they may as well hit the streets
and stay on the streets as they'll be on the streets anyway when they get evicted because
they can't pay the rent. And as they're being impoverished they may as well steal what they
can. And obviously they don't fear arrest and are happy to get a criminal record since even a
clean sheet won't get them a job in the failing economy, and they know that. I'm sure many
want a solution that will provide for their future. But who is providing it? So it's on them
to create it. Of course politicians will want to use them and manipulate them for their own
ends. And the elites, and the deep state too. And sure there are Jews in it as in anything.
And sure they're fat, ugly, and degenerate – they're Americans reflecting their own
society. But where it goes nobody knows
@Mike Whitney "Is Antifa a group of deep state agitators? That's the question."
99% of them wouldn't have a clue as to any larger strategic direction. Sorry,
but to repeat myself: "useful idiots".
"Do Deep State Elements Operate Within the Protest Movement?"
Well, duh! It seems likely that the entire George Floyd murder on camera was a staged
event, its even possible that he/it was never really killed. See:
PSYOP? George Floyd "death" was faked by crisis actors to engineer revolutionary riots,
video authors say
" Numerous videos are now surfacing that directly question the authenticity of the claimed
"death" of George Floyd by Minneapolis police. Several trending videos appear to reveal
striking inconsistencies in the official explanations behind the reported death of Floyd.
These videos appear to reinforce the idea that the George Floyd incident was, if not entirely
falsified, most definitely planned and rigged in advance. It is already confirmed that the
Obama Foundation was tweeting about George Floyd more than a week before he is claimed to
have died. "
"Obviously, since Barack Obama doesn't own a time machine, the only way the Obama
Foundation could have tweeted about George Floyd a week before his death is it the entire
event was planned in advanced.
Note: We do not endorse every claim in each of the videos shown below, but we believe the
public has the right to hear dissenting views that challenge the official narratives, and we
believe public debate that incorporates views from all sides of a particular issue offers
inherent merit for public discourse.
Numerous video authors are now spotting stunning inconsistencies in the viral videos that
claim to show white cops murdering George Floyd in broad daylight. Without exception, these
video authors, many of whom are black, believe:
at least one of the "police officers" was actually a hired crisis actor who has appeared
in other staged events in recent years.
that the black man depicted in the viral videos is not, in fact, an individual named
George Floyd.
that the responding medical personnel were not EMTs but were in fact mere crisis actors
wearing police costumes.
Each of the video authors shown below reveals still images and video clips that they say
support their claims. Here's an overview of some of the most intriguing videos and the
summary of what those videos are saying: .":
@Mike Whitney I think you are correct Mike. IF blm got $100 million from anyone it
follows that they are beholden -- & the only entities capable of such "generosity" are
"establishment" it therefore follows that BLM are beholden (controlled) by the establishment
( .the deep state .)
Now the New York Times thinks that the black, brown, white and yellow lives are dispensable
does it mean their own GRAY lives matter more to the rest of us? No, it does not!
The scale and coordination alone suggests that elements in the deep state are probably
involved.
It seems right and logical.
But what I don't understand, is why the deep state elite don't understand that in the end the
collapse of the "traditional society" will touch them too in their private life. In the long
run the ruining of the US will ruin everybody in the US including them. Don't they get it ?
Maybe they are intoxicated by their own lies are are begining to lose their lucidity. Like Al
Pacino intoxicated by his own coke in scarface.
@MrFoSquare What we need are some solid numbers:
How many arrested? (& who are they?)
How many properties destroyed?
Dollars worth of damage?
Which cities had the worst damage?
A social media "history" of protest/riot posting ?
Where/who are responsible for brick/frozen water bottle stashes?
Travel histories of notable offenders?
Links between "protesters" & the media ?
Money? Who/what/when/how was all this funded on a day-to-day basis.
And so on.
Mike Whitney doesn't know the first thing. It takes a lot of organizing time and personnel to
properly prepare and lead in the field any large public protest. There are people experienced
in this. Getting them together and deploying their capability is required.
These protests are classic unplanned, spontaneous actions. At least the first major wave
of them. Only after some time will parties try to lead, organize. Or manipulate.
First thing, it's like trying to herd cats. So, you need marshals. Lots of them. Ably led,
and clearly seen. Just to try and steer a protest down one street or to some point. You need
first aid available, provision for seniors and children. Water. Knowledgeable people to deal
with the media.
People who know what they're doing to deal with senior police. With city transit, buses,
taxis. Hospitals, road construction, fire departments. A good protest cleans itself up too so
provide the means for that. Loudspeakers, music – all this an more has to be organized.
By some people.
And 100% of this or even a hint of organizing is not evident at these protests. And the
evidence is easy to see. Organizers advertise too for volunteers. Everything in plain sight
for those with eyes to see.
If you are stupid enough to think that some handful of fruitcakes from some official
agency could even find their way to a protest, actually have a clue how to conduct themselves
and not get laughed at or just ignored – there's no hope for you. You know nothing
about protests and are pedalling fantasy.
@obwandiyag As usual, you're completely delusional. Most police departments are in the
exact same boat as the municipalities that fund them: one downturn (like, say, a public
lockdown followed by public disorder and looting) from going right to the wall.
There won't be any need to "defund" police; most of America's cities and towns are soon to
be on the bread line, looking for those Ctrl-P federal dollars. Quarterly deficits of twenty
trillion, here we come!
@Thomasina The power elite have different factions and they fight each other to a point,
but they do not try to expose each other. This is why none of Trump enemies are going to be
put in prison.
This is why Trump supports don't know what Genie Engery is, not that they would care.
The scum Trump appointed should tell you what side he's on.
I don't know if Antifa is run directly by the three-letter FedGov agencies. But I do know
that the university is the breeding ground for these vermin, and all universities, even
"private" ones, are largely funded by the governmnent, and are tax exempt.
@schnellandine The Hispanics in America are similar to waves of Italians in the late 19th
and early 20th Centuries, except the numbers are far larger and never ending, which impacts
assimilation. The Hispanics are the ones doing the hard physical labor for low pay, and they
are the ones in American society to invest in learning the skill to perform some of those
backbreaking, low paying jobs well. They are the Super Marios of today. Many of them ply
their trades as small businessmen. They are thankful for their jobs and the people they
serve.
Many are loving, salt-of-the-earth type people who genuinely love their blanco friends.
Howard Stern thinks their music sucks but at least they sing songs about el corazon, music of
the heart and of love. (No one is comparable to the Italians in that department, but what do
you suppose happened to the beautiful love music produced by black male vocalists as late as
a generation ago?) Except for the fact that Hispanics come from countries with long
traditions of corrupt, El Patron governments which unfortunately they want to enact here as a
social safety net, they are often traditional in their attitudes about religion and family.
Of course, they get in drunken brawls, abuse their women, and the graft and incompetence in
their institutions can be outrageous. The reason they flee here is because the world they've
created themselves in the shithole places they've leaving isn't as good as the West created
by Caucasian cultures. The law abiding, decent family people I'm speaking of prosper
alongside of whites and many come to recognize that whites and Hispanics can build a common
destiny that's far preferable to the direction black agitators are taking blacks in America.
So you think that everything they've done to Trump has been one big show and he's been
in on it? The pussy tape, Stormy Daniels, spying on his campaign, the leaking, the Steele
Dossier, Russiagate, Ukrainegate, his impeachment, lying to the FISA Courts by the FBI,
CIA's involvement, Mueller Report, DNC server, Clinton and Loretta Lynch on the tarmac,
fake news media, sanctuary cities, courts disobeying his executive orders, Covid-19,
protests – all of it has been a ruse to fool us into thinking that Trump is a
legitimate opposition?
Absolutely.
Keep the people fighting among each other and divided?
Yes, but the elite do not fear the majority they are in complete control through
insouciance and stupidity on the majority.
I guess you could be right, but what if you're not? What if Trump is actually an
outsider?
He's not his actions and inactions are impossible to logically explain away he is a minion
of the Deep State.
The protest movement is directed and controlled by the same zionists who control the
government and their goal is the destruction of America and they are being allowed to do the
wrecking and destruction that they are doing, as this helps full fill the zionist communist
takeover of America.
To see where this is leading read up on the bolshevik-communist revolution in Russia and
the communist revolution in China and Cuba and Cambodia, and there is the future of
America.
@Christophe GJ They enjoy human suffering. Who knows maybe their compensation is linked
to dead bodies. The deep state types will dwell in gate communities that will never be
breached. The perks of owning both segments of the "opposition." As for the CIA's owners, a
sharp depopulation has been their goal for some time. Why it has to be so ghoulish and
prolong is anyone's guess.
@Brian Reilly "To the issue at hand, black people should only be policed, arrested,
charged, prosecuted, defended, judged, and (if found guilty) punished by other blacks."
Yeah, some city tried that. To try to satisfy the "Get White police out of our
neighborhoods" they did -- they re-orged and sent only black cops into black neighborhoods,
and let the White cops police the White neighborhoods. And the BLACK POLICE SUED to end that!
They were, they claimed (and legitimately, too!) being treated unfairly by making THEM police
the most violent, the most dangerous, the most deadly neighborhoods, and "protecting" the
White cops from that duty by letting only the White cops work the nice neighborhoods. They
WON too!
(note: "IKAGO" = "I know a good one." the all-too-often excuse from the unawakened!)
=====================
I don't mourn the loss of Baltimore. Or Detroit, Chicago, Gary, Atlanta, etc etc etc.
It is ultimately a huge benefit to have Negroes concentrated in these huge teeming Petri
dishes.
As always I advocate the complete White withdrawal from these horrible urban sh_tholes,
and as always I advocate that since Negroes do not want to be policed, to immediately stop
policing them.
And to anyone who might be naive enough to say "hey, there are good people in those
neighborhoods, who try to work and raise their kids, who obey the law and who abhor the
lawlessness and rioting as much as anyone" . my response is that these same IKAGO's voted for
a Negro president, for Negro mayors, Negro city council members, Negro police chiefs and
Negro school superintendents, and now they are getting exactly what they deserve, good and
effing hard.
I have ZERO sympathy for blacks.
=====================
And the new rule:
Remember when seconds count, the police are not even obligated to respond.
Of course "deep state elements" operate in protests! What A STUPID question, Whitney. All
kinds of political tricksters, manipulators, provocateurs, idiots, fools, people suffering
from ennui, you name it Mike, they're involved. And yes, the murder of the black man in
Minneapolis was the trigger.
That's not the only cause of social unrest. There are lots of reasons that drive the
displeasure of the mass of people and it's not the silly "deep state". Before you use that
term, if you want any sort of salute from intelligent people, you need to define your terms.
Or are just just waving a red flag so you can attract a bunch of stupid Trumpsters?
There's a whole lot of deep state out there, good buddy. Just examine the federal budget
and whatever money you cannot assign to a particular institution or specific purpose, that is
funding your your "deep state". It's billions and billions. But there is no Wizard of Oz
behind the curtain to spend it all on nefarious purposes. Sure, the deep state destroyed the
WTC and killed a few thousand people. These hidden operators can do things civilians can only
imagine, but they cannot create movements, Whitney. You just can't fool all of the people all
of the time.
Are you having a touch of brain degeneration, Mike, like dear autocrat in the White
House?
A great article. While Trump may have some ties to the Deep State, I doubt very much that he
is their puppet. He won the nomination because he was against some of the Deep States key
policies. He even tried to implement his policies but mostly failed due to traitors in his
administration and all the coordinated coup attempts.
One recent development that causes me to think that this article is spot on is the blatant
attacks by retired generals and even currently serving generals against a sitting president.
Even Defense Sec. Esper (the Raytheon lobbyist) criticized Trump's comments on the
Insurrection Act, which was totally unnecessary since Trump only said that he had the
authority to use it.
The coordinated criticism of the generals just reminds me of how similar it is to the
coordinated effort by the CIA, FBI, State Department and NSA to use the Russiagate hoax and
impeachment hoax to remove Trump. The riots, the money funneled from BLM to Biden 2020,
support of Antifa by the MSM and the generals treasonous actions are not coincidences.
I'm surprised by the generally low level of the responses.
Mr. Whitney:
There haven't been 'millions' of protestors, maybe some thousands.
Please list the "valid grievances" that negros hold concerning the cops; are the cops
supposed to raise black IQ? These riots need to be suppressed pronto; don't waste your time
waiting for the fat orange buffoon to do anything.
Negros have no 'communities', and never will.
I'm wondering why Mr. Unz thinks he is required to let leftists like Whitney post
here.
(1)-There is a 'deep state'
(2)-(1) does NOT imply that negros are a noble race.
The opening statement is quite true. They've apparently been organizing under the radar for
some years now. Diversity is our greatest weakness and these fissures that run through the
country can be exploited. Blacks have been weaponized and used as the spearpoint along with
the more purposeful real Antifa (lots of wannabes walking around clad in black). Everything
has really been well coordinated and the Gene Sharp playbook followed. These 'color
revolution' employees are actually all over the globe, funded by various front groups and
NGOs. The money trail often leads to various billionaires like the ubiquitous Soros but
people like that may just be acting as fronts themselves. Supposed leftists working against
the interests of the value producing working class?
The George Floyd murder was a obviously a wholly staged Deep State event, complete with
the usual crisis actors, as this video summary clearly illustrates :
@Brian Reilly"To the issue at hand, black people should only be policed, arrested,
charged, prosecuted, defended, judged, and (if found guilty) punished by other blacks. No
white person should have anything to do with it. "
And when these same blacks attack or steal from a White person, which they often do, do
you think they'll get a just punishment from their fellow blacks or a high five?
The solution to the black problem is complete separation, there is no other way.
@Mike Whitney But why do you assume the CIA wants to get rid of Trump? Isn't that
tantamount to judging a book by its cover? Americans have been on to the evil shenanigans of
the intelligence community for decades. Trump is nothing more than controlled opposition and
a false sense of security for "patriots". One needs look no further than the prognostications
of Q to see that Trump is the beneficiary of deep state propaganda. The CIA's modus operandi,
together with the rest of the IC, is to deceive. So if they appear to be doing one thing
(fighting Trump) you can be sure they intend the opposite.
Americans are nose deep in false dichotomies, and Trump is a pole par excellence. Despite
his flagrant history as an NYC liberal, putative fat cat, swindler, and network television
superstar, he is now depicted as either a populist outsider, or a literal Nazi. The simple
fact is that he is an actor and confidence artist. He is playing a role, and he is playing to
both sides of the aisle, and his work is to deceive the entirety of the American public,
together with the mockingbird media, which is merely the yin to his pathetic yang.
Too many Americans think they have a choice, or a chance, by simply minding their own
business, consuming their media of choice, and voting. In fact, Americans are face to face
with the end of their history, as the country has been systematically looted for decades, and
will soon be demolished as it is no longer profitable to the oligarchs who manage the globe.
Obama-Trump is a 1-2 knockout punch.
@Uomiem That's a good point, and it's of the main problems I do have with Trump: his
cabinet picks and financial backers (Adelsen, Singer, et al.). But in fairness, what happens
when he tries to pick someone who's not approved by the system? Well, if they're cabinet
officers, they'll never get approved by the senate. And even if they're not, they will be
driven out of the White House somehow–just like Gen. Flynn and Steve Bannon. In short,
when it comes to staffing, Trump's choices are limited by the same swamp he's fighting. Sad
but true
@Thomasina Interesting comments by the Duran but I cannot find any evidence of a direct
investment by the CIA in Facebook. The CIA's investment arm, In-Q-Tel, did invest in early
Facebook investor Peter Theil's company Palantir and other companies. Also, Graylock Partners
were also early investors in Facebook along with Peter Theil and the head of Graylock is
Howard Cox who served on In-Q-Tel's board of directors. But these are indirect inferences.
Unlike the clear and direct investment of the CIA in the company that was eventually
purchased by Google and is now called Google Earth, I can't find any evidence of a direct
investment by the CIA in Facebook. I have no doubt it's true since it's a perfect tool for
data gathering. Do you have any direct evidence of such an investment?
Is the Deep State stage-managing the "BLM" protests to further an agenda? Absolutely.
The main influence of the Deep State is felt in its complete dominance of the controlled
media.
Like mantras handed down by the commissars, the mainstream media keep repeating key
phrases to narrowly define what's happening: "mostly peaceful protests", "anti-black
racism".
The media is an organ of the Deep State. The Deep State will decide when the protests will
end, and when that day arrives, the media will suddenly pivot on cue like a school of fish or
a flock of birds.
Perhaps some non believers in the Deep State would like to explain why the multi trillion
dollar corporations in America are supporting BLM, Antifa and other anarchy groups since on
the face of it anarchy would be antithetical to these corporations?
Hint: The wealthy and powerful (aka Deep State) know that anarchy divides a populous
thereby removing their ability to resist their true enemy and even more draconian laws. The
die is being cast at this moment and the complete subjugation of the American people will,
probably, be effectuate by the end of this year. A full court press is under way and life is
about to change for 99% of the American people.
If you disagree with my hint correct it.
Too many Americans think they have a choice, or a chance, by simply minding their own
business, consuming their media of choice, and voting. In fact, Americans are face to face
with the end of their history, as the country has been systematically looted for decades,
and will soon be demolished as it is no longer profitable to the oligarchs who manage the
globe. Obama-Trump is a 1-2 knockout punch.
Your points are excellent. All tragic, devastating events in the last, at least, 20
years have been staged or played to facilitate the total control by the Deep State.
The problem is power – and the nature of those who lust for it. The police are very
powerful, by necessity and the nature of police work is the exercise of power – on the
street.
Not to mention the fact that police forces, like every other institution, are managed from
the top. Sgt. Bernstein back at the station calls the shots, gets to decide who is hired /
fired and generally runs the department like a CEO runs a company. Not all cops are rotten,
but if Sgt. Bernstein is a scumbag, the whole department tends to behave as a scumbag.
I'll give you two guesses, the second one doesn't count, as to which tribe of psychopaths
– who call themselves "chosen" – have mastered the art of playing both sides
against the middle, using the police as a very powerful tool to accomplish an ancient agenda
of world-domination, straight out of The Torah.
The police are just another sad story of the destruction of America, by Shlomo.
@Mike Whitney Any explanation that ignores that the catalyst for what is happening is the
Federal Reserve Notes free fall is not a good explanation.
This is a failed Communist Putsch. The people pushing it have enough control of major
cities to keep it alive but not enough to push it into the heartland. 400 million guns and a
few billion bullets are protecting freedom in the USA just like they were intended to.
All failed communist revolutions end in fascism taking power. The Yahoo news comments
sections are way to big to censor properly and they are already taking on a Fascist tone with
almost half the posters. This is only just beginning and most people are beginning to
understand that these lies non whites tell about the fake systemic racism are too dangerous
to go unchallenged. The idea that the protests ,the protests not the riots, have no
foundation in truth is starting to work its way to the forefront of white peoples minds.
Non whites are coddled by the establishment in the USA and no real racists have any power
in the USA so this whole thing is and has been for 50 years based on lies.
The jew mob is going to lose all their economic power over the next year or so as the Fed
Note hyper-inflates. The mob knows this and made a grab for ideological power using low IQ
ungrateful non whites they have been inculcating with anti white ideals for decades as their
foot soldiers.
They are screwed because the places they control are parasitic just like they are. Cities
are full of people making nothing and pretty much just doing service jobs for each other. All
the things needed to keep cities going come from outside the cities and the jew mob is not in
charge in the places that actually produce things. Not like they are in the cities
anyway.
Ignoring the currency rises makes you dishonest Mike.
I think the leadership and tactics of the police are deplorable. I can only surmise that the
local political leadership in many cities is on the inside of this latest scam.
The police should be able to launch attacks on the crowd to single out those who are
Antifa activists. That is what the riot police in France would do. They should try to ignore
the rabble behind which these activists are sheltering.
By remaining on the defensive and without using the element of surprise to capture these
activists, the police are sitting ducks.
My dad told me what it was like in Cairo when the centre of the city was destroyed in
1952. I was tiny at that time and remember my mother carrying me. We watched Cairo burning in
the distance. We were on the roof of the huge house of my Egyptian grandfather in
Heliopolis.
The looters and arsonists were well-equipped. It was not by any means spontaneous. They
smashed the locks on the draw-down shutters of the shops with sledge hammers. Next, they
looted the shop. Lastly, they tossed in Molotov cocktails. The commercial heart of Cairo was
largely destroyed in a few hours. Cinemas and the Casino were burnt. Cairo was a very
pleasant metropolis in those days. It became prosperous during WW2 by supplying the
Allies.
My family's small factory was in the very centre of Cairo – in Abbassia. My father
rounded up his workers to defend the factory. Many lived on the premises. They were all tough
Sa'idi from Upper
Egypt. Many were Coptic Christians. They all had large staffs that they knew how to use. The
arsonists and looters kept well clear.
JUNE 9, 2020 CityLab University: A Timeline of U.S. Police Protests
The latest protests against police violence toward African Americans didn't appear out of
nowhere. They're rooted in generations of injustice and systemic racism.
@Sean said:
"While it is a possibility that whites could lose control of their society, and see it fall
into the hands of an explicitly anti -[r]acist elite/ minorities alliance,"
"Anti-racist?
The entire matter is "explicit" racism directed against Euro-whites.
@gay troll "But why do you assume the CIA wants to get rid of Trump?"
John Brennan collaborated with James Comey on the Russian collusion narrative. Brennan is
indicative of the upper-echelon CIA and its orientation towards the globalist billionaire
class.
@Loup-Bouc Maybe you also noticed that the opening pages of the article suggested that
the author was unhinged when he made so much of an alleged editorial in the NYT which wasn't
an editorial but an opinion piece by an activist. And what about the spontaneous eruptions of
protest all round the world? Masterminded by the US "Deep State"? Absurd.
Mr. Whitney may have got to an age when he can no longer understand the young and their
latest fashionable fatuities and follies.
@obwandiyag " The assholes on this asshole site will not let you say that what is
important is how the super-billionaires control us. "
Nonsense, I rant against the largely Jewish super-billionaires all the time.
Truth is that blacks and working class whites are in relatively similar positions compared
to the 1%. We should be seeking alliances with people like Rev. Farrakhan, but instead, for
some curious reason, big Jewish money is pouring into keeping racial grievances alive and
kicking. It looks very much like a divide and conquer strategy.
Where did the antiwar and Occupy Wall Street movements go after Obama's election? My guess
is that the financial elite saw the danger of having OWS ask questions about the bailouts, so
they devoted a ton of time and energy into pushing racial grievance politics, gender neutral
bathrooms and the like. Their co-ethnics in the media collaborated with them in making sure
only one perspective made the news.
PS: if you don't like the website, simply avoid visiting it. Trust me, no one will miss
your inane posts.
"90% of Americans are unlikely to even see more than ten black people in their entire
lives."
I sure hope you're talking about IRL, because I see more than ten black people in any
commercial break on any TV show on any cable or network TV station every hour of every day.
In fact, it's at least 50/50 B/W and it feels more like 60/40 B/W. And it's always the blacks
who are in charge, the whites spill chips all over the kitchen floor
@SunBakedSuburb 15 seasons of The Apprentice on NBC is indicative of Trump's
orientation towards the globalist billionaire class. It sure was nice of NBC to thus
rehabilitate Trump's image after it became clear he was a cheat who could not even hold down
a casino. From fake wrestler to fake boardroom CEO, Trump has ALWAYS been made for TV.
As for Russiagate, it was a transparent crock of shit from the moment Clapper sent his
uncorrobated assertions under the aegis of "17 intelligence agencies". You assume the point
of the charade was to "get Trump", but really Russiagate was designed to deceive "liberals"
just as Q was designed to deceive "conservatives". It is the appearance of conflict that
serves to divide Americans into two camps who both believe the other is at fault for all of
society's ills. In fact, it is the Zionists and bankers who are to blame for society's ills,
and like the distraction of black vs. white, Democrat vs. Republican keeps everybody's
attention away from the real chauvinists and criminals.
@Sean Well, I can't deny that yours is an extremely original interpretation. It sure made
me think. I can't say I'm convinced, though it doesn't seem to have any conspicuous a priori
inconsistency with facts. I guess time will tell.
@Realist Agree. Someone posted he had a friend at Minneapolis airport. Incoming planes
were full of antifa types the day after Floyd died.
They are very well organized. They are notorious around universities. Well, not
universities in dangerous black neighborhoods. They live like students in crowded apartments
and organize all their movements. Plenty of dumb kids to recruit. Plenty of downwardly mobile
White grads who can't get jobs or into grad s hook because they're White. Those Whites go
into liberal rabble rousing instead of rabble rousing against affirmative action, so
brainwashed are they. Portland is a college town. That's why antifa is so well organized
there. Seattle's a college town too as is Chicago.
Why ANTIFA doesn't loot banks, doesn't stand in front od Soros home, JPMorgan headquarters,
big corporations, Bezos business .etc? Because rich are paying for riots ..the same way they
payed to support Hitler during WWII.
@Anon Thanks for highlighting the complex racial politics -- in this case between
Hispanics and Africans. That was something Ron Unz got right as well -- independently of the
numerology -- in the other article; basically saying that there have been a lot of various
social-engineering projects going on.
Naturally I'm liable for everything else you said ;/ no comment, no contest,
I think it will be alright if we can get back to basics, natural rights, republican
representative organization, pluralism, etc The corporate nightmare has everyone crammed into
a vat of human resources. Undo that, see how it goes, then take it from there.
@Mike Whitney The reason most of the rioters arrested were native New Yorkers is that
they were the useful idiots designated fall guys.
The organizers are adept at changing clothes hats and sunglasses. Their job is to get
things started by smashing windows of a Nike's store and running away letting a few looters
be arrested.
I remember something written by an Indian communist, not Indian nationalist How To Start a
Riot in the 1920s.
1 Start rumors about abuse of Indians by British.
2. Decide where to start the riots.
3 Best place is in the open air markets around noon. The merchants will have collected
substantial money. The local lay abouts will be up and about.
4 Instigators start fights with the merchants raid cash boxes overturn tables and the riot is
on.
The ancient Roman politicians started riots that way. It's standard procedure in every
country in every era. All this fuss and discussion by the idiot intelligentsia is ridiculous
as is everything the idiot intelligentsia thinks, writes and does.
We Americans experience a black riot every few years, just as we experience floods,
droughts, blizzards , earthquakes, forest fires, tornadoes floods and hurricanes.
As long as we have blacks and liberal alleged intellectuals we'll have riots.
@Ashino Wolf Sushanti As far as I know BLM is also dead silent on the black slave markets
care of Obama and the EU in Libya.
There are also stories that money contributed to BLM will end up going to the DNC.
This is looking like another 1960's type insurrection that will end up the same way: it
will be used by the rich and powerful elites (notice how the corporate controlled media has
gone on one knee for BLM and has gone outright anti-white?), there will be a back lash that
will crush it (right after the election), and its leaders will be either absorbed into the
establishment or offed.
America looks like a hybrid of Stephen King, Brave New World, and 1984, and the rich and
powerful US elites and intel agencies stroke it and love it. Notice that the US super rich
have been raking it in since January 2020? While at the same time Trump is busy making the US
a vassal state of Israel and accelerating the roll-out of Cold War v2 which is just fine with
US elites that will not change with the election of moron Biden (if the people elect Biden
they are electing his VP as Biden will not last long; he is a lot like Yeltsin that was
pumped up on mental stimulants and nutriments to perform for short periods until the next
treatment). What a country, what a ship of fools.
The former New York senator published her
thoughts on her on Medium blog , where she appeared to endorse the Black
Lives Matter movement, something she has previously stayed well clear of doing. "George Floyd's
life mattered. Ahmaud Arbery and Breonna Taylor's lives mattered. Black lives matter," she
began by stating.
"I promise to keep fighting alongside all of you to make the United States a place where all
men and all women are treated as equals, just as we are and just as we deserve to be," she
added, positioning herself on the same side as the protestors, many of whom are demanding the
abolition of the police. Clinton commended the amazing "power of solidarity" she had seen and
promised to "speak out against white supremacy in all its forms," declaring that America is
long overdue for "an honest reckoning" with its racism problem.
However, an honest reckoning with Clinton's past unearths a myriad of troubling incidents
and positions that are difficult to square with her newfound radical antiracist stance. She
supported her husband and Joe Biden's
1994 Crime Bill that led to an explosion in mass incarceration across the country.
"... From this point of view the current situation is a mixed bag for Neoliberal Dems: protest are partially genuine protests against the level of inequality caused by neoliberalism, partially are an attempt to exploit legitimate grievances in order to topple Trump (CHAZ in Seattle looks like a kind of a new Maidan and clearly were at least partially city council and the governor supported.) ..."
"... The USA version of Hongweibings toppling statues definitely play into Trump hand: radicalization of protests gives Trump an advantage to present himself now as the only "law and order" candidate, the "Silent majority" candidate, a la Nixon. ..."
"... The key weakness of Neoliberal Democrats is the level of hypocrisy in their support of protests: Pelosi (and Schumer) looks like a wolf in sheep clothing donning African scarves. Along with Bill Clinton they did a lot to deprive Afro Americans of the social security benefits they enjoyed under the New Deal Capitalism, and putting them in jails for minor infractions with the law (Biden was the key player here) ..."
"... I would assume that the 2020 election will be a choice between two platforms, not between two candidates. And Trump now represents "law and order" platform. While Biden is forced to represent "change we can believe in" platform. And Democrats already burned all the bridges. ..."
Trump is staggering. He's plunging in the polls, and his behavior has become erratic
and unhinged. I don't mean he's being crude, infantile and wrapped in a world of fantasy
-- he's always like that. Rather, I see him as suddenly incoherent, fumbling with threats
and catchphrases as if he were locked out of his house at night, frantically trying one
key after another to see if any will work.
I think the personalities of Trump and Biden no longer matter: the level of polarization
of the USA electorate is a more important factor now.
In other words, the reaction to the protests of independents will determine the results
on 2020 elections.
From this point of view the current situation is a mixed bag for Neoliberal Dems:
protest are partially genuine protests against the level of inequality caused by
neoliberalism, partially are an attempt to exploit legitimate grievances in order to topple
Trump (CHAZ in Seattle looks like a kind of a new Maidan and clearly were at least
partially city council and the governor supported.)
The USA version of Hongweibings toppling statues definitely play into Trump hand:
radicalization of protests gives Trump an advantage to present himself now as the only "law
and order" candidate, the "Silent majority" candidate, a la Nixon.
The key weakness of Neoliberal Democrats is the level of hypocrisy in their support of
protests: Pelosi (and Schumer) looks like a wolf in sheep clothing donning African scarves.
Along with Bill Clinton they did a lot to deprive Afro Americans of the social security
benefits they enjoyed under the New Deal Capitalism, and putting them in jails for minor
infractions with the law (Biden was the key player here)
One minor point: exaggerated threats is the way Trump operate. He like poker players use
bluffing as a part of the political strategy. It's like he is trying to determine some
limits for each situation and sense how far he can go, as well as putting the opponents off
balance provoking them to overreact,. Then he retreats to a more reasonable position.
I would assume that the 2020 election will be a choice between two platforms, not
between two candidates. And Trump now represents "law and order" platform. While Biden is
forced to represent "change we can believe in" platform. And Democrats already burned all
the bridges.
Please note that Biden political history is the history of a staunch neoliberal,
completely hostile to the interests of the majority of the USA population and, especially,
Afro Americans and white working class (aka deplorable). As such he will now look as
hypocrite no matter what he say.
A strange mixture of Black nationalism with Black Bolshevism is a very interesting and pretty alarming phenomenon. It proved to
be a pretty toxic mix. But it is far from being new. We saw how the Eugčne Pottier famous song
International lines "We have been naught we
shall be all." and "Servile masses arise, arise." unfolded before under Stalinism in Soviet Russia.
We also saw Lysenkoism in Academia before, and it was not a pretty picture. Some Russian/Soviet scientists such as Academician Vavilov
paid with their life for the sin of not being politically correct. From this letter it is clear that the some departments
already reached the stage tragically close to that situation.
Lysenkoism was "politically correct" (a term invented by Lenin) because it was consistent with the broader Marxist doctrine.
Marxists wanted to believe that heredity had a limited role even among humans, and that human characteristics changed by living
under socialism would be inherited by subsequent generations of humans. Thus would be created the selfless new Soviet man
"Lysenko was consequently embraced and lionized by the Soviet media propaganda machine. Scientists who promoted Lysenkoism with
faked data and destroyed counterevidence were favored with government funding and official recognition and award. Lysenko and his
followers and media acolytes responded to critics by impugning their motives, and denouncing them as bourgeois fascists resisting
the advance of the new modern Marxism."
The Disgraceful Episode Of Lysenkoism Brings Us Global Warming Theory
Notable quotes:
"... In the extended links and resources you provided, I could not find a single instance of substantial counter-argument or alternative narrative to explain the under-representation of black individuals in academia or their over-representation in the criminal justice system. ..."
"... any cogent objections to this thesis have been raised by sober voices, including from within the black community itself, such as Thomas Sowell and Wilfred Reilly. These people are not racists or 'Uncle Toms'. They are intelligent scholars who reject a narrative that strips black people of agency and systematically externalizes the problems of the black community onto outsiders . Their view is entirely absent from the departmental and UCB-wide communiques. ..."
"... The claim that the difficulties that the black community faces are entirely causally explained by exogenous factors in the form of white systemic racism, white supremacy, and other forms of white discrimination remains a problematic hypothesis that should be vigorously challenged by historians ..."
"... Would we characterize criminal justice as a systemically misandrist conspiracy against innocent American men? I hope you see that this type of reasoning is flawed, and requires a significant suspension of our rational faculties. Black people are not incarcerated at higher rates than their involvement in violent crime would predict . This fact has been demonstrated multiple times across multiple jurisdictions in multiple countries. ..."
"... If we claim that the criminal justice system is white-supremacist, why is it that Asian Americans, Indian Americans, and Nigerian Americans are incarcerated at vastly lower rates than white Americans? ..."
"... Increasingly, we are being called upon to comply and subscribe to BLM's problematic view of history , and the department is being presented as unified on the matter. In particular, ethnic minorities are being aggressively marshaled into a single position. Any apparent unity is surely a function of the fact that dissent could almost certainly lead to expulsion or cancellation for those of us in a precarious position , which is no small number. ..."
"... The vast majority of violence visited on the black community is committed by black people . There are virtually no marches for these invisible victims, no public silences, no heartfelt letters from the UC regents, deans, and departmental heads. The message is clear: Black lives only matter when whites take them. Black violence is expected and insoluble, while white violence requires explanation and demands solution. Please look into your hearts and see how monstrously bigoted this formulation truly is. ..."
"... The claim that black intraracial violence is the product of redlining, slavery, and other injustices is a largely historical claim. It is for historians, therefore, to explain why Japanese internment or the massacre of European Jewry hasn't led to equivalent rates of dysfunction and low SES performance among Japanese and Jewish Americans respectively. ..."
"... Arab Americans have been viciously demonized since 9/11, as have Chinese Americans more recently. However, both groups outperform white Americans on nearly all SES indices - as do Nigerian Americans , who incidentally have black skin. It is for historians to point out and discuss these anomalies. However, no real discussion is possible in the current climate at our department . The explanation is provided to us, disagreement with it is racist, and the job of historians is to further explore additional ways in which the explanation is additionally correct. This is a mockery of the historical profession. ..."
"... Donating to BLM today is to indirectly donate to Joe Biden's 2020 campaign. This is grotesque given the fact that the American cities with the worst rates of black-on-black violence and police-on-black violence are overwhelmingly Democrat-run. Minneapolis itself has been entirely in the hands of Democrats for over five decades ; the 'systemic racism' there was built by successive Democrat administrations. ..."
"... The total alliance of major corporations involved in human exploitation with BLM should be a warning flag to us, and yet this damning evidence goes unnoticed, purposefully ignored, or perversely celebrated. We are the useful idiots of the wealthiest classes , carrying water for Jeff Bezos and other actual, real, modern-day slavers. Starbucks, an organisation using literal black slaves in its coffee plantation suppliers, is in favor of BLM. Sony, an organisation using cobalt mined by yet more literal black slaves, many of whom are children, is in favor of BLM. And so, apparently, are we. The absence of counter-narrative enables this obscenity. Fiat lux, indeed. ..."
"... MLK would likely be called an Uncle Tom if he spoke on our campus today . We are training leaders who intend, explicitly, to destroy one of the only truly successful ethnically diverse societies in modern history. As the PRC, an ethnonationalist and aggressively racially chauvinist national polity with null immigration and no concept of jus solis increasingly presents itself as the global political alternative to the US, I ask you: Is this wise? Are we really doing the right thing? ..."
I am one of your colleagues at the University of California, Berkeley. I have met you both personally but do not know you closely,
and am contacting you anonymously, with apologies. I am worried that writing this email publicly might lead to me losing my job,
and likely all future jobs in my field.
In your recent departmental emails you mentioned our pledge to diversity, but I am increasingly alarmed by the absence of diversity
of opinion on the topic of the recent protests and our community response to them.
In the extended links and resources you provided, I could not find a single instance of substantial counter-argument or alternative
narrative to explain the under-representation of black individuals in academia or their over-representation in the criminal justice
system. The explanation provided in your documentation, to the near exclusion of all others, is univariate: the problems of
the black community are caused by whites, or, when whites are not physically present, by the infiltration of white supremacy and
white systemic racism into American brains, souls, and institutions.
Many cogent objections to this thesis have been raised by sober voices, including from within the black community itself,
such as Thomas Sowell and Wilfred Reilly. These people are not racists or 'Uncle Toms'. They are intelligent scholars who reject
a narrative that strips black people of agency and systematically externalizes the problems of the black community onto outsiders
. Their view is entirely absent from the departmental and UCB-wide communiques.
The claim that the difficulties that the black community faces are entirely causally explained by exogenous factors in the
form of white systemic racism, white supremacy, and other forms of white discrimination remains a problematic hypothesis that should
be vigorously challenged by historians . Instead, it is being treated as an axiomatic and actionable truth without serious consideration
of its profound flaws, or its worrying implication of total black impotence. This hypothesis is transforming our institution and
our culture, without any space for dissent outside of a tightly policed, narrow discourse.
A counternarrative exists. If you have time, please consider examining some of the documents I attach at the end of this email.
Overwhelmingly, the reasoning provided by BLM and allies is either primarily anecdotal (as in the case with the bulk of Ta-Nehisi
Coates' undeniably moving article) or it is transparently motivated. As an example of the latter problem, consider the proportion
of black incarcerated Americans. This proportion is often used to characterize the criminal justice system as anti-black. However,
if we use the precise same methodology, we would have to conclude that the criminal justice system is even more anti-male than it
is anti-black .
Would we characterize criminal justice as a systemically misandrist conspiracy against innocent American men? I hope you see
that this type of reasoning is flawed, and requires a significant suspension of our rational faculties. Black people are not incarcerated
at higher rates than their involvement in violent crime would predict . This fact has been demonstrated multiple times across multiple
jurisdictions in multiple countries.
And yet, I see my department uncritically reproducing a narrative that diminishes black agency in favor of a white-centric explanation
that appeals to the department's apparent desire to shoulder the 'white man's burden' and to promote a narrative of white guilt .
If we claim that the criminal justice system is white-supremacist, why is it that Asian Americans, Indian Americans, and Nigerian
Americans are incarcerated at vastly lower rates than white Americans? This is a funny sort of white supremacy. Even Jewish
Americans are incarcerated less than gentile whites. I think it's fair to say that your average white supremacist disapproves of
Jews. And yet, these alleged white supremacists incarcerate gentiles at vastly higher rates than Jews. None of this is addressed
in your literature. None of this is explained, beyond hand-waving and ad hominems. "Those are racist dogwhistles". "The model minority
myth is white supremacist". "Only fascists talk about black-on-black crime", ad nauseam.
These types of statements do not amount to counterarguments: they are simply arbitrary offensive classifications, intended to
silence and oppress discourse . Any serious historian will recognize these for the silencing orthodoxy tactics they are , common
to suppressive regimes, doctrines, and religions throughout time and space. They are intended to crush real diversity and permanently
exile the culture of robust criticism from our department.
Increasingly, we are being called upon to comply and subscribe to BLM's problematic view of history , and the department is
being presented as unified on the matter. In particular, ethnic minorities are being aggressively marshaled into a single position.
Any apparent unity is surely a function of the fact that dissent could almost certainly lead to expulsion or cancellation for those
of us in a precarious position , which is no small number.
I personally don't dare speak out against the BLM narrative , and with this barrage of alleged unity being mass-produced by the
administration, tenured professoriat, the UC administration, corporate America, and the media, the punishment for dissent is a clear
danger at a time of widespread economic vulnerability. I am certain that if my name were attached to this email, I would lose my
job and all future jobs, even though I believe in and can justify every word I type.
The vast majority of violence visited on the black community is committed by black people . There are virtually no marches
for these invisible victims, no public silences, no heartfelt letters from the UC regents, deans, and departmental heads. The message
is clear: Black lives only matter when whites take them. Black violence is expected and insoluble, while white violence requires
explanation and demands solution. Please look into your hearts and see how monstrously bigoted this formulation truly is.
No discussion is permitted for nonblack victims of black violence, who proportionally outnumber black victims of nonblack violence.
This is especially bitter in the Bay Area, where Asian victimization by black assailants has reached epidemic proportions, to the
point that the SF police chief has advised Asians to stop hanging good-luck charms on their doors, as this attracts the attention
of (overwhelmingly black) home invaders . Home invaders like George Floyd . For this actual, lived, physically experienced reality
of violence in the USA, there are no marches, no tearful emails from departmental heads, no support from McDonald's and Wal-Mart.
For the History department, our silence is not a mere abrogation of our duty to shed light on the truth: it is a rejection of it.
The claim that black intraracial violence is the product of redlining, slavery, and other injustices is a largely historical
claim. It is for historians, therefore, to explain why Japanese internment or the massacre of European Jewry hasn't led to equivalent
rates of dysfunction and low SES performance among Japanese and Jewish Americans respectively.
Arab Americans have been viciously demonized since 9/11, as have Chinese Americans more recently. However, both groups outperform
white Americans on nearly all SES indices - as do Nigerian Americans , who incidentally have black skin. It is for historians to
point out and discuss these anomalies. However, no real discussion is possible in the current climate at our department . The explanation
is provided to us, disagreement with it is racist, and the job of historians is to further explore additional ways in which the explanation
is additionally correct. This is a mockery of the historical profession.
Most troublingly, our department appears to have been entirely captured by the interests of the Democratic National Convention,
and the Democratic Party more broadly. To explain what I mean, consider what happens if you choose to donate to Black Lives Matter,
an organization UCB History has explicitly promoted in its recent mailers. All donations to the official BLM website are immediately
redirected to ActBlue Charities , an organization primarily concerned with bankrolling election campaigns for Democrat candidates.
Donating to BLM today is to indirectly donate to Joe Biden's 2020 campaign. This is grotesque given the fact that the American
cities with the worst rates of black-on-black violence and police-on-black violence are overwhelmingly Democrat-run. Minneapolis
itself has been entirely in the hands of Democrats for over five decades ; the 'systemic racism' there was built by successive Democrat
administrations.
The patronizing and condescending attitudes of Democrat leaders towards the black community, exemplified by nearly every Biden
statement on the black race, all but guarantee a perpetual state of misery, resentment, poverty, and the attendant grievance politics
which are simultaneously annihilating American political discourse and black lives. And yet, donating to BLM is bankrolling the election
campaigns of men like Mayor Frey, who saw their cities devolve into violence . This is a grotesque capture of a good-faith movement
for necessary police reform, and of our department, by a political party. Even worse, there are virtually no avenues for dissent
in academic circles . I refuse to serve the Party, and so should you.
The total alliance of major corporations involved in human exploitation with BLM should be a warning flag to us, and yet this
damning evidence goes unnoticed, purposefully ignored, or perversely celebrated. We are the useful idiots of the wealthiest classes
, carrying water for Jeff Bezos and other actual, real, modern-day slavers. Starbucks, an organisation using literal black slaves
in its coffee plantation suppliers, is in favor of BLM. Sony, an organisation using cobalt mined by yet more literal black slaves,
many of whom are children, is in favor of BLM. And so, apparently, are we. The absence of counter-narrative enables this obscenity.
Fiat lux, indeed.
There also exists a large constituency of what can only be called 'race hustlers': hucksters of all colors who benefit from stoking
the fires of racial conflict to secure administrative jobs, charity management positions, academic jobs and advancement, or personal
political entrepreneurship.
Given the direction our history department appears to be taking far from any commitment to truth , we can regard ourselves as
a formative training institution for this brand of snake-oil salespeople. Their activities are corrosive, demolishing any hope at
harmonious racial coexistence in our nation and colonizing our political and institutional life. Many of their voices are unironically
segregationist.
MLK would likely be called an Uncle Tom if he spoke on our campus today . We are training leaders who intend, explicitly,
to destroy one of the only truly successful ethnically diverse societies in modern history. As the PRC, an ethnonationalist and aggressively
racially chauvinist national polity with null immigration and no concept of jus solis increasingly presents itself as the global
political alternative to the US, I ask you: Is this wise? Are we really doing the right thing?
As a final point, our university and department has made multiple statements celebrating and eulogizing George Floyd. Floyd was
a multiple felon who once held a pregnant black woman at gunpoint. He broke into her home with a gang of men and pointed a gun at
her pregnant stomach. He terrorized the women in his community. He sired and abandoned multiple children , playing no part in their
support or upbringing, failing one of the most basic tests of decency for a human being. He was a drug-addict and sometime drug-dealer,
a swindler who preyed upon his honest and hard-working neighbors .
And yet, the regents of UC and the historians of the UCB History department are celebrating this violent criminal, elevating his
name to virtual sainthood . A man who hurt women. A man who hurt black women. With the full collaboration of the UCB history department,
corporate America, most mainstream media outlets, and some of the wealthiest and most privileged opinion-shaping elites of the USA,
he has become a culture hero, buried in a golden casket, his (recognized) family showered with gifts and praise . Americans are being
socially pressured into kneeling for this violent, abusive misogynist . A generation of black men are being coerced into identifying
with George Floyd, the absolute worst specimen of our race and species.
I'm ashamed of my department. I would say that I'm ashamed of both of you, but perhaps you agree with me, and are simply afraid,
as I am, of the backlash of speaking the truth. It's hard to know what kneeling means, when you have to kneel to keep your job.
It shouldn't affect the strength of my argument above, but for the record, I write as a person of color . My family have been
personally victimized by men like Floyd. We are aware of the condescending depredations of the Democrat party against our race. The
humiliating assumption that we are too stupid to do STEM , that we need special help and lower requirements to get ahead in life,
is richly familiar to us. I sometimes wonder if it wouldn't be easier to deal with open fascists, who at least would be straightforward
in calling me a subhuman, and who are unlikely to share my race.
The ever-present soft bigotry of low expectations and the permanent claim that the solutions to the plight of my people rest exclusively
on the goodwill of whites rather than on our own hard work is psychologically devastating . No other group in America is systematically
demoralized in this way by its alleged allies. A whole generation of black children are being taught that only by begging and weeping
and screaming will they get handouts from guilt-ridden whites.
No message will more surely devastate their futures, especially if whites run out of guilt, or indeed if America runs out of whites.
If this had been done to Japanese Americans, or Jewish Americans, or Chinese Americans, then Chinatown and Japantown would surely
be no different to the roughest parts of Baltimore and East St. Louis today. The History department of UCB is now an integral institutional
promulgator of a destructive and denigrating fallacy about the black race.
I hope you appreciate the frustration behind this message. I do not support BLM. I do not support the Democrat grievance agenda
and the Party's uncontested capture of our department. I do not support the Party co-opting my race, as Biden recently did in his
disturbing interview, claiming that voting Democrat and being black are isomorphic. I condemn the manner of George Floyd's death
and join you in calling for greater police accountability and police reform. However, I will not pretend that George Floyd was anything
other than a violent misogynist, a brutal man who met a predictably brutal end .
I also want to protect the practice of history. Cleo is no grovelling handmaiden to politicians and corporations. Like us, she
is free. play_arrow
Blacks will always be poor and fucked in life when 75% of black infants are born to single most likely welfare dependent mothers...
And the more amount of welfare monies spent to combat poverty the worse this problem will grow...
taketheredpill , 37 minutes ago
Anonymous....
1) Is he really a Professor at Berkeley?
2) Is he really a Professor anywhere?
3) Is he really Black?
4) Is he really a He?
LEEPERMAX , 44 minutes ago
BLM is an international organization. They solicit tax free charitable donations via ActBlue. ActBlue then funnels billions
of dollars to DNC campaigns. This is a violation of campaign finance law and allows foreign influence in American elections.
CRM114 , 44 minutes ago
I've pointed this out before:
In 2015, after the Freddie Gray death Officers were hung out to dry by the Mayor of Baltimore (yes, her, the Chair of the DNC
in 2016), active policing in Baltimore basically stopped. They just count the bodies now. The clearance rate for homicides has
dropped to, well, we don't know because the Police refuse to say, but it appears to be under 15%. The homicide rate jumped 50%
almost immediately and has stayed there. 95% of homicides are black on black.
The Baltimore Sun keeps excellent records, so you can check this all for yourself.
Looking at killings by cops; if we take the worst case and exclude all the ones where the victim was armed and independent
witnesses state fired first, and assume all the others were cop murders, then there's about 1 cop murder every 3 years, which
means that since has now stopped and the homicide rate's gone up...
For every black man now not murdered by a cop, 400 more black men are murdered by other black men.
taketheredpill , 46 minutes ago
"As an example of the latter problem, consider the proportion of black incarcerated Americans. This proportion is often used
to characterize the criminal justice system as anti-black. However, if we use the precise same methodology, we would have to conclude
that the criminal justice system is even more anti-male than it is anti-black ."
It is the RATIO of UNARMED BLACK MALES KILLED to UNARMED WHITE MALES KILLED in RELATION TO % OF POPULATION. RATIO.
RATIO. UNARMED.
BLACK % POPULATION 13% BLACK % UNARMED MEN KILLED 37%
WHITE % POPULATION 74% BLACK % UNARMED MEN KILLED 45%
Is there a trend of MORE Black people being killed by police?
No. But there is an underlying difference in the numbers that is bad.
>>>>> As of 2018, Unarmed Blacks made up 36% of all people UNARMED killed by police. But black people make up 13% of the (unarmed)
population.
There's a massive Silent Majority of Americans , including black Americans, that are fed up with this absurd nonsense.
While there's a Vocal Minority of Americans : including Democrats, the media, corporations and race hustlers, that wish to
continue to promulgate a FALSE NARRATIVE into perpetuity...because it's a lucrative industry.
Gaius Konstantine , 57 minutes ago
A short while ago I had an ex friend get into it with me about how Europeans (whites), were the most destructive race on the
planet, responsible for all the world's evil. I pointed out to him that Genghis Khan, an Asian, slaughtered millions at a time
when technology made this a remarkable feat. I reminded him the Japanese gleefully killed millions in China and that the American
Indian Empires ran 24/7 human sacrifices with some also practicing cannibalism. His poor libtard brain couldn't handle the fact
that evil is a human trait, not restricted to a particular race and we parted (good riddance)
But along with evil, there is accomplishment. Europeans created Empires and pursued science, The Asians also participated in
these pursuits and even the Aztec and Inca built marvelous cities and massive states spanning vast stretches of territory. The
only race that accomplished little save entering the stone age is the Africans. Are we supposed to give them a participation trophy
to make them feel better? Is this feeling of inferiority what is truly behind their constant rage?
Police in the US have been militarized for a long time now and kill many more unarmed whites than they do blacks, where is
the outrage? I'm getting the feeling that this isn't really about George, just an excuse to do what savages do.
lwilland1012 , 1 hour ago
"Truth is treason in an empire of lies."
George Orwell
You know that the reason he is anonymous is that Berkley would strip him of his teaching credentials and there would be multiple
attempts on his life...
Ignatius , 1 hour ago
" The vast majority of violence visited on the black community is committed by black people . There are virtually no marches
for these invisible victims, no public silences, no heartfelt letters from the UC regents, deans, and departmental heads. The
message is clear: Black lives only matter when whites take them. Black violence is expected and insoluble, while white violence
requires explanation and demands solution. Please look into your hearts and see how monstrously bigoted this formulation truly
is."
A former fed who trained the police in Buffalo believes the elderly protester who was hospitalized after a cop pushed him
to the ground "got away lightly" and "took a dive," according to a report.
The retired FBI agent, Gary DiLaura,
told The Sun
he thinks there's no chance Buffalo officers will be convicted of assault over the
now-viral video showing the
longtime
peace activist Martin Gugino fall and left bleeding on the ground.
" I can't believe that they didn't deck him. If that would have been a 40-year-old guy going up there, I guarantee you they'd
have been all over him, " DiLaura said.
" He absolutely got away lightly. He got a light push and in my humble opinion, he took a dive and the dive backfired because
he hit his head. Maybe it'll knock a little bit of sense into him, " added the former fed, who trained Buffalo police on firearms
and defensive tactics, according to the report...
It's a great brainwashing process, which goes very slow[ly] and is divided [into] four basic stages. The first one [is]
demoralization ; it takes from 15-20 years to demoralize a nation. Why that many years? Because this is the minimum number
of years which [is required] to educate one generation of students in the country of your enemy, exposed to the ideology of
the enemy. In other words, Marxist-Leninist ideology is being pumped into the soft heads of at least three generations of American
students, without being challenged, or counter-balanced by the basic values of Americanism (American patriotism).
The result? The result you can see. Most of the people who graduated in the sixties (drop-outs or half-baked intellectuals)
are now occupying the positions of power in the government, civil service, business, mass media, [and the] educational system.
You are stuck with them. You cannot get rid of them. T hey are contaminated; they are programmed to think and react to certain
stimuli in a certain pattern. You cannot change their mind[s], even if you expose them to authentic information, even if you
prove that white is white and black is black, you still cannot change the basic perception and the logic of behavior. In other
words, these people... the process of demoralization is complete and irreversible. To [rid] society of these people, you need
another twenty or fifteen years to educate a new generation of patriotically-minded and common sense people, who would be acting
in favor and in the interests of United States society.
Yuri Bezmenov
American Psycho , 16 minutes ago
This article was one of the most articulate and succinct rebuttals to the BLM political power grab. I too have been calling
these "allies" useful idiots and I am happy to hear this professor doing the same. Bravo professor!
Today's false flag operations are generally carried out by intelligence agencies and
non-government actors including terrorist groups, but [unlike in the past] they are only
considered successful if the true attribution of an action remains secret. There is nothing
honorable about them as their intention is to blame an innocent party for something that it
did not do.
This video has 6,333,414 views and as such is probably the most watched commentary on the incident. She did not touch attempt to
exploit the death of Floyd but Clinton wing of Democratic Party
Personal accountability of blacks is important topic (and that includes rather low level of academic achievement among them; horrifies
number of singles mother and other ills that facilitate sliding into criminal behaviour) , but the we also need to distinguish between
a part that is due to blacks idiosyncrasies, and the part that is due to the fact that most blacks are poor. Although the standard of
living of most blacks in the USA is much higher then while people in Ukraine.
George Floyd is no hero. He was a troubled man with many problems. The issue should only be about his death. Regardless if you liked
or disliked him, no police has the legal authority to play judge, jury and executioner. According to witnesses, there was little if
any resistance on George's part. No self defense on the police's part was necessary. The only issue is that George was denied "due process".
THAT, is the problem. You cannot kill bad people that are not resisting arrest without due process. The clause in the Fifth Amendment
reads: No person shall ... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. While the clause in the Fourteenth
Amendment says: ...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.
As a young conservative I have noticed that our generation is being taught to be victims. Instead of combating the issues, we complain
and look for people to manipulate, and being driven by emotions rather than to take time and think. Not all but it's just my pov
I love Candace Owens because she does not use her race as a means for lack of responsibility and works for a dream....black Americans
or all Americans are played by the media and our obsession with actors, actresses and multimillionaires....wake up...
I listened to Sirius XM and the
DJ said "I couldn't wait to hear from jay z because he is one of the most intelligent men on earth." Really!!!!
The truth is being exposed much more brightly after many lies and brainwashing. If this brave woman would have spoken early at beginning
of riots, she would have been disregarded. But now the lies are being blown up when people understand they were fed up with lies and
half-truths and only partial picture by general media. We wish you Americans to make peace within you and heal the wounds. Cheers from
Israel
Your insight towards this BLM chaos actually has convinced people there are still some "upstanding" black Americans out there. Thank
you and stay safe!!
This is getting out of hand. An American criminal was killed due to police brutality, has now led to a statue of winston Churchill being
vandalised in London. These protesters arre brainless
He should have been arrested and not killed BUT, he was a crook the the media failed to tell but they have to hide the truth so they
can keep it going....They are criminals too.
She nailed it. Theft, drugs, counterfeit currency, woman assault, threaten people at gun point. He would have died of drugs anyway,
though he did not deserve the dastardly act. He is NOT.a HERO. The cops involved were also not heros. Both deserve to be condemned.
But the movement is to change the police brutality, it was murder captured on video. It was the first time my daughter watched a murder
on video repeated again and again as it was normal!. No it should NEVER be a normal.
" .a white president and a black president both signed off on drone attacks "
Who was this "black president"? I'm only aware of Nobel Peace Prize "winner", destroyer of
Libya, sponsor of jihadis in Syria and Nazis in Ukraine, genocidaire of Yemenis, and mass
murderer extraordinaire Barack Hussein Obama, who, if being the child of a black father makes
him "half-black", is, from being the child of a white mother, equally "half-white".
Problem here that the George Floyd protestors/rioters are a happy counter-cultural mix
of SJW, young blacks and young whites – impossible to portray them as the white power
KKK.
Same way that the Polish communist government couldn't effectively attack the Solidarity
worker's uprising. Government propaganda was designed to attack capitalists, exploiters of
the working class etc. which didn't make any sense against shipyard workers.
The contemporary geographical West bears almost nothing of classical Western culture.
Another good example is that classical Greco-Roman beauty standards opposes almost all kinds
of body modification and mutilations, like tattoos, piercings, scarification, circumcision,
etc. Many of these, especially the first two, became predominant in the last 3 decades.
Very true. Tattoos, piercings and scarification were deemed the sign of a criminal or a
barbarian in the Greco-Roman world. They valued the athletic body as it was and saw no need
to disfigure it. That is why they had such a hard time accepting circumcision.
BLM does not matter one bit. What you're witnessing here is a classic by-the-book Color
Revolution. Look at the analogies with Ukrainian EuroMaydan: is used Western Ukrainians as a ram;
here Afro Americans and assorted groups of anarchists/Maoists like antifa are used.
What is interesting is young whites are probably the majority is many protests. Are they all
unemployed or what? Or are they social media addicts and view this as the latest viral event that
they want to participate in
The latest "saint" in this religion was a highly flawed human
being , to put it charitably. Career criminal, drug dealer, someone who threatened a
pregnant woman with a gun during a robbery and then testified against his "colleagues" in
exchange for a lighter sentence
"... How much of this is virtue signalling by Mitt Romney and others of the elite? Is he willing to disgorge himself of the the hundreds of millions he took from Americans through his company Bain? ..."
These far right social conservatives lost yesterday and they don't even realize it. Mitt
Romney marched with BLM. Mitt is no radical on social issues (he certainly is on. Taxes on
the rich) you won't convince a single one of these hard right wing people that systemic
racism is real, even when you give examples like the North Carolina Republican Party
disenfranchising blacks "with surgical precision" or the direct evidence of the commenter
Dukeboy who states he is a retired police officer and is obviously a white supremacists. But
you don't need to convince them of anything. This is the same group who would have been
against the civil rights protests in the '60's. They aren't needed to create a massive
change.
The hubris to think that your feelings of guilt would be meaningful to black people is off
the charts.
"My local school has been underfunded for generations due to the property tax funding system
and redlining but Karen feels bad about it so all is right with the world!"-Said no black
person ever.
How much of this is virtue signalling by Mitt Romney and others of the elite? Is he
willing to disgorge himself of the the hundreds of millions he took from Americans through
his company Bain?
How much? 100% of it. Romney is a vicious corporate raider who has destroyed countless
jobs and by extension, lives. How many suicides have followed in the wake of Bain's corporate
takeovers? When Romney lived in Belmont, MA, he and his wife petitioned the town to not allow
ambulances to go down their street with sirens on. Seriously.
"... Just look at all the productive work now being done by the rioters. They have a vision for America. It is easier to rebuild when whole areas are turned to rubble than it is to clear them with heavy equipment. ..."
@Katrinka Katrinka, you dont understand. Diversity and multiculturalism is our strength !
I mean in which other country in the entire world can you go into a coffee shop at 10 am on a
workday and hear 40 different languages being bawled into $1500 cell phones.
Also, Just look at all the productive work now being done by the rioters. They have a
vision for America. It is easier to rebuild when whole areas are turned to rubble than it is
to clear them with heavy equipment.
Look on the bright side. A new slum area, oops I meant a new high end area will arise from
the ashes, a shining example of a brand new Utopia for all the world to see !
"Evidence" means testimony, writings, material objects, or other things presented to the
senses that are offered to prove the existence or nonexistence of a fact. -- California
Evidence Code sec 140
Even the NYT acknowledged (before it erased the text in its story on Reade that noted
there were no other sexual misconduct charges pending against him other than that long
history of assaults and sniffing and hands-on, text removed by the Times at the instance of
the Biden campaign staff?
Here's the original text: " The Times found no pattern of sexual misconduct by Mr. Biden,
beyond the hugs, kisses and touching that women previously said made them uncomfortable."
Waiting for the apologists to tell us why the edit to remove the last clause starting "beyond
" is just "Good journalism."
He and Trump are bad examples of the male part of the species. Nothing to choose that I
can see, other than who among the people that revise those bribes to them will be the first
in line at the MMT watering hole
i had a lengthy discussion about this with my brother and sil, it came down to her saying
I DON'T CARE ABOUT THAT re bidens history of being a ttl letch plus possible rapist and my
brother questioning what is obvious discomfort in multiple video evidence.
They said defeating trump was paramount to anything against biden. i simply give up at
this point.
Lots of partisan hackery and TDS going around in the last few years in once respectable
lefty publications. Mother Jones has gone completely to hell rather than raising any, as was
once their mission statement. I haven't read the Nation as much in recent years – I let
my subscription lapse a while ago as I found I just couldn't keep up with reading it.
Coincidentally I think that was about the time I started reading NC. The Nation has a history
of sheepdogging lefties to rally behind bad Dem candidates, which was another reason I didn't
feel bad letting my subscription go.
I do still have my subscription to Harper's but they were getting on my nerves quite a bit
to the point I considered cancelling them too. Rebecca Solnit wrote some truly cringe-worthy
editorials for them after Trump's election. They seem to have removed her from writing the
main editorial so maybe I wasn't the only one who felt she left a little to be desired. I'm
quite fond of the newer woman they have doing editorials, Lionel Shriver. She seems like
she'd fit in quite well here!
I left (pun intended) the Nation pub in the dust way back in the 1990's and buried it post
9/11. Used to be a real good alternative press pub 30-40 years ago. Somewhere along the line
it lost it's way and joined the wishy-washy "gatekeeper' society of "approved news."
RIP
The Nation was a sanity saviour back in late 70s and through 1980s; then something
happened. Not clear when or what, but I know I let my subscription lapse. Tried again later,
but it was never the same. It's mostly unbearable now, except for Stephen Cohen. Walsh has
been in the unbearable category for many years now.
Leonard Pitts just had an editorial in my local paper where he opined that even if Biden
had sexually assaulted Reade, it didn't really matter because we had to vote against
Trump.
I wrote this in reply:
So Leonard Pitts thinks that Biden's alleged sexual attack on Tara Reade isn't disqualifying,
even if true. Strange, he didn't think that way about Brett Kavanagh. I didn't want to attack
the columnist as a hypocrite without being sure, so I looked it up. Here is what he
wrote:
"It's a confluence of facts that speak painfully and pointedly to just how unseriously
America takes men's predations against women. You might disagree, noting that the Senate
Judiciary Committee has asked Ford to testify. But if history is any guide, that will prove
to be a mere formality – a sop to appearances – before the committee recommends
confirmation."
Looks very much like "Well, It's excusable when our guys do it."
Always had a crush on K v d Heuvel. (How's that for an opening to a post about misogyny
and sexual misconduct)?
But can't we disqualify Joe! as the craven proponent of the worst neo-lib policies that
got us exactly where we are today? Or, in polite company, ask politely whether he is even in
a mental state to hand over the keys to the to the family car, let alone the nuclear
football?
Let's take the Id out of IdPol, I don't care if the candidate has green skin and three
eyes if the policies they would enact come within smelling distance of benefiting the 99% (or
more precisely in Joe's case within hair smelling distance).
We can use his personal conduct as a component in our judgement but pleeease can we focus
on the stuff that would actually affect our lives. In his case, for the absolute worse.
(Note: I sincerely doubt whether Joe is currently allowed to drive a car, please oh please
Mr.God-Yahweh-Mohammed-Buddha-Obama can we not let him drive a nation).
For anyone running for office in modern
America, accusations of sexual assault are par for the course. But when it comes to weighing up these accusations, the US’
mainstream paper of record applies some very uneven standards.
Take Joe Biden, the Democratic Party’s presumptive nominee. If doubts weren’t already raised by his fondness for
sniffing women,
the emergence last month of a sexual assault allegation against the former vice president could have caused a major headache for
his campaign.
Yet amid the coronavirus pandemic, and given the political leanings of most media outlets, the scandal barely registered.
The
Intercept ran a story in March on how Tara Reade, a former Senate staffer, claimed that in 1993 Biden pushed her against a
wall, groped her, and penetrated her with his fingers. Reade had spoken up about the alleged incident a year earlier, but was
met with accusations that she was doing Russia’s bidding. The US media was still doing ‘Russiagate’ back then, remember?
. @DanaPerino I'm not quite sure why
you're telling FOX viewers that Elizabeth Warren is the last female candidate in the Dem
primary. Is it because you believe a fake indigenous woman of color is "real" and the real
indigenous woman of color in this race is fake? pic.twitter.com/VKCxy2JzFe
"... Democrats want to pass (and have introduced) programs like subsidized day care, parental leave, and universal health care. If you're not hearing them address this, you're not listening. And anything they try to pass through Congress would be immediately shot down by the GOP. ..."
Feminists need to rout some of their commendable passion into making sure that American mothers are cared for.
Whatever one thinks about the roar of noise that is the #MeToo movement, it’s proved damned effective at galvanizing action and
debate.
It’s also demonstrated how the world has grown more willing to do something about sexist and misogynistic injustices—ranging from
minor everyday ones to graver ones entrenched over a lifetime—that women have endured for centuries.
In which case: why the barely audible squeaks about maternity leave for America’s moms?
In my native UK, contractually employed mums (our brave versions of your brave moms) are entitled to up to 52 weeks of
maternity leave, 39 weeks of which is paid. That’s left me continually stunned at how this issue is so rarely touched on in
America during these supposedly progressive and enlightened times.
The United States remains the only country in the developed world that does not mandate paid maternity leave. All that’s on
the books is the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) of 1993, which requires 12 weeks of unpaid leave annually for mothers of
newborn or newly adopted children. And that’s only if they’ve been working in their jobs for a year and their employers have more
than 50 employees within 75 miles of where they work.
The downright pernickety-ness and stinginess of it all is only further exacerbated by the fact that if your spouse works at
the same company that you do, your employer can divide the 12-week total between the two of you.
Such splitting of hairs seems almost designed to pummel the morale of first-time or once-again mothers (as well as bleary-eyed
fathers). Yet very little has been said—and even less done—to improve matters since 1993. Not by politicians, not by public
figures, and, most tellingly for this article, not by feminists, even though the issue is a source of anxiety and woe for so many
women. All these sleep-deprived new moms, their bodies and hormones in chaos, their emotions rollercoastering, dragging
themselves back to the office.
Seven in 10 moms with kids younger than 18 were in the labor force in 2015, up from 47 percent in 1975, according to the Pew
Research Center, which also found that mothers are the primary breadwinners in four in 10 American families.
Given such stats and the miserable implications for families at such a challenging period in women’s lives, it’s odd to
observe what battles are not being fought by those feminists who claim to speak for all women, especially right now, when their
voices seem to be so effective. Admittedly several states have their own laws that offer partially paid maternity leave. And some
employers do offer paid leave of their own volition. But the fact is that, because FMLA is all there is, many women must return
to work after those 12 weeks are up.
So why not make more noise about #MomsToo, especially considering that #MeToo surely has some volume to spare?
I put that question to a single mom who works in women’s counseling, child assault protection, and the prevention of intimate
partner violence—suffice to say, she is well steeped in matters of men not stepping up or doing far worse. She countered that the
#MeToo movement is not just about sexual harassment; it’s about the general way that men and society view women. This in turn,
she explained, affects lots of other issues, including maternity leave, though she said that more pressing for her are the
terrible maternal mortality rates across the United States. In short, she says, the #MeToo tide is looking to raise all manner of
boats skippered by and sheltering long-suffering women.
I’d struggle to argue with any of that. At the same time, though, any worthy movement can become a bandwagon. And I suspect
the lack of #MomsToo attention has to do with some #MeToo supporters wanting to look edgy and on trend on social media, which
can’t usually be achieved by discussing the dull and antiquated institution of motherhood. Selfless devotion and sacrifice to a
little screaming brat who might not even live out the all but guaranteed extinction of the world? Please, girl.
I recently came across a book aimed at new moms that purported to explore the “brilliant, terrible, wonderful, confusing
realities of first-time motherhood.” Going off what I have seen of motherhood and speaking to new moms—my sister included, who
has had four kids, and does not hold back from offering candid assessments—that description seems apt. It captures the wild
spectrum of maternal experiences, which range from utter joy to utter nightmare, with an enormous amount in between.
Yet despite all that, American society keeps its arms folded when it comes to cutting moms some slack regarding their
so-called duties to their employers, with barely anything suggested about a duty of care due the other way.
Even more concerning is how the poor state of maternity leave is part of a much larger and more troubling dynamic, one that,
once again, the feminists could do more to consider and confront.
The New York Times comes in for a fair amount of criticism these days for its on-trend topics and attempts to appear woke. But
full credit to it for running in last weekend’s Sunday paper a devastatingly humane and thought-provoking article—the kind that
seems an endangered species—addressing declining birth rates in the developed world.
While acknowledging that the downward trend typically accompanies the spread of economic development that brings benefits to
women, it still delved into the nuances of how that trend also reflects a “profound failure: of employers and governments to make
parenting and work compatible” due to “the glaring absence of family-friendly policies in the U.S.”
This, the article’s author, Anna Louie Sussman, argues, is the result of the bigger picture that society is missing—and that
much talk of feminist empowerment misses too—whereby the current version of global capitalism is generating “social conditions
inimical to starting families.”
I think both sexes are being sold a lot of hokum in the name of self-realization, taking back control, and so on. And that
peddling is being done in the name of the overarching lord of us all: The Economy.
Sussman aptly addresses this, describing “a secular world in which a capitalist ethos–extract, optimize, earn, achieve,
grow—prevails,” while “a lifetime of messaging directs us” towards an “engaging career, esoteric hobbies, exotic holidays.” The
result, she says, is the “promise and pressure of seemingly limitless freedom, which can combine to make children an
after-thought, or an unwelcome intrusion on a life that offers rewards and satisfactions of another kind.”
This crisis in reproduction, Sussman argues, is compounded by the fact that so many people who are thinking of having a child
are wrestling with—and often giving up in the face of—well-grounded anxieties ranging from the increasing financial burdens of
child rearing to bringing children into a world wrought by environmental degradation.
Hence Sussman’s conclusion that improvements such as paid parental leave are “only a partial fix for our current crisis, a
handful of crumbs when our bodies and souls require a nourishing meal.”
As I’ve previously noted, men undoubtedly still play a role in women-centric issues, and hence have a right to participate in
important discussions that ultimately affect all of us.
Some feminists might disagree with that. But rather than calling out men for interfering, how about instead directing some of
that commendable passion into achieving important change? How about highlighting those more neglected issues such as maternity
leave that remain stubbornly entrenched amid the broader hypocrisies of a supposedly caring society that leaves so many mothers
in the lurch?
James Jeffrey is a freelance journalist who splits his time between the U.S., the UK, and further
afield, and writes for various international media. Follow him on Twitter
@jrfjeffrey .
Stingy maternity leave policies are driven by libertarian principles. The principal, driven by corporate donors, is that government
shall interfere with corporatism as little as possible. The other side of the lobby against maternity leave are conservatives
who don't believe women should be working at all while their children are in younger than high-school age. By the way, aren't
men parents too? Surely men should be on board with better maternity leave if they believe in family.
Why is AmConMag going beyond National Review in its series of articles "The Conservative Case for rabid Socialism"
This is both socialism and gender feminism. Or maybe because it isn't the government but "employers" enslaved by the government,
it is economic fascism?
Moms belong at home with their children over their entire childhood, and do they get another year of Maternity leave if they
get pregnant again within a few months of birth? Who pays for this? Maybe it is why we are sending jobs to Mexico and China because
they not merely do it cheaper, they don't have things like this that make employers into playing an inverse lottery. Hire a mother
to be, get stuck with a huge bill? But we've already wanted to lower wages so you need a two-income household, and how WILL those
women ever pay off their student loan debt?
You are extremely charitable with OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY. How about YOU supporting YOUR wife (and children)? If Women decide
they want to spend their 20's with college degrees, six figure debt, and careers, they shouldn't be mothers.
Instead, if you insist, why not do a "Child Support" on steroids and make the FATHER - even and especially if he is married
to the woman - pay for the leave and kid?
If paid maternity leave is so important, why don't conservatives lead? Oh, I forget conservatives don't care about maternity leave
because it would be a burden on businesses. Republicans (economic liberals) don't want any burdens on businesses. This isn't complicated.
Come on, why even write about this?
Democrats want to pass (and have introduced) programs like subsidized day care, parental leave, and universal health care.
If you're not hearing them address this, you're not listening. And anything they try to pass through Congress would be immediately
shot down by the GOP.
And states are coming up with their own paid family leave plans due to the failure of the federal government to come up with
a plan (WA state, for example).
What bubble are you in that you don't hear about these things?
why the barely audible squeaks about maternity leave for America's moms?
One wonders what you have been listening to, since the fight for paid family leave has been one of the most consistent, ongoing
issues of the US left for decades. And yes, that includes pretty much every "MeToo" activist. Of course, maybe you've just missed
it since we describe it as "family leave" that can be used by either or both parents; rather than your patronizing "maternity
leave for America's moms" framing.
"... "...real fear or anguish..." in fact only exist in people's heads. Identity politics poisoned neolibs like to externalize these sensations as being tangible features of the physical (non-metaphysical and non-imaginary) world. They are not. ..."
"... The corporate mass media exists solely to manufacture megatrends in society. Whether that is to manufacture mass cravings for a particular color and artificial flavor of carbonated corn syrup water or to manufacture the "real fear or anguish" that we are threatened by scary "others" to get the herd to crowd around symbols of security, the overall purpose is the same: Serve the interests of the big business elites. ..."
"...real fear or anguish..." in fact only exist in people's heads. Identity politics
poisoned neolibs like to externalize these sensations as being tangible features of the
physical (non-metaphysical and non-imaginary) world. They are not.
More topically, the corporate mass media excels at manufacturing "real fear or
anguish" . The farce taking place in HK is a perfect example of this, but we can see
similar examples elsewhere like Venezuela where well-fed upper middle class Venezuelans are
convinced beyond reason that Venezuelans (others that they don't know) are starving, or like
in Ukraine where western Ukrainians were certain in their anguish that eastern Ukrainians
were being killed by Russians. Many Americans are still experiencing very "real
fear or anguish" that Russians are wrecking their sham "Democracy™" . As
real as this may seem to the delusional and hysterical, it is still delusion and
hysteria.
The corporate mass media exists solely to manufacture megatrends in society. Whether
that is to manufacture mass cravings for a particular color and artificial flavor of
carbonated corn syrup water or to manufacture the "real fear or anguish" that we are
threatened by scary "others" to get the herd to crowd around symbols of security, the overall
purpose is the same: Serve the interests of the big business elites.
"... In communist parties, there is this risk of elitism, self-indulgence, and a belief that a certain avant-garde should lead a working class that does not know its own best interests, instead of asking people what they want. 20th-century Communism died with the Soviet Union, it has never been successfully updated for the 21st century but has been stuck in 100-year-old books. ..."
"... Curiously, events in Malmö have been mirrored somewhat in broader Swedish Left politics ..."
"... British Left "have no vision for an alternative to rampant neoliberalism and a deindustrialised, finance-led, low wage economy, they calculate the best way to make this work is within the EU." He argues that the cosmopolitan leadership of the Labour Party in particular "think we are some kind of uncivilised tribe, painting our faces blue, and only able to vote in a right-wing government," a view he finds "not only deeply insulting, but also self-defeating and overly optimistic about the EU." On immigration, Galloway argues that there is "nothing left-wing about unlimited mass immigration. It decapitates the countries from which the immigrants leave, and drives down wages in those where they arrive. The wealthy benefit from it, as they can afford cheap labor for their companies, or cheap au-pairs, cheap baristas, cheap plumbers. But the working class suffers." ..."
"... In this text, and other articles on the party's website, including this very interesting speech denouncing transgender ideology as anti-materialist and anti-scientific, the argument is made that ..."
"... Biological differentiation between male and female is a real thing . It doesn't just exist in humanity, it exists in many species throughout the natural world. Sexual reproduction is a natural biological process that has persisted in nature due to the diversity it engenders; it is a phenomenon encountered in the natural world. And let's not forget how this debate impinged upon us. ..."
"... The endorsement and promotion of multiculturalism and its sex-politics corollaries never did make much sense within the framework of rational critiques of capitalism, and the tension between the nominal desire for working class solidarity and divisive pseudo-Marxian doctrines (e.g. Whiteness Studies) designed to mobilise imported ethnic factions against the largest section of the working class (blue-collar Whites) was always destined to bring about significant stress fractures when Leftist fortunes began to decline. ..."
"The life of the individual is a constant struggle, and not merely a metaphorical one,
against want or boredom, but also an actual struggle against other people. He discovers
adversaries everywhere, lives in continual conflict and dies with sword in hand."
Arthur Schopenhauer, On the Suffering of the World
Although Nietzsche seems to be the philosopher of choice for many on the Dissident Right,
I've always had a soft spot for Arthur Schopenhauer. His cantankerous philosophical pessimism
has always struck a chord with my own temperament, and for many years I've found his
quasi-Buddhist and highly compassionate conceptualisation of suffering to be strangely
comforting. That life is a struggle involving endless adversaries and competitors also forms an
aspect of Schopenhauer's philosophy, and this continues to be significant in shaping my
political and philosophical outlook. Certainly, it goes without saying that adversaries have
never been in short supply for members of the Dissident Right. They are arrayed before us now,
emerging from all points of the political spectrum, and often even from within our own ranks.
Dissident right political philosophies, more than any other, appear destined to be mired in
continual conflict, and I often find it difficult to shake the dark impression that one day I
will die, metaphorical sword in hand, with every battle raging but far from won. For this
reason, I sometimes permit myself the relief of optimism (a form of cowardice to both
Schopenhauer and Spengler), and part of this is the attempt to find allies where formerly one
may have seen only foes. This brings me to the subject matter of this essay -- recent
developments on the Left which appear to suggest the emergence of an anti-globalist,
anti-immigration, and anti-Zionist/anti-Semitic politics.
Swedish Communists Wake Up
Just days ago, Sputnik
reported on the fact that almost half of the members of the Communist Party in Malmö,
Sweden, are resigning. They plan to establish a new workers' party that no longer features
multiculturalism, LGBT interests, and climate change as key policy goals. Nils Littorin, one of
the defectors,
told a local newspaper that today's Left has become part of the elite and has come to
"dismiss the views of the working class as alien and problematic." Littorin suggested that the
Left "is going through a prolonged identity crisis" and that his group, instead, intends to
stick to the original values, such as class politics. Littorin adds "[The Left] don't
understand why so many workers don't think that multiculturalism, the LGBT movement and Greta
Thunberg are something fantastic, but instead believe we are in the 1930s' Germany and that
workers who vote [right-wing] Sweden Democrats have been infected by some Nazi sickness." In a
piece of simple insight previously rare on the Left, he argues that the rise in right-wing
votes for people like Donald Trump and Boris Johnson are in fact due to "widespread
dissatisfaction with liberal economic migration that leads to low-wage competition and the
ghettoisation of communities, a development that only benefits major companies." Rather than
being beneficial to working class Whites, Littorin condemns a "chaotic" immigration policy that
has led to "cultural clashes, segregation and exclusion due to an uncontrolled influx from
parts of the world characterised by honour culture and clan mentalities."
Littorin continues to talk sense when it comes to the LGBT agenda. He explains that LGBT
issues and the climate movement are merely "state ideologies" that are "rammed down people's
throats". Littorin adds that phenomena like these happen at the expense of real issues, such as
poverty, homelessness, and income equality: "Pride, for instance, has been reduced to dealing
with sexual orientation. We believe that human dignity is primarily about having a job and
having pension insurance that means that you are not forced to live on crumbs when you are
old."
As well as prioritising jobs and pensions over the flamboyant celebration of buggery,
Littorin and his colleagues have pledged to abandon the name and ethos of Communism, describing
it as a
word drawn to the dirt, a nasty word today, and not entirely undeservedly. In communist
parties, there is this risk of elitism, self-indulgence, and a belief that a certain
avant-garde should lead a working class that does not know its own best interests, instead of
asking people what they want. 20th-century Communism died with the Soviet Union, it has never
been successfully updated for the 21st century but has been stuck in 100-year-old books.
Curiously, events in Malmö have been mirrored somewhat in broader Swedish Left
politics, with Markus Allard, the leader of the left-wing Örebro Party, expressing
similar
thoughts in an op-ed titled "Socialists don't belong to the left," accusing the mainstream
left of completely abandoning
its base , switching from the working class to "parasitic grant-grabbing layers within the
middle class."
British Socialists Reinvent Themselves
Almost simultaneously, an identical process is occurring in Britain with George Galloway 's announcement of a
new Workers
Party of Britain . At the time of its launch Galloway described the party as "hard Brexit
and hard labour," and added: "If you're a liberal who thinks it's Left if you're still pining
for the EU, if you think shouting "racist," "homophobic," "transphobic" at everybody who
doesn't agree with you is the way forward, we're probably not for you." Galloway's pro-Brexit
stance is rooted in his
belief that the modern British Left "have no vision for an alternative to rampant
neoliberalism and a deindustrialised, finance-led, low wage economy, they calculate the best
way to make this work is within the EU." He argues that the cosmopolitan leadership of the
Labour Party in particular "think we are some kind of uncivilised tribe, painting our faces
blue, and only able to vote in a right-wing government," a view he finds "not only deeply
insulting, but also self-defeating and overly optimistic about the EU." On immigration,
Galloway argues that there is "nothing left-wing about unlimited mass immigration. It
decapitates the countries from which the immigrants leave, and drives down wages in those where
they arrive. The wealthy benefit from it, as they can afford cheap labor for their companies,
or cheap au-pairs, cheap baristas, cheap plumbers. But the working class suffers."
Galloway has also stressed that his new party will strongly pursue anti-Israel politics, and
is fully committed to opposing the IHRA definition of antisemitism.
Galloway and the Workers Party of Britain have also taken a stand against the more extreme
forms of LGBT indoctrination, particularly the mass promotion of transgenderism. Galloway, who
has previously been attacked by a
self-styled "trans anarchist" while giving a speech, is here following the lead of the
pro-Brexit Communist Party of Great Britain (Marxist-Leninist) which recently published
Identity Politics and the Transgender Trend: Where is LGBT ideology taking us and Why does
it matter?
In this text, and other articles on the party's website, including this
very interesting speech denouncing transgender ideology as anti-materialist and
anti-scientific, the argument is made that
Biological differentiation between male and female is a real thing . It doesn't
just exist in humanity, it exists in many species throughout the natural world. Sexual
reproduction is a natural biological process that has persisted in nature due to the
diversity it engenders; it is a phenomenon encountered in the natural world. And let's not
forget how this debate impinged upon us. We've been following this ideological trend, and
encountering identity politics (idpol) among supporters and candidates for membership of our
party, and amongst people we've been working with for at least four or five years. Because
idpol has become a fashion in that period. And it is a fashion; it is a trend. And it
suddenly -- from being very marginal to certain academic institutions in the 1970s -- became
mainstream globally worldwide; it was actively promoted. Not promoted by communists, not by
socialists, but picked up on and accepted by many of them, because they are led by, and they
blindly followed, bourgeoise society down this dead-end. There is a group of self-proclaimed
'socialists' who are not actually any longer fighting against our oppression, they're
fighting against reality!
The Left in Crisis?
None of these developments are entirely surprising and, in fact, the argument could be made
that they are the inevitable side effect of what Nils Littorin termed the Left's prolonged
"identity crisis." The endorsement and promotion of multiculturalism and its sex-politics
corollaries never did make much sense within the framework of rational critiques of capitalism,
and the tension between the nominal desire for working class solidarity and divisive
pseudo-Marxian doctrines (e.g. Whiteness Studies) designed to mobilise imported ethnic factions
against the largest section of the working class (blue-collar Whites) was always destined to
bring about significant stress fractures when Leftist fortunes began to decline.
And decline they have. Of course, we have to set aside rampant ideological and cultural
success. Figures and cliques operating under the banner of social equality and eternal progress
continue to hold the reins of power in government, academia, and the mass media. But the Left
is without question currently subject to a period of political decline. It's losing votes, and
more important, it's fast losing hearts and minds. I should also add that they aren't losing
them to right-wing ideas, but to the hollow shells of right-wing ideas (Free Enterprise! Build
the Wall!) and to the charismatic globalist play-actors who promote-these ideas like salesmen
selling used cars or aftershave. White working-class people are voting for free enterprise
without hesitation while Jewish
vulture capitalism operates with impunity under that very banner, destroying their towns,
exporting their jobs, and repossessing their homes. The same people vote for a wall they'll
never get -- and would never really solve the problems resulting from capitalism or ensure a
majority White future. And they do it not because of concern about identity or racial destiny,
but in the same way one might decide to install CCTV in a grocery store -- the ever-elusive
Wall will never be built so long as it represents nothing more than the aspiration to protect
mere inventory. The hollow men of the pseudo-Right-wing offer flimsy placebos, and yet the
political Left, supposedly the historical repository of hard materialism, can't seem to
compete.
There's been a scramble to blame the situation on
a lack of charismatic leaders , disunity, a lack of attractive policies, and even the idea
that the European Left made the
fatal mistake of trying to meet the Right on its own turf by "flirting with closed-border
nationalism or neoliberalism." But the real reason is surely the fact the Left has consistently
alienated and browbeat working class Whites, while slowly revealing itself to be an elite-run
clique of cosmopolitans, who are living the high life while waxing lyrical about oppressions
that are rarely real and often imaginary, and in any case never affect them personally. Added
to this is the fact Leftist ideology has become so convoluted and contorted, with the
square-peg doctrine of Marx endlessly forced into new and increasingly abstract circular and
triangular holes, resulting in Marxist interpretations of such ephemera as graffiti, pop music,
and drag queens, all of which strike the average blue-collar worker as a steaming pile of
effeminate middle-class navel-gazing. All this plays out as young yet dithering social justice
warriors, jobless and senseless, search for oppression like an old lady with dementia searches
for a purse she hasn't owned in 20 years. As the pundits split hairs, I look on, and it occurs
to me rather simply that right now the pseudo-Left-wing liars aren't quite as good as the
pseudo-Right-wing liars.
Are These Rebels Potential Allies?
When I was around 11 years old, my mother made a new friend, a Scottish woman in her 30s,
who always struck me as very strange. It was her eyes. I didn't know at first what
schizophrenia was, though I would soon find out. One day she arrived at our house and,
recognising her, I opened the door and welcomed her in. I called to my mother, who was
upstairs, and made small talk with the Scottish woman, who, standing still and staring right at
me, seemed perfectly cheerful and articulate. She asked about how I was doing at school, and we
talked a little bit about science, which she seemed to know a lot about. It was only after a
few minutes that I noticed the smell and deduced that the woman had fouled herself. By the time
my mother arrived, the Scottish woman had descended into a stream-of-consciousness gibberish
that culminated in her attempting unsuccessfully to retrieve a knife from the kitchen before
running from the property. She'd simply stopped taking her medication. We later discovered she
was found by police that night, dancing and weeping with bare, bloody feet in a nearby
graveyard, wearing nothing but a nightgown and proclaiming to the dead that she was God,
distraught at the death of the crucified son.
The episode has remained with me now for over two decades, shaping my perceptions of
reality, relationships, and trust. Here it suffices only to remark that the insane talk sense
at times, even as their psyche shatters. And if we dig deeply enough into the statements of
these moderately "awakened" Leftists, do we yet see signs of madness? A look again at the
statement from the Communist Party of Great Britain (Marxist-Leninist), along with some reading
between the lines, suggests something decidedly off . Yes, "biological differentiation
between male and female is a real thing." Of course it is. But so is biological differentiation
between races, and yet here our erstwhile British hardcore materialists, currently led by a
full-blooded ethnic Indian named Harpal Brar , decide to fight against reality.
On that note, we should add that Brar's daughter, Joti Brar, has been announced as George
Galloway's deputy leader at the "hard Brexit and hard labour" Worker's Party of Britain.
Galloway, it's worth adding, has been married four times, with three marriages to non-Whites
(Palestinian Amineh Abu-Zayyad in 1994, Lebanese Rima Husseini in 2007, and ethnic Indonesian
Putri Gayatri Pertiwi in 2012). So for all his protestations of being against mass migration,
one gets the distinct impression that Galloway is a committed multiculturalist and that his
party will be internationalist in every meaningful sense of the term.
If there is any hope for some sanity in this camp of frustrated Leftists it is for the
simple reason that these small new pockets of reason are for the most part free of Jewish
influence and all the intellectual distortions such influence entails. In a 2018 essay titled "
On
"Leftist Anti-Semitism": Past and Present ," I considered the gradual shift of Jews away
from the hard Left due to growing anti-Zionism, and their growing confinement in centrist
neoliberalism:
Jewish blindness to their privileges, genuine or feigned, is of course one major cause for
the undeniable friction between Jews and the modern Left. It was perhaps inevitable that
foolish but earnest egalitarians on the Left would come to the slow realization that their
'comrades of the Jewish faith' were in fact not only elitists, but an elite of a very special
sort. The simultaneous preaching of open borders/common property and 'the land of the Jewish
people' was always going to strike a discordant note among the wearers of sweaty Che Guevara
t-shirts, especially when accompanied so very often by the cacophony of Israeli gunfire and
the screams of bloodied Palestinian children. Mass migration, that well-crafted toxin
coursing through the highways and rail lines of Europe, has proven just as difficult to
manage. Great waves of human detritus wash upon Western shores, bringing raw and passionate
grievances even from the frontiers of Israel. These are people whose eyes have seen behind
the veil, and who sit only with great discomfort alongside the kin of the IDF in league with
the Western political Left -- the only common ground being a shared desire to dispossess the
hated White man. For these reasons, the Left could well become a cold house for Jews without
becoming authentically, systematically, or traditionally anti-Semitic. One might therefore
expect Jews to regroup away from the radical left, occupying a political space best described
as staunchly centrist -- a centrism that leans left only to pursue multiculturalism and other
destructive 'egalitarian' social policies, and leans right only in order to obtain elite
protections and privileges [domestically for the Jewish community, internationally for
Israel]. A centrism based, in that old familiar formula, on 'what is best for Jews.'
As seen in the recent clash between Jews and the UK's Labour Party, the political relocation
of Jews to a kind of amorphous and opportunistic centrism will bring them into direct conflict
with those on the hard Left who not only pursue anti-Zionist politics but also object to
manifestations of raw Jewish power like the mass adoption of the IHRA definition of
anti-Semitism and the economic abuses of politically ambiguous (neither Left nor Right, but
Jewish) oligarchs like Paul Singer. As such, and together with their natural aversion to being
part of the Right, Jews will increasingly find it difficult to define themselves politically as
anything other than Jews, leading to the increased visibility of their activities and interests
-- something witnessed in the unprecedented step of Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis openly calling
for British Jews to move against Jeremy Corbyn. This increased visibility can only be a good
thing for those concerned with Jewish influence, and who have been frustrated in previous
periods by Jewish influence masquerading in various political guises.
A potential opportunity, imperfect but perhaps feasible, may therefore be arising whereby
White interests could be subliminally or even publicly defended through savvy, nominally
hard-Left activism against mass migration (on economic rather than racial grounds), against
Israel and international Zionist influence, against some aspects of PC culture, and against the
capitalist excesses of the Jewish vulture funds. It goes without saying that Leftist activists
don't receive anywhere near the same level of social, professional, or legal punishment for
their activism as those on the Right, especially the dissident Right. I don't think I'm too
wide of the mark in suggesting that an anti-immigration agitator with "Workers Party of
Britain" plastered over his social media is less likely to lose his job than someone with
public National Front affiliations. It may therefore be worth serious consideration by young
activists as to whether they might want to cultivate a kind of "Leftist" mask to defend White
interests in much the same way as Jews in the past have adopted various convenient political
masks while concealing deeper ethnic interests. I am suggesting a combination of infiltration
and masquerade. What matters most is the private motivation and the potential benefits of the
ultimate goal -- White interests and objectives serving them.
There are, of course, also dangers in supporting such movements. I am not suggesting the
investment of serious time and money in these groups, since the risk is great that the majority
of their members are committed to a politics that is ultimately antagonistic and destructive to
our own ultimate goals. There is also huge potential for betrayal on many of the issues where
we might have common ground -- immigration, LGBT madness, PC culture -- and I find it difficult
to shake off the impression that these developments bear the mark of a temporary despair and
are designed to dupe blue-collar Whites into voting Left once more.
Still, 2020 may open up a new front in the war, and as the New Year approaches, I'll silence
my inner Schopenhauer and toast to that.
This stupid idea of "intersectionality" is just a fig leaf on dangerous government policy
Notable quotes:
"... Being labeled a conspiracist is actually not that bad, as probably 80% of major conspiracies (the term invented by CIA to discredit the opposition to Warren commission findings) proved to be the most adequate, albeit "politically incorrect" explanations of the events in question. They are just the explanations that undermine the establishment narrative. Right now most people (around 61% of voters and 71% of independents) believe that CIA operatives at senior levels played active role in JFK assassination. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-one-thing-in-politics-most-americans-believe-in-jfk-conspiracies/ ..."
"... the left, as a movement, is going through a prolonged identity crisis and that his group, instead, intends to stick to the original values, such as class warfare. ..."
"... The right-wingers' major gains from the working class are, according to Littorin, a token of widespread dissatisfaction with liberal economic migration that leads to "low-wage competition" and the "ghettoisation of communities", a development that "only benefits major companies". ..."
"... Littorin described multiculturalism, LGBT issues and the climate movement as state ideologies that are "rammed down people's throats". According to him, phenomena like LGBT-certification and the cult around 16-year-old climate activist Greta Thunberg and "other -isms" happen at the expense of the real issues, such as income equality. ..."
"... "Pride, for instance, has been reduced to dealing with sexual orientation. We believe that human dignity is primarily about having a job and having pension insurance that means that you are not forced to live on crumbs when you are old," Littorin explained. ..."
"... 20th-century Communism died with the Soviet Union, it has never been successfully updated for the 21st century ..."
"... similar thoughts in an opinion piece called "Socialists don't belong to the left", accusing the mainstream left of completely abandoning its base , switching from the working class to "parasitic grant-grabbing layers within the middle class". ..."
As I see it, intersectionality combines a recognition that people are oppressed both through the economic structures of capitalism
and as members of various subordinate groups with a rejection of both:
"essentialist" identity politics, based on the claim that some particular aspect of identity (gender, race, sexuality,
disability etc) should trump all others; and
"working class" politics, presented as a politics of universal liberation, but reduced by the failure of revolutionary
Marxism to another kind of identity politics (I took this formulation from
Don Arthur on Twitter. I had something
to say about class and Marxism
a while back)
likbez 01.02.20 at 1:11 am (no link)
Jake Gibson 01.01.20 at 3:49 pm @35
Here, I thought likbez was just a social reactionary, now I find he/she is also an infowars style conspiracist.
This is an ad hominem attack and as such is without merits.
Being labeled a conspiracist is actually not that bad, as probably 80% of major conspiracies (the term invented by CIA
to discredit the opposition to Warren commission findings) proved to be the most adequate, albeit "politically incorrect" explanations
of the events in question. They are just the explanations that undermine the establishment narrative. Right now most people (around
61% of voters and 71% of independents) believe that CIA operatives at senior levels played active role in JFK assassination.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-one-thing-in-politics-most-americans-believe-in-jfk-conspiracies/
So IMHO if a person views Russiagate as a color revolution against Trump run by intelligence agencies and Ukrainegate as attempt
to replicate 2018 success with Mueller witch hunt on a new level by neoliberal Democrats led by Pelosi and Schumer, this suggests
some attempt of independent thinking, and some level of resistance to neoliberal groupthink. Which may be a bridge too far, but
in general is not that bad, even if wrong.
The opposite camp that does not question the establishment narrative, especially as for Russiagate (and related false flag
operations such as DNC leak converted by Crowdstrike into Russian hack using CIA malware, probably from Vault 7 exposed by Wikileaks
and the creation of Gussifer 2.0 fake personality ) can be called a camp of neoliberal lemmings, or victims of neoliberal brainwashing,
your choice ;-)
Also for an Infowars adept I have friends in strange places -- a faction of Swedish communists -- which somehow managed to
replicate my views almost to a tee ;-)
Almost half of the members of the Communist Party in Malmö are resigning. Instead, they plan establish a new workers' party
that doesn't put as much emphasis on things like multiculturalism, LGBT issues and climate alarmism, which have become the
staples and rallying calls of today's left.
Nils Littorin, one of the defectors, explained to Lokaltidningen that today's left has become part of the elite and has
come to "dismiss the views of the working class as alien and problematic". Littorin suggested that the left, as a movement,
is going through a prolonged identity crisis and that his group, instead, intends to stick to the original values, such as
class warfare.
"They don't understand why so many workers don't think that multiculturalism, the LGBT movement and Greta Thunberg are something
fantastic, but instead believe we are in the 1930s' Germany and that workers who vote [right-wing] Sweden Democrats have been
infected by some Nazi sickness," he explained to Lokaltidningen.
The right-wingers' major gains from the working class are, according to Littorin, a token of widespread dissatisfaction
with liberal economic migration that leads to "low-wage competition" and the "ghettoisation of communities", a development
that "only benefits major companies".
According to Littorin, one of the underlying problems is a "chaotic" immigration policy that has led to cultural clashes,
segregation and exclusion due to an uncontrolled influx from parts of the world characterised by honour culture and clan mentalities.
Littorin described multiculturalism, LGBT issues and the climate movement as state ideologies that are "rammed down
people's throats". According to him, phenomena like LGBT-certification and the cult around 16-year-old climate activist Greta
Thunberg and "other -isms" happen at the expense of the real issues, such as income equality.
"Pride, for instance, has been reduced to dealing with sexual orientation. We believe that human dignity is primarily
about having a job and having pension insurance that means that you are not forced to live on crumbs when you are old," Littorin
explained.
The goal, according to Littorin is to enter Malmö City Council by 2022. The name of the party remains undetermined, but
Littorin stressed that the word "Communist" will no longer be present.
It's a word drawn to the dirt, a nasty word today, and not entirely undeservedly. In communist parties, there is this risk
of elitism, self-indulgence, and a belief that a certain avant-garde should lead a working class that does not know its own
best interests, instead of asking people what they want.
20th-century Communism died with the Soviet Union, it has never been successfully updated for the 21st century
but has been stuck in 100-year-old books. But the principles that Marx formulated, they still apply to me," Littorin concluded.
Earlier this week, Markus Allard, the leader of the left-wing Örebro Party expressed similar thoughts in an opinion
piece called "Socialists don't belong to the left", accusing the mainstream left of completely abandoning its base , switching
from the working class to "parasitic grant-grabbing layers within the middle class".
"... In my book, I identify two main factors that make the "soft totalitarianism" we're drifting into different from the hard totalitarianism of the communist years. One is the vastly greater capabilities of surveillance technology, and its penetration into daily life in this current stage of capitalism. The other is the pseudo-religion of Social Justice, the holy trinity of which is Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion. The mathematician James Lindsay last year wrote an insightful essay analyzing Social Justice ideology as a kind of postmodern religion ("faith system," he writes). Reading Slezkine on Bolshevism illuminates this with new depth. ..."
"... To be clear, Social Justice religion is not the same thing as Bolshevism, which conquered a nation and turned it into a charnel house. But the psychological dynamics are so similar that I can understand now why Soviet-bloc emigres feel in their bones that something wicked is coming, and coming fast. ..."
"... The Marxist faith system prophesied a worldwide conflagration -- Revolution -- that would see the saints (the Proletariat) cleanse the world of the wicked (the Bourgeoisie) and their false religion (Capitalism). The Revolution would establish Communism: a paradise in which the state would wither away, because the cause of man's alienation would have been dealt with. Marx despised religion, but he did not believe that his system was religious at all. It was, he taught, entirely scientific -- thus making Marxism entirely compatible with what Enlightenment-era elites believed was the prime source of authority. ..."
"... Here's an interesting difference: from what I can tell, most SJWs don't have a clearly envisioned utopia ..."
"... They don't know; all they know is that these things must come to pass, and will come to pass. We have to first destroy the old world and its corrupt structures. From the point of view of someone who stands to be smashed by these revolutionaries, it doesn't really matter whether or not they have a plan for what to do after you're overthrown. ..."
"... Here's another interesting difference, and an important one: SJWs may want to destroy the oppressive practices, but unlike the Bolsheviks, they don't want to destroy the institutions of society. Rather, they want to conquer them and administer them . The religion of Social Justice has already conquered the university, as James Lindsay points out, and is moving quickly into other institutions: media (the NYT is its Pravda ), law, tech, entertainment, and corporate America. The Social Justice faith system can be easily adapted by the institutions of bourgeois capitalism -- a fact that conceals its radicalism. ..."
"... The people who have lived in societies suffused with this kind of ideology -- emigres from Soviet-bloc countries -- can see through the veil. With this new book I'm working on, I'm going to do my best to help readers see through their eyes. Meanwhile, if you are really interested in the Russian Revolution, I strongly urge you to read The House Of Government -- all 1,128 pages of it. Yuri Slezkine is a masterful storyteller. It reads like a novel. ..."
"... even evil men respect great writers sometimes. ..."
"... The main difference between the Bolsheviks and SJWs is gender and class. ..."
LGBT Pride poster in Soviet Style (
Design
Boom ) I'm reading one of the best books I've ever seen, historian Yuri Slezkine's The House of Government: A Saga of the Russian Revolution . It's a massive
-- over 1,000 pages -- history of the Bolshevik movement, focusing on the people who lived in a vast apartment building constructed
across the Moskva River from the Kremlin, for party elites. In the 1930s, during the purges, it was the most dangerous address in
the country. The secret police came for people there all the time.
The book has given me a breakthrough in understanding why so many people who grew up under communism are unnerved by what's going
on in the West today, even if they can't all articulate it beyond expressing intense but inchoate anxiety about political correctness.
Reading Slezkine , a UC-Berkeley historian, clarifies things
immensely. Let me explain as concisely as I can. All of this is going into the book I'm working on, by the way.
In my book, I identify two main factors that make the "soft totalitarianism" we're drifting into different from the hard totalitarianism
of the communist years. One is the vastly greater capabilities of surveillance technology, and its penetration into daily life in
this current stage of capitalism. The other is the pseudo-religion of Social Justice, the holy trinity of which is Equity, Diversity,
and Inclusion.
The mathematician James Lindsay last year wrote an insightful essay analyzing Social Justice ideology as a kind of postmodern religion
("faith system," he writes). Reading Slezkine on Bolshevism illuminates this with new depth.
To be clear, Social Justice religion is not the same thing as Bolshevism, which conquered a nation and turned it into a charnel
house. But the psychological dynamics are so similar that I can understand now why Soviet-bloc emigres feel in their bones that something
wicked is coming, and coming fast.
I'm going to give a brief overview of the ideas in this part of Slezkine's book. Slezkine describes the Bolsheviks as "millenarian
sectarians preparing for the apocalypse." He gives a short history of apocalyptic sects, which he said began in the
Axial Age , the period between the 8th and the 3rd centuries
BC that saw parallel developments in civilizations -- Chinese, Indian, Middle Eastern, Greco-Roman -- that caused a fundamental shift
in human consciousness. The Axial Age introduced some concepts that are still with us today, including the idea that history is linear.
Religion and philosophical systems of the Axial Age developed a sense of separation from the Real (that is, what is material), and
the Ideal (what is transcendent). They also introduced the idea that time would culminate in a final battle between Good and Evil
that would result in the End of History and the everlasting reign of Justice. The rich will be conquered, and the poor will triumph.
Slezkine writes at some length about these themes in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament), but points out that they also existed in
parallel in other religions of the era. The two Abrahamic religions that emerged from Axial Age Judaism -- Christianity and Islam
-- modified these same concepts for themselves. The Book of Revelation in the Christian Bible is the standard Western account of
the Apocalypse, but not the only one.
In the 16th century, the radical Protestant theologian
Thomas Müntzer , leader of an apocalyptic Reformation sect, led an armed revolt against the Catholic Church, Martin Luther, and
feudal authority. He and his followers believed the Last Days were upon the world, and that revolutionary violence was necessary
to prepare for them.
These movements, says Slezkine, often depend on the virtuous mutually surveilling each other to keep everyone in line. Calvin's
Geneva was like this, and had laws prescribing the death penalty for relatively minor violations of its purity code. In the 17th
century, the English Puritan movement under Thomas Oliver [the mistake was mine --
RD] Cromwell (the "Puritan Moses") was in this same vein.
The Enlightenment birthed apocalyptic millenarianism without God. Slezkine doesn't mention him, but I want to put in a plug for
the book Black Mass by the English political philosopher John Gray,
which I wrote about here. Gray
is an atheist, but he cannot stand the militant atheism of people like Richard Dawkins and the late Christopher Hitchens. In the
book, Gray writes about how the instinct for utopia, born out of religion, keeps surfacing in the West, even without God. Nothing
is more human, he writes, than to be prepared to kill and die to secure meaning in life. More Gray:
Those who demand that religion be exorcised from politics think this can be achieved by excluding traditional faiths from public
institutions; but secular creeds are formed from religious concepts, and suppressing religion does not mean it ceases to control
thinking and behaviour. Like repressed sexual desire, faith returns, often in grotesque forms, to govern the lives of those who
deny it.
Slezkine writes that this same apocalyptic millenarianism erupted in anti-Christian form in the French Revolution. The Jacobins
were Enlightenment apocalyptics, believing in the triumph of Reason, Science, and Virtue. And they were proto-Bolsheviks. Robespierre,
in a 1794 speech to the National Assembly, praised "virtue, without which terror is destructive; terror, without which virtue is
impotent. The Terror is nothing but justice, prompt, severe, inflexible; it is thus an emanation of virtue."
In 19th century America, millenarianism took more gentle forms, but was still popular. Baptist preacher
William Miller prophesied the end of the world
in 1843, and reached a national audience with his forecast of doom. It didn't happen, but his work gave rise to the Adventist movements,
which are still with us today. Joseph Smith, founder of the Latter-Day Saints faith, was another millenarian -- a more successful
one.
Slezkine says that apocalyptic millenarianism in 19th century Europe often took the form of nationalism. Karl Marx advocated German
nationalism as the first step in the worldwide communist revolution. Following Hegel, History was Marx's god. Slezkine:
[F]aith in progress is just as basic to modernity as the Second Coming was to Christianity ('progressive' means 'virtuous'
and 'change' means 'hope'). 'Totalitarianism' is not a mysterious mutation: it is a memory and a promise; an attempt to keep hope
alive.
By "totalitarianism," he means the system by which apocalyptic millenarians enforce the conditions they believe will constitute
the New Jerusalem -- the utopia in which their sect believes.
The Marxist faith system prophesied a worldwide conflagration -- Revolution -- that would see the saints (the Proletariat)
cleanse the world of the wicked (the Bourgeoisie) and their false religion (Capitalism). The Revolution would establish Communism:
a paradise in which the state would wither away, because the cause of man's alienation would have been dealt with. Marx despised
religion, but he did not believe that his system was religious at all. It was, he taught, entirely scientific -- thus making Marxism
entirely compatible with what Enlightenment-era elites believed was the prime source of authority.
In Russia of the late 19th century, there was a great deal of apocalyptic fervor, and, of course, a number of Marxist and other
left-wing revolutionary groups. The Bolsheviks were the most ruthless and disciplined of them all. Slezkine says it doesn't matter
whether the faith of the Bolsheviks was really a religion or not. The fact is, it functioned like one. If religion is a set of agreements
about sacred realities, though sacred realities believed to be objectively true, and the community organized around those beliefs,
then every state on earth is religious. The Bolshevik "faith" united people, focused them around what Slezkine calls "the ultimate
conditions of their existence," and told them what they had to do.
For the pre-revolutionary Bolsheviks, the priests and the prophets were their intellectuals, who were "religious about being secular."
Writes Slezkine: "A conversion to socialism was a conversion to the intelligentsia, to a fusion of millenarian faith and lifelong
learning."
The Bolshevik faith was initially spread among the intellectuals primarily through reading groups. Once you adopted the Marxist
faith, everything else in life became illuminated. The intellectuals went into the world to preach religion to the workers. These
missionaries, says Slezkine, appealed to and tried to intensify hatred in the hearts of their listeners. They spoke to the moral
sense within the common people, and gave them what, if taken in a strictly religious sense, would be called prophetic revelations.
The pre-revolutionary Bolsheviks denounced "Philistines" -- people who are sunk in their everydayness, and lack revolutionary
consciousness. It is chilling to read the lines of description they had for people like this. Slezkine calls the Philistines the
"stock antipode of the intelligent" -- that is, the kind of person that a member of the intelligentsia saw as his exact opposite.
In pre-revolutionary Russia, the intelligentsia saw themselves as a kind of secular priesthood. The way they wrote about their enemies,
and the way they rhapsodized about revolution, was utterly fanatical and inhuman. Slezkine:
The revolutionaries were going to prevail because of the sheer power of their hatred. It cleansed the soul and swelled like
the flood of the real day.
The "real day" is the day of Apocalypse, when the truth is fully made manifest, and all evil, injustice, and lies are cleansed
from the earth. It would come about through "sacred fury." Slezkine quotes Bolshevik memoirs recalling the revolutionary days of
1917-18. Pure ecstasy, like the day of Pentecost in the New Testament.
Slezkine draws this interesting distinction:
Marx and Engels were not utopians – they were prophets. They did not talk about what a perfect system of social order should
be and how and why it should be adopted or tested; they knew with absolute certainty that it was coming – right now, all by itself,
and thanks to their words and deeds.
The Bolsheviks, however, did have a complex plan for creating utopia. Reading Slezkine, you can't help but be impressed by the
power and discipline that Lenin and his lieutenants exercised. He was one of the most evil men who ever lived, Lenin -- Slezkine's
accounts of Bolshevik mass murder of class enemies on Lenin's orders make Robespierre's bloodthirstiness seem like amateur hour.
But he was a true revolutionary genius.
For young people in pre-revolutionary Russia, being part of these leftist groups "gave one a great sense of purpose, power, and
belonging." Note this: one reason for the advance of revolutionary consciousness is that parents, despite depending on the stability
of Tsarist autocracy, would not turn away from their radicalized children. Slezkine: "The 'students' were almost always abetted at
home while still in school and almost never damned when they became revolutionaries."
Bolshevism in power tried to destroy the traditional family, seeing it as an incubator of capitalism. Slezkine writes about how
this form of Bolshevik radicalism had to give way to a more conservative ideology of the family, because it caused problems that
Soviet society could not deal with.
In power, Bolsheviks carried out apocalyptic destruction of the old order, including the mass murder of class enemies. I have
just now arrived at the point in Slezkine's narrative in which he describes the "Great Disappointment" -- a term (borrowed from the
Millerites) for the experience of the New Jerusalem not having arrived as promised. As I understand it, Slezkine will describe the
homicidal spasms of the 1930s, under Stalin, as the vengeful Bolshevik reaction to utopia's failure. Utopia can only have failed
because its proselytes were weak in faith -- and therefore deserve to be punished for their infidelity.
So, what does this have to do with our own Social Justice Warriors? There are clear parallels. Again, I encourage you to read
James Lindsay's
analysis of the postmodern faith system of Social Justice for more. I believe that this is what those who lived under communism
intuit from the Social Justice Warriors -- I mean, why it frightens them:
Like the early Bolsheviks, the SJWs are radically alienated from society. They regard ordinary people as the intelligents
regarded the so-called Philistines: with visceral contempt.
Justice depends on group identity. For Marxists, the line between Good and Evil ran between classes: the Proletariat and the Peasants
on one side, the Bourgeoisie on the other. Marxism sees justice as entirely a matter of taking power away from the Bourgeoisie, and
giving it to the revolutionary classes. Some in the bourgeoisie acquired revolutionary consciousness, and aided the Revolution.
Similarly, for the SJWs, the line also passes between groups, based on group identity. The Oppressors are whites, males, capitalists,
heterosexuals, and Christians. The Oppressed are ethnic minorities, women, anti-capitalists, LGBTs, atheists, and other "marginalized"
people. Justice is about taking power from the Oppressors and giving it to the Oppressed. Some among the Oppressors acquire revolutionary
consciousness and aid the revolution; they are called "allies," and practice "allyship."
Social Justice Warriors, like the early Bolsheviks, are intellectuals whose gospel is spread by intellectual agitation. It is
a gospel that depends on awakening and inspiring hatred in the hearts of those it wishes to induce into revolutionary consciousness.
This is why it matters immensely that they have established their base within universities, where they can train those who will be
going out to work in society's institutions in
ideologized hatred.
SJWs believe that science is on their side, even when their claims are unscientific. They are doing the old post-Enlightenment
utopian trick of making essentially religious claims, but claiming that they are objectively true. Quote from a Times story:
"We're all born nonbinary. We learn gender."
Our talk shifted again from the past to the future. Jacobs spoke about foreseeing a time when people passing each other on
the street wouldn't immediately, unconsciously sort one another into male or female, which even Jacobs reflexively does. "I don't
know what genders are going to look like four generations from now," they added, allowing that they might sound utopian, naďve.
"I think we're going to perceive each other as people. The classifications we live under will fall by the wayside."
Among the voices of the young, there are echoes and amplifications of Jacobs's optimism, along with the stories of private
struggle. "There are as many genders as there are people," Emmy Johnson, a nonbinary employee at Jan Tate's clinic, told me with
earnest authority. Johnson was about to sign up for a new dating app that caters to the genderqueer. "Sex is different as a nonbinary
person," they said. "You're free of gender roles, and the farther you can get from those scripts, the better sex is going to be."
Their tone was more triumphal: the better life is going to be. "The gender boxes are exploding," they declared.
In the case of transgender SJWs, parents can become the greatest advocates for their children, as in pre-revolutionary Russia
with the radical youth. A distressed parent of a female-to-male transgender told me that in her child's high school, the pressure
on parents from other parents to suppress all doubts about transgenderism was intense. Here, from that same NYT Magazine piece
I quote above, is another anecdote:
Kai grew up in the Maryland suburbs outside Washington; both his parents are economists. He came out to them as genderqueer
a year and a half ago, and they, as he put it, were willing "to step through the door" he held wide for them, the door into his
way of seeing himself. They read a piece of creative writing he gave them, a meditation using Dadaism to explicate the nonsense
of either-or. His mother asked if she could buy him new clothes. "Shopping for clothes was something we'd always done," he said.
"It was her way of saying, 'I want to keep being part of your life.' That was really stepping through the door. And then, all
the nerve-rackingness of shopping in the men's section of a department store and trying on pants and worrying about how people
are looking at you and reading your gender, it would have been really hard to do on my own. But my mother was there. Just like
when we'd shopped together before. And that made it normal."
Here's an interesting difference: from what I can tell, most SJWs don't have a clearly envisioned utopia. What will the world
look like when whiteness is once and for all defeated? When toxic masculinity has been fully vanquished? And so forth. They don't
know; all they know is that these things must come to pass, and will come to pass. We have to first destroy the old world and its
corrupt structures. From the point of view of someone who stands to be smashed by these revolutionaries, it doesn't really matter
whether or not they have a plan for what to do after you're overthrown.
Here's another interesting difference, and an important one: SJWs may want to destroy the oppressive practices, but unlike the
Bolsheviks, they don't want to destroy the institutions of society. Rather, they want to conquer them and administer them . The religion
of Social Justice has already conquered the university, as James Lindsay points out, and is moving quickly into other institutions:
media (the NYT is its Pravda ), law, tech, entertainment, and corporate America. The Social Justice faith system can be easily
adapted by the institutions of bourgeois capitalism -- a fact that conceals its radicalism.
The people who have lived in societies suffused with this kind of ideology -- emigres from Soviet-bloc countries -- can see through
the veil. With this new book I'm working on, I'm going to do my best to help readers see through their eyes. Meanwhile, if you are
really interested in the Russian Revolution, I strongly urge you to read The House Of Government -- all 1,128 pages of it.
Yuri Slezkine is a masterful storyteller. It reads like a novel.
I cannot believe you, Rod. You cannot keep this up. You post twice as much as anyone else at AC, even more than the manic Trump-hating
machine (I mention NO names). Go to bed, please. The only reason I'm still up (just an hour ahead of LA) is...well...never
mind.
___
...but reading this (just getting started) reminds me that Bulgakov, author of The Master and Margarita was, allegedly,
protected by Stalin, even though Stalin knew he was writing it. Maybe your friend, Prufrock, mentioned that recently. Either
he or someone else I follow observed that even evil men respect great writers sometimes.
The main difference between the Bolsheviks and SJWs is gender and class.
The Bolsheviks may have been led by intellectuals, but they did have genuine support among much of the industrial working
class, especially the workers of Petrograd, the Latvian riflemen, as well as ethnic minorities in the Russian empire. The fact
that they were utterly hated by much of the peasantry for their grain collection and collectivization efforts should not obscure
that they did have a base of support within the proletariat.
The Bolsheviks were also an (almost) entirely male group. SJWs on the other hand are disproportionately female, sometimes
radically so. Both of these factors mean that the potential of SJWs for mass revolutionary violence is probably relatively
low. Of course, they can still harm society in other ways, but I doubt we will ever see an SJW version of Stalin or Che.
In some ways, the SJWs represent the hollowness of the modern left. There had always been vegans, sexual utopians, and organic
fruit drinkers on the left, but at least in the past this bohemian influence had been tempered by trade unions and fraternal
organizations of working class men. Now, it's bohemian hipster silliness all the way down.
While you may be correct about the potential for specifically revolutionary violence, that does not mean we cannot end up living
under a repressive regime. Writing the neo-Bolsheviks off as "silly" is to gravely underestimate the potential consequences
of their seizure of our civic institutions.
Yes, we may find them intellectually unserious. They probably are, after all. That doesn't mean that they themselves are
not deadly serious in their beliefs, however. Just because you don't share their irrational faith doesn't mean that you can't
be forced to live according to its dictates should they gain enough power.
I wouldn't refer to vegans as "bohemians". If anything the program strikes me as decidedly ascetic, and one of the few such
instances in modern culture.
I believe that any group, once its members become convinced that they are saving the world and that anyone in their way is
The Enemy to be Destroyed, can move into engaging in mass murder. Don't forget that the progressives of yesteryear not only
supported the Bolsheviks, but every other communist movement and not only being morally superior, but superior in every other
way, too.
Read back issues of Sojourners after the Vietnam War ended. Jim Wallis either denies that mass executions were taking place
or he hints that maybe those being executed deserved their fate. He also refused to condemn the murderous destruction of Cambodia
while it was going on. I believe that it is only one step that a lot of these people have to take before they descend into
the hell of mass killing.
Its Dostoevskys Demons that is the most insightful work from/about Russia on the psychology of political fanatics: Bolshevism,
SJW, etc are all illumined by his masterpiece more so than analogies between social-political systems with very different etiologies.
Could't agree more. The similarities of both branches of totalitarianism are staggering. Couple of points:
In Russia of the late 19th century, there was a great deal of apocalyptic fervor, and, of course, a number of Marxist and
other left-wing revolutionary groups. The Bolsheviks were the most ruthless and disciplined of them all. Slezkine says it
doesn't matter whether the faith of the Bolsheviks was really a religion or not. The fact is, it functioned like one.
1) Bolsheviks didn't exist in 19th century. Bolsheviks faction of RSDRP - Russian social-democratic party was formed in
1903. They were not the most ruthless either - there were many other vicious parties and groups, more violent and outright
crazy.
2) Revolutionaries in Russia acted like religious fanatics and did't hesitate to use Religious terminology either. Take
the infamous 1869 "The Catechism of a Revolutionary" by Sergey Nechayev:
The revolutionary knows that in the very depths of his being, not only in words but also in deeds, he has broken all the
bonds which tie him to the social order and the civilized world with all its laws, moralities, and customs, and with all
its generally accepted conventions. He is their implacable enemy, and if he continues to live with them it is only in order
to destroy them more speedily
Lenin adored the man.
Dostoevsky's "Demons" were inspired by Nechayev and his followers.
People on the liberal end of the spectrum regularly tell each other horror stories about how conservatives are just like fascists
and draw parallels and so forth. There's a theory about authoritarian mindsets. And if you hang around comment sections on
the political right you will see dehumanizing rhetoric about the left.
Probably everybody is right about the terribleness of the Other political tribes.
The problem with that is that conservatives want to actually conserve the institutions and sensibilities that have served as
the foundation of our civilization for centuries.
The Left wants to tear everything down because it feels good in the moment, damn the ultimate consequences, which more often
than not, are negative.
They did it in Russia a century ago, and their spiritual heirs are doing it again here.
There is a lot in Slezkine's book which is quite interesting, but a lot more which is merely tedious. Rod does us a big favor
with this Reader's Digest version.
The Year of Big Russian Books! Currently reading the newly translated Stalingrad by Grossman, to be followed by its
better-known sequel Life and Fate . Now this. Oy vey!
Seriously though, this looks amazing.
This is what I was getting at the other day when I said on another thread that SJW-ism is fundamentalist. It's not actually
Bolshie, because it stems too much from a godless version of Yankee Puritanism. But the parallels are definitely there.
I stumbled into the book because I had to make the 8-hour drive to Dallas, and was looking for a book on tape. Our local library
had it available through the streaming app Libby. I had meant to read it earlier in my research, but was intimidated by its
size. However, sitting in one spot for 16 hours over the course of a weekend, it's more approachable. On audiobook, it's 45
hours long! I ended up buying a paperback copy so I can continue. I'll be going to Russia next week, and might bring it with
me.
Fr Seraphim Rose was writing and warning 40-50 years ago about precisely this phenom coming to America -- obviously not with
prophetic specificity concerning the LGBT agenda, etc., -- the essentially religious aspect of secular millennialist movements,
tracing them to the Anabaptist uprisings, the French Revolution, etc. Have you read his slim book 'Nihilism'?
"they don't want to destroy the institutions of society. Rather, they want to conquer them and administer them"
Yes, that is the brilliant insight of the SJW and the modern left: No need to abolish capitalism, just get all the jobs in
the HR department so you can indoctrinate all the employees.
Good insight about the apocalyptic style of the SJW. They indeed look for the progressive Son of Man from Heaven so to speak,
who will lay the ax to the old tree of white/Christian/hetero culture and cast the bad fruit into the fire. Escape this via
the Benedict Option? "Who said you could flee from the coming wrath?", their prophets will ask.
What an absurd claim. Fox News is much more akin to Pravda than the NYT ever would be. Fox literally runs non-stop propaganda
for the president and attempts to cover for his corruption. NYT has never had that kind of relationship with any president
that we know of. Hosts on Fox have massive conflicts of interest which they don't report (Hannity and his use of Cohen as his
private lawyer). That is what a Pravda looks like.
Look, I'm a paid subscriber to the Times. I have to read it for the same reason Kremlinologists had to read Pravda. It really
is Pravda for the Social Justice faith system.
That you are this myopic regarding the Times makes Rod's point about Pravda better than he did.
If you think the Times, or their writers and editors, has no conflict of interests, then there is no hope for you.
Seriously.
You're right. I changed it. What's so funny is that as I was up late last night writing that post, I was thinking about a book
Prof. Tighe sent me this year about Thomas Cromwell. I told myself to be sure not to make the mistake of putting Thomas's name
where Oliver's should be. And I made that very mistake!
I was going to point that out but figured someone else had beaten me to it.
The two Cromwells were akin (Thomas was a collateral ancestor to Oliver) but they were as different as could be. Thomas was
a political nihilist who did whatever Henry VIII wanted, until he failed to anticipate the mercurial monarch and lost his head.
Oliver was a bit of a fanatic, though with a few decent instincts (he stopped the looting of the royal tombs, and saved Westminster
Abbey from demolition).
Criticism of ideologies that embody millenarianism without God is all well and good. The problem is that the various politically
conservative ideologies that also nominally orient themselves around a Judeo-Christian worldview consistently turn a blind
eye to grave evils committed by members of the societal elites, in the name of whatever political and economic ideology they
support instead.
There is an absence of a courageously prophetic stand for truth and justice on the part of Christian elites and intellectuals.
It so happens that many of the parties making such critiques adhere to an ideology embodying secular messianism, and this is
then employed as a rationalization by Christian intellectuals to turn a blind eye to the evils in question in the service of
their own pet political ideology.
Here are ongoing examples right now, picked almost at random, where such a prophetic witness is lacking:
- The ongoing slaughter and mass starvation in Yemen being caused by Saudi Arabia, and supported by the United States
- The betrayal of the Kurds (if being true to the promises made to them must come at the expense of American geopolitical interests,
then this is what the Christian moral witness necessitates)
- The ongoing criminal violation of anti-trust laws by the medical industry involved in their refusal to make public the costs
of their services
- The homicidal criminality of the Boeing executives who knowingly put a death-trap airliner into global circulation
- The homicidal drug-dealing criminality of pharmaceutical company executives who knowingly caused the opoiod crisis by employing
a business model built on deliberately addicting people
Secular messianism would lose a lot of its appeal and raison d'etre if the Christian intelligentsia would take from the
secular messianists, and take upon themselves, the task of prophetically denouncing the criminality routinely engaged in by
their society's power elite.
No one is bearing prophetic witness to those things, to use your term. Only a few Cassandras here and there. It's not just
our Christian elites that fail here, it's all of them, left, right and center.
A picture is worth a thousand words. While it used to be that Communists were demeaned by associating with homosexuality, now
homosexuals are demeaned by association with communism.
He wasn't as crazy as, say, the Fifth Monarchy Men, but he did impose draconian moral regulations and he left his tolerance
at home when he went to Ireland.
Oliver Cromwell wasn't so tolerant if you were Catholic or Irish or worked in the theater; and he was less tolerant and liberal
than Charles I (who was executed) or Charles II, who thankfully ended the Puritan reign after Cromwell's death.
Well, he was more tolerant of Catholics than a lot of Catholics were of Protestants at the time (cf. massacres of Protestants
in Ulster--let along continental Europe--and Cromwell's actions with respect to Maryland), more tolerant than his predecessors
toward Jews, and more respectful of free conscience than most of his contemporaries. Anyway, my point is not that he was a
saint or some kind of liberal before his time; just that he doesn't deserve to be categorized with Bolsheviks and Jacobins.
A Soviet emigre myself, I would like to point out that there is a silver lining here. Totalitarian ideologists may very well
succeed at capturing power and inflict immeasurable harm on the societies they control. But the structures they erect will
ultimately fall apart due to the major flaw of totalitarian / mythological thought: its denial of reality. The Nazis attacked
the Soviet Union (whose totalitarianism was more beningn for its victim groups than the future envisaged by the Nazis for their
racial enemies, though) believing they would be invincible because of their racial superiority. The Soviet Union entered an
arms race with the United States believing its economy would be able to sustain it. If Post-Marxism succeeds at consolidating
its power, its eventual downfall is virtually assured, too. Let's hope, it won't take 70 years.
Here's another interesting difference, and an important one: SJWs may want to destroy the oppressive practices, but unlike
the Bolsheviks, they don't want to destroy the institutions of society. Rather, they want to conquer them and administer
them. The religion of Social Justice has already conquered the university, as James Lindsay points out, and is moving quickly
into other institutions: media (the NYT is its Pravda), law, tech, entertainment, and corporate America. The Social Justice
faith system can be easily adapted by the institutions of bourgeois capitalism -- a fact that conceals its radicalism.
Does id-pol's total congruence with massive multinational consumer capitalism "conceal its radicalism," or does it rather
point up the insane radicalism of global consumer capitalism? Western conservatives who embraced the free market out of fear
of communism embraced something that is, or at least has the potential to be, as radical as communism is.
Identity politics are *the* way to manage and administer global consumer capitalist organizations and societies, since they
function as a way of rendering populations legible to technocrats and unseen, unaccountable, untouchable administrators who
work on computers, with spreadsheets. People can now be databased, can be put into "relational databases" and characterized
with algorithm-friendly descriptors. People are rendered text-searchable; people are catalogued the same way a multinational
corporation catalogues its products and the different pieces/ingredients components of each product.
Identity politics are ideal for global consumer capitalism for a number of other reasons, too. For one thing, they disintegrate
ties of solidarity between members of families and between citizens of nations, and disintegrate historical communities as
well, and even social or economic classes, by prioritizing market segmentation into discrete categories based on *self-creation*
or self-satisfaction. For example, sexual identity -- sexual identity categories are aggressively emphasized because these
are categories based on individual desire and appetites, and a sort of self-idealization.* And the emphasis on migrants/immigrants
being superior or ideal members of a community because they *chose* to be where they are, they chose to move, rather than just
staying where they were born.** But even market segmentation based on tastes like "I enjoy comedies" or "I enjoy tearjerkers"
or "I like fantasy video games" vs. "I like first-person shooter games" is a form is categorization and disintegration based
on personal preference and tastes. The point is that unchosen bonds or ties, and relational bonds or ties or classes, are to
be disintegrated in favor of self-chosen self-actualizing categories.
(*Identity politics so loves and adores sexual identity "diversity" that it tolerates a particularly wide range of sexual
self-categorization, 88 genders and 256 orientations or whatever, because what it loses in algorithmic legibility it gains
in the sheer power of liberationist sexual self-identification to explode unchosen and strong affiliative bonds in favor of
a radically atomized and self-focused individual, a perfect foot soldier with absolutely no counter-loyalties to anything other
than the idpol regime/ideology.)
(**Note that both establishment Democrats AND establishment Republicans enthusiastically push and promote this idea that
the person born on the other side of the world who moves to America tomorrow is BETTER and MORE AMERICAN than somebody who
was born here, because of the active *choice* to come to the USA rather than just be some loser non-"dynamic" non-"innovative"
schmuck who happened to be born within the country's borders and thus deserves no credit or regard whatsoever.)
As identity politics disintegrates unchosen and God-given bonds and ties and relational categories, in favor of "self-directed"
"self-chosen" legible identity markers, it renders traditional left-wing goals and causes related to class solidarity and economic
equality toothless and impotent, riven to pieces by the progressive stack; the solidarity that can sustain a picket line is
shredded to pieces by the narcissistic self-created individual, who tells himself that he is BETTER than the picketers because
whereas they call the strike-breakers "scabs," he sees them as morally superior and he would never be so mean and cruel as
to dehumanize them in that way. Of course, the scabs are in actual truth meaningless to him except as symbols of his own superior
moral worth, and the picketers are equally meaningless to him because he has no class solidarity and never subordinates himself
willingly to the group on a class basis. He would far rather enjoy the narcissistic satisfaction of publishing a thinkpiece,
for pennies, about how dehumanizing the language of "scabs" is, with his name on it, with his sheer goodness visible to all,
than engage in the kind of class solidaristic activity that would mean subordination to a larger group of people some of whom
are probably hopelessly behind the times in their thinking.
Identity politics were deployed during Occupy Wall Street to neuter it and they have been utilized by both the Democratic
and Republican establishments to dissolve populations of problematic subjects into naked individuals atomized and self-actualized
into totally dependent subjects of the system. Kevin Williamson and National Review telling problematically non-libertarian
poor whites to sever ties with their communities and their homes, to "get a U-Haul" and go where the market wants them. Hillary
Clinton saying "if we break up the big banks, will that end sexism? Will that end racism? Will that end homophobia?" Both National
Review and Hillary Clinton want the atomized individual completely subject to money power, to the capitalists, to the financial
class; National Review tells *its* audience that true conservatism, morality, and Christianity all demand it; Hillary Clinton
tells her audience that true morality, progressivism, and liberality demand back-burnering systematic economic and political
change of the kind that is national in character and requires class solidarity-- in favor of instead focusing on deliberately
vague and endless efforts to stop "sexism" and "homophobia" and "racism" that of course will always have to be priorities forever
since these things can never end as the idpol advocates themselves admit and which will be attempted via the policing and targeting
and harrassment of ALL, including the poor, by ideological commissars and apparatchiks. The government/the demos/the state
is not to be trained on the billionaires, to tackle them or correct them, but on all of us--WE are the problem. A politics
of petty bureaucrats, snitches, informants, ideological policemen -- again, a politics that SEVERS ties and bonds between people
in favor of the atomized and legible individual, the row of Excel spreadsheet column signifiers on some technocrats' massive
file of humans rendered legible to the algorithm.
Identity politics is global consumer capitalism and the fact that neither establishment liberals nor conservatives can accept
this since it shows that each is actually a lie and the opposite of what it pretends to be is why the whole system is felt
to be both untouchably strong/unassailable and liable to full and total and sudden collapse. What does "The End of History"
mean if not that there aren't really contesting/opposing powers anymore, that there isn't actually any more real conflict?
On Day One in creative writing class you learn that there is no story, no narrative, at all, if there is no conflict.
Occupy did a pretty good job of neutering itself, rejecting any form of coherent leadership and spending its days in a drum-banging
pot smoking daze. Wayne and Garth do political protest.
Identity politics are *the* way to manage and administer global consumer capitalist organizations and societies, since they
function as a way of rendering populations legible to technocrats
You could expand this into a pretty good follow-up to James C. Scott's "Seeing like a state" (if you will, "Seeing like
a Social Justice Technocrat"), which presents the art of making unruly populations "legible" as the central concern of modern
statecraft. There's an interesting difference between your argument and his, though: where you argue that the current version
prefers people who are mobile and unattached to any particular location, Scott argues that "nomads and pastoralists (such as
Berbers and Bedouins), hunter-gatherers, Gypsies, vagrants, homeless people, itinerants, runaway slaves, and serfs have always
been a thorn in the side of states. Efforts to permanently settle these mobile peoples (sedentarization) seemed to be a perennial
state project". Basically, the only way to make populations legible was to make them stay put. I guess that changed.
This is an interesting point. I would say that consumer capitalism cares little about nomads, vagrants, homeless people, etc.,
because there's no money in them. Why should consumer capitalism care about them? It feels no loyalty to a specific community
and its people; it feels no loyalty to those who happen to exist somewhere in its proximity; it has no use for them. I mean,
Seeing Like A State is written from a Cold War perspective, when American cities had real, serious problems with criminal activity
from poor and marginal people, and it was affecting even the upper middle class and the rich. But the Cold War ended, and at
basically exactly the same time things started to improve in American cities (the ones that matter, anyway, like NYC and Washington
DC).
Maybe Seeing Like A State is more concerned with the way a more robustly national -- that is, not completely globalist --
elite or ruling class conducts itself, but here at The End of History, I'm not sure things are the same. If vagrants, homeless
people, itinerants, etc. are not terribly legible, nobody cares, because they aren't worth anything anyway. They don't buy
things, they can't be farmed for debt payments, and they probably can't even be used effectively as vote banks.
Conversely, the middle-class single man or woman whose job is everything to him or her and who conspicuously consumes --
*this* is where the money is. The single person whose entire lifestyle is about consumption -- the right foods, the right products,
travel, clothes, etc. -- and whose entire focus is on their career -- this is the ideal for the multinational corporation.
Any roots, or ties to specific places or communities, will interfere with this ideal specimen's total devotion to and capture
by consumerism.
I guess what I'm saying is there's "Seeing Like A State," and then there's Seeing Like a Multinational Corporation, or a
globalist organization. The former might want itinerants to plunk down somewhere. The latter knows that there's no real escape
*physically*, nowhere "out of reach" short of going into outer space, and that the more people get moved around the more shorn
they are of particularist, illegible-to-the-market bonds, ties, and obligations.
One can understand the appeal of Marxism, and to a greater degree socialism. The pseudo-spiritual parallel of "the last will
be first" akin to Christianity is perhaps the greatest attractor to the social justice minded individual. While I don't think
we will experience anything like revolutionary Russia in this country, I truly feel there are similarities to our present day.
Namely, the envy and vindictiveness which has become so commonplace in our daily lives. There is a general anxiety and anger
out there which is manifesting itself through economic realities such as the growing wealth gap. You combine this with the
growing aversion to institutions such as the family and religion which are purveyors of traditional hierarchy, and this is
laying the foundation for the far-left in this country to essentially weaponize their ideology on to a younger generation.
And just like the Bolsheviks, it is all centered in envy, vindictiveness, anger and bloodthirsty want of power in order to
bring about a utopia where the last will now be first. That was marxist communism, and as Rod continues to point out, these
components are slowly revealing themselves in a soft totalitarianism through which the invocation of "science" is being used
to chip away at civic virtue, decency and the greater public good. There are indeed parallels to revolutionary Russia.
Thanks for pointing this out. The "last shall be first" end-point is exactly the inverted hierarchy of the SJW.
So what are we saying? We're not supposed to take it literally? We don't really mean it? That the whole "Blessed are the
poor.".. ends with an Emily Littela "Never mind"? Or is it just that we want to get there on our own bus... With our own idea
of who is marginalized?
Everyone wants their own personal Jesus I guess.
BTW - by the way, I think one of the weakest components of Rod's thesis is the refusal to weigh the power of industrial,
finance and late-stage capitalism and it's corollary effects on culture. Unless one is willing to conflate Liberalism with
Capitalism there is no excuse for ignoring its overwhelming impact on culture and civic morality.
Show's what you know. I'm devoting an entire chapter to Woke Capitalism, and how so many conservatives are blind to the threat
from it because we are programmed by our past to think of the State as the only threat.
I'm chuckling here for a number of reasons. I am pleased and apprehensive at the same time.
I may be wrong but I was thinking this just before you responded. The reason you guys - conservatives and traditionalists
- lost was because while your side was investing in retrograde politicians, megachurches and tv evangelists; gold as a great
investment; guns and prepper equipment the secularists were investing in publishing, movies, film, literature, art, technology
and education, i.e, mass media.
It had nothing to do with ideology. It was that nihilistic value-engine, corporate America, commoditizing and monetizing
everything from Air Jordans to pornography to in vitro fertilization - all of it. Daniel Bell was talking about this back in
the 70's but you know this. It wasn't "woke" Capitalism that did this. It was just that good ole American capitalism chipping
away at the culture dollar by dollar - along with all those concomitant trends in marketing, industrialization, communications,
rural to urban and suburban migrations, etc.
You guys not only put your eggs in the wrong baskets but you gave them to the Republican Party, who cheered it on; "What's
good for GM is good for America". By the time FOX rolled around it was too late. That's why the party had to spend so much
time over the last couple decades on gerrymandering, voter suppression and r*tf&*$king election tactics.
"Woke" Capitalism is what happens when you pay attention to the wrong stuff and end up losing every battle before this one.
I'll be interested in what you have to say in the new book. Good luck with it.
The Bolsheviks only came to power because Russia had been ruled by incompetents for time out of mind, and things fell apart
badly during the debacle of WWI. Radicals of both Left and Right we shall always have with us. They will not be a threat as
long as our leaders are reasonably capable, government is somewhere within hailing distance of popular consensus, and no external
catastrophe sinks us.
Here's an interesting difference: from what I can tell, most SJWs don't have a clearly envisioned utopia. What will the
world look like when whiteness is once and for all defeated?
Many of us can thank God, then, that SJW's understand and accept the carcinogenic risks of tanning booths.
I understand the parallels, and you do a good job of explaining them. But it seems a little forced. Cutting to the basic difference
- the Bolsheviks were more than prepared to use violence, terror and intimidation to crush the old order, techniques used on
a scale rarely if ever seen before in human history, over decades. I just can't see SJWs (of which I have a couple of sympathizers
in my immediate family) getting to grips with the business end of an assault rifle or concentration camp. To me, they seem
just another group of middle class nags, wokier-than-though types who are more likely to irritate me to death than actually
kill me for believing the wrong things. Although the image of drag queen story hour with added Kalashnikovs and gallows does
have a certain dark, Pythonesque appeal.
Point of interest, do you have a vision of what it be like if whiteness is once and for defeated. You should have a vision
so that you can point out the ultimate horror of what they want to achieve. I never really bought into the SJW conspiracy but
reading more of your posts I am rethinking this issue. Still not convinced it is a movement with any staying power.
The difference is that there's no such thing as soft totalitarianism.
All totalitarianism is hard. What you call "soft totalitarianism" is simply a set of social ethics you don't like, that
make life uncomfortable for people with a very different set of social ethics. In other words, it's the price of living in
a non-totalitarian society where people get to accept the values they like and reject those they don't. Not a perfect society,
but definitely not a totalitarian one.
In the 60s, the various radicals, including the Weathermen and Black Power groups, were supported by white collar leftists,
no matter the violence of the era. Today, antifa is supported and aided by Democratic politicians and bureaucrats in its violence.
Much of the antifa are radicalized wealthy college kids LARPing as revolutionaries, but they are violent nonetheless.
Likewise, BLM engaged in considerable violence in various protests.
They are all proto Bolsheviks, sure of their own righteousness as they support violence against opponents ("punching Nazis",
throwing cement milkshakes, and the like).
People, more than a few, are losing their jobs and/or social standing because of this insanity, and their numbers increase
daily, as does the number of people who keep their mouths shut because of fear of job loss.
This issue is not to be met by shoulder shrugging and indifference.
now is the time for average people to begin speaking up and out whenever this nonsense rise to the surface.
Have you been paying attention to the "black shirts" that are terrorizing anyone who dares wear a MAGA hat, or attend a conservative
rally of any sort?
There's a growing trend among the SJW crowd to arm themselves, and organize for violence.
Don't underestimate the willingness of the left to commit violence on a grand scale.
In Europe, the alienated turn towards Islamic Radicalism or various forms of ethno-nationalism. In the North of Ireland, those
alienated turn towards either the IRA (if Irish and Catholic) or the UVF (if British or Protestant). How are the social justice
warriors in the United States any different than the various types of bourgeoise European ethno-nationalism, such as Catalan,
Scots, or Irish nationalism?
There is no significant difference between the status of a serf growing food for his feudal lord and someone living under a
Socialist system where the government runs everything. In both systems a person can't work for himself, nor does he own any
land. Socialism is a trap invented by the old feudal elite to fool people into surrendering all the advantages they got from
the advances of the last few centuries and going back to new form of Feudalism.
Yes, the ability to own property -- and especially to own income-producing property -- along with the rule of law to protect
that property are the keys to society-wide prosperity.
From the point of view of someone who stands to be smashed by these
revolutionaries, it doesn't really matter whether or not they have a
plan for what to do after you're overthrown.
That lack of a plan, that lack of realization that utopia is unattainable on this earth, means that sooner or later everyone
stands to be "smashed by the revolutionaries". While we've long congratulated ourselves on the uniqueness of the American Revolution,
an alternate view appears increasingly tenable, viz. that it is merely an imitation, per augmentationem , of
the same basic theme in the grand prolation canon of revolutions.
Nothing is more human, he writes, than to be prepared to kill and die to secure meaning in life.
Nothing is more human than to be prepared to kill and die to secure dominance and glory. Jesus expects his followers to
resist their natural inclinations resulting from The Fall.
So this is a problem with "secular millenarians" but not religious millenarians? Of course, reframing secular left politics
into an apocalyptic religious frame work requires it. But it doesn't necessarily make it so. It may accelerate it.
And "The revolutionaries were going to prevail because of the sheer power of their hatred. It cleansed the soul and swelled
like the flood of the real day." could just as easily apply to Trump's base. The contempt and schadenfreude at Trump
rallies is so thick you can cut it with a knife.
In fact, many of those in the center and the Left frame the current moment in terms of Weimar and the rise of National Socialism.
The parallels have been noted by more than a few historians. You've noted them.
So why is this apocalypse more likely than the other? After all Trump and his minions have been co-opting American institutions
from the Court and Congress to law enforcement; intelligence; foreign policy, etc, etc, etc. The Left has the universities?
What happens when they fall next? If not to this Trump then the next one.
This really reminds me of the old Chinese Finger Trap puzzle. The harder each opposing side pulls the more entrapped they
become.
Bingo! And i fear this as well. We have the neo-Weimar neoliberal mostly fecklless hedonists of the left and the nascent growing
*something* that will oppose them, or react to them. It's different and strange, it's right-wing but not really, and fascist
but not really, and nationalist but not really. It's VERY dangerous though and growing.
Bingo! And i fear this as well. We have the neo-Weimar neoliberal mostly fecklless hedonists of the left and the nascent growing
*something* that will oppose them, or react to them. It's different and strange, it's right-wing but not really, and fascist
but not really, and nationalist but not really. It's VERY dangerous though and growing.
So i'm much more worried about the young men in the big black pick up trucks, back from multiple deployments, with the punisher
stickers, and think blue line flags.
The mopey woke gender studies grad in HR may not be the long term threat the guy with the simmering and growing anger, and
with the practical experience with long rifles, and with the peers who feel the same way, turn out to be.
What happens when instead of Trump, we get a Lenin or a Stalin, distinctly American, who can appeal to and organize these
angry young men?
Either way, I'll work to peacefully oppose both these extremes, trust in Christ, work on turning the other cheek, spread
the gospel, and focus on enduring to the end.
Here's an interesting difference: from what I can tell, most SJWs don't have a clearly envisioned utopia. What will the
world look like when whiteness is once and for all defeated? When toxic masculinity has been fully vanquished? And so forth.
They don't know;...
Which is why they are doomed to fail.
SJWs are trying to solve socio-economic problems with metaphysical, therapeutic solutions. Stigmatizing white skin and Western
culture isn't going to provide economic investment to impoverished minority communities. Delegitimizing law enforcement won't
reduce violent crime. Obliterating gender distinctions doesn't lead to equal pay for women or get more women and LGBT into
STEM professions.
Their worldview is built on the fallacy that a better world can simply be willed into existence. It's analogous to the Underpants
Gnome theory of profit.*
Emotion is not reality, and self-expression is no substitute for competence.
To round out the SJW religion, their Church Fathers are: Foucault, Butler, Derrida, Lacan, Said, etc. And like the worst
aspects of Abrahamic religions, SJW theologians (ie, Sociologists, Studies professors, etc.) are prone to an idiotic, if often
hilarious, textual fundamentalism.
Regarding the role of parents, Sailer recently posted about a Soviet "child saint" who snitched on his parents. A reminder
that Faith comes before family.
More and more has my mind been turning to my memories of the late fifties, when Russia was called the existential threat by
my influencers. I was ten years old. Only much later did I learn of the HUAC and backlash against the "Red Scare". Only even
later did I learn of men and ideas like Lincoln Steffens... in the 30's .."I have seen the future, and it works."
And now, the existential warnings are emanating from both sides of Political World. It's a Bizarro version of deja vu.
This is most interesting and insightfull once again. I will definitely buy your new book, once it arrives. One thing I would
like to add: The SJWs know how to appeal to ordinary people and install hatred in their hearts by adressing REAL injustices
and problems in society, just like the Bolsheviks did. Problems and injustices that those who reject and oppose SJW-religion
often ignore (to their own future peril). For instance, SJWs are hammering on extreme and ever growing inequality. A thing
ordinary people who need three McDonals-jobs to survive can relate to. Then there is Climate Disaster. A thing that will hit
those ordinary people, who are already struggling, hardest.
Simply put in general: When an intellectual stromtrooper-elite pushes a new faith in the mainstream, they need one or more
levers. If the old faith is willfully blind to the existance of these levers, it propably deserves to die.
Haven't read all of this but I don't really think there's much utopian thinking left in the West - and especially amongst segments
of the younger generation. If that's where you're going with this I think you're mistaken. Instead, we're living under the
tyranny of the now, or 'quarterly capitalism'.
Byung Han's got some great work on this..the burnout society: a society that can't imagine a future and that must be pumped
up on fictions, intoxicants, just to keep desire, and the system, going. Or, as G. Steiner acutely remarked: there are no new
beginnings. So, there isn't really an acceleration of time but a fragmentation of it ( since there is no direction to it..no
fulfilment of time).
I'm sure there's some 'revolutionary' zeal in some parts but I think fatigue, ennui, and a blasé attitude are equally if
not more common. Yeah, like, whatever ( I hear you say).
Also, with so many people in debt I doubt they buy the idea of progress. For all the whirl of change, the factory remains
( Chesterton said). In fact, the mania for superficial change is almost an admission that real change ( utopian thinking) cannot
come about.
My tuppence worth.
If you weren't making that point..profound apologies.
I agree with this. The point of identity politics is in fact *not* a revolutionary new regime or the establishment of a new
dispensation--identity politics is so atomizing and disintegrating that it is unappealing to people to even think/fantasize
of some shared new common destiny... identity politics is thoroughly bourgeois and capitalist, it is a rat race, it is climbing
the corporate ladder, it is the "self" -- note well, the *self* -- as brand. At most identity politics looks forward to a world
that resembles an international airport or the hotel and corporate convention center attached to such an airport-- not something
people really actually want to spend much time fantasizing about.
You should watch HBOs documentary of Theranos, because Silicon Valley is really the dominant force in the wokification of corporate
America, which is far more significant than most SJW trends. There's a specific part that's fascinating, an experiment done
by Dan Ariely where they design a payoff based on the outcome of a dice roll that is very easy to cheat. The twist: they had
a lie detector strapped on. When the payoff simply was given to themselves, lying was infrequent and detectable. When they
were told the money would be given to a charity of their choice, lying shot up and it was not detectable by the machine.
Conclusion: believing in a cause will make people physically believe their own lies. It's a huge reason why startup founders
have learned to bilk billions from credulous investors, and it's a huge reason why SJWs are now able to bilk liberals into
legitimizing their increasing mania. It's all basically strategic bullshit, just like Theranos' completely nonfunctional technology,
but for whatever reason it's worked for an entire decade.
This strategy has been enormously successful in the last decade, and corporate America is just bandwagoning. But they're
bandwagoning mania and dishonesty, and often running organizations that serve much more vital businesses than chat apps and
sales automation.
I did not realize anyone still believe that a lie detector can actually detect lies, but as long as it was done for the
good cause of scientific research, I guess it does no harm;-).
Anyway, if you enjoyed that movie, I highly recommend John Carreyrou's book about Theranos, which investigates the case
in much more detail than the movie (
https://www.amazon.com/Bad-... ).
A couple of other authors to consider, from an older generation (born before WWII), writing along similar lines. I'm sure Slezkine
refers to them:
Andrzej Walicki (Marxism and the Leap to the Kingdom of Freedom)
Martin Malia (The Soviet Tragedy and other works)
Walicki is a bit less well known than Malia, but very worth reading in the context of your book, for his assessment of how
certain ideas of what constitutes true freedom (as opposed to bourgeois liberalism) lead in practice to totalitarianism.
The people who have lived in societies suffused with this kind of
ideology -- emigres from Soviet-bloc countries -- can see through the
veil.
Right, as can many Americans who came of age before about 1990 (I believe a paradigm shift took place culturally after the
WWII generation a la George Bush and the Me generation a la Bill Clinton).
The West, and the East for that matter, has done fine without DQST for many, many centuries.
In a healthy society, people would feel no reason to conceive of or initiate such a thing in the first place, let alone try
to suppress it.
And I think you already knew that.
Not having a clearly delineated utopia was also an essential characteristic of Marxism. Del Noce explains it very well: to
the extent that Marx was expecting the revolution to engender a new, divinized man that would take back all the characteristic
he had alienated into God, the new society could not really be described in term of any what we know about the pre-revolutionary
world, just like, say, a Christian cannot describe paradise.
" The Social Justice faith system can be easily adapted by the institutions of bourgeois capitalism -- a fact that conceals
its radicalism."
Bingo!
Rod, I don't know about you but I feel I'm living from one week to the next. Do you really know anyone who's got this utopian
way of thinking or is it mainly an elite ("they've already taken the universities") kind of thing?
I think it's like the Bolsheviks in pre-revolutionary Russia: the intellectuals will guide and instruct the masses, who don't
have to fully comprehend what they're doing to be effective.
And the voices of the intellectuals are radically magnified by social media and the entertainment industry, to a degree undreamt
of by the revolutionaries in Russia.
This was a dense post, and a single comment can't do justice to it.
Social justice advocates picked a bad target for their wicked. Whiteness in a country that is 72% white, maleness in a world
that is 50% male, and heteronormativity in a world that is at least 90% heterosexual.
It ensures that when they infiltrate an institution, they'll generate strife and enemies, and be outnumbered, even with
allies.
Social Justice moved through universities more easily because they started off liberal, and are more insulated from profit
constraints than other businesses. The rate of tuition increases indicates the market is inelastic. So there's so much demand
any costs social justice incurs its host institution is unimportant.
This is not the case with many other businesses. Which when colonized by social justice ideology find themselves stepping
on the toes of more than half of their consumers. Many of these consumers will go to competitors and starve the business of
profit. Even a small decline in the consumer base can be traumatic to the balance sheet, hence the aphorism "Get Woke, Go Broke".
It's not even true for all universities as University of Missouri and Evergreen college found out.
This means there are likely limits to the spread of social justice ideology. But I suspect this won't phase its adherents
because they likely derive meaning from the struggle, and lack of success is secondary.
One interesting parallel between the contemporary social justice crowd and their communist counterparts, as Slezkine presents
them, is that many intellectuals who converted to the revolutionary religion were driven by intense feelings of shame and guilt
"on account of [what they perceived as] their unearned privilege" (p24, 26); many were themselves children of intellectuals,
and felt "both chosen and damned" because of the leisure this afforded them (ibid). But such feelings were a rather intellectual
affair: their guilt did not stem from any interaction with the less privileged, but was largely "derived from books" (ibid).
This seems rather similar to the current crop, most of whom seem to feel immense guilt about things they have only read about.
Like the early Bolsheviks, the BenOps are radically alienated from society. They regard ordinary people as dangerous and morally
corrupt.
Justice depends on group identity. For the BenOp Trad, the line between Good and Evil runs between the Faithful on one side,
the Left on the other. BenOp sees justice as entirely a matter of taking power away from the Left, and giving it to the reactionary
classes.
BenOp Trads, like the early Bolsheviks, are intellectuals whose gospel is spread by intellectual agitation. It is a gospel
that depends on awakening and inspiring fear of SJWs in the hearts of those it wishes to induce into reactionary consciousness.
This is why it matters immensely that they have established their base within churches, where they can train those who will
be going out to work in society's institutions in ideologized hatred.
BenOp Trads believe that science is on their side, even when their claims are unscientific. They are doing the old pre-Enlightenment
utopian trick of making essentially religious claims, but claiming that they are objectively true. "It's Adam and Eve, not
Adam and Steve."
BenOp Trads are utopians who believe that their personal Safety requires smashing all the old forms for the sake of liberation.
Jurists seemed "unqualified" by the nonpartisan ABA are elevated to lifetime positions in the judiciary. Government corruption
at the highest level is acceptable, so long as the government protects the BenOp Trad.
Parents can become the greatest advocates for their children, as in pre-revolutionary Russia with the radical youth. Parents
are encouraged to home-school their children, to insulate them from mainstream ideas. Public libraries are to be avoided.
Here's an interesting difference: from what I can tell, most BenOp Trads don't have a clearly envisioned utopia. The movement
is not towards physical segregation in an isolated community, like millenarians past. They've given up hope of conquering the
culture or the government, and there's no clear way forward besides individual BenOp outposts.
The media is the driving force on this subject because it really is outrageous and sensational which gets people watching the
ads that pay the media's salaries and office spaces. Hollywood jumped on the bandwagon for economic reasons also. I think people
who are against this trend are clueless about how to fight against it. Write the sponsors and tell them why you won't buy their
products. In advertising world mentality, every letter or email represents at least 500 or more people who agree, but don't
communicate their opinions. Complaining accomplishes nothing, and never has.
Thanks Rod -- a great piece. Just a couple of quibbles: SJW is of course, really just neo-Marxism or "Cultural Marxism". With
that in mind, another parallel with Bolshevism comes to mind, one highlighted by the characterization of dissenters as "Philistines".
A fascist cynic and satirist, Giovanni Papini, had this to say about Lenin in his book 'Gog' (a novel published in 1931 largely
consisting of fictional interviews with famous personalities of the time):
'I [the narrator's name is Gog] murmured a random compliment on the great work he [Lenin] had done in Russia. And then that
half-dead face became filled with spectral wrinkles that sought to be a sarcastic smile.
'"But everything was done," exclaimed Lenin with an unexpected and almost cruel brio, "everything was done before we arrived.
Foreigners and imbeciles assume that something new has been created here. Blind bourgeois error. The Bolsheviks have done nothing
but adopt, by developing it, the regime established by the tsars and which is the only one adapted to the Russian people. One
cannot govern a hundred million brutes without the baton, spies, secret police, terror, gallows, military tribunals, galleries
and torture. We have only changed the class that founded its hegemony over this system. There were sixty thousand nobles and
perhaps forty thousand grand bureaucrats; in total, one hundred thousand people. Today there are about two million proletarians
and communists. It is progress, great progress, because privileges are twenty times more numerous, but ninety-eight percent
of the population has not gained much on the other hand. Indeed, to be sure, it has gained nothing, and this is at the same
time what it wanted, what it sought, although on the other hand it was absolutely inevitable."
'..."Then," I muttered, "what about Marx, and progress, and the rest?"
'"To you, who are a powerful and foreign man," he added, "we can say it all. No one will believe it. But remember that Marx
himself has taught us the purely instrumental and fictitious value of theories. Given the state of Russia and Europe, I have
had to use communist ideology to achieve my true end. In other countries and at other times I would have chosen another manner.
Marx was nothing more than a Hebrew bourgeois clinging to English statistics and a secret admirer of industrialism. He lacked
a sense of barbarism, and for this reason he was only a third of a man. A brain saturated with beer and Hegelianism, in which
his friend Engels sketched out some brilliant idea. The Russian Revolution is a complete negation of Marx's prophecies. Where
there was almost no bourgeoisie, Communism has won there."
'""Men, Mr. Gog, are frightful savages who must be dominated by an unscrupulous savage like me. The rest is charlatanism,
literature, philosophy and music for the use of fools. And since savages are similar to criminals, the main ideal of any government
should be that the nation should resemble as closely as possible a penal establishment. The old tsarist dungeon is the last
word in political wisdom. Well thought out, the life of the prisoner is the most adapted to the vulgar average of men. Not
being free, they are, at last, exempt from the dangers and nuisances of responsibility and are in conditions of not being able
to do evil. As soon as a man enters prison, he must, by force, lead the life of an innocent man. Moreover, he has no thoughts
or worries, for those who think and command for him are already there; he works with the body, but his spirit rests. And he
knows that every day he will have something to eat and he will be able to sleep, even if he does not work, even if he is sick,
and all this without the worries that are incumbent upon the free man to obtain his bread every morning and a bed every night.
My dream is to transform Russia into an immense penal establishment, and do not imagine that I say this out of selfishness,
because with such a system, the most enslaved and sacrificed are the bosses and those who second them."
'..I.dared to ask one of my questions: "And the peasants?"
'"I hate the peasants," replied Vladimir Ilyich with a disgusting gesture, "I hate the mujik [peasant] idealized by that
softened Westerner called Turgenev and by that converted satyr hypocrite called Tolstoy. The peasants represent everything
I detest: the past, faith, heresy and religious mania, manual labor. I tolerate them and pet them, but I hate them. I would
like to see them all disappear, down to the last. For me, an electrician is worth a hundred peasants...
'"We will come to be able, I hope, to live with the food produced in a few minutes by the machines in our chemical factories,
and we will finally be able to finish off all the useless laborers. Life in Nature is a prehistoric shame...
'"Keep in mind that Bolshevism represents a threefold war: that of scientific barbarians against rotten intellectuals, of
the East against the West, and of the city against the countryside. And in this war we will not hesitate in the choice of weapons.
The individual is something that must be suppressed. It is an invention of those Greek idlers or those fantastical Germans.
Whoever resists will be extirpated like a malignant pustule. Blood is the best fertilizer offered to Nature...
'"Do not believe that I am cruel. All these executions and all these gallows that are raised by my order displease me. I
hate the victims, especially because they force me to kill them. But I cannot do otherwise. I boast of being the director of
a model penitentiary, of a peaceful and well-organized prison. But here are to be found, as in all prisons, the rebels, the
restless, those who have the stupid nostalgia of old ideologies and homicidal mythologies. All those are suppressed. I cannot
allow a few thousand sick people to compromise the future happiness of millions of men. Besides, after all, the ancient medical
bleedings were not a bad cure for bodies. There is some voluptuousness in feeling the master of life and death. Since the old
God was killed - I don't know if in France or Germany - certain satisfactions have been monopolized by man. I am, if you will,
a local demigod, camped between Asia and Europe, and so I can afford a little whim. These are the tastes whose secrets, after
the decline of the pagans, had been lost. Human sacrifices had something good: they were a deep symbol, a high teaching; a
healthy feast. And I, instead of the hymns of the faithful, feel the screams of the prisoners and of the dying come to me,
and I assure you that I would not change that symphony for Beethoven's 9th, announcing the beatitude to come."
I quote from this text because I genuinely think efficiency of empire eventually came to weigh, before Communism, as the
existential concern of both Leninism and Stalinism, that is to say the long-term survivability of Russia as it was mattered
most, i.e. its definitional indissolubility as empire--an empire of peasants (unlike the US, which was one immigrants), but
an empire all the same.
Leninism/Stalinism superceded tsarism because it, like Maoism, avoided the colonial disintegration of the vast empire-as-nation,
the nation which can only ever be conceived as empire or "cataclysmically"--for the foundational ethnos--lose all sense of
self and purpose otherwise; in that strict sense of imperial essentiality, which Tocqueville noted long before the appearance
of the Bolsheviks, Russia is the closest compeer of the United States.
If these spoiled and lazy SJWs had been made by their parents to leave home and get a real job, go rent an apartment, and start
paying the bills and taxes, and work their way through college... They wouldn't be SJWs, they would "grow up" pretty fast !
As I recall from my limited reading and discussions, the Bolshies were composed of "workers and soldiers soviets." The peasants
(many of them kulaks) weren't considered part of the revolutionary class and later fared quite badly. I'm not sure what the
Russian Revolution's parallel would be to our woke capitalists who adjust quite easily to SJW ideology since the SJW's don't
challenge them in any meaningful sense. Also, the Bolshies did more than virtue signal. Economic hard times here may dissipate
SJW energies rather quickly as their commitment to revolutionary change may turn out to be skin deep. A lost generation may
be violent at the fringes but its members have no traction unless the police and the military were to take up their cause.
But their version of social justice may be quite different than that of the university-educated SJW's.
You should add the important point that the Socialist-Revolutionaires (SRs, Esers) were much more popular than the Bolsheviks
among the intellectuals and also the common people. They were focused on the peasants, and after the war wanted to split Gentry
estates between the peasants.
The House of Government is indeed a great book. One of the best I've ever read about Bolshevism, and modern leftism and utopian
movements in general. It should be required reading for all incoming college freshmen.
Not only do the defectors regard these phenomenons as having been "rammed down workers'
throats" by the establishment, but they also want to discard the name "Communist" as "drawn
down to the dirt". Almost half of the members of the Communist Party in Malmö are
resigning. Instead, they plan establish a new workers' party that doesn't put as much emphasis
on things like multiculturalism, LGBT issues and climate alarmism, which have become the
staples and rallying calls of today's left.
Nils Littorin, one of the defectors,
explained to Lokaltidningen that today's left has become part of the elite and has
come to "dismiss the views of the working class as alien and problematic". Littorin suggested
that the left, as a movement, is going through a prolonged identity crisis and that his group,
instead, intends to stick to the original values, such as class warfare.
"They don't understand why so many workers don't think that multiculturalism, the LGBT
movement and Greta Thunberg are something fantastic, but instead believe we are in the 1930s'
Germany and that workers who vote [right-wing] Sweden Democrats have been infected by some Nazi
sickness," he explained to Lokaltidningen.
The right-wingers' major gains from the working class are, according to Littorin, a token of
widespread dissatisfaction with liberal economic migration that leads to "low-wage competition"
and the "ghettoisation of communities", a development that "only benefits major companies".
According to Littorin, one of the underlying problems is a
"chaotic" immigration policy that has led to cultural clashes, segregation and exclusion
due to an uncontrolled influx from parts of the world characterised by honour culture and clan
mentalities.
Littorin described multiculturalism, LGBT issues and the climate movement as state
ideologies that are "rammed down people's throats". According to him, phenomena like
LGBT-certification and the cult around 16-year-old climate activist Greta Thunberg and "other
-isms" happen at the expense of the real issues, such as income equality.
"Pride, for instance, has been reduced to dealing with sexual orientation. We believe that
human dignity is primarily about having a job and having pension insurance that means that you
are not forced to live on crumbs when you are old," Littorin explained.
The goal, according to Littorin is to enter Malmö City Council by 2022. The name of the
party remains undetermined, but Littorin stressed that the word "Communist" will no longer be
present.
"It's a word drawn to the dirt, a nasty word today, and not entirely undeservedly. In
communist parties, there is this risk of elitism, self-indulgence, and a belief that a
certain avant-garde should lead a working class that does not know its own best interests,
instead of asking people what they want. 20th-century Communism died with the Soviet Union,
it has never been successfully updated for the 21st century but has been stuck in
100-year-old books. But the principles that Marx formulated, they still apply to me,"
Littorin concluded.
Earlier this week, Markus Allard, the leader of the left-wing Örebro Party expressed
similar
thoughts in an opinion piece called "Socialists don't belong to the left", accusing the
mainstream
left of completely abandoning
its base , switching from the working class to "parasitic grant-grabbing layers within the
middle class".
Owing to its long-standing socialist traditions, Sweden currently has two active communist
parties , the Communist Party and the Swedish Communist Party, both dating back to the
1970s. Despite formally remaining loyal to Marxism-Leninism, the two are not on speaking terms.
Also, the Left Party, which unlike the two aforementioned ones has parliamentary
representation, was called the Communist Party for several decades
"... Not only do the defectors regard these phenomenons as having been "rammed down workers' throats" by the establishment, but they also want to discard the name "Communist" as "drawn down to the dirt". ..."
Not only do the defectors regard these phenomenons as having been "rammed down workers'
throats" by the establishment, but they also want to discard the name "Communist" as "drawn
down to the dirt".
Almost half of the members of the Communist Party in Malmö are resigning. Instead, they
plan establish a new workers' party that doesn't put as much emphasis on things like
multiculturalism, LGBT issues and climate alarmism, which have become the staples and rallying
calls of today's left.
Nils Littorin, one of the defectors,
explained to Lokaltidningen that today's left has become part of the elite and has
come to "dismiss the views of the working class as alien and problematic". Littorin suggested
that the left, as a movement, is going through a prolonged identity crisis and that his group,
instead, intends to stick to the original values, such as class warfare.
"They don't understand why so many workers don't think that multiculturalism, the LGBT
movement and Greta Thunberg are something fantastic, but instead believe we are in the 1930s'
Germany and that workers who vote [right-wing] Sweden Democrats have been infected by some Nazi
sickness," he explained to Lokaltidningen.
The right-wingers' major gains from the working class are, according to Littorin, a token of
widespread dissatisfaction with liberal economic migration that leads to "low-wage competition"
and the "ghettoisation of communities", a development that "only benefits major companies".
According to Littorin, one of the underlying problems is a
"chaotic" immigration policy that has led to cultural clashes, segregation and exclusion
due to an uncontrolled influx from parts of the world characterised by honour culture and clan
mentalities.
Littorin described multiculturalism, LGBT issues and the climate movement as state
ideologies that are "rammed down people's throats". According to him, phenomena like
LGBT-certification and the cult around 16-year-old climate activist Greta Thunberg and "other
-isms" happen at the expense of the real issues, such as income equality.
"Pride, for instance, has been reduced to dealing with sexual orientation. We believe that
human dignity is primarily about having a job and having pension insurance that means that you
are not forced to live on crumbs when you are old," Littorin explained.
The goal, according to Littorin is to enter Malmö City Council by 2022. The name of the
party remains undetermined, but Littorin stressed that the word "Communist" will no longer be
present.
It's a word drawn to the dirt, a nasty word today, and not entirely undeservedly. In
communist parties, there is this risk of elitism, self-indulgence, and a belief that a certain
avant-garde should lead a working class that does not know its own best interests, instead of
asking people what they want. 20th-century Communism died with the Soviet Union, it has never
been successfully updated for the 21st century but has been stuck in 100-year-old books. But
the principles that Marx formulated, they still apply to me," Littorin concluded.
Earlier this week, Markus Allard, the leader of the left-wing Örebro Party expressed
similar
thoughts in an opinion piece called "Socialists don't belong to the left", accusing the
mainstream
left of completely abandoning
its base , switching from the working class to "parasitic grant-grabbing layers within the
middle class".
Owing to its long-standing socialist traditions, Sweden currently has two active communist
parties , the Communist Party and the Swedish Communist Party, both dating back to the
1970s. Despite formally remaining loyal to Marxism-Leninism, the two are not on speaking terms.
Also, the Left Party, which unlike the two aforementioned ones has parliamentary
representation, was called the Communist Party for several decades.
"... Robert Pfaller: Until the late 1970s, all "Western" (capitalist) governments, right or left, pursued a Keynesian economic policy of state investment and deficit spending. (Even Richard Nixon is said to have once, in the early 1970ies, stated, "We are all Keynesians"). This lead to a considerable decrease of inequality in Western societies in the first three decades after WWII, as the numbers presented by Thomas Piketty and Branko Milanovic in their books prove. Apparently, it was seen as necessary to appease Western workers with high wages and high employment rates in order to prevent them from becoming communists. ..."
"... Whenever the social-democratic left came into power, for example with Tony Blair, or Gerhard Schroeder, they proved to be the even more radical neoliberal reformers. As a consequence, leftist parties did not have an economic alternative to what their conservative and liberal opponents offered. Thus they had to find another point of distinction. This is how the left became "cultural" (while, of course, ceasing to be a "left"): from now on the marks of distinction were produced by all kinds of concerns for minorities or subaltern groups. And instead of promoting economic equality and equal rights for all groups, the left now focused on symbolic "recognition" and "visibility" for these groups. ..."
"... Thus not only all economic and social concerns were sacrificed for the sake of sexual and ethnic minorities, but even the sake of these minorities itself. Since a good part of the problem of these groups was precisely economic, social and juridical, and not cultural or symbolic. And whenever you really solve a problem of a minority group, the visibility of this group decreases. But by insisting on the visibility of these groups, the policies of the new pseudo-left succeded at making the problems of these groups permanent – and, of course, at pissing off many other people who started to guess that the concern for minorities was actually just a pretext for pursuing a most brutal policy of increasing economic inequality. ..."
"... The connection to neoliberalism is the latter's totalitarian contention of reducing the entirety of human condition into a gender-neutral cosmopolitan self expressing nondescript market preferences in a conceptual vacuum, a contention celebrated by its ideologues as "liberation" and "humanism" despite its inherent repression and inhumanity. ..."
"... "..'identity politics,' which pretty much encapsulate the central concerns of what these days is deemed to represent what little of the 'left' survives, plays into the hands of the neoliberal ruling establishment(s), because at bottom it is a 'politics' that has been emptied of all that is substantively political.." ..."
"... Agreed. And the truth is that the message is much clearer than that of the critics, below. So it ought to be for the world, sliding into fascism, in which we live in might have been baked by the neo-liberals but it was iced by 57 varieties of Blairites . The cowards who flinched led by the traitors who sneered. ..."
"... 'identity politics,' which pretty much encapsulate the central concerns of what these days is deemed to represent what little of the 'left' survives, plays into the hands of the neoliberal ruling establishment(s), because at bottom it is a 'politics' that has been emptied of all that is substantively political, namely, the fight for an equitable production and distribution of goods, both material and cultural, ensuring a decent life for all. ..."
"... Why bother getting your hands dirty with an actual worker's struggle when you can write yet another glamorously "radical" critique of the latest Hollywood blockbuster (which in truth just ends up as another advert for it)? ..."
"... The One Per Cent saw an opportunity of unlimited exploitation and they ran with it. They're still running (albeit in jets and yachts) and us Proles are either struggling or crawling. Greed is neither Left or Right. It exists for its own self gratification. ..."
"... Actually, post-modernism doesn't include everybody -- just the 'marginalized' and 'disenfranchised' minorities whom Michel Foucault championed. The whole thing resembles nothing so much as the old capitalist strategy of playing off the Lumpenproletariat against the proletariat, to borrow the original Marxist terminology. ..."
"... if you don't mind me asking, exactly at what point do you feel capitalism was restored in the USSR? It was, I take it, with the first Five Year Plan, not the NEP? ..."
"... Also, the Socialist or, to use your nomenclature, "Stalinist" system, that was destroyed in the the USSR in the 1990s–it was, in truth, just one form of capitalism replaced by another form of capitalism? ..."
Robert Pfaller interviewed by Kamran Baradaran, via
ILNA
The ruling ideology since the fall of the Berlin Wall, or even earlier, is postmodernism. This is the ideological embellishment
that the brutal neoliberal attack on Western societies' welfare (that was launched in the late 1970s) required in order to attain
a "human", "liberal" and "progressive" face.
Robert Pfaller is one of the most distinguished figures in today's radical Left. He teaches at the University of Art and Industrial
Design in Linz, Austria. He is a founding member of the Viennese psychoanalytic research group 'stuzzicadenti'.
Pfaller is the author of books such as On the Pleasure Principle in Culture: Illusions Without Owners , Interpassivity:
The Aesthetics of Delegated Enjoyment , among others. Below is the ILNA's interview with this authoritative philosopher on
the Fall of Berlin Wall and "Idea of Communism".
ILNA: What is the role of "pleasure principle" in a world after the Berlin Wall? What role does the lack of ideological
dichotomy, which unveils itself as absent of a powerful left state, play in dismantling democracy?
Robert Pfaller: Until the late 1970s, all "Western" (capitalist) governments, right or left, pursued a Keynesian economic
policy of state investment and deficit spending. (Even Richard Nixon is said to have once, in the early 1970ies, stated, "We are
all Keynesians"). This lead to a considerable decrease of inequality in Western societies in the first three decades after WWII,
as the numbers presented by Thomas Piketty and Branko Milanovic in their books prove. Apparently, it was seen as necessary to
appease Western workers with high wages and high employment rates in order to prevent them from becoming communists.
Ironically one could say that it was precisely Western workers who profited considerably of "real existing socialism" in the
Eastern European countries.
At the very moment when the "threat" of real existing socialism was not felt anymore, due to the Western economic and military
superiority in the 1980ies (that led to the fall of the Berlin Wall), the economic paradigm in the Western countries shifted.
All of a sudden, all governments, left or right, pursued a neoliberal economic policy (of privatization, austerity politics, the
subjection of education and health sectors under the rule of profitability, liberalization of regulations for the migration of
capital and cheap labour, limitation of democratic sovereignty, etc.).
Whenever the social-democratic left came into power, for example with Tony Blair, or Gerhard Schroeder, they proved to
be the even more radical neoliberal reformers. As a consequence, leftist parties did not have an economic alternative to what
their conservative and liberal opponents offered. Thus they had to find another point of distinction. This is how the left became
"cultural" (while, of course, ceasing to be a "left"): from now on the marks of distinction were produced by all kinds of concerns
for minorities or subaltern groups. And instead of promoting economic equality and equal rights for all groups, the left now focused
on symbolic "recognition" and "visibility" for these groups.
Thus not only all economic and social concerns were sacrificed for the sake of sexual and ethnic minorities, but even the
sake of these minorities itself. Since a good part of the problem of these groups was precisely economic, social and juridical,
and not cultural or symbolic. And whenever you really solve a problem of a minority group, the visibility of this group decreases.
But by insisting on the visibility of these groups, the policies of the new pseudo-left succeded at making the problems of these
groups permanent – and, of course, at pissing off many other people who started to guess that the concern for minorities was actually
just a pretext for pursuing a most brutal policy of increasing economic inequality.
ILNA: The world after the Berlin Wall is mainly considered as post-ideological. Does ideology has truly decamped from our
world or it has only taken more perverse forms? On the other hand, many liberals believe that our world today is based on the
promise of happiness. In this sense, how does capitalism promotes itself on the basis of this ideology?
Robert Pfaller: The ruling ideology since the fall of the Berlin Wall, or even earlier, is postmodernism. This is the ideological
embellishment that the brutal neoliberal attack on Western societies' welfare (that was launched in the late 1970s) required in
order to attain a "human", "liberal" and "progressive" face. This coalition between an economic policy that serves the interest
of a tiny minority, and an ideology that appears to "include" everybody is what Nancy Fraser has aptly called "progressive neoliberalism".
It consists of neoliberalism, plus postmodernism as its ideological superstructure.
The ideology of postmodernism today has some of its most prominent symptoms in the omnipresent concern about "discrimination"
(for example, of "people of color") and in the resentment against "old, white men". This is particularly funny in countries like
Germany: since, of course, there has been massive racism and slavery in Germany in the 20th century – yet the victims of this
racism and slavery in Germany have in the first place been white men (Jews, communists, Gypsies, red army prisoners of war, etc.).
Here it is most obvious that a certain German pseudo-leftism does not care for the real problems of this society, but prefers
to import some of the problems that US-society has to deal with. As Louis Althusser has remarked, ideology always consists in
trading in your real problems for the imaginary problems that you would prefer to have.
The general ideological task of postmodernism is to present all existing injustice as an effect of discrimination. This is,
of course, funny again: Since every discrimination presupposes an already established class structure of inequality. If you do
not have unequal places, you cannot distribute individuals in a discriminating way, even if you want to do so. Thus progressive
neoliberalism massively increases social inequality, while distributing all minority groups in an "equal" way over the unequal
places.
MASTER OF UNIVE
Abbreviate & reduce to lowest common denominator which is hyperinflation by today's standards given that we are indeed all
Keynesians now that leveraged debt no longer suffices to prop Wall Street up.
Welcome to the New World Disorder. Screw 'postmodernism' & Chicago School 'neoliberalism'!
MOU
Danubium
There is no such thing as "post-modernism".
The derided fad is an organic evolution of the ideologies of "modernity" and the "Enlightenment", and represents the logical
conclusion of their core premise: the "enlightened self" as the source of truth instead of the pre-modern epistemologies of
divine revelation, tradition and reason.
It does not represent any "liberation" from restrictive thought, as the "self" can only ever be "enlightened" by cult-like
submission to dogma or groupthink that gives tangible meaning to the intangible buzzword, its apparent relativism is a product
of social detachment of the intellectual class and its complete and utter apathy towards the human condition.
The connection to neoliberalism is the latter's totalitarian contention of reducing the entirety of human condition into
a gender-neutral cosmopolitan self expressing nondescript market preferences in a conceptual vacuum, a contention celebrated
by its ideologues as "liberation" and "humanism" despite its inherent repression and inhumanity.
The trend is not to successor or opponent, but rather modernism itself in its degenerative, terminal stage.
Monobazeus
Well said
bevin
"..'identity politics,' which pretty much encapsulate the central concerns of what these days is deemed to represent what little
of the 'left' survives, plays into the hands of the neoliberal ruling establishment(s), because at bottom it is a 'politics'
that has been emptied of all that is substantively political.."
Agreed. And the truth is that the message is much clearer than that of the critics, below.
So it ought to be for the world, sliding into fascism, in which we live in might have been baked by the neo-liberals but it
was iced by 57 varieties of Blairites . The cowards who flinched led by the traitors who sneered.
So cutting through all of the verbiage, the upshot of Pfaller's contentions seems to be that 'identity politics,' which pretty
much encapsulate the central concerns of what these days is deemed to represent what little of the 'left' survives, plays into
the hands of the neoliberal ruling establishment(s), because at bottom it is a 'politics' that has been emptied of all that
is substantively political, namely, the fight for an equitable production and distribution of goods, both material and cultural,
ensuring a decent life for all.
Difficult not to agree.
For indeed, "If you do not have unequal places, you cannot distribute individuals in a discriminating way, even if you want
to do so."
Capricornia Man
You've nailed it, Norman. In many countries, the left's obsession with identity politics has driven class politics to the periphery
of its concerns, which is exactly where the neoliberals want it to be. It's why the working class just isn't interested.
Martin Usher
It must be fun to sit on top of the heap watching the great unwashed squabbling over the crumbs.
Red Allover
The world needs another put down of postmodern philosophy like it needs a Bob Dylan album of Sinatra covers . . .
maxine chiu
I'm glad the article was short .I don't think I'm stupid but too much pseudo-intellectualism makes me fall asleep.
Tim Jenkins
Lol, especially when there are some galling glaring errors within " too much pseudo-intellectualism "
Thanks for the laugh, maxine,
Let them stew & chew (chiu) on our comments 🙂
Bootlyboob
As with any use of an -ism though, you need sort the wheat from the chaff when it comes to using 'postmodernism'. Do you mean
Baudrillard and Delueze? or do you mean some dirty cunt like Bernard Henri-Levy. There is a bit of a difference.
Bootlyboob
Ok, so Levi is not really a postmodernist. But still, there are philosphers of postmodernism that were, and still are, worth
reading.
BigB
Postmodernism: what is it? I defy anyone to give a coherent and specific definition. Not least, because the one 'Classical
Liberal' philosopher who did – Stephen Hicks – used the term as a blanket commodification of all post-Enlightenment thought
starting with Rousseau's Romanticism. So PoMo has pre-Modern roots? When the left start playing broad and wide with political
philosophical categories too – grafting PoMo onto post-Classical roots as a seeming post-Berlin Wall emergence what actually
is being said? With such a depth and breadth of human inquiry being commodified as 'PoMo' – arguably, nothing useful.
Neoliberalism is Classic Liberalism writ large. The basic unit of Classicism is an individuated, independent, intentional,
individual identitarianism as an atom of the rational ('moral') market and its self-maximising agency. Only, the 'Rights of
Man' and the 'Social Contract' have been transfered from the Person (collectively: "We the People " as a the democratic sovereign
power) to the Corporation as the new 'Neo-Classicist' supranational sovereign. Fundamentally, nothing has changed.
As pointed out below: this was already well underway by November 1991 – as a structural-function of the burgeoning Euromarkets.
These were themselves on the rise as the largest source of global capital *before* the Nixon Shock in 1971. There is an argument
to be made that they actually caused the abandoning of Breton Woods and the Gold Standard. Nonetheless, 1991 is a somewhat
arbitrary date for the transition from 'High Modernity' to 'PostModernity'. Philosophers. political, and social scientists
– as Wittgenstein pointed out – perhaps are victims of their own commodification and naming crisis? Don't get me started on
'post-Humanism' but what does PoMo actually mean?
As the article hints at: the grafting of some subjectivist single rights issues to the ultra-objectivist core market rationality
of neoliberalism is an intentional character masking. Even the 'neoliberal CNS' (central nervous system) of the WEF admits
to four distinct phases of globalisation. The current 'Globalisation 4.0' – concurrent with the 'Fourth Industrial Revolution'
– is a further development of this quasi-subjectivist propagandic ploy. Globalisation is now humanist, sovereigntist, environmentalist,
and technologist (technocratic). Its ultimate *telos* is 'fully automated luxury communism' or the harmoniousness of man and
nature under an ecolological *Tianxia* the sustainable 'Ecological Civilisation'. Which, I would hope, absolutely nobody is
gullible enough to believe?
Who says the leopard cannot change its spots? It can, and indeed does. Neoliberalism is a big-data micromarketing driven
technocratic engine of reproduction tailored to the identitarian individual. PoMo – in one sense – is thus the logical extremisation
of Classical Liberalism which is happening within the Classical Liberal tradition. It is certainly not a successor state or
'Fourth Political Theory' which is one of the few things Aleksandr Dugin gets right.
This is why the term needs defintion and precisification or, preferably, abandoning. If both the left and right bandy the
term around as a eupehemism for what either does not like – the term can only be a noun of incoherence. Much like 'antisemitism':
it becomes a negative projection of all undesirable effects onto the 'Other'. Which, when either end of the political spectrum
nihilates the Other leaves us with the vicious dehumanisation of the 'traditional' identitarian fascist centre. All binary
arguments using shared synthetic terminology – that are plastic in meaning depending on who is using the term – cancel each
other out.
Of which, much of which is objectified and commodified as 'PoMo' was a reaction against. A reaction that anticipated the
breakdown of the identitarian and sectarian 'technological postmodern' society. So how can that logically be a 'reaction against'
and an 'embelishment to' neoliberalism'?
This is not a mere instance of pedantry: I/we are witnessing the decoherence of language due to an extremisation of generalisation
and abstraction of sense and meaning. That meaning is deferred is a post-structuralist tenet: but one that proceeds from the
extreme objectivisation of language (one to one mapping of meaning as the analytical signified/signifier relationship) and
the mathematicisation of logic (post-Fregian 'meta-ontology') not its subjectivisation.
If PoMo means anything: it is a rich and authentic vein of human inquiry that was/is a creative attempt to rescue us from
a pure objectivist Hell (David Ray Griffin's "positive postmodernism"). One that was/is not entirely satisfactory; merely because
it has not yet completed. In the midst: we have the morbid hybrid symptomatology of the old Classical Libertarian fascism trying
to recuperate the new Universal Humanism for which PoMo is a meaningless label. Especially if it is used to character masque
the perennial philosophy of Humanism that has been dehumanised and subjugated by successive identitarian regimes of knowledge
and power since forever in pre-Antiquity.
We are all human: only some humans are ideologically more human than others is the counter-history of humanity. When we
encounter such ideologically imprecise degenerative labels as 'PoMo' – that can mean anything to anyone (but favours the status
quo) this makes a nonsense of at least 5,000 years of thought. Is it any wonder that we are super-ordinated by those who can
better dictate who we are? Language is overpower and writing is supra-sovereign administration and bureaucracy over the 'owness'
of identity. Its co-option by the pseudoleft is a complete denigration and betrayal of the potential of a new Humanism. The
key to which is the spiritual recovery and embodiment of who we really are – proto-linguistically and pre-ontologically – before
all these meaningless labels get in the way.
Bootlyboob
You said it better than I ever could.
Stephen Hick's book is quite the laugh. I tried to read it but it made no sense. From memory, it starts at Kant and Hegel
and gets them completely wrong, (he even draws little charts with their ideas in tabulated form, WTF?) so I quickly deleted
the .pdf. Any book that begins with a summary of these two philosophers and then thinks they can hold my attention until they
get to their take on 'postmodernism' is sorely mistaken. Postmodernism is a made up label for about four or five French intellectuals
in the 1970's that somehow took over the world and completely fucked it up. Why do I somehow not follow this line of 'thought'?
Reg
No, Postmodernism is a real thing, it is the capitalist assimilation of situationism to overcome the crisis of profit in the
70s caused by overproduction and the attempt by the 1% to recapture a greater a greater % of GDP that they had lost due to
the post war settlement. This was an increasingly a zero sum game economy after Germany and Japan had rebuilt their manufacturing
capacity, with the US constrained by a widening trade deficit and the cost of the cold and Vietnam war increasing US debt.
The inflation spikes in the 70s is only reflective of these competing demands.
The problem of modernism is than peoples needs are easily saited, particularly in conditions of overproduction. Postmodern
production is all about creating virtual needs that are unsatisfied. The desire for status or belonging or identity are infinite,
and overcomes the dead time of 'valourisation' (time taken for investment to turn into profit) of capital by switching to virtual
production of weightless capitalism. The creation of 'intangible asset's such as trade marks, while off shoring production
is central. This is a form of rentier extraction, as the creation of a trade mark creates no real value if you have offshored
not only production but R&D to China. This is why fiance, and free movement of capital supported by monetary policy and independent
central banks are central to Postmodern neo-liberal production. The problem being that intangible assets are easy to replace
and require monopoly protection supported by a Imperial hegemon to maintain rentier extraction. Why does China need a US or
UK trade mark of products where both innovation and production increasingly come from China? How long can the US as a diminishing
empire maintain rentier extraction at the point of a military it increasingly cannot afford, particularly against a military
and economic superpower like China? It is no accident US companies that have managed to monetise internet technologies are
monopolies, google, microsoft, Apple. An operating system for example has a reproduction cost of zero, the same can be said
of films or music, so the natural price is zero, only a monopoly maintains profit.
The connection to situationism is the cry of May 68 'Make your dreams reality', which was marketised by making peoples dreams
very interesting ones about fitted kitchens, where even 'self actualisation was developed into a product, where even ones own
body identity became a product to be developed at a price. This is at the extreme end of Marxist alienation as not only work
or the home becomes alienated, but the body itself.
David Harvey covers some of this quite well in his "The condition of Postmodernity". Adam Curtis also covers quite well in
'The Trap' and the 'Century of the self'.
BigB
I'm inclined to agree with everything you write. It would fall into what I called 'precisification' and actual definition.
What you describe is pure Baudrillard: that capitalism reproduces as a holistic system of objects that we buy into without
ever satisfying the artificial advertorial need to buy. What we actually seek is a holism of self that cannot be replaced by
a holism of objects hence an encoded need for dissatisfaction articulated as dissatisfaction a Hyperrealism of the eternally
desiring capitalist subject. But Baudrillard rejected the label too.
What I was pointing out was the idea of 'contested concept'. Sure, if we define terms, let's use it. Without that pre-agreed
defintion: the term is meaningless. As are many of our grandiloquent ideas of 'Democracy', 'Freedom', 'Prosperity', and especially
'Peace'. Language is partisan and polarised. Plastic words like 'change' can mean anything and intentionally do. And the convention
of naming creates its own decoherence sequence. What follows 'postmodernism'? Post-humanism is an assault on sense and meaning.
As is the current idea that "reality is the greatest illusion of all".
We are having a real communication breakdown due to the limitations of the language and out proliferation of beliefs. Baudrillard
also anticipated the involution and implosion of the Code. He was speaking from a de Saussurian (semiologic) perspective. Cognitive
Linguistics makes this ever more clear. Language is maninly frames and metaphors. Over expand them over too many cognitive
domains: and the sense and meaning capability is diluted toward meaninglessnes – where reality is no longer real. This puts
us in the inferiorised position of having our terms – and thus our meaning – dictated by a cognitive elite a linguistic 'noocracy'
(which is homologous with the plutocracy – who can afford private education).
Capitalism itself is a purely linguistic phenomena: which is so far off the beaten track I'm not even going to expand on
it. Except to say: that a pre-existing system of objects giving rise to a separate system of thoughts – separate objectivity
and subjectivity – is becoming less tenable to defend. I'd prefer to think in terms of 'embodiment' and 'disembodiment' rather
than distinct historical phases. And open and closed cognitive cycles rather than discreet psycholgical phases. We cannot be
post-humans if we never embodied our humanism fully. And we cannot be be post-modern when we have never fully lived in the
present having invented a disembodied reality without us in it, which we proliferated trans-historically the so-called 'remembered
present'.
Language and our ideas of reality are close-correlates – I would argue very close correlates. They are breaking down because
language and realism are disembodied which, in itself is ludicrous to say. But we have inherited and formalised an idealism
that is exactly that. Meaning resides in an immaterial intellect in an intangible mind floating around in an abstract neo-Platonic
heaven waiting for Reason to concur with it. Which is metaphysical bullshit, but it is also the foundation of culture and 'Realism'.
Which makes my position 'anti-Realist'. Can you see my problem with socio-philosophical labels now!? They can carry sense if
used carefully, as you did. In general discourse they mean whatever they want to mean. Which generally means they will be used
against you.
Ramdan
"the SPIRITUAL RECOVERY and embodiment of who we really are – PROTO-LINGUISTICALLY and PRE-ONTOLOGICALLY – BEFORE all these
MEANINGLESS LABELS get in the way."
Thanks BigB. I just took the liberty to add emphasis.
Robbobbobin
Smarty pants (label).
Robert Laine
A reply to the article worthy of another Off-G article (or perhaps a book) which would include at a minimum the importance
of non-dualistic thinking, misuse of language in the creation of MSM and government narratives and the need to be conscious
of living life from time to time while we talk about it. Thankyou, BigB.
Don't you love how all these people discuss postmodernism without ever bothering to define what it is. How confused. Hicks
and Peterson see postmodernists as Neo-Marxists and this guy sees them as Neoliberals. None of the main theorists that have
been associated with Postmodernism and Post-Structuralism and I'm thinking Derrida, Baudrillard and Foucault here (not that
I see Foucault as really belonging in the group) would not even accept the term 'postmodernism' as they would see it as an
inappropriate form of stereo-typography with no coherent meaning or definition and that presupposing that one can simply trade
such signifiers in 'transparent' communication and for us all to think and understand the same thing that 'postmodernism' as
a body of texts and ideas might be 'constituted by' is a large part of the problem under discussion. I often think that a large
question that arises from Derrida's project is not to study communication as such but to study and understand miss-communication
and how and why it comes about and what is involved in our misunderstandings. If people don't get that about 'postmodern' and
post-structuralist theories then they've not understood any thing about it.
BigB
You are absolutely right: the way we think in commodities of identities – as huge generalizations and blanket abstractions
– tends toward grand narration and meaninglessness. Which is at once dehumanising, ethnocentric, exceptionalist, imperialist
in a way that favours dominion and overpower. All these tendencies are encoded in the hierarchical structures of the language
– as "vicious" binary constructivisms. In short, socio-linguistic culture is a regime of overpower and subjugation. One that
is "philosopho-political" and hyper-normalises our discrimination.
Deleuze went further when he said language is "univocal". We only have one equiprimordial concept of identity – Being. It
is our ontological primitive singularity of sense and meaning. Everything we identity – as "Difference" – is in terms of Being
(non-Being is it's binary mirror state) as an object with attributes (substances). Being is differentiated into hierarchies
(the more attributes, the more "substantial"- the 'greater' the being) which are made "real" by "Repetition" hence Difference
and Repetition. The language of Dominion, polarization, and overpower is a reified "grand ontological narrative" constructivism.
One dominated by absolutised conceptual Being. That's all.
[One in which we are naturally inferiorised in our unconscious relationship of being qua Being in which we are dominated
by a conceptual "Oedipal Father" – the singularity of the Known – but that's another primal 'onto-theocratic' narrative the
grandest of then all].
One that we are born and acculturated into. Which the majority accept and never question. How many people question not just
their processes of thought but the structure of their processes of thought? A thought cannot escape its own structure and that
structure is inherently dominative. If not in it's immediacy then deferred somewhere else via a coduit of systemic violence
structured as a "violent hierarchy" of opposition and Othering.
Which is the ultimate mis-communication of anything that can be said to be "real" non-dominative, egalitarian, empathic,
etc. Which, of course, if we realise the full implications we can change the way we think and the "naturalised" power structures
we collectively validate.
When people let their opinions be formed for them, and commodify Romanticism, German Idealism, Marxism, Phenomenology, Structuralism,
Post-Structuralism, Existentialism, etc as the pseudo-word "PoMo" – only to dismiss it they are unbeknowingly validating the
hegemony of power and false-knowledge over. Then paradoxically using those binary power structures to rail about being dominated!
Those linguistic power structures dominate politics too. The "political unconscious" is binary and oppositional which tends
toward negation and favours the status quo but how many people think in terms of the psychopolitical and psycholinguistic algorithms
of power and politics?
Derrida's project is now our project and it has hardly yet begun. Not least because cognitive linguistics were unkown to
Derrida. That's how knowledge works by contemporising and updating previous knowledge from Structuralism to Post-Structuralism
to
Nihilating anything that can be called "PoMo" (including that other pseudo-label "Cultural Marxism") condemns us to another
200 years of Classical Liberalism which should be enough impetus to compel everyone to embrace the positive aspects of PoMo!
Especially post-post-structuralism that stupid naming convention again
I think a lot of people forget that both Derrida and Baudrillard died before the financial crisis. I don't think either of
them like myself at that time paid much attention to economics and markets as they worked within very specific and focused
fields. Derrida spent his whole life analysing phonocentrism and logocentrism throughout the history of philosophy and Baudrillard
was more a cultural sociologist then anything else. They like most people assumed that neoliberalism was working and they enjoyed
well paid jobs and great celebrity so they didn't have much cause to pay that much attention to politics. Following the Invasion
of Iraq Derrida did come out very strongly against the US calling it the biggest and most dangerous rogue state in the world
and he cited and quoted Chomsky's excellent work. We should also include the UK as the second biggest rogue state.
Once the GFC happened I realized that my knowledge on those subjects was virtually zero and I have since spent years looking
at them all very closely. I think Derrida and Baudrillard would have become very political following the GFC and even more
so now given current events with the yellow vests in France. Shame those two great thinkers died before all the corruption
of neoliberalism was finally revealed. I believe that would have had a great deal to say about it Derrida at least was a very
moral and ethical man.
Bootlyboob
I think you would like this essay if you have not read it already.
If anyone wants a good overview of postmodernism and post-structuralism Cuck philosophy has has some excellent videos covering
the subject matter and ideas. He explains how postmodernism has nothing to do with identity politics and shows how Hick and
Peterson have fundamentally misunderstood postmodernism. He also has 3 videos covering postmodern basics and some others on
Derrida and Baudrillard. You will not find the concepts explained better though one can never give a comprehensive review as
such things are essentially beyond us.
He puts too much weight on Foucault for my liking but that's just the fact that my understanding of postmodernism is obviously
different to his because all of our largely chance encounters with different texts at different times, which mean that we all
come away with slightly different ideas about what these things might mean at any given time. Even in relation to differences
in our own ideas from day to day or year to year.
Bootlyboob
Yes, that's why I mentioned the article in relation to your earlier comment. I don't think any of these philosophers would
have changed their stances based on the events 20 or 30 post their deaths. They essentially predicted the course that society
has taken.
Judith Butler took part in the occupy wall street movement and she's a post-structuralist so she has clearly changed her mind
since the GFC. Deleuze may have to a certain extent have predicted such things but that doesn't necessarily mean they would
have been happy about them. Derrida always spoke of the 'democracy' to come. Instead what we are looking forward to is tech
based technocratic totalitarianism. I don't go along with Deleuze on that matter anyway. I don't see a discreet transition
from one to the other but rather see us having to endure the combined worst of both scenarios.
Bootlyboob
In relation to Peterson. I did write an email to him once and he wrote back to me saying he does indeed like the writings of
Deleuze and Baudrillard. But it was a one line response. I'm still assuming he merely uses a false reading of Derrida as a
prop to advance his own arguments.
Peterson doesn't understand that postmodernism is not the source of identity politics or cultural marxism. That source is Anglo
sociology. I was doing an MSc in sociology back in 1994/95 and they had been transitioning away from Marx and class conflict
to Nietzsche and power conflicts understood within a very simplistic definition of power as a simple binary opposition of forces
between and 'oppressor' and a 'resistor'.
They borrow a bit from Foucault but they cannot accept his postmodern conclusions as power is necessarily revealed as a
positive force that actually constructs us all: in which case one cannot really object to it on political grounds. Let's face
it, these cultural ex-Marxists (now actually an elitist Nietzschean ubermench) don't seem to object to power's miss-functioning
at all on any kind of institutional level but solely concentrate on supposed power relations at the personal level.
That's all if you buy into 'power'at all as such. Baudrillard wrote 'Forget Foucault' and that 'the more one sees power
everywhere the less one is able to speak thereof'. I try and stay clear of any theory that tries to account for everything
with a single concept or perspective as they end up over-determining and reductionist.
A major benefit (for the elites) of postmodernism is its epistemological relativism, which denies the fundamentally important
commitments to objectivity, to facts and evidence. This results in the absurd situation where all the matters is the narrative.
This obvious fact is partially obscured by the substitution of emotion for evidence and logic.
https://viewsandstories.blogspot.com/2018/06/emotion-substitutes-for-evidence-and.html
Seamus Padraig
Yup. Among other things, po-mo 'theory' enables Orwell's doublethink .
BigB
This is exactly the misunderstanding of a mythical "po-mo 'theory'" – if such a thing exists – that I am getting at. 'Po-mo
theory' is in fact a modernity/postmodernity hybrid theory. Pomo theory is yet to emerge.
For instance: Derrida talked of the 'alterity' of language and consciousness that was neither subjectivist nor objectivist.
He also spoke of 'inversion/subversion' – where one bipolar oppositional term becomes the new dominant ie 'black over white'
or 'female over male'. This, he made specifically clear, was just as violent a domination as the old normal. How is this enabling
'doublethink'.
If you actually study where Derrida, Baudrillard, Deleuze; etc where taking their 'semiotics' it was to the 'Middle Way'
of language – much the same destination as Buddhism. This is the clear and precise non-domination of either extreme of language.
Only, they never supplied the praxis; and their followers and denigrators where not as prescient.
There is so much more to come from de Saussurian/Piercian semiotics and Bergsonian/Whiteheadian process philosophy. We have
barely scratched the surface. One possibility is the fabled East/West synthesis of thought that quantum physics and neuroscience
hint at.
What yo do not realise is that our true identity is lost in the language. Specifically: the Law of Identity and the Law
of the Excluded Middle of our current Theory of Mind prevent the understanding of consciousness. To understand why you actually
have to read and understand the linguistic foundations of the very theory you have just dismissed.
Robbobbobin
"Specifically: the Law of Identity and the Law of the Excluded Middle of our current Theory of Mind prevent the understanding
of consciousness."
Yes, but. What do you mean by " our current Theory of Mind"?
Tim Jenkins
Was that a promo for Po-mo theory, BigB ? (chuckle)
BigB
In fact: if followed through – PoMo leads to the point of decoherence of all narrative constructivism. Which is the same point
the Buddhist Yogacara/Madhyamaka synthesis leads to. Which is the same point quantum physics and contemporary cognitive neuroscience
leads to. The fact of a pre-existent, mind-independent, objective ground for reality is no longer tenable. Objectivism is dead.
But so is subjectivism.
What is yet to appear is a coherent narrative that accommodates this. Precisely because language does not allow this. It
is either subjectivism or objectivism tertium non datur – a third is not given. It is precisely within the excluded middle
of language that the understanding of consciouness lies. The reason we have an ontological cosmogony without consciousness
lies precisely in the objectification and commodification of language. All propositions and narratives are ultimately false
especially this one.
Crucially, just because we cannot create a narrative construction or identity for 'reality' – does not mean we cannot experience
'reality'. Which is what a propositional device like a Zen koan refers to
All linguistic constructivism – whether objective or subjective – acts as a covering of reality. We take the ontological
narrative imaginary for the real 'abhuta-parikalpa'. Both object and subject are pratitya-samutpada – co-evolutionary contingent
dependendencies. The disjunction of all dualities via ersatz spatio-temporality creates Samsara. The ending of Samsara is the
ending and re-uniting of all falsely dichotomised binary definitions. About which: we can say precisely nothing.
Does this mean language is dead? No way. Language is there for the reclamation by understanding its superimpositional qualitiy
(upacara). A metaphoric understanding that George Lakoff has reached with Mark Johnston totally independently of Buddhism.
I call it 'poetic objectivism' of 'critical realism' which is the non-nihilational, non-solipsistic, middle way. Which precisely
nihilates both elitism and capitalism: which is why there is so much confusion around the language. There is more at stake
than mere linguistics. The future of humanity will be determined by our relationship with our languages.
vexarb
@BigB: "The fact of a pre-existent, mind-independent, objective ground for reality is no longer tenable. Objectivism is dead."
Do you mean that there is more to life than just "atoms and empty space"? Plato, Dante and Blake (to name the first 3 who
popped into my head) would have agreed with that: the ground of objective reality is mind -- the mind of God.
"The atoms of Democritus, and Newton's particles of Light,
Are sands upon the Red Sea shore, Where Israel's tents do shine so bright".
Tim Jenkins
Funnily enough, I was only writing just yesterday on OffG's 'India's Tryst with Destiny' article, just what poor standards
we have in the Education of our children today, in urgent need of massive revisions, which I've highlighted and how the guilt
lays squarely on the shoulders of Scientists & Academia in our Universities, from Physics to History & Law & the 'Physiology
of Psychology' these guys really just don't 'cut it' anymore resting on Laurels, living in Fear and corrupted by capitalism
>>> wholly !
Somebody should be shot, I say for Terrorist Acts !
Corruption is the Destruction of Culture &
"The Destruction of Culture is a Terrorist Act", now officially,
in international Law @UNESCO (thanks, Irina Bokova)
Would the author of this piece like to review & correct some obviously glaring errors ?
George
Good article. On this topic, I read an essay by the late Ellen Meiksins Wood where she noted that our splendid "new Left" are
all at once too pessimistic and too optimistic. Too pessimistic because they blandly assume that socialism is dead and so all
struggles in that direction are futile. Too optimistic because they assume that this (up till now) bearable capitalism around
them can simply continue with its shopping sprees, pop celebrity culture, soap operas, scandal sheets, ineffectual though comfortable
tut-tutting over corrupt and stupid politicians and – best of all – its endless opportunity for writing postmodernist deconstructions
of all those phenomena.
Why bother getting your hands dirty with an actual worker's struggle when you can write yet another
glamorously "radical" critique of the latest Hollywood blockbuster (which in truth just ends up as another advert for it)?
Fair Dinkum
During the 50's and 60's most folks living in Western cultures were happy with their lot: One house, one car, one spouse, one
job, three or four kids and enough money to live the 'good life'
Then along came Vance Packard's 'Hidden Persuaders' and hell broke loose.
The One Per Cent saw an opportunity of unlimited exploitation and they ran with it.
They're still running (albeit in jets and yachts) and us Proles are either struggling or crawling.
Greed is neither Left or Right.
It exists for its own self gratification.
Seamus Padraig
Excellent article and very true. Just one minor quibble:
This coalition between an economic policy that serves the interest of a tiny minority, and an ideology that appears to
"include" everybody is what Nancy Fraser has aptly called "progressive neoliberalism".
Actually, post-modernism doesn't include everybody -- just the 'marginalized' and 'disenfranchised' minorities whom
Michel Foucault championed. The whole thing resembles nothing so much as the old capitalist strategy of playing off the
Lumpenproletariat against the proletariat, to borrow the original Marxist terminology.
Stephen Morrell
The following facile claim doesn't bear scrutiny: "At the very moment when the "threat" of real existing socialism was not
felt anymore, due to the Western economic and military superiority in the 1980ies (that led to the fall of the Berlin Wall),
the economic paradigm in the Western countries shifted."
The economic paradigm shifted well before the 1980s and it had nothing to do with "Western economic and military superiority
in the 1980ies". The death knell of Keynesianism was sounded with the de-linking of the US dollar and the gold standard in
1971 and the first oil crisis of 1973. Subsequently, the 1970s were marked by a continuous and escalating campaign of capital
strikes which produced both high inflation and high unemployment ('stagflation') in the main imperial centres. These strikes
persisted until the bourgeoisie's servants were able to implement their desired 'free market' measures in the 1980s, the key
ones being smashing of trade union power and consequent devastation of working conditions and living standards, privatisation
of essential services, dissolution of social welfare and all the rest. All in the name of 'encouraging investment'.
The fear of 'existing socialism' (and of the military might of Eastern Europe and the USSR) persisted right up to the restoration
of capitalism in the USSR in 1991-92. The post-soviet triumphalism (to that moronic and ultimate post-modernist war cry, 'The
End of History') only opened the floodgates for the imposition of the neoliberal paradigm over the whole globe. The real essence
of the 'globalisation' ideology has been this imposition of imperial monopoly and hegemony on economically backward but resource-rich
countries that hitherto could gain some respite or succour from the USSR and Eastern Europe as an alternative to the tender
mercies of the World Bank and IMF whose terms correspondingly centred on the neoliberal paradigm.
The key class-war victories of the 1980s by the ruling class, especially in the main Anglophone imperial centres (exemplified
by the air traffic controllers strike in Reagan's US and the Great Coal Strike in Thatcher's England), were the necessary condition
to them getting their way domestically. However, the dissolution of the USSR not only allowed the imperialists to rampage internationally
(through the World Bank, IMF, WTO, etc) but gave great fillip to their initial class-war victories at home to impose with impunity
ever more grinding impoverishment and austerity on the working class and oppressed -- from the 1990s right up to fraught and
crisis-ridden present. The impunity was fuelled in many countries by that domestic accompaniment to the dissolution of the
USSR, the rapidly spiralling and terminal decline of the mass Stalinist Communist parties, the bourgeoisie's bogeyman.
Finally, productivity in the capitalist west was always higher than in post-capitalist countries. The latter universally
have been socialised economies built in economically backward countries and saddled with stultifying Stalinist bureaucracies,
including in the USSR and Eastern Europe. Capitalist productivity didn't suddenly exceed that in the USSR or Eastern Europe
in the 1980s.
So, overall, the 'triumph' of the neoliberal paradigm didn't really have much to do with the imperialist lie of "Western
economic and military superiority in the 1980ies". That fairytale might fit into some post-modernist relativist epistemology
of everything being equally 'true' or 'valid', but in the real world it doesn't hold up empirically or logically. In Anglophone
philosophic academia at least, post-modernism really picked up only after Althusser strangled his wife, and hyper-objectivist
structuralism correspondingly was strangled by hyper-subjectivist post-modernism.
Seamus Padraig
The death knell of Keynesianism was sounded with the de-linking of the US dollar and the gold standard in 1971 and the
first oil crisis of 1973.
Not really, no. In fact, we still do have Keynesianism; but now, it's just a Keynsianism for the banks, the corporations
and the MIC rather than the rest of us. But check the stats: the governments of West are still heavily involved in deficit
spending–US deficits, in fact, haven't been this big since WW2! Wish I got some of that money
Tim Jenkins
I find this kind of a pointless discussion on Keynes & so on
"Capitalism has Failed." Christine Lagarde 27/5/2014 Mansion House
"Socialism for the Rich" (Stiglitz: Nobel Economic laureate, 2008/9)
More important is the structuring of Central Banks to discuss and
Richard A. Werner's sound observations in the link
Riddle me this Seamus: this year we just got a new statue of Woodrow Wilson in Plovdiv BG.
Last year we got a statue of John no-name McCain in Sofia Bulgaria
See the patterns in the most poverty stricken EU nation ?
Not difficult !
vexarb
Seamus, me too! At least, wish I could get some of my own money back.
Tim Jenkins
Whenever I think about some serious R.O.I. of time & money & family contributions to Tech. Designs, lost in the '80's, I have
to play some music or switch to Zen mode 🙂
vexarb
@Tim: "R.O.I (Return On Investment)". The first time I have come across that P.O.V (Point Of View) on this site. The essence
of Darwin's theory of evolutionary progress: to slowly build on an initial slight advantage. The 80s (I was there), Maggie
Snatcher, Baroness Muck, no such thing as Society, the years that the Locust has eaten. Little ROI despite a tsunami of fiat
money swirling around the electronic world. Where is the ROI from capital in the WC.Clinton / B.Liar / Brown regimes, that
were so boastful of their economic policies. Where are the snows of yesteryear?
Tim Jenkins
Well said, Stephen: this wholly weird wee article certainly begs the question, how old is & where was this tainted memory &
member of academia in the 'Winter of '79' ? and how could he have possibly missed all the denationalisation/privatisation,
beginning with NFC and onwards, throughout the '80's, under Thatcher ? Culminating in screwing UK societal futures, by failing
to rollout Fibre Optic Cable in the UK, (except for the Square Mile city interests of London) which Boris now promises to do
today, nationwide,
a mere 30 years too damn late, when it would have been so cheap, back then and production costs could have been tied to
contracts of sale of the elite British Tech. at that time
Worth reading both part one & two of that link, imo scandalous !
Nice wholly suitable reference to Althusser 😉 say no more.
Talk about 'Bonkers' 🙂 we shan't be buying the book, for sure 🙂
Your comment was way more valuable. Do people get paid for writing things like this, these days. I was just outside Linz
for 2 months, just before last Christmas and I found more knowledgeable people on the street, in & around Hitler's ole' 'patch',
during his formative years, on the streets of Linz: where the joke goes something along the lines of
"If a homeless unemployed artist can't make it in Austria, he has nothing to fear, knowing that he can be on the road to
becoming the Chancellor of Germany in just another year "
BigB
I was right with you to the end, Stephen. Althusser killed his wife for sure: but he was deemed insane and never stood trial.
He was almost certainly suffering from a combination of conditions, exacerbated by a severe form of PTSD, as we would call
it now.
Whether or not one has sympathy for this has become highly politicised. Classic Liberals, anti-communists, and radical feminists
always seem to portray the 'murder' as a rational act of the misogynistic male in the grips of a radical philosophy for which
wife murder is as natural a consequence as the Gulag. His supporters try to portray the 'mercy' killing of Helene as an 'act
of love'. It wasn't that simple though, was it? Nor that black and white.
I cannot imagine what life was like in a German concentration camp for someone who was already suffering from mental illness.
From what I have read: the 'treatment' available in the '50s was worse than the underlying condition. He was also 'self-medicating'.
I cannot imagine what the state of his mind was in 1980: but I am inclined to cut him some slack. A lot of slack.
I cannot agree with your last statement. Althusser's madness was not a global trigger event – proceeding as a natural consequence
from "hyper-subjectivist post-modernism". Which makes for a literary original, but highly inaccurate metaphor. Not least because
Althusser was generally considered as a Structuralist himself.
Other than that, great comment.
Stephen Morrell
I understand your sentiments toward Althusser, and am sorry if my remarks about him were insensitive or offensive. However,
I know from personal experience of hardline Althusserian academic philosophers who suddenly became post-modernists after the
unfortunate incident. The point I was trying to make was that his philosophy wasn't abandoned for philosophical reasons but
non-philosophical, moral ones. It wasn't a condemnation of Althusser. It was a condemnation of many of his followers.
I made no claim that this was some kind of 'global trigger event'. Philosophy departments, or ideas as such, don't bring
change. If post-modernism didn't become useful to at least some sectors of the ruling class at some point, then it would have
remained an academic backwater (as it should have). Nor that post-modernism was some kind of 'natural consequence' of structuralism
(which is what I think you meant). Philosophically, it was a certainly one reaction to structuralism, one among several. Other
more rational reactions to structuralism included EP Thompson's and Sebastiano Timpinaro's.
As Marx said, "the ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas" [German Ideology], and if the ruling class
finds some of them useful they'll adopt them. Or as Milton Friedman, one of the main proponents of neoliberalism, proclaimed:
"Only a crisis – actual or perceived – produces real change. When that crisis occurs, the actions that are taken depend on
the ideas that are lying around." Post-modernism, as a philosophy 'lying around', serves as a nice philosophical/ideological
fit for the intelligentsia to rationalise the anti-science ideology the ruling class today is foisting on rest of the population.
Politically, Althusser was disowned by many French leftists for his support of the thoroughly counter-revolutionary role
of the Stalinist PCF in the 1968 May events. His authority lasted for over a decade longer in the Anglophone countries.
Lochearn
"In Anglophone philosophic academia at least, post-modernism really picked up only after Althusser strangled his wife, and
hyper-objectivist structuralism correspondingly was strangled by hyper-subjectivist post-modernism."
Wonderful sentence. I'll keep that – if I may – for some imaginary dinner table with some imaginary academic friends.
Tim Jenkins
I was thinking exactly the same and imagining the window of opportunity to provoke some sound conversation, after some spluttering of red w(h)ine
Stephen Morrell
Thank you. I'll rephrase it to improve it slightly if you like:
In Anglophone philosophic academia at least, post-modernism really picked up only after Althusser strangled his wife, and
in revenge hyper-objectivist structuralism was strangled by hyper-subjectivist post-modernism.
Red Allover
Mr. Morrell's use of the phrase "stultifying Stalinist bureaucracies," to describe the actually existing Socialist societies
of the Eastern bloc, indicates to me that he is very much of the bourgeois mind set that he purports to criticize. This "plague
on both your houses" attitude is very typical of the lower middle class intellectual in capitalist countries, c.f. Chomsky,
Zizek, etc.
Stephen Morrell
On the contrary, all the remaining workers states (China, North Korea, Viet Nam, Laos and Cuba) must be defended against imperialist
attack and internal counterrevolution despite the bureaucratic castes that hold political power in these countries. Political,
not social, revolutions are needed to sweep away these bureaucracies to establish organs of workers democracy and political
power (eg soviets) which never existed in these countries (unlike in the first years of the USSR).
To his last days, the dying Lenin fought the rising bureaucracy led by Stalin, but Russia's backwardness and the failure
of the revolution to spread to an advanced country (especially Germany, October 1923) drove its rise. Its ideological shell
was the profoundly reactionary outlook and program of 'Socialism in One Country' (and only one country). And while Stalin defeated
him and his followers, it was Trotsky who came to a Marxist, materialist understanding of what produced and drove the Soviet
Thermidor. Trotsky didn't go running off to the bourgeoisie of the world blubbering about a 'new class' the way Kautsky, Djilas,
Shachtman, Cliff, et al. did.
The restoration of capitalism in the Soviet Union was a profound defeat for the working class worldwide, as it would be
for the remaining workers states. Now if that's a 'bourgeois mindset' of a 'lower middle class intellectual', be my guest and
nominate the bourgeois or petty bourgeois layers that hold such views. Certainly Chomsky, Zizek et al. couldn't agree with
such an outlook, but it's only the bourgeoisie and the Stalinists who contend that the workers states are 'socialist' or 'communist'.
Only a true post-modernist could delude themselves into concurring, or claim that the political repression, censorship and
corrupting bureaucratism of the Stalinist regimes were indeed not stultifying.
Red Allover
Thanks for your intelligent response. I am very familiar with the Trotskyist positions you outline. I could give you the Leninist
rebuttal to each of them, but you are probably familiar with them as well. I don't want to waste your time, or mine. However,
if you don't mind me asking, exactly at what point do you feel capitalism was restored in the USSR? It was, I take it, with
the first Five Year Plan, not the NEP?
Also, the Socialist or, to use your nomenclature, "Stalinist" system, that was destroyed in the the USSR in the 1990s–it was,
in truth, just one form of capitalism replaced by another form of capitalism? Would this summarize your view accurately?
Stephen Morrell
Capitalism was restored in the USSR in 1991-92. Stalinism was not another form of capitalism, as the Third Campists would contend.
The Stalinist bureaucracy rested on exactly the same property relations a socialist system would which were destroyed with
Yeltsin's (and Bush's) counterrevolution. Last, I've never labelled the Stalinist bureaucracy as a 'system'.
Perhaps if you changed your moniker to: "Troll Allover" one could take you seriously, well, not really – 'seriously' – but
at least in a sort of weird, twisted & warped post-modern sense – eh?
Red Allover
I'm sorry, what is the argument you are making? I know name calling is beneath intelligent, educated people.
Supporting neoliberalism is the key treason of contemporary intellectuals eeho were instrumental in decimating the New Deal capitalism,
to say nothing about neocon, who downgraded themselves into intellectual prostitutes of MIC mad try to destroy post WWII order.
Notable quotes:
"... More and more, intellectuals were abandoning their attachment to the traditional panoply of philosophical and scholarly ideals. One clear sign of the change was the attack on the Enlightenment ideal of universal humanity and the concomitant glorification of various particularisms. ..."
"... "Our age is indeed the age of the intellectual organization of political hatreds ," he wrote near the beginning of the book. "It will be one of its chief claims to notice in the moral history of humanity." There was no need to add that its place in moral history would be as a cautionary tale. In little more than a decade, Benda's prediction that, because of the "great betrayal" of the intellectuals, humanity was "heading for the greatest and most perfect war ever seen in the world," would achieve a terrifying corroboration. ..."
"... In Plato's Gorgias , for instance, the sophist Callicles expresses his contempt for Socrates' devotion to philosophy: "I feel toward philosophers very much as I do toward those who lisp and play the child." Callicles taunts Socrates with the idea that "the more powerful, the better, and the stronger" are simply different words for the same thing. Successfully pursued, he insists, "luxury and intemperance are virtue and happiness, and all the rest is tinsel." How contemporary Callicles sounds! ..."
"... In Benda's formula, this boils down to the conviction that "politics decides morality." To be sure, the cynicism that Callicles espoused is perennial: like the poor, it will be always with us. What Benda found novel was the accreditation of such cynicism by intellectuals. "It is true indeed that these new 'clerks' declare that they do not know what is meant by justice, truth, and other 'metaphysical fogs,' that for them the true is determined by the useful, the just by circumstances," he noted. "All these things were taught by Callicles, but with this difference; he revolted all the important thinkers of his time." ..."
"... In other words, the real treason of the intellectuals was not that they countenanced Callicles but that they championed him. ..."
"... His doctrine of "the will to power," his contempt for the "slave morality" of Christianity, his plea for an ethic "beyond good and evil," his infatuation with violence -- all epitomize the disastrous "pragmatism" that marks the intellectual's "treason." The real problem was not the unattainability but the disintegration of ideals, an event that Nietzsche hailed as the "transvaluation of all values." "Formerly," Benda observed, "leaders of States practiced realism, but did not honor it; With them morality was violated but moral notions remained intact, and that is why, in spite of all their violence, they did not disturb civilization ." ..."
"... From the savage flowering of ethnic hatreds in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union to the mendacious demands for political correctness and multiculturalism on college campuses across America and Europe, the treason of the intellectuals continues to play out its unedifying drama. Benda spoke of "a cataclysm in the moral notions of those who educate the world." That cataclysm is erupting in every corner of cultural life today. ..."
"... Finkielkraut catalogues several prominent strategies that contemporary intellectuals have employed to retreat from the universal. A frequent point of reference is the eighteenth-century German Romantic philosopher Johann Gottfried Herder. "From the beginning, or to be more precise, from the time of Plato until that of Voltaire," he writes, "human diversity had come before the tribunal of universal values; with Herder the eternal values were condemned by the court of diversity." ..."
"... Finkielkraut focuses especially on Herder's definitively anti-Enlightenment idea of the Volksgeist or "national spirit." ..."
"... Nevertheless, the multiculturalists' obsession with "diversity" and ethnic origins is in many ways a contemporary redaction of Herder's elevation of racial particularism over the universalizing mandate of reason ..."
"... In Goethe's words, "A generalized tolerance will be best achieved if we leave undisturbed whatever it is which constitutes the special character of particular individuals and peoples, whilst at the same time we retain the conviction that the distinctive worth of anything with true merit lies in its belonging to all humanity." ..."
"... The geography of intellectual betrayal has changed dramatically in the last sixty-odd years. In 1927, intellectuals still had something definite to betray. In today's "postmodernist" world, the terrain is far mushier: the claims of tradition are much attenuated and betrayal is often only a matter of acquiescence. ..."
"... In the broadest terms, The Undoing of Thought is a brief for the principles of the Enlightenment. Among other things, this means that it is a brief for the idea that mankind is united by a common humanity that transcends ethnic, racial, and sexual divisions ..."
"... Granted, the belief that there is "Jewish thinking" or "Soviet science" or "Aryan art" is no longer as widespread as it once was. But the dispersal of these particular chimeras has provided no inoculation against kindred fabrications: "African knowledge," "female language," "Eurocentric science": these are among today's talismanic fetishes. ..."
"... Then, too, one finds a stunning array of anti-Enlightenment phantasmagoria congregated under the banner of "anti-positivism." The idea that history is a "myth," that the truths of science are merely "fictions" dressed up in forbidding clothes, that reason and language are powerless to discover the truth -- more, that truth itself is a deceitful ideological construct: these and other absurdities are now part of the standard intellectual diet of Western intellectuals. The Frankfurt School Marxists Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno gave an exemplary but by no means uncharacteristic demonstration of one strain of this brand of anti-rational animus in the mid-1940s. ..."
"... Historically, the Enlightenment arose as a deeply anti-clerical and, perforce, anti-traditional movement. Its goal, in Kant's famous phrase, was to release man from his "self-imposed immaturity." ..."
"... The process of disintegration has lately become an explicit attack on culture. This is not simply to say that there are many anti-intellectual elements in society: that has always been the case. "Non-thought," in Finkielkraut's phrase, has always co-existed with the life of the mind. The innovation of contemporary culture is to have obliterated the distinction between the two. ..."
"... There are many sides to this phenomenon. What Finkielkraut has given us is not a systematic dissection but a kind of pathologist's scrapbook. He reminds us, for example, that the multiculturalists' demand for "diversity" requires the eclipse of the individual in favor of the group ..."
"... To a large extent, the abdication of reason demanded by multiculturalism has been the result of what we might call the subjection of culture to anthropology. ..."
"... In describing this process of leveling, Finkielkraut distinguishes between those who wish to obliterate distinctions in the name of politics and those who do so out of a kind of narcissism. The multiculturalists wave the standard of radical politics and say (in the words of a nineteenth-century Russian populist slogan that Finkielkraut quotes): "A pair of boots is worth more than Shakespeare." ..."
"... The upshot is not only that Shakespeare is downgraded, but also that the bootmaker is elevated. "It is not just that high culture must be demystified; sport, fashion and leisure now lay claim to high cultural status." A grotesque fantasy? ..."
"... . Finkielkraut notes that the rhetoric of postmodernism is in some ways similar to the rhetoric of Enlightenment. Both look forward to releasing man from his "self-imposed immaturity." But there is this difference: Enlightenment looks to culture as a repository of values that transcend the self, postmodernism looks to the fleeting desires of the isolated self as the only legitimate source of value ..."
"... The products of culture are valuable only as a source of amusement or distraction. In order to realize the freedom that postmodernism promises, culture must be transformed into a field of arbitrary "options." "The post-modern individual," Finkielkraut writes, "is a free and easy bundle of fleeting and contingent appetites. He has forgotten that liberty involves more than the ability to change one's chains, and that culture itself is more than a satiated whim." ..."
"... "'All cultures are equally legitimate and everything is cultural,' is the common cry of affluent society's spoiled children and of the detractors of the West. ..."
"... There is another, perhaps even darker, result of the undoing of thought. The disintegration of faith in reason and common humanity leads not only to a destruction of standards, but also involves a crisis of courage. ..."
"... As the impassioned proponents of "diversity" meet the postmodern apostles of acquiescence, fanaticism mixes with apathy to challenge the commitment required to preserve freedom. ..."
"... Communism may have been effectively discredited. But "what is dying along with it is not the totalitarian cast of mind, but the idea of a world common to all men." ..."
On the abandonment of Enlightenment intellectualism, and the emergence of a new form of Volksgeist.
When hatred of culture becomes itself a part of culture, the life of the mind loses all meaning. -- Alain Finkielkraut,
The Undoing of Thought
Today we are trying to spread knowledge everywhere. Who knows if in centuries to come there will not be universities
for re-establishing our former ignorance? -- Georg Christoph Lichtenberg (1742-1799)
I n 1927, the French essayist Julien Benda published his famous attack on the intellectual corruption of the age, La Trahison
des clercs. I said "famous," but perhaps "once famous" would have been more accurate. For today, in the United States anyway,
only the title of the book, not its argument, enjoys much currency. "La trahison des clercs": it is one of those memorable phrases
that bristles with hints and associations without stating anything definite. Benda tells us that he uses the term "clerc" in "the
medieval sense," i.e., to mean "scribe," someone we would now call a member of the intelligentsia. Academics and journalists, pundits,
moralists, and pontificators of all varieties are in this sense clercs . The English translation, The Treason of the Intellectuals
,
1 sums it up neatly.
The "treason" in question was the betrayal by the "clerks" of their vocation as intellectuals. From the time of the pre-Socratics,
intellectuals, considered in their role as intellectuals, had been a breed apart. In Benda's terms, they were understood to
be "all those whose activity essentially is not the pursuit of practical aims, all those who seek their joy in the practice
of an art or a science or a metaphysical speculation, in short in the possession of non-material advantages." Thanks to such men,
Benda wrote, "humanity did evil for two thousand years, but honored good. This contradiction was an honor to the human species, and
formed the rift whereby civilization slipped into the world."
According to Benda, however, this situation was changing. More and more, intellectuals were abandoning their attachment to
the traditional panoply of philosophical and scholarly ideals. One clear sign of the change was the attack on the Enlightenment ideal
of universal humanity and the concomitant glorification of various particularisms. The attack on the universal went forward
in social and political life as well as in the refined precincts of epistemology and metaphysics: "Those who for centuries had exhorted
men, at least theoretically, to deaden the feeling of their differences have now come to praise them, according to where the sermon
is given, for their 'fidelity to the French soul,' 'the immutability of their German consciousness,' for the 'fervor of their Italian
hearts.'" In short, intellectuals began to immerse themselves in the unsettlingly practical and material world of political passions:
precisely those passions, Benda observed, "owing to which men rise up against other men, the chief of which are racial passions,
class passions and national passions." The "rift" into which civilization had been wont to slip narrowed and threatened to close
altogether.
Writing at a moment when ethnic and nationalistic hatreds were beginning to tear Europe asunder, Benda's diagnosis assumed the
lineaments of a prophecy -- a prophecy that continues to have deep resonance today. "Our age is indeed the age of the intellectual
organization of political hatreds ," he wrote near the beginning of the book. "It will be one of its chief claims to notice in
the moral history of humanity." There was no need to add that its place in moral history would be as a cautionary tale. In little
more than a decade, Benda's prediction that, because of the "great betrayal" of the intellectuals, humanity was "heading for the
greatest and most perfect war ever seen in the world," would achieve a terrifying corroboration.
J ulien Benda was not so naïve as to believe that intellectuals as a class had ever entirely abstained from political involvement,
or, indeed, from involvement in the realm of practical affairs. Nor did he believe that intellectuals, as citizens, necessarily
should abstain from political commitment or practical affairs. The "treason" or betrayal he sought to publish concerned the
way that intellectuals had lately allowed political commitment to insinuate itself into their understanding of the intellectual vocation
as such. Increasingly, Benda claimed, politics was "mingled with their work as artists, as men of learning, as philosophers." The
ideal of disinterestedness, the universality of truth: such guiding principles were contemptuously deployed as masks when they were
not jettisoned altogether. It was in this sense that he castigated the " desire to abase the values of knowledge before the values
of action ."
In its crassest but perhaps also most powerful form, this desire led to that familiar phenomenon Benda dubbed "the cult of success."
It is summed up, he writes, in "the teaching that says that when a will is successful that fact alone gives it a moral value, whereas
the will which fails is for that reason alone deserving of contempt." In itself, this idea is hardly novel, as history from the Greek
sophists on down reminds us. In Plato's Gorgias , for instance, the sophist Callicles expresses his contempt for Socrates'
devotion to philosophy: "I feel toward philosophers very much as I do toward those who lisp and play the child." Callicles taunts
Socrates with the idea that "the more powerful, the better, and the stronger" are simply different words for the same thing. Successfully
pursued, he insists, "luxury and intemperance are virtue and happiness, and all the rest is tinsel." How contemporary Callicles
sounds!
In Benda's formula, this boils down to the conviction that "politics decides morality." To be sure, the cynicism that Callicles
espoused is perennial: like the poor, it will be always with us. What Benda found novel was the accreditation of such cynicism
by intellectuals. "It is true indeed that these new 'clerks' declare that they do not know what is meant by justice, truth, and other
'metaphysical fogs,' that for them the true is determined by the useful, the just by circumstances," he noted. "All these things
were taught by Callicles, but with this difference; he revolted all the important thinkers of his time."
In other words, the real treason of the intellectuals was not that they countenanced Callicles but that they championed him.
To appreciate the force of Benda's thesis one need only think of that most influential modern Callicles, Friedrich Nietzsche.
His doctrine of "the will to power," his contempt for the "slave morality" of Christianity, his plea for an ethic "beyond good and
evil," his infatuation with violence -- all epitomize the disastrous "pragmatism" that marks the intellectual's "treason." The real
problem was not the unattainability but the disintegration of ideals, an event that Nietzsche hailed as the "transvaluation of all
values." "Formerly," Benda observed, "leaders of States practiced realism, but did not honor it; With them morality was violated
but moral notions remained intact, and that is why, in spite of all their violence, they did not disturb civilization ."
Benda understood that the stakes were high: the treason of the intellectuals signaled not simply the corruption of a bunch of
scribblers but a fundamental betrayal of culture. By embracing the ethic of Callicles, intellectuals had, Benda reckoned, precipitated
"one of the most remarkable turning points in the moral history of the human species. It is impossible," he continued,
to exaggerate the importance of a movement whereby those who for twenty centuries taught Man that the criterion of the morality
of an act is its disinterestedness, that good is a decree of his reason insofar as it is universal, that his will is only moral
if it seeks its law outside its objects, should begin to teach him that the moral act is the act whereby he secures his existence
against an environment which disputes it, that his will is moral insofar as it is a will "to power," that the part of his soul
which determines what is good is its "will to live" wherein it is most "hostile to all reason," that the morality of an act is
measured by its adaptation to its end, and that the only morality is the morality of circumstances. The educators of the human
mind now take sides with Callicles against Socrates, a revolution which I dare to say seems to me more important than all political
upheavals.
The Treason of the Intellectuals is an energetic hodgepodge of a book. The philosopher Jean-François Revel recently
described it as "one of the fussiest pleas on behalf of the necessary independence of intellectuals." Certainly it is rich, quirky,
erudite, digressive, and polemical: more an exclamation than an analysis. Partisan in its claims for disinterestedness, it is ruthless
in its defense of intellectual high-mindedness. Yet given the horrific events that unfolded in the decades following its publication,
Benda's unremitting attack on the politicization of the intellect and ethnic separatism cannot but strike us as prescient. And given
the continuing echo in our own time of the problems he anatomized, the relevance of his observations to our situation can hardly
be doubted. From the savage flowering of ethnic hatreds in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union to the mendacious demands
for political correctness and multiculturalism on college campuses across America and Europe, the treason of the intellectuals continues
to play out its unedifying drama. Benda spoke of "a cataclysm in the moral notions of those who educate the world." That cataclysm
is erupting in every corner of cultural life today.
In 1988, the young French philosopher and cultural critic Alain Finkielkraut took up where Benda left off, producing a brief
but searching inventory of our contemporary cataclysms. Entitled La Défaite de la pensée
2 ("The 'Defeat' or 'Undoing' of Thought"), his essay is in part an updated taxonomy of intellectual betrayals. In this
sense, the book is a trahison des clercs for the post-Communist world, a world dominated as much by the leveling imperatives
of pop culture as by resurgent nationalism and ethnic separatism. Beginning with Benda, Finkielkraut catalogues several prominent
strategies that contemporary intellectuals have employed to retreat from the universal. A frequent point of reference is the eighteenth-century
German Romantic philosopher Johann Gottfried Herder. "From the beginning, or to be more precise, from the time of Plato until that
of Voltaire," he writes, "human diversity had come before the tribunal of universal values; with Herder the eternal values were condemned
by the court of diversity."
Finkielkraut focuses especially on Herder's definitively anti-Enlightenment idea of the Volksgeist or "national spirit."
Quoting the French historian Joseph Renan, he describes the idea as "the most dangerous explosive of modern times." "Nothing," he
writes, "can stop a state that has become prey to the Volksgeist ." It is one of Finkielkraut's leitmotifs that today's multiculturalists
are in many respects Herder's (generally unwitting) heirs.
True, Herder's emphasis on history and language did much to temper the tendency to abstraction that one finds in some expressions
of the Enlightenment. Ernst Cassirer even remarked that "Herder's achievement is one of the greatest intellectual triumphs of the
philosophy of the Enlightenment."
Nevertheless, the multiculturalists' obsession with "diversity" and ethnic origins is in many ways a contemporary redaction
of Herder's elevation of racial particularism over the universalizing mandate of reason. Finkielkraut opposes this just as the
mature Goethe once took issue with Herder's adoration of the Volksgeist. Finkielkraut concedes that we all "relate to a particular
tradition" and are "shaped by our national identity." But, unlike the multiculturalists, he soberly insists that "this reality merit[s]
some recognition, not idolatry."
In Goethe's words, "A generalized tolerance will be best achieved if we leave undisturbed whatever it is which constitutes
the special character of particular individuals and peoples, whilst at the same time we retain the conviction that the distinctive
worth of anything with true merit lies in its belonging to all humanity."
The Undoing of Thought resembles The Treason of the Intellectuals stylistically as well as thematically. Both
books are sometimes breathless congeries of sources and aperçus. And Finkielkraut, like Benda (and, indeed, like Montaigne), tends
to proceed more by collage than by demonstration. But he does not simply recapitulate Benda's argument.
The geography of intellectual betrayal has changed dramatically in the last sixty-odd years. In 1927, intellectuals still
had something definite to betray. In today's "postmodernist" world, the terrain is far mushier: the claims of tradition are much
attenuated and betrayal is often only a matter of acquiescence. Finkielkraut's distinctive contribution is to have taken the
measure of the cultural swamp that surrounds us, to have delineated the links joining the politicization of the intellect and its
current forms of debasement.
In the broadest terms, The Undoing of Thought is a brief for the principles of the Enlightenment. Among other things,
this means that it is a brief for the idea that mankind is united by a common humanity that transcends ethnic, racial, and sexual
divisions.
The humanizing "reason" that Enlightenment champions is a universal reason, sharable, in principle, by all. Such ideals have not
fared well in the twentieth century: Herder's progeny have labored hard to discredit them. Granted, the belief that there is
"Jewish thinking" or "Soviet science" or "Aryan art" is no longer as widespread as it once was. But the dispersal of these particular
chimeras has provided no inoculation against kindred fabrications: "African knowledge," "female language," "Eurocentric science":
these are among today's talismanic fetishes.
Then, too, one finds a stunning array of anti-Enlightenment phantasmagoria congregated under the banner of "anti-positivism."
The idea that history is a "myth," that the truths of science are merely "fictions" dressed up in forbidding clothes, that reason
and language are powerless to discover the truth -- more, that truth itself is a deceitful ideological construct: these and other
absurdities are now part of the standard intellectual diet of Western intellectuals. The Frankfurt School Marxists Max Horkheimer
and Theodor Adorno gave an exemplary but by no means uncharacteristic demonstration of one strain of this brand of anti-rational
animus in the mid-1940s.
Safely ensconced in Los Angeles, these refugees from Hitler's Reich published an influential essay on the concept of Enlightenment.
Among much else, they assured readers that "Enlightenment is totalitarian." Never mind that at that very moment the Nazi war machine
-- what one might be forgiven for calling real totalitarianism -- was busy liquidating millions of people in order to fulfill
another set of anti-Enlightenment fantasies inspired by devotion to the Volksgeist .
The diatribe that Horkheimer and Adorno mounted against the concept of Enlightenment reminds us of an important peculiarity about
the history of Enlightenment: namely, that it is a movement of thought that began as a reaction against tradition and has now emerged
as one of tradition's most important safeguards. Historically, the Enlightenment arose as a deeply anti-clerical and, perforce,
anti-traditional movement. Its goal, in Kant's famous phrase, was to release man from his "self-imposed immaturity."
The chief enemy of Enlightenment was "superstition," an omnibus term that included all manner of religious, philosophical, and
moral ideas. But as the sociologist Edward Shils has noted, although the Enlightenment was in important respects "antithetical to
tradition" in its origins, its success was due in large part "to the fact that it was promulgated and pursued in a society in which
substantive traditions were rather strong." "It was successful against its enemies," Shils notes in his book Tradition (1981),
because the enemies were strong enough to resist its complete victory over them. Living on a soil of substantive traditionality,
the ideas of the Enlightenment advanced without undoing themselves. As long as respect for authority on the one side and self-confidence
in those exercising authority on the other persisted, the Enlightenment's ideal of emancipation through the exercise of reason
went forward. It did not ravage society as it would have done had society lost all legitimacy.
It is this mature form of Enlightenment, championing reason but respectful of tradition, that Finkielkraut holds up as an ideal.
W hat Finkielkraut calls "the undoing of thought" flows from the widespread disintegration of a faith. At the center of that faith
is the assumption that the life of thought is "the higher life" and that culture -- what the Germans call Bildung -- is its
end or goal.
The process of disintegration has lately become an explicit attack on culture. This is not simply to say that there are many
anti-intellectual elements in society: that has always been the case. "Non-thought," in Finkielkraut's phrase, has always co-existed
with the life of the mind. The innovation of contemporary culture is to have obliterated the distinction between the two. "It
is," he writes, "the first time in European history that non-thought has donned the same label and enjoyed the same status as thought
itself, and the first time that those who, in the name of 'high culture,' dare to call this non-thought by its name, are dismissed
as racists and reactionaries." The attack is perpetrated not from outside, by uncomprehending barbarians, but chiefly from inside,
by a new class of barbarians, the self-made barbarians of the intelligentsia. This is the undoing of thought. This is the new "treason
of the intellectuals."
There are many sides to this phenomenon. What Finkielkraut has given us is not a systematic dissection but a kind of pathologist's
scrapbook. He reminds us, for example, that the multiculturalists' demand for "diversity" requires the eclipse of the individual
in favor of the group . "Their most extraordinary feat," he observes, "is to have put forward as the ultimate individual liberty
the unconditional primacy of the collective." Western rationalism and individualism are rejected in the name of a more "authentic"
cult.
One example: Finkielkraut quotes a champion of multiculturalism who maintains that "to help immigrants means first of all respecting
them for what they are, respecting whatever they aspire to in their national life, in their distinctive culture and in their attachment
to their spiritual and religious roots." Would this, Finkielkraut asks, include "respecting" those religious codes which demanded
that the barren woman be cast out and the adulteress be punished with death?
What about those cultures in which the testimony of one man counts for that of two women? In which female circumcision is practiced?
In which slavery flourishes? In which mixed marriages are forbidden and polygamy encouraged? Multiculturalism, as Finkielkraut points
out, requires that we respect such practices. To criticize them is to be dismissed as "racist" and "ethnocentric." In this secular
age, "cultural identity" steps in where the transcendent once was: "Fanaticism is indefensible when it appeals to heaven, but beyond
reproach when it is grounded in antiquity and cultural distinctiveness."
To a large extent, the abdication of reason demanded by multiculturalism has been the result of what we might call the subjection
of culture to anthropology. Finkielkraut speaks in this context of a "cheerful confusion which raises everyday anthropological
practices to the pinnacle of the human race's greatest achievements." This process began in the nineteenth century, but it has been
greatly accelerated in our own age. One thinks, for example, of the tireless campaigning of that great anthropological leveler, Claude
Lévi-Strauss. Lévi-Strauss is assuredly a brilliant writer, but he has also been an extraordinarily baneful influence. Already in
the early 1950s, when he was pontificating for UNESCO , he was urging all and sundry to "fight against ranking cultural differences
hierarchically." In La Pensée sauvage (1961), he warned against the "false antinomy between logical and prelogical mentality"
and was careful in his descriptions of natives to refer to "so-called primitive thought." "So-called" indeed. In a famous article
on race and history, Lévi-Strauss maintained that the barbarian was not the opposite of the civilized man but "first of all the man
who believes there is such a thing as barbarism." That of course is good to know. It helps one to appreciate Lévi-Strauss's claim,
in Tristes Tropiques (1955), that the "true purpose of civilization" is to produce "inertia." As one ruminates on the proposition
that cultures should not be ranked hierarchically, it is also well to consider what Lévi-Strauss coyly refers to as "the positive
forms of cannibalism." For Lévi-Strauss, cannibalism has been unfairly stigmatized in the "so-called" civilized West. In fact, he
explains, cannibalism was "often observed with great discretion, the vital mouthful being made up of a small quantity of organic
matter mixed, on occasion, with other forms of food." What, merely a "vital mouthful"? Not to worry! Only an ignoramus who believed
that there were important distinctions, qualitative distinctions, between the barbarian and the civilized man could possibly
think of objecting.
Of course, the attack on distinctions that Finkielkraut castigates takes place not only among cultures but also within a given
culture. Here again, the anthropological imperative has played a major role. "Under the equalizing eye of social science," he writes,
hierarchies are abolished, and all the criteria of taste are exposed as arbitrary. From now on no rigid division separates masterpieces
from run-of-the mill works. The same fundamental structure, the same general and elemental traits are common to the "great" novels
(whose excellence will henceforth be demystified by the accompanying quotation marks) and plebian types of narrative activity.
F or confirmation of this, one need only glance at the pronouncements of our critics. Whether working in the academy or other
cultural institutions, they bring us the same news: there is "no such thing" as intrinsic merit, "quality" is an only ideological
construction, aesthetic value is a distillation of social power, etc., etc.
In describing this process of leveling, Finkielkraut distinguishes between those who wish to obliterate distinctions in the
name of politics and those who do so out of a kind of narcissism. The multiculturalists wave the standard of radical politics and
say (in the words of a nineteenth-century Russian populist slogan that Finkielkraut quotes): "A pair of boots is worth more than
Shakespeare."
Those whom Finkielkraut calls "postmodernists," waving the standard of radical chic, declare that Shakespeare is no better than
the latest fashion -- no better, say, than the newest item offered by Calvin Klein. The litany that Finkielkraut recites is familiar:
A comic which combines exciting intrigue and some pretty pictures is just as good as a Nabokov novel. What little Lolitas read
is as good as Lolita . An effective publicity slogan counts for as much as a poem by Apollinaire or Francis Ponge . The
footballer and the choreographer, the painter and the couturier, the writer and the ad-man, the musician and the rock-and-roller,
are all the same: creators. We must scrap the prejudice which restricts that title to certain people and regards others as sub-cultural.
The upshot is not only that Shakespeare is downgraded, but also that the bootmaker is elevated. "It is not just that high
culture must be demystified; sport, fashion and leisure now lay claim to high cultural status." A grotesque fantasy? Anyone
who thinks so should take a moment to recall the major exhibition called "High & Low: Modern Art and Popular Culture" that the Museum
of Modern Art mounted a few years ago: it might have been called "Krazy Kat Meets Picasso." Few events can have so consummately summed
up the corrosive trivialization of culture now perpetrated by those entrusted with preserving it. Among other things, that exhibition
demonstrated the extent to which the apotheosis of popular culture undermines the very possibility of appreciating high art on its
own terms.
When the distinction between culture and entertainment is obliterated, high art is orphaned, exiled from the only context in which
its distinctive meaning can manifest itself: Picasso becomes a kind of cartoon. This, more than any elitism or obscurity,
is the real threat to culture today. As Hannah Arendt once observed, "there are many great authors of the past who have survived
centuries of oblivion and neglect, but it is still an open question whether they will be able to survive an entertaining version
of what they have to say."
And this brings us to the question of freedom. Finkielkraut notes that the rhetoric of postmodernism is in some ways similar
to the rhetoric of Enlightenment. Both look forward to releasing man from his "self-imposed immaturity." But there is this difference:
Enlightenment looks to culture as a repository of values that transcend the self, postmodernism looks to the fleeting desires of
the isolated self as the only legitimate source of value.
For the postmodernist, then, "culture is no longer seen as a means of emancipation, but as one of the élitist obstacles to this."
The products of culture are valuable only as a source of amusement or distraction. In order to realize the freedom that postmodernism
promises, culture must be transformed into a field of arbitrary "options." "The post-modern individual," Finkielkraut writes, "is
a free and easy bundle of fleeting and contingent appetites. He has forgotten that liberty involves more than the ability to change
one's chains, and that culture itself is more than a satiated whim."
What Finkielkraut has understood with admirable clarity is that modern attacks on elitism represent not the extension but the
destruction of culture. "Democracy," he writes, "once implied access to culture for everybody. From now on it is going to mean everyone's
right to the culture of his choice." This may sound marvelous -- it is after all the slogan one hears shouted in academic and cultural
institutions across the country -- but the result is precisely the opposite of what was intended.
"'All cultures are equally legitimate and everything is cultural,' is the common cry of affluent society's spoiled children
and of the detractors of the West." The irony, alas, is that by removing standards and declaring that "anything goes," one does
not get more culture, one gets more and more debased imitations of culture. This fraud is the dirty secret that our cultural commissars
refuse to acknowledge.
There is another, perhaps even darker, result of the undoing of thought. The disintegration of faith in reason and common
humanity leads not only to a destruction of standards, but also involves a crisis of courage. "A careless indifference to grand
causes," Finkielkraut warns, "has its counterpart in abdication in the face of force." As the impassioned proponents of "diversity"
meet the postmodern apostles of acquiescence, fanaticism mixes with apathy to challenge the commitment required to preserve freedom.
Communism may have been effectively discredited. But "what is dying along with it is not the totalitarian cast of mind, but
the idea of a world common to all men."
Julien Benda took his epigraph for La Trahison des clercs from the nineteenth-century French philosopher Charles Renouvier:
Le monde souffre du manque de foi en une vérité transcendante : "The world suffers from lack of faith in a transcendent truth."
Without some such faith, we are powerless against the depredations of intellectuals who have embraced the nihilism of Callicles as
their truth.
1The Treason of the Intellectuals, by Julien Benda, translated by Richard Aldington, was first published in 1928.
This translation is still in print from Norton.
2La Défaite de la pensée , by Alain Finkielkraut; Gallimard, 162 pages, 72 FF . It is available in English, in
a translation by Dennis O'Keeffe, as The Undoing of Thought (The Claridge Press [London], 133 pages, £6.95 paper).
Roger Kimball is Editor and Publisher of The New Criterion and President and Publisher of Encounter Books. His latest book
is The Fortunes of Permanence: Culture and Anarchy in an Age of Amnesia (St. Augustine's Press)
"If minorities prefer Sharia Law, then we advise them to go to those places where that's the
state law.
Russia does not need minorities. Minorities need Russia, and we will not grant them special
privileges, or try to change our laws to fit their desires, no matter how loud they yell
"discrimination"
A while back we were discussing the merits of a liberal arts education and the sad state of
our current education system. As part of that discussion, I looked at the current curriculum of
my old prep school to see if it changed much from when I was there. To my surprise and joy, it
changed very little. Students are still required to take four years of theology good Jesuit
theology. I was struck by the entry for the current theology department at Fairfield Prep and
now present it below.
In light of the current discussion about the rise of the new bolsheviki in the Democratic
Party, I thought I'd share my thoughts on the Ignatian approach to Roman Catholicism. I'm
pretty sure many of you will consider the black robes to be quite red. I, on the other hand,
find the teachings and example of Saint Ignatius of Loyola to be far more profound and worthy
of emulation than anything Marx or Lenin ever dreamed of.
-- -- -- -- -- --
What is theology? Fundamentally, it's about conversation.
The Greek word Theós (God) combined with logos (word, or reason) describes what
happens in theology classes at Fairfield Prep. Talking about God, discovering God in the person
of Jesus Christ, asking questions, having discussions and debates, and exploring the truths of
other world religions are some of the many things that happen in theology. Through exegetical
analysis of Scripture, learning the philosophies of the Saints (in particular, St. Ignatius of
Loyola), contemplation, and reflection, theology students at Fairfield Prep are drawn to a more
intimate experience of the Divine in their own lives.
In the classroom, students are exposed to the teachings of Christ regarding the Gospel
imperative – the care of the poor. Theology students are inspired to work for equality
and social justice in their local and global communities.
In the spirit of Christ, through Ignatian practices, students are encouraged to grow
spiritually and religiously by orienting themselves towards others. Practically speaking,
students are called to "Find God in All Things." By recognizing the presence of the Divine
within others and the universe we live in, students may be inspired to develop a deeper
appreciation and love for Creation – in particular, care for our environment.
Morality, ethics, philosophy, history, science – they are all present within
discussions of theology. Regardless of faith background (or lack thereof) all students are
encouraged to express their beliefs and share their life experiences in their own ways. In
theology, we are constantly working towards discovering Truth in our lives. Through science,
history, literature, Scripture, and the Sacraments, we understand that God can be found in all
things and in all ways here at Fairfield Prep. Join us as we continue the discussions, the
questions, the reflections, and the actions that will make this world a more loving place for
all.
- Mr. Corey J. Milazzo
Chair of the Theology Department
-- -- -- -- -- --
It's still there, the call to find God in all things and to be a man for others. I graduated
a few years before Father Pedro Arrupe presented his dissertation and made his presentation
which became known as his "Men for Others" thesis. But his ideas already ran through the halls
and faculty of Fairfield Prep by the end of the 60s. Community service was an integral part of
the curriculum back then as were frequent retreats based on the Ignatian spiritual exercises.
They still are. The Jesuits molded us into men for others, social justice warriors, but with a
keen sense of self-examination (the examen). When we graduated in the rose garden of Bellarmine
Hall under a beautiful June sun, we were charged with the familiar Jesuit call "ite inflammate
omnia" (go forth and set the world on fire).
That phrase in itself is provocative. It goes back to Saint Ignatius of Loyola himself. It
may go back much further, back to Saint Catherine of Siena. One of her most repeated quotes is
"Be who God meant you to be and you will set the world on fire." Setting the world on fire must
have a different meaning back then. It sounds down right revolutionary these days.
In more recent times, Jesuits participated in the development of liberation theology, a
blending of the Church's professed preference for the poor and Marxism that is unsettling to
many both in and outside the Church. This expression of strident social justice was never
supported by the Vatican, especially when liberation theologists aligned themselves with armed
Marxist revolutions. Even Pope Francis was not a fan although as Father Bergoglio he said,
"The option for the poor comes from the first centuries of Christianity. It's the
Gospel itself. If you were to read one of the sermons of the first fathers of the Church,
from the second or third centuries, about how you should treat the poor, you'd say it was
Maoist or Trotskyist. The Church has always had the honor of this preferential option for the
poor."
Pope Francis seeks reconciliation with rather than expulsion of the liberation
theologists. This doesn't surprise me considering the Jesuits' firmly held faith in the primacy
of conscience, the belief that an informed conscience is the ultimate and final authority on
what is morally permissible, and it is the obligation of the individual to follow their
conscience even if it contradicts or acts against Church teaching. I believe that, but I also
believe the liberation theologists could benefit from a more rigorous examen to reach a higher
sense of discernment and a truly informed conscience.
I think the 1986 film "The Mission" captured some of these ideas and struggles very well with
the interplay of Father Gabriel, Roderigo Mendoza and both the secular and religious authorities
of that time. As a product of a Jesuit and Special Forces education, this film resonated with
me.
"... . . . The ability of alcohol to cause short term memory problems and blackouts is due to its effects on an area of the brain called the hippocampus. The hippocampus is a structure that is vital to learning and the formation of memory. ..."
"... Why did no one ask Christine Beasley Ford how much and how often she drank in high school and in college? ..."
Alcohol, Memory, and the Hippocampus
[In adolescents] . . . cognitive processes are exquisitely sensitive to the effects of
chemicals such as alcohol. Among the most serious problems is the disruption of memory, or
the ability to recall information that was previously learned. When a person drinks
alcohol, (s)he can have a "blackout."
A blackout can involve a small memory disruption, like forgetting someone's name, or it can
be more serious -- the person might not be able to remember key details of an event that
happened while drinking. An inability to remember the entire event is common when a
person drinks 5 or more drinks in a single sitting ("binge").
. . . The ability of alcohol to cause short term memory problems and blackouts is due to
its effects on an area of the brain called the hippocampus. The hippocampus is a structure
that is vital to learning and the formation of memory.
Christine Ford claims her difficulties in her first years in college were due to "trauma"
from the attempted rape. A professor of psychology, Ford used impressive big words, (iirc)
stating that endocrine imprints such traumatic memories on the hippocampus.
So does alcohol.
Why did no one ask Christine Beasley Ford how much and how often she drank in high
school and in college?
"... Their testimony was usually highly emotional and impassioned, leaving an impression very similar to that conveyed last night by Dr. Ford. ..."
"... The "Recovered" (or "False") Memory Syndrome movement emerged in the midst of the steadily radicalizing Feminist Movement in the United States, probably at the very apogee of its extreme evolution, and was a movement in which Freudian therapy was central and Freudian therapists came to play the leading role. ..."
"... It was only after they had been subjected to extensive pseudo-scientific Freudian "therapy," in which sex always lay prominently at the center, that virtually all of these women came forward with these stories. ..."
"... nd, in this dispute the American ultra-Feminists chose to believe and preach the worst, most salacious, and most vicious possible interpretation of Dr. Freud's highly speculative, evidence-less, and – as subsequent study has overwhelmingly shown – completely contrived diagnoses. ..."
"... Beginning with a conviction that cocaine could provide a substantial therapeutic base for solving psychological problems, Freud seems himself to have become for a period a regular consumer of that drug, but subsequently altered the focus of his therapy to hypnosis. After realizing certain limitations to this approach, he shifted again, turning to the so-called "Talking Cure" rooted in provoking word associations, which provided the basis for the classic Freudian method of popular imagination – with the patient reclining on a couch and the good Dr. seated behind with his notebook and pen in hand. This is the method he retained for the rest of his life. ..."
"... The primary fault which has been cited for Freud's methods generally, but which has been particularly critiqued in both hypnosis and the "Talking Cure" as a reason for their invalidation, is the claim that both – at least inadvertently – incorporate the high probability of suggestion from the therapist. ..."
"... Analysis thus follows a circular course, the analyst's theoretical surmise being first subtly communicated to the patient, then confirmed by the patient's casting of his (or, more often her) own ideas within the framework which had been suggested by the analyst. In the end, nothing new is actually discovered. The patient merely replicates the expressed Freudian doctrine. ..."
"... Those women patients, and a few men, became their victims, but in turn became the perpetrators in the savaging of numerous men's lives, as these men were subjected to the most vicious accusations imaginable. Most of these accusations were, in retrospect, clearly fantasies in a ruthless mid-20th century male-witch hunt. ..."
"... Into this popular intellectual desert walks Dr. Ford, both whose personal history and her strange physical mannerisms in testimony before the Senate clearly indicate she has unfortunately suffered some form of serious psychological disturbance. ..."
"... Seemingly alienated from her own parents and most immediate family members, she has made her home as far away from the Washington, DC area ..."
"... In 2012 she underwent some sort of psychological counseling with her husband, though the details as far as I know have not emerged. But, it hardly seems likely coincidental that her first documentable expressions of antipathy to Judge Kavanaugh occurred in that year, when it was announced that Judge Kavanaugh was considered the likely Supreme Court appointee should Mit Romney win the Presidential election. Her expressions of antipathy to him have only grown from there. ..."
"... Use of weapons and tactics, of which the defender is unprepared for, is a good offense. ..."
"... Are Republicans et al. unable to understand basic military strategy? Do we lack the ability to conceive of new tactics and weapons to use against Democrats and Globalists? ..."
"... I realize that it is unacceptable to attack this poor helpless victim so the "it can't be corroborated" card has to be played. However, who else notices how carefully manicured these charges are such that they can never be falsified? This is the actual proof she is a liar and this whole thing is staged. ..."
"... She always takes everybody on some emotional ride right up to the point where she could be exposed but never with enough information so somebody could come out of the woodwork and prove she is a liar. ..."
"... We also have the infamous letter where we are repeatedly reminded she mailed it BEFORE Kavanaugh was picked. Of course, we only have Feinstein's word for that since nobody saw it until after this crap started. The delay was used to push up the story with new revelation about Mike Judge in a grocery store that shied away from her – again with no specific date so Judge could prove she is a liar. ..."
"... We also have all of our own recollections of high school insecurities and male-female interactions. What freshman or sophomore girl didn't get all giddy at the thought of the older guys hitting on her so she could tell all her friends about her older boyfriend ..."
"... Outside doors enter public areas kitchen sunroom living rooms not bedrooms. An outside door into a master bedroom with attached bathroom is a red flag that it's intended for an illegal what's called in law apartment ..."
"... Your post is very perceptive and just might be how it all went down. With the complications of couples' counseling over her demand for the bizarre double main entry doors. (lulz) Though I would think any family that built an illegal in-law apartment into their Palo Alto house and deployed it, would be ratted out by their neighbors. ..."
We still have to wait to see whether Judge Kavanaugh's appointment will go through, so the most important practical consequence
of this shameful exercise in character assassination is as yet unknown. I'm pretty sure he'll eventually be appointed.
But, I think some critical theoretical aspects of the context in which this battle was waged were definitively clarified in
the course of this shameful and hugely destructive effort by the Democrat leadership to destroy Judge Kavanaugh's reputation in
pursuit of narrow political advantage. On balance, although Judge Kavanaugh and his family were the ones who had to pay the price
for this bitter learning experience, all of us should be the long-term beneficiaries of this contest's central but often hidden
issues being brought to light and subjected to rational analysis. I want to show what I think these hidden issues are.
What this sordid affair was all about was the zombie-like return-from-the-dead of a phenomenon exposed and pretty much completely
invalidated more than thirty years ago, which never should have been permitted to raise its ugly head before an assembly of rational,
educated Americans: the "Recovered Memory" (aka "False Memory") Syndrome movement of the 1980s, in which numerous troubled, frequently
mentally off-balance, women (and a few men) came forward to declare that they had been the victims of incestual sexual abuse –
most often actual sexual intercourse – at the hands of mature male family members; usually fathers but sometimes uncles, grandfathers,
or others.
Their testimony was usually highly emotional and impassioned, leaving an impression very similar to that conveyed last
night by Dr. Ford. Many hearers were completely convinced that these events had occurred. I recall having a discussion in
the 1990s with two American women who swore up and down that they believed fully 25% of American women had been forced into sexual
intercourse with their fathers. I was dumbfounded that they could believe such a thing. But, vast numbers of American women did
believe this at that time, and many – perhaps most – may never have looked sufficiently into the follow-up to these testimonials
to realize that the vast majority of such bizarre claims had subsequently been definitively proven invalid.
The "Recovered" (or "False") Memory Syndrome movement emerged in the midst of the steadily radicalizing Feminist Movement
in the United States, probably at the very apogee of its extreme evolution, and was a movement in which Freudian therapy was central
and Freudian therapists came to play the leading role.
It was only after they had been subjected to extensive pseudo-scientific Freudian "therapy," in which sex always lay prominently
at the center, that virtually all of these women came forward with these stories. A major controversy, which arose within
the ranks of the Freudians themselves over what was the correct understanding of the Master's teachings, lay at the core of the
whole affair. A nd, in this dispute the American ultra-Feminists chose to believe and preach the worst, most salacious, and
most vicious possible interpretation of Dr. Freud's highly speculative, evidence-less, and – as subsequent study has overwhelmingly
shown – completely contrived diagnoses.
It's now known that Dr. Freud's journey to the theoretical positions which had become orthodoxy among his followers by the
mid-20th century had followed a strange, little known, possibly deliberately self-obscured, and clearly unorthodox course.
Beginning with a conviction that cocaine could provide a substantial therapeutic base for solving psychological problems, Freud
seems himself to have become for a period a regular consumer of that drug, but subsequently altered the focus of his therapy to
hypnosis. After realizing certain limitations to this approach, he shifted again, turning to the so-called "Talking Cure" rooted
in provoking word associations, which provided the basis for the classic Freudian method of popular imagination – with the patient
reclining on a couch and the good Dr. seated behind with his notebook and pen in hand. This is the method he retained for the
rest of his life.
The primary fault which has been cited for Freud's methods generally, but which has been particularly critiqued in both
hypnosis and the "Talking Cure" as a reason for their invalidation, is the claim that both – at least inadvertently – incorporate
the high probability of suggestion from the therapist. In this view, patient testimony moves subtly, and probably without
the patient's awareness, from whatever his or her own understanding might originally have been to the interpretation implicitly
propounded by the analyst. Analysis thus follows a circular course, the analyst's theoretical surmise being first subtly communicated
to the patient, then confirmed by the patient's casting of his (or, more often her) own ideas within the framework which had been
suggested by the analyst. In the end, nothing new is actually discovered. The patient merely replicates the expressed Freudian
doctrine.
The particular doctrine at hand was undergoing a critical reworking at this very time, and this important reconsideration of
the Master's meaning almost certainly constituted a major, likely the predominating, factor which facilitated the emergence of
the Recovered Memory Syndrome movement. Freudian orthodoxy at that time included as an important – seemingly its key – component
the conviction of a child's (even an infant's) sexuality, as expressed through the hypothesized Oedipus Complex for males, and
the corresponding Electra Complex for females. In these complexes, Freud speculated that sexually-based neuroses derived from
the child's (or infant's) fear of imagined enmity and possible physical threat from the same-sex parent, because of the younger
individual's sexual longing for the opposite-sex parent.
This Freudian idea, entirely new to European, American, and probably most other cultures, that children, even infants, were
the possessors of an already well-developed sexuality had been severely challenged by Christian and some other traditional authorities,
and had been met with repugnance from many individuals in Western society. But, the doctrine, as it then stood, was subject to
a further major questioning in the mid-1980s from Freudian historical researcher Jeffrey Masson, who postulated, after examining
a collection of Freud's personal writings long kept from popular examination, that the Child Sexual Imagination thesis itself
was a pusillanimous and ethically-unjustified retreat from an even more sinister thesis the Master had originally held, but which
he had subsequently abandoned because of the controversy and damage to his own career its expression would likely cause. This
was the belief, based on many of his earlier interviews of mostly women patients, that it wasn't their imaginations which lay
behind their neuroses. They had told him that they had actually been either raped or molested as infants or young girls by their
fathers. This was the secret horror hidden away in those long-suppressed writings, now brought into the light of day by Prof.
Masson.
Masson's research conclusions were initially widely welcomed within the psychoanalytical fraternity/sorority and shortly melded
with the already raging desire of many ultra-Feminist extremists to place the blame for whatever problems and dissatisfactions
women in America were encountering in their lives upon the patriarchal society by which they claimed to be oppressed. The problem
was men. Countless fathers were raping their daughters. Wow! What an incentive to revolutionary Feminist insurrection! You couldn't
find a much better justification for their man-hate than that. Bring on the Feminist Revolution! Men are not only a menace, they
are no longer even necessary for procreation, so let's get rid of them entirely. This is the sort of extreme plan some radical
Feminists advocated. Many psychoanalysts became their professional facilitators, providing the illusion of medical validation
to the stories the analysts themselves had largely engendered. Those women patients, and a few men, became their victims,
but in turn became the perpetrators in the savaging of numerous men's lives, as these men were subjected to the most vicious accusations
imaginable. Most of these accusations were, in retrospect, clearly fantasies in a ruthless mid-20th century male-witch hunt.
This radical ideology is built upon the conviction that Dr. Freud, in at least this one of his several historical phases of
interpretative psychological analysis, was really on to something. But, subsequent evaluation has largely shown that not to be
the case. The same critique which had been delivered against the Child Sexual Imagination version of Freud's "Talking Cure" analytical
method was equally relevant to this newly discovered Father Molestation thesis: all such notions had been subtly communicated
to the patient by the analyst in the course of the interview. Had thousands, hundreds of thousands, even millions of European
and American women really been raped or molested by their fathers? Freud offered no corroborating evidence of any kind, and I
think it's the consensus of most competent contemporary psychoanalysts to reject this idea. Those few who retain a belief in it
betray, I think, an ideological commitment to Radical Feminism, for whose proponents such a view offers an ever tempting platform
to justify their monstrous plans for the future of a human race in which males are subjected to the status of slaves or are entirely
eliminated.
But, the judicious conclusions of science often – perhaps usually – fail to promptly percolate down to the comprehension of
common humanity on the street, and within the consequent vacuum of understanding scheming politicians can frequently find opportunity
to manipulate, obfuscate, and distort facts in order to facilitate their own devious and often highly destructive schemes. Such,
I fear, is the situation which has surrounded Dr. Ford. The average American of either sex has absolutely no familiarity with
the history, character, or ultimate fate of the Recovered Memory Syndrome movement, and may well fail to realize that the phenomenon
has been nearly entirely disproved.
Into this popular intellectual desert walks Dr. Ford, both whose personal history and her strange physical mannerisms in
testimony before the Senate clearly indicate she has unfortunately suffered some form of serious psychological disturbance.
Seemingly alienated from her own parents and most immediate family members, she has made her home as far away from the
Washington, DC area where she was born as possible within the territorial limits of the continental United States. The focus
of her professional research and practice in the field of psychology has lain in therapeutic treatment to overcome mental and
emotional trauma, a problem she has acknowledged has been her own disturbing preoccupation for many decades. In 2012 she underwent
some sort of psychological counseling with her husband, though the details as far as I know have not emerged. But, it hardly seems
likely coincidental that her first documentable expressions of antipathy to Judge Kavanaugh occurred in that year, when it was
announced that Judge Kavanaugh was considered the likely Supreme Court appointee should Mit Romney win the Presidential election.
Her expressions of antipathy to him have only grown from there.
Dr. Ford is clearly an unfortunate victim of something or someone, but I don't believe it was Judge Kavanaugh. Almost certainly
she has been influenced in her denunciations against him by both that long-term preoccupation with her own sense of psychological
injury, whatever may have been its cause, and her professional familiarization with contemporary currents of psychological theory,
however fallacious, likely mediated by the ministrations of that unnamed counselor in 2012. Subsequently, she has clearly been
exploited mercilessly by the scheming Democratic Party officials who have viciously plotted to turn her plight to their own cynical
advantage. As in so many cases during the 1980s Recovered Memory movement, she has almost certainly been transformed by both the
scientifically unproven doctrines and the conscienceless practitioners of Freudian mysticism from being merely an innocent victim
into an active victimizer – doubling, tripling, or even quadrupling the pain inherent in her own tragic situation and aggressively
projecting it upon helpless others, in this case Judge Kavanaugh and his entire family. She is not a heroine.
A recovered memory from more than five decades ago. Violet Elizabeth, a irritating younger child who tended to tag along,
often wore expensive Kate Greenaway dresses. Her family was new money.
William was no misogynist, though. He liked and respected Joan, who was his friend. The second William book is online.
Rules-of-thumb
-- -- -- -- -- -- -
1. A good offense is the best defense.
2. An ambush backed up by overwhelming force is a good offense.
3. Use of weapons and tactics, of which the defender is unprepared for, is a good offense.
Are Republicans et al. unable to understand basic military strategy? Do we lack the ability to conceive of new tactics
and weapons to use against Democrats and Globalists?
I realize that it is unacceptable to attack this poor helpless victim so the "it can't be corroborated" card has to be played.
However, who else notices how carefully manicured these charges are such that they can never be falsified? This is the actual
proof she is a liar and this whole thing is staged.
She always takes everybody on some emotional ride right up to the point where she could be exposed but never with enough
information so somebody could come out of the woodwork and prove she is a liar.
We also have the infamous letter where we are repeatedly reminded she mailed it BEFORE Kavanaugh was picked. Of course, we
only have Feinstein's word for that since nobody saw it until after this crap started. The delay was used to push up the story
with new revelation about Mike Judge in a grocery store that shied away from her – again with no specific date so Judge could
prove she is a liar. This all reeks of testimony gone over and coached by a team of lawyers.
We also have all of our own recollections of high school insecurities and male-female interactions. What freshman or sophomore
girl didn't get all giddy at the thought of the older guys hitting on her so she could tell all her friends about her older
boyfriend
and possibility of going to the prom as a lower classman? All he had to do (assuming he wasn't repulsive physically and he was
a bit of a jock) was make the usual play of pretending to be interested and he likely would have been at least getting to first
base at the party.
From her pictures she was no Pamela Anderson and would likely have been flattered. The idea that you rape someone
without trying to get the milk handed to you on a silver platter is ridiculous.
This is another female driven hysteria based on lies like the child molestation and satanic cult hysterias of years past. Those
were all driven by crazy or politically motivated women who whipped up the rest of the ignorant females.
Outside doors enter public areas kitchen sunroom living rooms not bedrooms. An outside door into a master bedroom
with attached bathroom is a red flag that it's intended for an illegal what's called in law apartment
Your post is very perceptive and just might be how it all went down. With the complications of couples' counseling over her
demand for the bizarre double main entry doors. (lulz) Though I would think any family that built an illegal in-law apartment
into their Palo Alto house and deployed it, would be ratted out by their neighbors.
"... " The Republican and Democratic parties, or, to be more exact, the Republican-Democratic party, represent the capitalist class in the class struggle. They are the political wings of the capitalist system and such differences as arise between them relate to spoils and not to principles ..."
"... "The real question before the American people is why are they, the media, the government, MeToo feminists, the Identity Politics Democrats and liberal-progressive-left, and conservatives stone silent while Washington enables Saudia Arabia to murder the Yemeni people to the point that Yemenis have to eat leaves in a desperate attempt to survive." ..."
"... Why are vastly more people wondering whether Ford's accusations are true than those wondering how to change our FUBAR/SNAFU political system? ..."
" The Republican and Democratic parties, or, to be more exact, the Republican-Democratic party, represent the capitalist class
in the class struggle. They are the political wings of the capitalist system and such differences as arise between them relate to
spoils and not to principles ."
(The Socialist Party and the Working Class". Eugene V. Debs' opening speech as Presidential candidate of the Socialist Party in
Indianapolis, Indiana, www.marxists.org . September 1, 1904. )
I haven't paid any attention to the "Kavanaugh hearings" other than reading some headlines and some comments here and there. It's
not that I don't care about the Supreme Court, although my paying attention to this bullshit won't change a damn thing, it's more
that the entire spectacle of watching this country's political system in action, with or without sex crime accusations, makes me
sick.
I'm writing this because I clicked on an article titled,
"More Like a
Hijacking Than A Democracy, Senator Graham" because the reference to democracy interested me (we don't live in one for the ten
thousandth time). I scanned the article, which has a photo of Lindsey Graham and some suits against a wood grained background of
political importance, and saw it contained information about the process and system being followed by the oligarchy controlled duopoly.
At this point in my life, I'm adamantly against having a "Supreme" court with nine One Percenter assholes appointed for LIFE by
the duopoly unrepresentatives having the power of life, death or misery over hundreds of millions of people, and beyond when it comes
down to it. What bullshit. As with everything else in our national political system, the system and process has become so warped,
corrupt, partisan and ideological it's pathetic.
Plenty of people are asking why the process is unfolding the way it is, with the sex allegations as the focal point, but very
few are asking why we have a system like this at all. Why do we need this? Who and what is this for? Aren't there better options?
Why are we letting all these assholes do this to us? WHY do we let the corrupt and oligarchy controlled democratic and republican
parties completely control this process? In the end, isn't this just another example of how fucked up our political system is at
the national level?
"The real question before the American people is why are they, the media, the government, MeToo feminists, the Identity Politics
Democrats and liberal-progressive-left, and conservatives stone silent while Washington enables Saudia Arabia to murder the Yemeni
people to the point that Yemenis have to eat leaves in a desperate attempt to survive."
Kind of the same old, same old Paul. I think the real question is why can't enough of us organize together to challenge those that
rule us. I mean really challenge, like revolution type challenge. Overthrow these motherfuckers type challenge. This isn't new. Look
at that Debs quote, 1904. Nothing is new, we keep doing the same shit over and over. Maybe that's just the way it is, but then again,
we're smarter than that aren't we? Why aren't more people calling for/demanding radical change to our fucked up political system
completely controlled by the rich? Why are vastly more people wondering whether Ford's accusations are true than those wondering
how to change our FUBAR/SNAFU political system?
They're doing all this shit and then we're going to have another election. Shit.
The Kavanaugh confirmation process has been a missed opportunity for the United States to
face up to many urgent issues on which the bi-partisans in Washington, DC are united and
wrong.
Kavanaugh's career as
a Republican legal operative and judge supporting the power of corporations, the security
state and abusive foreign policy should have been put on trial. The hearings could have
provided an opportunity to confront the security state, use of torture, mass spying and the
domination of money in politics and oligarchy as he has had an important role in each of
these.
Kavanaugh's behavior as a teenager who likely drank too much and was inappropriately
aggressive and abusive with women, perhaps even attempting rape, must also be confronted. In an
era where patriarchy and mistreatment of women are being challenged, Kavanaugh is the wrong
nominee for this important time. However, sexual assault should not be a distraction that keeps
the public's focus off other issues raised by his career as a conservative political
activist.
The Security State, Mass Spying and Torture
A central issue of our era is the US security state -- mass spying on emails, Internet
activity, texts and phone calls. Judge Kavanough
enabled invasive spying on everyone in the United States . He described mass surveillance
as "entirely consistent" with the US Constitution. This manipulation of the law turns the
Constitution upside down a it clearly requires probable cause and a search warrant for the
government to conduct searches.
Kavanaugh
explained in a decision, "national security . . . outweighs the impact on privacy
occasioned by this [NSA] program." This low regard for protecting individual privacy should
have been enough for a majority of the Senate to say this nominee is inappropriate for the
court.
Kavanaugh ruled multiple times that police have the
power to search people, emphasizing "reasonableness" as the standard for searching people.
He ruled broadly for the police in searches conducted on the street without a warrant and for
broader use of drug testing of federal employees. Kavanaugh applauded Justice Rehnquist's views
on the Fourth Amendment, which favored police searches by defining probable cause in a flexible
way and creating a broad exception for when the government has "special needs" to search
without a warrant or probable cause. In this era of police abuse through stop and frisk, jump
out squads and searches when driving (or walking or running) while black, Kavanaugh is the
wrong nominee and should be disqualified.
Kavanaugh also played a role in the Bush torture policy. Torture is against US
and international law , certainly facilitating torture should be disqualifying not only as
a justice but
should result in disbarment as a lawyer . Kavanaugh was appointed by President Trump, who
once vowed he would "bring back waterboarding and a hell of a lot worse than
waterboarding." Minimizing torture is demonstrated in his rulings, e.g. not protecting
prisoners at risk of torture and not allowing people to sue the government on allegations of
torture.
Torture is a landmine in the Senate, so
Kavanaugh misled the Senate likely committing perjury on torture . In his 2006
confirmation, he said he was "not involved" in "questions about the rules governing detention
of combatants." Tens of thousands of documents have been kept secret by the White House about
Kavanaugh from the Bush era. Even so, during these confirmation hearings documents related to
the nomination of a lawyer involved in the torture program showed
Kavanaugh's role in torture policies leading Senator Dick Durbin to write : "It is clear
now that not only did Judge Kavanaugh mislead me when it came to his involvement in the Bush
Administration's detention and interrogation policies, but also regarding his role in the
controversial Haynes nomination."
Durbin spoke more broadly about perjury writing: "This is a theme that we see emerge with
Judge Kavanaugh time and time again – he says one thing under oath, and then the
documents tell a different story. It is no wonder the White House and Senate Republicans are
rushing through this nomination and hiding much of Judge Kavanaugh's record -- the questions
about this nominee's credibility are growing every day." The long list of
perjury allegations should be investigated and if proven should result in him not being
confirmed.
This should have been enough to stop the process until documents were released to reveal
Kavanaugh's role as Associate White House Counsel under George Bush from 2001 to 2003 and
as his White House Staff Secretary from 2003 to 2006. Unfortunately, Democrats have been
complicit in allowing torture as well, e.g. the Obama administration never prosecuted anyone
accused of torture and advanced the careers of people involved in torture.
Shouldn't the risk of having a torture facilitator on the Supreme Court be enough to stop
this nomination?
Corporate Power vs Protecting People and the Planet
In this era of corporate power, Kavanaugh sides with the corporations. Ralph Nader
describes him as a corporation masquerading as a judge . He narrowly limited the powers of
federal agencies to curtail corporate power and to protect the interests of the people and
planet.
This is evident in cases where Kavanaugh has favored
reducing restrictions on polluting corporations. He dissented in cases where the majority ruled
in favor of environmental protection but has never dissented where the majority ruled against
protecting the environment. He ruled against agencies seeking to protect clean air and water.
If Kavanaugh is on the court, it will be much harder to hold corporations responsible for the
damage they have done to the climate, the environment or health.
Kavanaugh takes the side of businesses over their workers with a consistent history of
anti-union and anti-labor rulings. A few examples of many, he ruledin favor of the Trump Organizatio
n throwing out the results of a union election,
sided with the management of Sheldon Adelson's Venetian Casino Resort upholding the
casino's First Amendment
right to summon police against workers engaged in a peaceful demonstration -- for which
they had a permit, affirmed the Department of Defense's discretion to negate
the collective bargaining rights of employees, and overturned an NLRB ruling that allowed
Verizon workers to display pro-union signs on company property despite having given up the
right to picket in their collective bargaining agreement. In this time of labor unrest and
mistreatment of workers, Kavanaugh will be a detriment to workers rights.
Kavanough
opposed the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) ruling in favor of net neutrality,
which forbids telecom companies from discrimination on the Internet. He argued net neutrality
violated the First Amendment rights of Internet Service Providers (ISP) and was beyond the
power granted to the FCC. He put the rights of big corporations ahead of the people having a
free and open Internet. The idea that an ISP has a right to control what it allows on the
Internet could give corporations great control over what people see on the Internet. It is a
very dangerous line of reasoning in this era of corporations curtailing news that challenges
the mainstream narrative.
Kavanaugh will be friendly to powerful business and the interests of the wealthy on the
Supreme Court, and will tend to stand in the way of efforts by administrative agencies to
regulate them and by people seeking greater rights.
On the third day of his confirmation hearings, Judge Brett Kavanaugh seemed to refer to the
use of contraception as "abortion-inducing drugs ." It was a discussion of a case where
Kavanaugh dissented from the majority involving the Priests for Life's challenge to the
Affordable Care Act (ACA). Kavanaugh opposed the requirement that all health plans cover birth
control, claiming that IUDs and emergency contraception were an infringement of their free
exercise of religion.
Kavanaugh clerked for Judge Kosinski who he describes as a mentor. Kosinski was forced to
resign after being accused of harassing at least 12 women in the sanctity of his judicial
chambers. Kavanaugh swears he never saw any signs that the judge was sexually harassing
women, but the Democrats did not ask a single question about it.
Multiple accusers
have come forward to allege Kavanaugh's involvement in sexual assault and abuse. While Dr.
Christine Blasey Ford is viewed as credible – she was the only witness allowed to testify
– it is not clear these allegations will be thoroughly reviewed. After being approved by
the committee, the Republican leadership and President Trump agreed on a limited FBI
investigation. It is unclear
whether the FBI will be allowed to follow all the evidence and question all the witnesses.
As we write this newsletter, the outcome has yet to unfold but Jeffrey St.
Clair at Countpunch points out, "the FBI investigation will be overseen by director
Christopher Wray, who was two years behind Brett-boy at both Yale and Yale Law. After
graduation, they entered the same rightwing political orbit and both took jobs in the Bush
Administration. How do you think it's going to turn out?"
Why don't Democrats, as Ralph Nader
suggests , hold their own hearing and question all the witnesses? If there is corroborating
evidence for the accusers, Kavanaugh should not be approved.
During his confirmation process, in response to the accusations of assault, he claimed they
were "a calculated and orchestrated political hit" and "revenge on behalf of the Clinton's." He
demonstrated partisan anger and displayed a lack of judicial temperament, making him unfit to
serve on the Supreme Court.
Kavanaugh exposes the true partisan nature of the highest court, which is not a neutral
arbiter but another battleground for partisan politics. The lack of debate on issues of spying,
torture and more shows both parties support a court that protects the security state and
corporate interests over people and planet. Accusations of sexual assault must be confronted,
but there are many reasons Kavanaugh should not be on the court. The confirmation process
undermines the court's legitimacy and highlights bi-partisan corruption.
An interesting hypothesis. CIA definitly became a powerful political force in the USA -- a rogue political force which starting from JFK assasination tries to control who is elected to important offices. But in truth Cavanaugh is a pro-CIA candidate so to speak. So why CIA would try to derail him.
Notable quotes:
"... I think I've figured out why they had to go to couples counseling about an outside door and why she came up with claim that she needed an outside bedroom door because she'd been assaulted 37 years ago. The Palo Alto building codes for single family homes were created to make sure single family homes remained single family and weren't chopped up into apartments. ..."
"... An outside door into a master bedroom with attached bathroom is a red flag that it's intended for an illegal what's called in law apartment ..."
"... So she wants the door. Husband says waste of money and trouble. Contractor says call me when you're ready. So they go to counseling Husband explains why the door's unreasonable. Therapist asks wife why she " really deep down" needs the door. Wife makes up the story about attempted rape 35 years ago flashbacks If only there were 2 doors in that imaginary bedroom she could have escaped. ..."
"... Kacanaugh was nominated. CIA searched for sex problems in his working life. Found nothing Searched law school and college found nothing. In desperation searched high school found nothing. Searched CIA personnel records which go back to grade school and found one of their own employees was about Kavanaugh's age and attended a high school near his and the students socialized. ..."
"... She's 3rd generation CIA. grandfather assistant director. Father CIA contractor who managed CIA unofficial band accounts. And she runs a CIA recruitment office. ..."
I think I've figured out why they had to go to couples counseling about an outside door and why she came up with claim
that she needed an outside bedroom door because she'd been assaulted 37 years ago. The Palo Alto building codes for single family
homes were created to make sure single family homes remained single family and weren't chopped up into apartments.
Outside doors enter public areas kitchen sunroom living rooms not bedrooms. An outside door into a master bedroom with
attached bathroom is a red flag that it's intended for an illegal what's called in law apartment
There's a unit It's a stove 2 ft counter space and sink. The stoves electric and plugs into an ordinary household electricity.
It's backed against the bathroom wall. Break through the wall, connect the pipes running water for the sink. Add an outside door
and it's a small apartment.
Assume they didn't want to make it an apartment just a master bedroom. Usually the contractor pulls the permits routinely.
But an outside bedroom door is complicated. The permits will cost more. It might require an exemption and a hearing They night
need a lawyer. And they might not get the permit.
So she wants the door. Husband says waste of money and trouble. Contractor says call me when you're ready. So they go to
counseling Husband explains why the door's unreasonable. Therapist asks wife why she " really deep down" needs the door. Wife
makes up the story about attempted rape 35 years ago flashbacks If only there were 2 doors in that imaginary bedroom she could
have escaped.
Kacanaugh was nominated. CIA searched for sex problems in his working life. Found nothing Searched law school and college
found nothing. In desperation searched high school found nothing. Searched CIA personnel records which go back to grade school
and found one of their own employees was about Kavanaugh's age and attended a high school near his and the students socialized.
She's 3rd generation CIA. grandfather assistant director. Father CIA contractor who managed CIA unofficial band accounts.
And she runs a CIA recruitment office.
... it appears that 21st century sexual politics now affords women the best of all worlds. She may now participate as an equal
in dorm party drinking games with men.
And yet she remains so vulnerable that 35 years later an alleged incident involving the exposure of a (presumably flaccid)
male member - as a result of such activities - seemingly merits serious investigation as an 'assault'...
As commented elsewhere, all her screeching about double standards for women are utter BS. She
broke the rules while playing against another woman and not a man. The men's tennis league is
utterly irrelevant since she may as well have compared her league to men's football. She
failed by the standards of her league and not those of another. It was clear that she was
breaking the rules of her league and she was the one that escalated the conflict. It has
nothing to do with women's rights.
The PC drones are rather mentally deficient. They respond to trigger phrases and not to
concepts or principles.
Australian cartoonist Mark Knight is in trouble with J K Rowling and other self-styled
guardians of who may portray Serena Williams in meltdown and who may not. The offending
drawing below:
"... The identity politics phenomenon sweeping across the Western world is a divide and conquer strategy that prevents the emergence of a genuine resistance to the elites. ..."
"... Each subgroup, increasingly alienated from all others, focuses on the shared identity and unique experiences of its members and prioritises its own empowerment. Anyone outside this subgroup is demoted to the rank of ally, at best. ..."
"... Precious time is spent fighting against those deemed less oppressed and telling them to 'check their privilege' as the ever-changing pecking order of the 'Oppression Olympics' plays out. The rules to this sport are as fluid as the identities taking part. One of the latest dilemmas affecting the identity politics movement is the issue of whether men transitioning to women deserve recognition and acceptance or 'whether trans women aren't women and are apparently " raping ..."
"... It is much easier to 'struggle' against an equally or slightly less oppressed group than to take the time and effort to unite with them against the common enemy - capitalism. ..."
"... There is a carefully crafted misconception that identity politics derives from Marxist thought and the meaningless phrase 'cultural Marxism', which has more to do with liberal culture than Marxism, is used to sell this line of thinking. Not only does identity politics have nothing in common with Marxism, socialism or any other strand of traditional left-wing thought, it is anathema to the very concept. ..."
"... 'An injury to one is an injury to all' has been replaced with something like 'An injury to me is all that matters'. No socialist country, whether in practice or in name only, promoted identity politics. Neither the African and Asian nations that liberated themselves from colonialist oppression nor the USSR and Eastern Bloc states nor the left-wing movements that sprung up across Latin America in the early 21st century had any time to play identity politics. ..."
"... The idea that identity politics is part of traditional left-wing thought is promoted by the right who seek to demonise left wing-movements, liberals who seek to infiltrate, backstab and destroy said left-wing movements, and misguided young radicals who know nothing about political theory and have neither the patience nor discipline to learn. The last group seek a cheap thrill that makes them feel as if they have shaken the foundations of the establishment when in reality they strengthen it. ..."
"... Identity politics is typically a modern middle-class led phenomenon that helps those in charge keep the masses divided and distracted. ..."
"... Think your friends would be interested? Share this story! ..."
"... Tomasz Pierscionek is a doctor specialising in psychiatry. He was previously on the board of the charity Medact, is editor of the London Progressive Journal and has appeared as a guest on RT's Sputnik and Al-Mayadeen's Kalima Horra. ..."
The
identity politics phenomenon sweeping across the Western world is a divide and conquer strategy
that prevents the emergence of a genuine resistance to the elites. A core principle of
socialism is the idea of an overarching supra-national solidarity that unites the international
working class and overrides any factor that might divide it, such as nation, race, or gender.
Workers of all nations are partners, having equal worth and responsibility in a struggle
against those who profit from their brain and muscle.
Capitalism, especially in its most evolved, exploitative and heartless form - imperialism -
has wronged certain groups of people more than others. Colonial empires tended to reserve their
greatest brutality for subjugated peoples whilst the working class of these imperialist nations
fared better in comparison, being closer to the crumbs that fell from the table of empire. The
international class struggle aims to liberate all people everywhere from the drudgery of
capitalism regardless of their past or present degree of oppression. The phrase 'an injury
to one is an injury to all' encapsulates this mindset and conflicts with the idea of
prioritising the interests of one faction of the working class over the entire collective.
Since the latter part of the 20th century, a liberally-inspired tendency has taken root
amongst the Left (in the West at least) that encourages departure from a single identity based
on class in favour of multiple identities based upon one's gender, sexuality, race or any other
dividing factor. Each subgroup, increasingly alienated from all others, focuses on the
shared identity and unique experiences of its members and prioritises its own empowerment.
Anyone outside this subgroup is demoted to the rank of ally, at best.
At the time of writing there are apparently over
70 different gender options in the West, not to mention numerous sexualities - the
traditional LGBT acronym has thus far grown to LGBTQQIP2SAA
. Adding race to the mix results in an even greater number of possible permutations or
identities. Each subgroup has its own ideology. Precious time is spent fighting against
those deemed less oppressed and telling them to 'check their privilege' as the ever-changing
pecking order of the 'Oppression Olympics' plays out. The rules to this sport are as fluid as
the identities taking part. One of the latest dilemmas affecting the identity politics movement
is the issue of whether men transitioning to women deserve recognition and acceptance or
'whether trans women aren't women and are apparently " raping "
lesbians'.
The ideology of identity politics asserts that the straight white male is at the apex of the
privilege pyramid, responsible for the oppression of all other groups. His original sin
condemns him to everlasting shame. While it is true that straight white men (as a group) have
faced less obstacles than females, non-straight men or ethnic minorities, the majority of
straight white men, past and present, also struggle to survive from paycheck to paycheck and
are not personally involved in the oppression of any other group. While most of the world's
wealthiest
individuals are Caucasian males, millions of white men exist who are both poor and
powerless. The idea of 'whiteness' is itself an ambiguous concept involving racial profiling.
For example, the Irish, Slavs and Ashkenazi Jews may look white yet have suffered more than
their fair share of famines, occupations and genocides throughout the centuries. The idea of
tying an individual's privilege to their appearance is itself a form of racism dreamed up by
woolly minded, liberal (some might say privileged) 'intellectuals' who would be superfluous in
any socialist society.
Is the middle-class ethnic minority lesbian living in Western Europe more oppressed than the
whitish looking Syrian residing under ISIS occupation? Is the British white working class male
really more privileged than a middle class woman from the same society? Stereotyping based on
race, gender or any other factor only leads to alienation and animosity. How can there be unity
amongst the Left if we are only loyal to ourselves and those most like us? Some 'white' men who
feel the Left has nothing to offer them have decided to play the identity politics game in
their search of salvation and have drifted towards supporting Trump (a billionaire with whom
they have nothing in common) or far-right movements, resulting in further alienation, animosity
and powerlessness which in turn only strengthens the position of the top 1%. People around the
world are more divided by class than any other factor.
It is much easier to 'struggle' against an equally or slightly less oppressed group than
to take the time and effort to unite with them against the common enemy - capitalism.
Fighting oppression through identity politics is at best a lazy, perverse and fetishistic form
of the class struggle led by mostly liberal, middle class and tertiary-educated activists who
understand little of left-wing political theory. At worst it is yet another tool used by the
top 1% to divide the other 99% into 99 or 999 different competing groups who are too
preoccupied with fighting their own little corner to challenge the status quo. It is ironic
that one of the major donors to the faux-left identity politics movement is the privileged
white cisgender male billionaire
George Soros , whose NGOs helped orchestrate the Euromaidan protests in Ukraine that gave
way to the emergence of far right and neo-nazi movements: the kind of people who believe in
racial superiority and do not look kindly on diversity.
There is a carefully crafted misconception that identity politics derives from Marxist
thought and the meaningless phrase 'cultural Marxism', which has more to do with liberal
culture than Marxism, is used to sell this line of thinking. Not only does identity politics
have nothing in common with Marxism, socialism or any other strand of traditional left-wing
thought, it is anathema to the very concept.
'An injury to one is an injury to all' has been replaced with something like 'An injury
to me is all that matters'. No socialist country, whether in practice or in name only, promoted
identity politics. Neither the African and Asian nations that liberated themselves from
colonialist oppression nor the USSR and Eastern Bloc states nor the left-wing movements that
sprung up across Latin America in the early 21st century had any time to play identity
politics.
The idea that identity politics is part of traditional left-wing thought is promoted by
the right who seek to demonise left wing-movements, liberals who seek to infiltrate, backstab
and destroy said left-wing movements, and misguided young radicals who know nothing about
political theory and have neither the patience nor discipline to learn. The last group seek a
cheap thrill that makes them feel as if they have shaken the foundations of the establishment
when in reality they strengthen it.
Identity politics is typically a modern middle-class led phenomenon that helps those in
charge keep the masses divided and distracted. In the West you are free to choose any
gender or sexuality, transition between these at whim, or perhaps create your own, but you are
not allowed to question the foundations of capitalism or liberalism. Identity politics is the
new opiate of the masses and prevents organised resistance against the system. Segments of the
Western Left even believe such aforementioned 'freedoms' are a bellwether of progress and an
indicator of its cultural superiority, one that warrants export abroad be it softly via NGOs or
more bluntly through colour revolutions and regime change.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
Tomasz Pierscionek is a doctor specialising in psychiatry. He was previously on the
board of the charity Medact, is editor of the London Progressive Journal and has appeared as a
guest on RT's Sputnik and Al-Mayadeen's Kalima Horra.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the
author and do not necessarily represent those of RT. Read more
"... For example, when a Republican talks about "freedom" they don't mean "freedom from want". They mean "freedom from government oppression", but only government oppression. ..."
"... Democrats act the same way about different things. When a Democrat says "diversity", they only mean diversity of race, gender, or sexual orientation. Diversity of ideas? Diversity of class? Not so much. When a Democrat says "privilege" it refers to "white" and "male". Privilege of wealth? (i.e. like the dictionary definition) That generally gets forgotten. ..."
"... -- Preamble to the Constitution of the Industrial Workers Of The World (IWW) ..."
"... @thanatokephaloides ..."
"... -- Preamble to the Constitution of the Industrial Workers Of The World (IWW) ..."
I've come to realize that there's a lot of confusion out there due to people using words with very specific definitions.
For example, when a Republican talks about "freedom" they don't mean "freedom from want".
They mean "freedom from government oppression", but only government oppression.
Private oppression? Republicans will either deny it exists, or justify it.
When a Republican is "pro-life" it only refers to birth.
Because those very same pro-life people are generally pro-war and pro-death penalty.
Democrats act the same way about different things.
When a Democrat says "diversity", they only mean diversity of race, gender, or sexual orientation.
Diversity of ideas? Diversity of class? Not so much.
When a Democrat says "privilege" it refers to "white" and "male".
Privilege of wealth? (i.e. like the dictionary definition) That generally gets forgotten.
And then there is the bipartisan misuse of words, which revolves around war and wealth.
When they say "humanitarian war" they mean, um, some contradictory concepts that are meaningless, but are designed to make you feel
a certain way.
When they say "socialism" they really mean "state oppression" regardless of the economic system.
As for the many version of socialism with minimal or non-existent central governments? Or when socialist programs work? No one talks
about them.
Let's not forget substituting or mixing up "middle class" for "working class".
"Working class" now equals "poor", which isn't right.
They use "working class" as a smear too.
When you say "working class" some people
automatically insert certain words in front of it, as if it's generally understood.
When many hear discussion of outreach to "working class" voters, they silently add the words "white" and "male" and all too often
imagine them working on a factory floor or in construction. They shouldn't. According to another analysis by CAP from late last
year, just under 6 in 10 members of the working class are white, and the group is almost half female (46 percent).
The topic of the needs and interests of the working class is usually race and gender neutral. Only the dishonest or indoctrinated
can't wrap their minds around that fact.This is important because working class values don't require a race or gender lens.
a new report released today by the Center for American Progress makes a convincing argument, using extensive polling data, that
this divide does not need to exist. As it turns out, in many cases, voters -- both college educated and working class, and of
all races -- are in favor of an economic agenda that would offer them broader protections whether it comes to work, sickness or
retirement.
"The polling shows that workers across race support similar views on economic policy issues," said David Madland, the co-author
of the report, entitled "The Working-Class Push for Progressive Economic Policies." "They support a higher minimum wage, higher
taxes on the wealthy, and more spending on healthcare and retirement. There is broad support among workers for progressive economic
policy."
This shows that it's possible to make economic issues front and center in a campaign platform in a way that doesn't just talk
to working class whites and dismisses the concerns of female and minority voters. It also shows that the oft-discussed dilemma
among Democrats -- whether to prioritize college educated voters or working class ones -- may be a false choice.
Propaganda is all about false choices. To accomplish this, the media has created a world in which the working class
exist only in the margins .
With the working class largely unrepresented in the media, or represented only in supporting roles, is it any wonder that people
begin to identify in ways other than their class? Which is exactly what the
ruling class
wants .
I can't believe I used to fall for this nonsense! It takes a stupendous level of cognitive dissonance to simultaneously celebrate
the fortunes of someone from a specific identity while looking past the vast sea of people from said identity who are stuck in
gut-wrenching poverty. We pop champagnes for the neo-gentry while disregarding our own tribulations. It's the most stunning form
of logical jujitsu establishment shills have successfully conditioned us to accept; instead of gauging the health of the economy
and the vitality of our nation based on the collective whole, we have been hoodwinked to accept the elevation of a few as success
for us all.
Diversity has become a scam and nothing more than a corporate bamboozle and a federated scheme that is used to hide the true nature
of crony capitalism. We have become a Potemkin society where tokens are put on the stage to represent equality while the vast
majority of Americans are enslaved by diminishing wages or kneecapped into dependency. The whole of our politics has been turned
into an identity-driven hustle. On both sides of the aisle and at every corner of the social divide are grievance whisperers and
demagogues who keep spewing fuel on the fire of tribalism. They use our pains and suffering to make millions only to turn their
backs on us the minute they attain riches and status.
It's only when you see an article written by the ruling elite, or one that identifies with the ruling elite, that you realize
just how out-of-touch they can be. The rich really
are different - they are sociopaths.
They've totally and completely bought into their own
righteousness,
merit and virtue .
Class ascendance led me to become what Susan Jacoby classifies in her recent New York Times Op-Ed "Stop Apologizing for Being
Elite" as an "elite": a vague description of a group of people who have received advanced degrees. Jacoby urges elites to reject
the shame that they have supposedly recently developed, a shame that somehow stems from failing to stop the working class from
embracing Trumpism. Jacoby laments that, following the 2016 election, these elites no longer take pride in their wealth, their
education, their social status, and posits that if only elites embraced their upward mobility, the working class would have something
to aspire to and thus discard their fondness for Trump and his promises to save them.
That level of condescension just blows my mind. It occurred to me some time ago that I have much more in common with a working
class slob in France, or Mexico, or Brazil, or Russia, than I do with the wealthy elite in my own country. Don't think that the wealthy
haven't figured that out too.
That is the only word you need pay attention to.
I am inferior therefore expendable.
How the lofty will fail. They will succumb to those who are lessor in their minds.
Nice post gjohn.
That is the only word you need pay attention to.
I am inferior therefore expendable.
How the lofty will fail. They will succumb to those who are lessor in their minds.
Nice post gjohn.
It occurred to me some time ago that I have much more in common with a working class slob in France, or Mexico, or Brazil,
or Russia, than a do with the wealthy elite in my own country.
Don't think that the wealthy haven't figured that out too.
The working class and the employing class have nothing in common.
There can be no peace so long as hunger and want are found among
millions of the working people and the few, who make up the employing
class, have all the good things of life.
-- Preamble to the Constitution of the Industrial Workers Of The World (IWW) source
@thanatokephaloides I have been a worker and an employer for most of my career. I associate with many of the same ilk.
None of us working / employer types can afford to hire the millions of under employed. Maybe a few here and there. We are not
wealthy, nor are we taking advantage of the poor. Try to put this lofty idealism into perspective.
It occurred to me some time ago that I have much more in common with a working class slob in France, or Mexico, or Brazil,
or Russia, than a do with the wealthy elite in my own country.
Don't think that the wealthy haven't figured that out too.
The working class and the employing class have nothing in common.
There can be no peace so long as hunger and want are found among
millions of the working people and the few, who make up the employing
class, have all the good things of life.
-- Preamble to the Constitution of the Industrial Workers Of The World (IWW) source
pay $125K per kid for college if you earn more than 125K. That makes zero sense. A parent has no legal obligation to a child
after age 18, but the 18 year old must include parental income if they apply for PELL. If they are included in their parents family,
then the family must be legally obligated to pay for college. 18 can legally die, go to war, be incarcerated, and contractually
bound, but they can't have a drink or be legally entitled to the same rights and benefits as everyone else.
Since the college-educated express less support at any price, it reeks of pettiness and tit for tat. "I paid for mine, you
pay for yours." It is no wonder there is so much resentment at all levels and an economic coalition can't be formed. Somebody
is always measuring who mom loves best. At no time did Bernie say a word about means testing a GD thing. It is why he was able
to transcend labels.
Since the college-educated express less support at any price, it reeks of pettiness and tit for tat. "I paid for mine, you
pay for yours."
Especially when one considers the chances of that being true are really quite small.
Contrary to the Randian beLIEf, they didn't build what they have all by themselves. Society carried quite a bit of the freight
here.
pay $125K per kid for college if you earn more than 125K. That makes zero sense. A parent has no legal obligation to a child
after age 18, but the 18 year old must include parental income if they apply for PELL. If they are included in their parents
family, then the family must be legally obligated to pay for college. 18 can legally die, go to war, be incarcerated, and contractually
bound, but they can't have a drink or be legally entitled to the same rights and benefits as everyone else.
Since the college-educated express less support at any price, it reeks of pettiness and tit for tat. "I paid for mine, you
pay for yours." It is no wonder there is so much resentment at all levels and an economic coalition can't be formed. Somebody
is always measuring who mom loves best. At no time did Bernie say a word about means testing a GD thing. It is why he was able
to transcend labels.
That starts out on disparities in housing, but rounds abouts to the "Elite Class" and the urban gentrification by corporatist
democrats. It points out how the democratic party caters to this elite wing, and how the NIMBY-ism of the elites blocks affordable
housing laws. It ends up with some observations:
"Taking it a step further, a Democratic Party based on urban cosmopolitan business liberalism runs the risk not only of leading
to the continued marginalization of the minority poor, but also -- as the policies of the Trump administration demonstrate --
to the continued neglect of the white working-class electorate that put Trump in the White House."
We really can't afford the wealthy parasite class anymore nor should we suffer their think tanks that make folks worship them
and their lifestyles of indulgence and greed!
"... The American ruling class loves Identity Politics, because Identity Politics divides the people into hostile groups and prevents any resistance to the ruling elite. With blacks screaming at whites, women screaming at men, and homosexuals screaming at heterosexuals, there is no one left to scream at the rulers. ..."
"... Consequently, the ruling elite have funded "black history," "women's studies," and "transgender dialogues," in universities as a way to institutionalize the divisiveness that protects them. These "studies" have replaced real history with fake history. ..."
PCR's latest is really good. I love it when he gets to ripping, and doesn't stop for 2000+ words or so. It reads a lot better
than Toynbee, fersher.
The working class, designated by Hillary Clinton as "the Trump deplorables," is now the victimizer, not the victim. Marxism
has been stood on its head.
The American ruling class loves Identity Politics, because Identity Politics divides the people into hostile groups
and prevents any resistance to the ruling elite. With blacks screaming at whites, women screaming at men, and homosexuals screaming
at heterosexuals, there is no one left to scream at the rulers.
The ruling elite favors a "conversation on race," because the ruling elite know it can only result in accusations that will
further divide society. Consequently, the ruling elite have funded "black history," "women's studies," and "transgender dialogues,"
in universities as a way to institutionalize the divisiveness that protects them. These "studies" have replaced real history
with fake history.
All of America, indeed of the entire West, lives in The Matrix, a concocted [and false] reality. Western peoples are so
propagandized, so brainwashed, that they have no understanding that their disunity was created in order to make them impotent
in the face of a rapacious ruling class, a class whose arrogance and hubris has the world on the brink of nuclear Armageddon.
History as it actually happened is disappearing as those who tell the truth are dismissed as misogynists, racists, homophobes,
Putin agents, terrorist sympathizers, anti-Semites, and conspiracy theorists. Liberals who complained mightily of McCarthyism
now practice it ten-fold.
The United States with its brainwashed and incompetent population -- indeed, the entirety of the Western populations are
incompetent -- and with its absence of intelligent leadership has no chance against Russia and China, two massive countries
arising from their overthrow of police states as the West descends into a gestapo state. The West is over and done with. Nothing
remains of the West but the lies used to control the people. All hope is elsewhere.
"... With the election of 2016, symptoms of the long emergency seeped into the political system. Disinformation rules. There is no coherent consensus about what is happening and no coherent proposals to do anything about it. The two parties are mired in paralysis and dysfunction and the public's trust in them is at epic lows. Donald Trump is viewed as a sort of pirate president, a freebooting freak elected by accident, "a disrupter" of the status quo at best and at worst a dangerous incompetent playing with nuclear fire. A state of war exists between the White House, the permanent D.C. bureaucracy, and the traditional news media. Authentic leadership is otherwise AWOL. Institutions falter. The FBI and the CIA behave like enemies of the people. ..."
"... They chatter about electric driverless car fleets, home delivery drone services, and as-yet-undeveloped modes of energy production to replace problematic fossil fuels, while ignoring the self-evident resource and capital constraints now upon us and even the laws of physics -- especially entropy , the second law of thermodynamics. Their main mental block is their belief in infinite industrial growth on a finite planet, an idea so powerfully foolish that it obviates their standing as technocrats. ..."
"... The universities beget a class of what Nassim Taleb prankishly called "intellectuals-yet-idiots," hierophants trafficking in fads and falsehoods, conveyed in esoteric jargon larded with psychobabble in support of a therapeutic crypto-gnostic crusade bent on transforming human nature to fit the wished-for utopian template of a world where anything goes. In fact, they have only produced a new intellectual despotism worthy of Stalin, Mao Zedong, and Pol Pot. ..."
"... Until fairly recently, the Democratic Party did not roll that way. It was right-wing Republicans who tried to ban books, censor pop music, and stifle free expression. If anything, Democrats strenuously defended the First Amendment, including the principle that unpopular and discomforting ideas had to be tolerated in order to protect all speech. Back in in 1977 the ACLU defended the right of neo-Nazis to march for their cause (National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie, 432 U.S. 43). ..."
"... This is the recipe for what we call identity politics, the main thrust of which these days, the quest for "social justice," is to present a suit against white male privilege and, shall we say, the horse it rode in on: western civ. A peculiar feature of the social justice agenda is the wish to erect strict boundaries around racial identities while erasing behavioral boundaries, sexual boundaries, and ethical boundaries. Since so much of this thought-monster is actually promulgated by white college professors and administrators, and white political activists, against people like themselves, the motives in this concerted campaign might appear puzzling to the casual observer. ..."
"... The evolving matrix of rackets that prompted the 2008 debacle has only grown more elaborate and craven as the old economy of stuff dies and is replaced by a financialized economy of swindles and frauds . Almost nothing in America's financial life is on the level anymore, from the mendacious "guidance" statements of the Federal Reserve, to the official economic statistics of the federal agencies, to the manipulation of all markets, to the shenanigans on the fiscal side, to the pervasive accounting fraud that underlies it all. Ironically, the systematic chiseling of the foundering middle class is most visible in the rackets that medicine and education have become -- two activities that were formerly dedicated to doing no harm and seeking the truth ! ..."
"... Um, forgotten by Kunstler is the fact that 1965 was also the year when the USA reopened its doors to low-skilled immigrants from the Third World – who very quickly became competitors with black Americans. And then the Boom ended, and corporate American, influenced by thinking such as that displayed in Lewis Powell's (in)famous 1971 memorandum, decided to claw back the gains made by the working and middle classes in the previous 3 decades. ..."
"... "Wow – is there ever negative!" ..."
"... You also misrepresent reality to your readers. No, the black underclass is not larger, more dysfunctional, and more alienated now than in the 1960's, when cities across the country burned and machine guns were stationed on the Capitol steps. The "racial divide" is not "starker now than ever"; that's just preposterous to anyone who was alive then. And nobody I've ever known felt "shame" over the "outcome of the civil rights campaign". I know nobody who seeks to "punish and humiliate" the 'privileged'. ..."
"... My impression is that what Kunstler is doing here is diagnosing the long crisis of a decadent liberal post-modernity, and his stance is not that of either of the warring sides within our divorced-from-reality political establishment, neither that of the 'right' or 'left.' Which is why, logically, he published it here. National Review would never have accepted this piece ..."
"... "Globalization has acted, meanwhile, as a great leveler. It destroyed what was left of the working class -- the lower-middle class -- which included a great many white Americans who used to be able to support a family with simple labor." ..."
"... Young black people are told by their elders how lucky they are to grow up today because things are much better than when grandpa was our age and we all know this history.\ ..."
"... It's clear that this part of the article was written from absolute ignorance of the actual black experience with no interest in even looking up some facts. Hell, Obama even gave a speech at Howard telling graduates how lucky they were to be young and black Today compared to even when he was their age in the 80's! ..."
"... E.g. Germany. Germany is anything but perfect and its recent government has screwed up with its immigration policies. But Germany has a high standard of living, an educated work force (including unions and skilled crafts-people), a more rational distribution of wealth and high quality universal health care that costs 47% less per capita than in the U.S. and with no intrinsic need to maraud around the planet wasting gobs of taxpayer money playing Global Cop. ..."
"... The larger subtext is that the U.S. house of cards was planned out and constructed as deliberately as the German model was. Only the objective was not to maximize the health and happiness of the citizenry, but to line the pockets of the parasitic Elites. (E.g., note that Mitch McConnell has been a government employee for 50 years but somehow acquired a net worth of over $10 Million.) ..."
On America's 'long emergency' of recession, globalization, and identity politics.
Can a people recover from an excursion into unreality? The USA's sojourn into an alternative universe of the mind accelerated
sharply after Wall Street nearly detonated the global financial system in 2008. That debacle was only one manifestation of an array
of accumulating threats to the postmodern order, which include the burdens of empire, onerous debt, population overshoot, fracturing
globalism, worries about energy, disruptive technologies, ecological havoc, and the specter of climate change.
A sense of gathering crisis, which I call the long emergency , persists. It is systemic and existential. It calls into
question our ability to carry on "normal" life much farther into this century, and all the anxiety that attends it is hard for the
public to process. It manifested itself first in finance because that was the most abstract and fragile of all the major activities
we depend on for daily life, and therefore the one most easily tampered with and shoved into criticality by a cadre of irresponsible
opportunists on Wall Street. Indeed, a lot of households were permanently wrecked after the so-called Great Financial Crisis of 2008,
despite official trumpet blasts heralding "recovery" and the dishonestly engineered pump-up of capital markets since then.
With the election of 2016, symptoms of the long emergency seeped into the political system. Disinformation rules. There is
no coherent consensus about what is happening and no coherent proposals to do anything about it. The two parties are mired in paralysis
and dysfunction and the public's trust in them is at epic lows. Donald Trump is viewed as a sort of pirate president, a freebooting
freak elected by accident, "a disrupter" of the status quo at best and at worst a dangerous incompetent playing with nuclear fire.
A state of war exists between the White House, the permanent D.C. bureaucracy, and the traditional news media. Authentic leadership
is otherwise AWOL. Institutions falter. The FBI and the CIA behave like enemies of the people.
Bad ideas flourish in this nutrient medium of unresolved crisis. Lately, they actually dominate the scene on every side. A species
of wishful thinking that resembles a primitive cargo cult grips the technocratic class, awaiting magical rescue remedies that promise
to extend the regime of Happy Motoring, consumerism, and suburbia that makes up the armature of "normal" life in the USA.
They chatter
about electric driverless car fleets, home delivery drone services, and as-yet-undeveloped modes of energy production to replace
problematic fossil fuels, while ignoring the self-evident resource and capital constraints now upon us and even the laws of physics
-- especially entropy , the second law of thermodynamics. Their main mental block is their belief in infinite industrial growth
on a finite planet, an idea so powerfully foolish that it obviates their standing as technocrats.
The non-technocratic cohort of the thinking class squanders its waking hours on a quixotic campaign to destroy the remnant of
an American common culture and, by extension, a reviled Western civilization they blame for the failure in our time to establish
a utopia on earth. By the logic of the day, "inclusion" and "diversity" are achieved by forbidding the transmission of ideas, shutting
down debate, and creating new racially segregated college dorms. Sexuality is declared to not be biologically determined, yet so-called
cis-gendered persons (whose gender identity corresponds with their sex as detected at birth) are vilified by dint of
not being "other-gendered" -- thereby thwarting the pursuit of happiness of persons self-identified as other-gendered. Casuistry
anyone?
The universities beget a class of what Nassim Taleb prankishly called "intellectuals-yet-idiots," hierophants trafficking in fads
and falsehoods, conveyed in esoteric jargon larded with psychobabble in support of a therapeutic crypto-gnostic crusade bent on transforming
human nature to fit the wished-for utopian template of a world where anything goes. In fact, they have only produced a new intellectual
despotism worthy of Stalin, Mao Zedong, and Pol Pot.
In case you haven't been paying attention to the hijinks on campus -- the attacks on reason, fairness, and common decency, the
kangaroo courts, diversity tribunals, assaults on public speech and speakers themselves -- here is the key take-away: it's not about
ideas or ideologies anymore; it's purely about the pleasures of coercion, of pushing other people around. Coercion is fun and exciting!
In fact, it's intoxicating, and rewarded with brownie points and career advancement. It's rather perverse that this passion for tyranny
is suddenly so popular on the liberal left.
Until fairly recently, the Democratic Party did not roll that way. It was right-wing Republicans who tried to ban books, censor
pop music, and stifle free expression. If anything, Democrats strenuously defended the First Amendment, including the principle that
unpopular and discomforting ideas had to be tolerated in order to protect all speech. Back in in 1977 the ACLU defended the right
of neo-Nazis to march for their cause (National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie, 432 U.S. 43).
The new and false idea that something labeled "hate speech" -- labeled by whom? -- is equivalent to violence floated out of the
graduate schools on a toxic cloud of intellectual hysteria concocted in the laboratory of so-called "post-structuralist" philosophy,
where sundry body parts of Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida, Judith Butler, and Gilles Deleuze were sewn onto a brain comprised of
one-third each Thomas Hobbes, Saul Alinsky, and Tupac Shakur to create a perfect Frankenstein monster of thought. It all boiled down
to the proposition that the will to power negated all other human drives and values, in particular the search for truth. Under this
scheme, all human relations were reduced to a dramatis personae of the oppressed and their oppressors, the former generally
"people of color" and women, all subjugated by whites, mostly males. Tactical moves in politics among these self-described "oppressed"
and "marginalized" are based on the credo that the ends justify the means (the Alinsky model).
This is the recipe for what we call identity politics, the main thrust of which these days, the quest for "social justice," is
to present a suit against white male privilege and, shall we say, the horse it rode in on: western civ. A peculiar feature of the
social justice agenda is the wish to erect strict boundaries around racial identities while erasing behavioral boundaries, sexual
boundaries, and ethical boundaries. Since so much of this thought-monster is actually promulgated by white college professors and
administrators, and white political activists, against people like themselves, the motives in this concerted campaign might appear
puzzling to the casual observer.
I would account for it as the psychological displacement among this political cohort of their shame, disappointment, and despair
over the outcome of the civil rights campaign that started in the 1960s and formed the core of progressive ideology. It did not bring
about the hoped-for utopia. The racial divide in America is starker now than ever, even after two terms of a black president. Today,
there is more grievance and resentment, and less hope for a better future, than when Martin Luther King made the case for progress
on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in 1963. The recent flash points of racial conflict -- Ferguson, the Dallas police ambush, the
Charleston church massacre, et cetera -- don't have to be rehearsed in detail here to make the point that there is a great deal of
ill feeling throughout the land, and quite a bit of acting out on both sides.
The black underclass is larger, more dysfunctional, and more alienated than it was in the 1960s. My theory, for what it's worth,
is that the civil rights legislation of 1964 and '65, which removed legal barriers to full participation in national life, induced
considerable anxiety among black citizens over the new disposition of things, for one reason or another. And that is exactly why
a black separatism movement arose as an alternative at the time, led initially by such charismatic figures as Malcolm X and Stokely
Carmichael. Some of that was arguably a product of the same youthful energy that drove the rest of the Sixties counterculture: adolescent
rebellion. But the residue of the "Black Power" movement is still present in the widespread ambivalence about making covenant with
a common culture, and it has only been exacerbated by a now long-running "multiculturalism and diversity" crusade that effectively
nullifies the concept of a national common culture.
What follows from these dynamics is the deflection of all ideas that don't feed a narrative of power relations between oppressors
and victims, with the self-identified victims ever more eager to exercise their power to coerce, punish, and humiliate their self-identified
oppressors, the "privileged," who condescend to be abused to a shockingly masochistic degree. Nobody stands up to this organized
ceremonial nonsense. The punishments are too severe, including the loss of livelihood, status, and reputation, especially in the
university. Once branded a "racist," you're done. And venturing to join the oft-called-for "honest conversation about race" is certain
to invite that fate.
Globalization has acted, meanwhile, as a great leveler. It destroyed what was left of the working class -- the lower-middle class
-- which included a great many white Americans who used to be able to support a family with simple labor. Hung out to dry economically,
this class of whites fell into many of the same behaviors as the poor blacks before them: absent fathers, out-of-wedlock births,
drug abuse. Then the Great Financial Crisis of 2008 wiped up the floor with the middle-middle class above them, foreclosing on their
homes and futures, and in their desperation many of these people became Trump voters -- though I doubt that Trump himself truly understood
how this all worked exactly. However, he did see that the white middle class had come to identify as yet another victim group, allowing
him to pose as their champion.
The evolving matrix of rackets that prompted the 2008 debacle has only grown more elaborate and craven as the old economy of
stuff dies and is replaced by a financialized economy of swindles and frauds . Almost nothing in America's financial life
is on the level anymore, from the mendacious "guidance" statements of the Federal Reserve, to the official economic statistics of
the federal agencies, to the manipulation of all markets, to the shenanigans on the fiscal side, to the pervasive accounting fraud
that underlies it all. Ironically, the systematic chiseling of the foundering middle class is most visible in the rackets that medicine
and education have become -- two activities that were formerly dedicated to doing no harm and seeking the truth !
Life in this milieu of immersive dishonesty drives citizens beyond cynicism to an even more desperate state of mind. The suffering
public ends up having no idea what is really going on, what is actually happening. The toolkit of the Enlightenment -- reason, empiricism
-- doesn't work very well in this socioeconomic hall of mirrors, so all that baggage is discarded for the idea that reality is just
a social construct, just whatever story you feel like telling about it. On the right, Karl Rove expressed this point of view some
years ago when he bragged, of the Bush II White House, that "we make our own reality." The left says nearly the same thing in the
post-structuralist malarkey of academia: "you make your own reality." In the end, both sides are left with a lot of bad feelings
and the belief that only raw power has meaning.
Erasing psychological boundaries is a dangerous thing. When the rackets finally come to grief -- as they must because their operations
don't add up -- and the reckoning with true price discovery commences at the macro scale, the American people will find themselves
in even more distress than they've endured so far. This will be the moment when either nobody has any money, or there is plenty of
worthless money for everyone. Either way, the functional bankruptcy of the nation will be complete, and nothing will work anymore,
including getting enough to eat. That is exactly the moment when Americans on all sides will beg someone to step up and push them
around to get their world working again. And even that may not avail.
James Howard Kunstler's many books include The Geography of Nowhere, The Long Emergency, Too Much Magic: Wishful Thinking,
Technology, and the Fate of the Nation , and the World Made by Hand novel series. He blogs on Mondays and Fridays at
Kunstler.com .
I think I need to go listen to an old-fashioned Christmas song now.
The ability to be financially, or at least resource, sustaining is the goal of many I know since we share a lack of confidence
in any of our institutions. We can only hope that God might look down with compassion on us, but He's not in the practical plan
of how to feed and sustain ourselves when things play out to their inevitable end. Having come from a better time, we joke about
our dystopian preparations, self-conscious about our "overreaction," but preparing all the same.
Look at it this way: Germany had to be leveled and its citizens reduced to abject penury, before Volkswagen could become the world's
biggest car company, and autobahns built throughout the world. It will be darkest before the dawn, and hopefully, that light that
comes after, won't be the miniature sunrise of a nuclear conflagration.
An excellent summary and bleak reminder of what our so-called civilization has become. How do we extricate ourselves from this
strange death spiral?
I have long suspected that we humans are creatures of our own personal/group/tribal/national/global fables and mythologies. We
are compelled by our genes, marrow, and blood to tell ourselves stories of our purpose and who we are. It is time for new mythologies
and stories of "who we are". This bizarre hyper-techno all-for-profit world needs a new story.
"The black underclass is larger, more dysfunctional, and more alienated than it was in the 1960s. My theory, for what it's worth,
is that the civil rights legislation of 1964 and '65, which removed legal barriers to full participation in national life, induced
considerable anxiety among black citizens over the new disposition of things, for one reason or another."
Um, forgotten by Kunstler is the fact that 1965 was also the year when the USA reopened its doors to low-skilled immigrants
from the Third World – who very quickly became competitors with black Americans. And then the Boom ended, and corporate American,
influenced by thinking such as that displayed in Lewis Powell's (in)famous 1971 memorandum, decided to claw back the gains made
by the working and middle classes in the previous 3 decades.
Hey Jim, I know you love to blame Wall Street and the Republicans for the GFC. I remember back in '08 you were urging Democrats
to blame it all on Republicans to help Obama win. But I have news for you. It wasn't Wall Street that caused the GFC. The crisis
actually had its roots in the Clinton Administration's use of the Community Reinvestment Act to pressure banks to relax mortgage
underwriting standards. This was done at the behest of left wing activists who claimed (without evidence, of course) that the
standards discriminated against minorities. The result was an effective repeal of all underwriting standards and an explosion
of real estate speculation with borrowed money. Speculation with borrowed money never ends well.
I have to laugh, too, when you say that it's perverse that the passion for tyranny is popular on the left. Have you ever heard
of the French Revolution? How about the USSR? Communist China? North Korea? Et cetera.
Leftism is leftism. Call it Marxism, Communism, socialism, liberalism, progressivism, or what have you. The ideology is the
same. Only the tactics and methods change. Destroy the evil institutions of marriage, family, and religion, and Man's innate goodness
will shine forth, and the glorious Godless utopia will naturally result.
Of course, the father of lies is ultimately behind it all. "He was a liar and a murderer from the beginning."
When man turns his back on God, nothing good happens. That's the most fundamental problem in Western society today. Not to
say that there aren't other issues, but until we return to God, there's not much hope for improvement.
Hmm. I just wandered over here by accident. Being a construction contractor, I don't know enough about globalization, academia,
or finance to evaluate your assertions about those realms. But being in a biracial family, and having lived, worked, and worshiped
equally in white and black communities, I can evaluate your statements about social justice, race, and civil rights.
Long story short, you pick out fringe liberal ideas, misrepresent them as mainstream among liberals, and shoot them down. Casuistry,
anyone?
You also misrepresent reality to your readers. No, the black underclass is not larger, more dysfunctional, and more alienated
now than in the 1960's, when cities across the country burned and machine guns were stationed on the Capitol steps. The "racial
divide" is not "starker now than ever"; that's just preposterous to anyone who was alive then. And nobody I've ever known felt
"shame" over the "outcome of the civil rights campaign". I know nobody who seeks to "punish and humiliate" the 'privileged'.
I get that this column is a quick toss-off before the holiday, and that your strength is supposed to be in your presentation,
not your ideas. For me, it's a helpful way to rehearse debunking common tropes that I'll encounter elsewhere.
But, really, your readers deserve better, and so do the people you misrepresent. We need bad liberal ideas to be critiqued
while they're still on the fringe. But by calling fringe ideas mainstream, you discredit yourself, misinform your readers, and
contribute to stereotypes both of liberals and of conservatives. I'm looking for serious conservative critiques that help me take
a second look at familiar ideas. I won't be back.
I disagree, NoahK, that the whole is incohesive, and I also disagree that these are right-wing talking points.
The theme of this piece is the long crisis in the US, its nature and causes. At no point does this essay, despite it stream
of consciousness style, veer away from that theme. Hence it is cohesive.
As for the right wing charge, though it is true, to be sure, that Kunstler's position is in many respects classically conservative
-- he believes for example that there should be a national consensus on certain fundamentals, such as whether or not there are
two sexes (for the most part), or, instead, an infinite variety of sexes chosen day by day at whim -- you must have noticed that
he condemned both the voluntarism of Karl Rove AND the voluntarism of the post-structuralist crowd.
My impression is that what Kunstler is doing here is diagnosing the long crisis of a decadent liberal post-modernity, and his stance is not that of either
of the warring sides within our divorced-from-reality political establishment, neither that of the 'right' or 'left.' Which is
why, logically, he published it here. National Review would never have accepted this piece. QED.
This malaise is rooted in human consciousness that when reflecting on itself celebrating its capacity for apperception suffers
from the tension that such an inquiry, such an inward glance produces. In a word, the capacity for the human being to be aware
of his or herself as an intelligent being capable of reflecting on aspects of reality through the artful manipulation of symbols
engenders this tension, this angst.
Some will attempt to extinguish this inner tension through intoxication while others through the thrill of war, and it has
been played out since the dawn of man and well documented when the written word emerged.
The malaise which Mr. Kunstler addresses as the problem of our times is rooted in our existence from time immemorial. But the
problem is not only existential but ontological. It is rooted in our being as self-aware creatures. Thus no solution avails itself
as humanity in and of itself is the problem. Each side (both right and left) seeks its own anodyne whether through profligacy
or intolerance, and each side mans the barricades to clash experiencing the adrenaline rush that arises from the perpetual call
to arms.
"Globalization has acted, meanwhile, as a great leveler. It destroyed what was left of the working class -- the lower-middle class
-- which included a great many white Americans who used to be able to support a family with simple labor."
And to whom do we hand
the tab for this? Globalization is a word. It is a concept, a talking point. Globalization is oligarchy by another name. Unfortunately,
under-educated, deplorable, Americans; regardless of party affiliation/ideology have embraced. And the most ironic part?
Russia
and China (the eventual surviving oligarchies) will eventually have to duke it out to decide which superpower gets to make the
USA it's b*tch (excuse prison reference, but that's where we're headed folks).
And one more irony. Only in American, could Christianity,
which was grew from concepts like compassion, generosity, humility, and benevolence; be re-branded and 'weaponized' to further
greed, bigotry, misogyny, intolerance, and violence/war. Americans fiddled (over same sex marriage, abortion, who has to bake
wedding cakes, and who gets to use which public restroom), while the oligarchs burned the last resources (natural, financial,
and even legal).
"Today, there is more grievance and resentment, and less hope for a better future, than when Martin Luther King made the case
for progress on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in 1963."
Spoken like a white guy who has zero contact with black people. I mean, even a little bit of research and familiarity would
give lie to the idea that blacks are more pessimistic about life today than in the 1960's.
Black millenials are the most optimistic group of Americans about the future. Anyone who has spent any significant time around
older black people will notice that you don't hear the rose colored memories of the past. Black people don't miss the 1980's,
much less the 1950's. Young black people are told by their elders how lucky they are to grow up today because things are much
better than when grandpa was our age and we all know this history.\
It's clear that this part of the article was written from absolute
ignorance of the actual black experience with no interest in even looking up some facts. Hell, Obama even gave a speech at Howard
telling graduates how lucky they were to be young and black Today compared to even when he was their age in the 80's!
Here is the direct quote;
"In my inaugural address, I remarked that just 60 years earlier, my father might not have been served in a D.C. restaurant
-- at least not certain of them. There were no black CEOs of Fortune 500 companies. Very few black judges. Shoot, as Larry Wilmore
pointed out last week, a lot of folks didn't even think blacks had the tools to be a quarterback. Today, former Bull Michael Jordan
isn't just the greatest basketball player of all time -- he owns the team. (Laughter.) When I was graduating, the main black hero
on TV was Mr. T. (Laughter.) Rap and hip hop were counterculture, underground. Now, Shonda Rhimes owns Thursday night, and Beyoncé
runs the world. (Laughter.) We're no longer only entertainers, we're producers, studio executives. No longer small business owners
-- we're CEOs, we're mayors, representatives, Presidents of the United States. (Applause.)
I am not saying gaps do not persist. Obviously, they do. Racism persists. Inequality persists. Don't worry -- I'm going to
get to that. But I wanted to start, Class of 2016, by opening your eyes to the moment that you are in. If you had to choose one
moment in history in which you could be born, and you didn't know ahead of time who you were going to be -- what nationality,
what gender, what race, whether you'd be rich or poor, gay or straight, what faith you'd be born into -- you wouldn't choose 100
years ago. You wouldn't choose the fifties, or the sixties, or the seventies. You'd choose right now. If you had to choose a time
to be, in the words of Lorraine Hansberry, "young, gifted, and black" in America, you would choose right now. (Applause.)"
I love reading about how the Community Reinvestment Act was the catalyst of all that is wrong in the world. As someone in the
industry the issue was actually twofold. The Commodities Futures Modernization Act turned the mortgage securities market into
a casino with the underlying actual debt instruments multiplied through the use of additional debt instruments tied to the performance
but with no actual underlying value. These securities were then sold around the world essentially infecting the entire market.
In order that feed the beast, these NON GOVERNMENT loans had their underwriting standards lowered to rediculous levels. If you
run out of qualified customers, just lower the qualifications. Government loans such as FHA, VA, and USDA were avoided because
it was easier to qualify people with the new stuff. And get paid. The short version is all of the incentives that were in place
at the time, starting with the Futures Act, directly led to the actions that culminated in the Crash. So yes, it was the government,
just a different piece of legislation.
Kunstler itemizing the social and economic pathologies in the United States is not enough. Because there are other models that
demonstrate it didn't have to be this way.
E.g. Germany. Germany is anything but perfect and its recent government has screwed up with its immigration policies. But Germany
has a high standard of living, an educated work force (including unions and skilled crafts-people), a more rational distribution
of wealth and high quality universal health care that costs 47% less per capita than in the U.S. and with no intrinsic need to
maraud around the planet wasting gobs of taxpayer money playing Global Cop.
The larger subtext is that the U.S. house of cards was planned out and constructed as deliberately as the German model was.
Only the objective was not to maximize the health and happiness of the citizenry, but to line the pockets of the parasitic Elites.
(E.g., note that Mitch McConnell has been a government employee for 50 years but somehow acquired a net worth of over $10 Million.)
P.S. About the notionally high U.S. GDP. Factor out the TRILLIONS inexplicably hoovered up by the pathological health care
system, the metastasized and sanctified National Security State (with its Global Cop shenanigans) and the cronied-up Ponzi scheme
of electron-churn financialization ginned up by Goldman Sachs and the rest of the Banksters, and then see how much GDP that reflects
the actual wealth of the middle class is left over.
Right-Wing Dittoheads and Fox Watchers love to blame the Community Reinvestment Act. It allows them to blame both poor black people
AND the government. The truth is that many parties were to blame.
One of the things I love about this rag is that almost all of the comments are included.
You may be sure that similar commenting privilege doesn't exist most anywhere else.
Any disfavor regarding the supposed bleakness with the weak hearted souls aside, Mr K's broadside seems pretty spot on to me.
I think the author overlooks the fact that government over the past 30 to 40 years has been tilting the playing field ever more
towards the uppermost classes and against the middle class. The evisceration of the middle class is plain to see.
If the the common man had more money and security, lots of our current intrasocial conflicts would be far less intense.
Andrew Imlay: You provide a thoughtful corrective to one of Kunstler's more hyperbolic claims. And you should know that his jeremiad
doesn't represent usual fare at TAC. So do come back.
Whether or not every one of Kunstler's assertions can withstand a rigorous fact-check, he is a formidable rhetorician. A generous
serving of Weltschmerz is just what the season calls for.
America is stupefied from propaganda on steroids for, largely from the right wing, 25? years of Limbaugh, Fox, etc etc etc Clinton
hate x 10, "weapons of mass destruction", "they hate us because we are free", birtherism, death panels, Jade Helm, pedophile pizza, and more Clinton hate porn.
Americans have been taught to worship the wealthy regardless of how they got there. Americans have been taught they are "Exceptional" (better, smarter, more godly than every one else) in spite of outward appearances.
Americans are under educated and encouraged to make decisions based on emotion from constant barrage of extra loud advertising
from birth selling illusion.
Americans brain chemistry is most likely as messed up as the rest of their bodies from junk or molested food. Are they even
capable of normal thought?
Donald Trump has convinced at least a third of Americans that only he, Fox, Breitbart and one or two other sources are telling
the Truth, every one else is lying and that he is their friend.
Is it possible we are just plane doomed and there's no way out?
I loathe the cotton candy clown and his Quislings; however, I must admit, his presence as President of the United States has forced
everyone (left, right, religious, non-religious) to look behind the curtain. He has done more to dis-spell the idealism of both
liberal and conservative, Democrat and Republican, rich and poor, than any other elected official in history. The sheer amount
of mind-numbing absurdity resulting from a publicity stunt that got out of control ..I am 70 and I have seen a lot. This is beyond
anything I could ever imagine. America is not going to improve or even remain the same. It is in a 4 year march into worse, three
years to go.
Mr. Kuntzler has an honest and fairly accurate assessment of the situation. And as usual, the liberal audience that TAC is trying
so hard to reach, is tossing out their usual talking points whilst being in denial of the situation.
The Holy Bible teaches us that repentance is the first crucial step on the path towards salvation. Until the progressives,
from their alleged "elite" down the rank and file at Kos, HuffPo, whatever, take a good, long, hard look at the current national
dumpster fire and start claiming some responsibility, America has no chance of solving problems or fixing anything.
Kunstler must have had a good time writing this, and I had a good time reading it. Skewed perspective, wild overstatement, and
obsessive cherry-picking of the rare checkable facts are mixed with a little eye of newt and toe of frog and smothered in a oar
and roll of rhetoric that was thrilling to be immersed in. Good work!
aah, same old Kunstler, slightly retailored for the Trump years.
for those of you familiar with him, remember his "peak oil" mania from the late 00s and early 2010s? every blog post was about
it. every new year was going to be IT: the long emergency would start, people would be Mad Maxing over oil supplies cos prices
at the pump would be $10 a gallon or somesuch.
in this new rant, i did a control-F for "peak oil" and hey, not a mention. I guess even cranks like Kunstler know when to give
a tired horse a rest.
Kunstler once again waxes eloquent on the American body politic. Every word rings true, except when it doesn't. At times poetic,
at other times paranoid, Kunstler does us a great service by pointing a finger at the deepest pain points in America, any one
of which could be the geyser that brings on catastrophic failure.
However, as has been pointed out, he definitely does not hang out with black people. For example, the statement:
But the residue of the "Black Power" movement is still present in the widespread ambivalence about making covenant with a common
culture, and it has only been exacerbated by a now long-running "multiculturalism and diversity" crusade that effectively nullifies
the concept of a national common culture.
The notion of a 'national common culture' is interesting but pretty much a fantasy that never existed, save colonial times.
Yet Kunstler's voice is one that must be heard, even if he is mostly tuning in to the widespread radicalism on both ends of
the spectrum, albeit in relatively small numbers. Let's face it, people are in the streets marching, yelling, and hating and mass
murders keep happening, with the regularity of Old Faithful. And he makes a good point about academia loosing touch with reality
much of the time. He's spot on about the false expectations of what technology can do for the economy, which is inflated with
fiat currency and God knows how many charlatans and hucksters. And yes, the white working class is feeling increasingly like a
'victim group.'
While Kunstler may be more a poet than a lawyer, more songwriter than historian, my gut feeling is that America had better
take notice of him, as The American ship of state is being swept by a ferocious tide and the helmsman is high on Fentanyl (made
in China).
Re: The crisis actually had its roots in the Clinton Administration's use of the Community Reinvestment Act
Here we go again with this rotting zombie which rises from its grave no matter how many times it has been debunked by statisticians
and reputable economists (and no, not just those on the left– the ranks include Bruce Bartlett for example, a solid Reaganist).
To reiterate again : the CRA played no role in the mortgage boom and bust. Among other facts in the way of that hypothesis is
the fact that riskiest loans were being made by non-bank lenders (Countrywide) who were not covered by the CRA which only applied
to actual banks– and the banks did not really get into the game full tilt, lowering their lending standards, until late in the
game, c. 2005, in response to their loss of business to the non-bank lenders. Ditto for the GSEs, which did not lower their standards
until 2005 and even then relied on wall Street to vet the subprime loans they were buying.
To be sure, blaming Wall Street for everything is also wrong-headed, though wall Street certainly did some stupid, greedy and
shady things (No, I am not letting them off the hook!) But the cast of miscreants is numbered in the millions and it stretches
around the planet. Everyone (for example) who got into the get-rich-quick Ponzi scheme of house flipping, especially if they lied
about their income to do so. And everyone who took out a HELOC (Home Equity Line of Credit) and foolishly charged it up on a consumption
binge. And shall we talk about the mortgage brokers who coached people into lying, the loan officers who steered customers into
the riskiest (and highest earning) loans they could, the sellers who asked palace-prices for crackerbox hovels, the appraisers
who rubber-stamped such prices, the regulators who turned a blind eye to all the fraud and malfeasance, the ratings agencies who
handed out AAA ratings to securities full of junk, the politicians who rejoiced over the apparent "Bush Boom" well, I could continue,
but you get the picture.
"The Holy Bible teaches us that repentance is the first crucial step on the path towards salvation. Until the progressives, from
their alleged "elite" down the rank and file at Kos, HuffPo, whatever, take a good, long, hard look at the current national dumpster
fire and start claiming some responsibility, America has no chance of solving problems or fixing anything."
Pretty sure that calling other people to repent of their sin of disagreeing with you is not quite what the Holy Bible intended.
And I feel like the Democrats get so distracted. They have been talking about sexual
harassment and stuff instead of the TAX BILL. It is so damn easy to get them to take their
eyes off the ball! and get played again and again. . . and TRAGIC given the consequences . .
.
It's the perfect "distraction". Allows them to engage in virtue-signaling and "fighting
for average Americans". It's all phony, they always "lose" in the end getting exactly what
they wanted in the first place, while not actually having to cast a vote for it.
It's all related, less safety net and more inequality means more desperation to take a
job, *ANY* job, means more women putting up with sexual harassment (and workplace bullying
and horrible and illegal workplace conditions etc.) as the price of a paycheck.
Horrible Toomey's re-election was a parallel to the Clinton/Trump fiasco. The Democrats
put up a corporate shill, Katie McGinty that no-one trusted.
"Former lobbyist Katie McGinty has spent three decades in politics getting rich off the
companies she regulated and subsidized. Now this master of the revolving-door wants
Pennsylvania voters to give her another perch in government: U.S. Senator." Washington
Examiner.
She was a Clintonite through and through, that everyone, much like $Hillary, could see
through.
To paraphrase the Beatles, you say you want a revolution but you don't really mean it. You
want more of the same because it makes you feel good to keep voting for your Senator or your
Congressman. The others are corrupt and evil, but your guys are good. If only the others were
like your guys. News flash: they are all your guys.
America is doomed. And so much the better. Despite all America has done for the world, it
has also been a brutal despot. America created consumerism, super-sizing and the Kardashians.
These are all unforgivable sins. America is probably the most persistently violent country in
the world both domestically and internationally. No other country has invaded or occupied so
much of the world, unless you count the known world in which case Macedonia wins.
This tax plan is what Americans want because they are pretty ignorant and stupid. They are
incapable of understanding basic math so they can't work out the details. They believe that
any tax cut is inherently good and all government is bad so that is also all that matters.
They honestly think they or their kids will one day be rich so they don't want to hurt rich
people. They also believe that millionaires got their money honestly and through hard work
because that is what they learned from their parents.
Just send a blank check to Goldman Sachs. Keep a bit to buy a gun which you can use to
either shoot up a McDonalds or blow your own brains out.
And some people still ask me why I left and don't want to come back. LOL
Macedonia of today is not the same are that conquered the world. They stole the name from
Greeks.
That being said, the US is ripe for a change. Every policy the current rulers enact seems
to make things better. However, I suspect a revolution would kill majority of the population
since it would disrupt the all important supply chains, so it does not seem viable.
However, a military takeover could be viable. If they are willing to wipe out the most
predatory portions of the ruling class, they could fix the healthcare system, install a
high-employment policy and take out the banks and even the military contractors. Which could
make them very popular.
Yeah, right. Have you seen our generals? They're just more of the same leeches we
have everywhere else in the 0.01%. Have you seen any of the other military dictatorships
around the world, like actually existing ones? They're all brilliantly corrupt and total
failures when it comes to running any sort of economy. Not to mention the total loss of civil
rights. Americans have this idiotic love of their military thanks to decades of effective
propaganda and think the rule of pampered generals would somehow be better than the right to
vote. Bleh.
This is a military dictatorship. The fourth and sixth amendments have been de facto
repealed. Trump cared about one thing and one thing only, namely to repeal the estate tax. He
is the ultimate con man and this was his biggest con. It is truly amazing how he accomplished
this. He has saved his family a billion $$$. He will now turn over governing to the generals
and Goldman Sachs. He may even retire. Truly amazing. One has to admire the sheer perversity
of it all. When will the American electorate get tired of being conned? The fact is they have
nothing but admiration for Trump. We live in a criminal culture, winner take all. America
loves its winners.
There is an old 2003 David Brooks column in which he mentions that
"The Democrats couldn't even persuade people to oppose the repeal of the estate tax, which
is explicitly for the mega-upper class. Al Gore, who ran a populist campaign, couldn't even
win the votes of white males who didn't go to college, whose incomes have stagnated over the
past decades and who were the explicit targets of his campaign. Why don't more Americans want
to distribute more wealth down to people like themselves?"
Then Brooks goes on to explain
"The most telling polling result from the 2000 election was from a Time magazine survey
that asked people if they are in the top 1 percent of earners. Nineteen percent of Americans
say they are in the richest 1 percent and a further 20 percent expect to be someday. So right
away you have 39 percent of Americans who thought that when Mr. Gore savaged a plan that
favored the top 1 percent, he was taking a direct shot at them."
The Republicans have conditioned people to believe government services (except for
defense/military) are run poorly and need to be "run like a business" for a profit.
The problem is that not all government services CAN be profitable (homeless care, mental
health care for the poor, EPA enforcement, OSHA enforcement). And when attempts are made to
privatize some government operations such as incarceration, the result is that the private
company tries to maximize profits by pushing for laws to incarcerate ever more people.
The history of the USA as viewed by outsiders, maybe 50 years hence, will be that of a
resource consuming nation that spent a vast fortune on military hardware and military
adventures when it had little to fear due to geography, a nation that touted an independent
press that was anything but, a nation that created a large media/entertainment industry which
helped to keep citizens in line, a nation that fostered an overly large (by 2 or 3 times per
Paul Whooley) parasitical financial industry that did not perform its prime capital
allocation task competently as it veered from bubble to bubble and a nation that managed to
spend great sums on medical care without covering all citizens.
But the USA does have a lot of guns and a lot of frustrated people.
Maybe Kevlar vests will be the fashion of the future?
The provision to do away with the estate tax, if not immediately, in the current versions
(House and Senate) is great news for the 1%, and bad for the rest of us.
And if more people are not against that (thanks for quoting the NYTImes article), it's the
failure of the rest of the media for not focusing more on it, but wasting time and energy on
fashion, sports, entertainment, etc.
he provision to do away with the estate tax . . . is great news for the 1%
I think it's even a little more extreme than that. The data is a few years old, but it is
only the top 0.6% who are affected by estate taxes in the United States. See the data at
these web sites:
The military adventures were largely in support of what Smedley Butler so accurately
called the Great "Racket" of Monroe Doctrine colonialism and rapacious extractive
"capitalism" aka "looting."
It took longer and costed the rich a bit more to buy up all the bits of government, but
the way they've done will likely be more compendious and lasting. Barring some "intervening
event(s)".
While Republicans show their true colors, im out there seeing a resurgence of civil
society. And im starting to reach Hard core Tea Party types. Jobs, Manufacturing, Actual
Policy.
On Sunday night, Social Justice Warriors in Baltimore filmed themselves desecrating and damaging
a 225-year-old monument to Christopher Columbus -- this, in the name of racial and economic justice:
Late last week,
someone desecrated a statue of St. Junipero Serra in Mission Hills, Calif. The Franciscan priest
is hated by Social Justice Warriors for his work in establishing mission churches in the 18th century.
The group is seeking the removal of 13 statues in the city, including the equestrian monument
to Andrew Jackson in Jackson Square. That monument, which commemorates Jackson's victory at the
Battle of New Orleans in the War of 1812, has been a particular target of the group because Jackson
owned slaves and, as president, was responsible for violently forcing Native Americans off their
land in what came to be known as the Trail of Tears.
The group also wants the city to rename dozens of streets, buildings and institutions. In all,
there are more than 100 symbols it wants removed or renamed.
Andrew Schneck, 25, who was released from probation early last year after being convicted in
2015 of storing explosives, was charged in a criminal complaint filed in federal court, Acting
U.S. Attorney Abe Martinez said in a statement Monday.
Schneck was arrested Saturday night after a Houston park ranger spotted him kneeling in bushes
in front of the Dowling monument in the park, Martinez said.
When confronted Saturday night in the park, he tried to drink some of the liquid explosives
but spit it out, officials said.
The ranger then asked if he planned to harm the statue, and he said he did because he did not
"like that guy," according to a sworn statement submitted in federal court by an FBI agent investigating
the case.
This attachment is less surprising when we consider that sports fans typically use their fandom
as a means of telling themselves who they are. Sports fandom has become, to borrow a term from
the philosopher Michel Foucault, a practice of subjectivization -- a phenomenon in which individuals
subject themselves to a set of behavioral regulations, and by doing so, acquire a sense of their
own identities.
Just as a practicing Christian may create and obtain new forms of self-knowledge through confession,
prayer and the observance of Lent, a sports fan can come to understand himself as a particular
sort of person -- a Southerner, for example, or a "real man" -- by adhering to certain rituals,
like reading the sports page and watching ESPN every day to gather more and more knowledge about
his team, by talking with other fans about that team in the right ways (and proving that he knows
more than them), by learning and participating in the songs, chants, dress, tailgate rituals,
game-day traditions and home décor choices of its fans.
The extraordinary reach of football into fans' lives makes perfect sense when we see it for
what it is: the most popular mechanism in contemporary America for cultivating a sense of self
that is rooted in a community. In a world of uncertainty, fragmentation and isolation, sports
fandom offers us clear winners and losers, connection to family and community -- and at its best,
the assurance that we are really No. 1.
Yet this "we" of fandom ought to give us pause -- perhaps just as much as the scandals, the
violence and the exploitation that surround the game.
Lord Nelson, one of England's greatest heroes. My God.
Whether or not any or most of these people will succeed in their goal is not my concern here.
Rather, I'm interested in what this new period of iconoclasm tells us about where we are as a society,
and where we may be going.
Iconoclasm often accompanies radical, even violent, change in a society. The word comes from the
Greek meaning "image-smashers," and was first used to describe a turbulent period in the Byzantine
empire in which the
Emperor attempted to ban the use of religious icons as idolatrous. He failed, as you can see
by visiting an Orthodox church today. But the word stuck because it was useful.
Whether religious or political (e.g., French revolutionaries, militants in China's Cultural Revolution),
real iconoclasts are violent. The damage Reformation-era iconoclasm did to religious art in Europe
was incalculable.
For example, in England:
Even now there is denial about the scale of the erasing of our medieval past. The Tate estimates
we lost 90% of our religious art. It was probably even more than that. The destruction was on
a scale that far outstrips the modern efforts of Islamist extremists. And it was not only art
we lost, but also books and music.
We think of Henry VIII and the destruction of the monasteries, but that was not the end of
the destruction, it marked the beginning. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Cranmer, hailed
the reign of his son, the boy king Edward VI, as that of a new Josiah, destroyer of idols. After
his coronation an orgy of iconoclasm was launched. In churches rood screens, tombs with their
prayers for the dead, and stain glass windows, were smashed. The Elizabethan antiquarian John
Stow complained, some of this Christian Taliban "judged every image to be an idol", so that not
only religious art, but even the secular thirteenth century carvings of kings in Ludgate were
broken.
And:
The civil war, and the further destruction it brought, took place two generations after England
had gone through what has been described as a "cultural revolution designed to obliterate England's
memory of who and what she had been". There was not much of that past left. In our cultural history
the Reformation is nearly always depicted as a force that opened up England from a closed minded
past. But it was our knowledge of that past that was closed and if one future opened to us, we
will never know what might have been, not least in art.
That's often what iconoclasm tries to do: erase cultural memory. The zealotry with which iconoclasts
go after their targets has to do with their conviction that the image, and what it stands for, is
so offensive that it cannot be tolerated, nor can its defenders be reasoned with. They can only be
conquered by force.
In the case of our present iconoclasts, what they are attacking are aspects of what leftist academic
critics "whiteness" . It is
understandable why black Americans and others would object to monuments commemorating Confederate
figures (though it is worth asking why all of a sudden removing these objects became an urgent imperative
at this particular time). But those statues are the low-hanging fruit. As the New Orleans protesters
signal, any American figure who had anything to do with slavery is on the hit list. Donald Trump
was not wrong to wonder if George Washington and Thomas Jefferson are going to be next.
Both men were compromised
by slaveholding.
The argument in favor of eliminating Confederate statues but not those of the slaveholding Founders
is that we honor the latter in spite of their owning slaves, but the former have monuments
built to them because they fought to preserve slavery. That's a reasonable position to take,
but it assumes that reason is driving this iconoclasm. Why is Columbus under siege, both in his monuments
and in his holiday (e.g., the Oberlin, Ohio, city council just voted to replace Columbus Day with
Indigenous People's Day)? Why are vandals going after St. Junipero Serra and St. Joan of Arc?
Because they represent European culture and civilization, which entails Christianity. Because,
in the minds of the iconoclasts, they represent whiteness.
This morning I picked up a book from my shelves that I haven't looked at since it came out in
2004: the late political scientist Samuel Huntington's Who
Are We? The Challenges To America's National Identity. It was startling to read Huntington
in light of recent events, including most of all the Trump election. It was even more startling --
and deeply dismaying -- to read Huntington and consider that the odious white nationalists might
have a clearer understanding of what's going on now than respectable people. Let me explain.
Huntington, who taught at Harvard, writes that the country has been losing a sense of coherent
identity for some time now. It's not that Americans were a homogeneous people, but rather that its
Anglo-Protestant founding culture was able to assimilate immigrants. This has partly to do with strong
belief in the "American Creed," a commonly held set of assumptions about what the nation stood for:
liberty, equality under the law, equality of opportunity (if not of result), individualism, populism,
limited government, and free-market economics. These ideas, Huntington said, came out of Protestant
England and its reception of the Enlightenment.
On assimilation, the glaring exception, of course, were the descendants of the unwilling immigrants
among us: those of African slaves, for whom the American Creed did not apply. Nevertheless:
American national identity peaked politically with the rallying of Americans to their country
and its cause in World War II. It peaked symbolically with President Kennedy's 1961 summons: 'Ask
not what your country can do for you -- ask what you can do for your country.'
Starting in the 1960s, writes Huntington, "deconstructionists" of national identity encouraged
"individuals were defined by their group membership, not common nationality." Pushing identity politics
was a time-tested strategy for colonialist regimes, for the sake of dividing and conquering subject
peoples. But the governments of nation-states instead focused on uniting their disparate peoples.
(Indeed, the Civil Rights Movement was about compelling the white majority to extend the promises
of the Constitution and the Creed to black Americans -- in other words, to fully unite them to the
whole.)
Huntington says that this did not start from below, but was imposed from the top, by American
political, legal, and cultural elites. He writes, "These efforts by a nation's leaders to deconstruct
the nation they governed were, quite possibly, without precedent in human history."
By 1992, the liberal historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr. warned that all this had become "a cult,
and today it treatens to become a counter-revolution against the original theory of American as 'one
people,' a common culture, a single nation." Huntington continues, talking about how the promises
of the Civil Rights movement were turned on their head by racial preferences:
This replacement of individual rights by group rights and of color-blind law by color-conscious
law was never approved by the American people and received only intermittent, passive, and partial
acceptance by American legislators. "What is extraordinary about this change," the distinguished
sociologist Daniel Bell commented, "is that, without public debate, an entirely new principle
of rights has been introduced into the polity." "Group rights and equality of condition," Belz
agrees, "were introduced into public opinion as a new public philosophy that distinguishes among
individuals on racial and ethnic grounds and that ultimately denies the existence of a common
good."
The implications of this view were cogently stated by the Thernstroms: "Racial classifications
deliver the message that skin color matters -- profoundly. They suggest that whites and blacks
are not the same, that race and ethnicity are the qualities that really matter. They imply that
individuals are defined by blood -- not by character, social class, religious sentiments, age,
or education. But categories appropriate to a caste system are a poor basis on which to build
that community of equal citizens upon which democratic government depends."
If you want to talk about racializing American society, it didn't start with Richard Spencer and
his crew. Led by elites, America has been balkanizing along racial and ethnic lines since the late
1960s. Multiculturalism, that 1990s buzzword, led to colleges emphasizing ethnic studies and non-Western
courses, and devaluing those in Western civilization. Huntington, quoting Schlesinger Jr:
"The mood is one of divesting Americans of the sinful European inheritance and seeking redemptive
infusions from non-Western cultures." At the turn of the century, none of fifty top American colleges
and universities required a course in American history.
He who controls a culture's memory controls the culture. Huntington says that if a nation "is
a remembered as well as an imagined community, people who are losing that memory are becoming something
less than a nation."
One of the most remarkable things about Huntington's narrative is how this disuniting of America
was led by elites, despite resistance from the population. Look, from the vantage point of a nation
led by President Donald Trump, at this passage from Huntington's 2004 book. The political scientist
is talking about the simple demographic and political fact that whites, especially white males, are
losing power and place in US society:
It should not be difficult to see that "rebellion" and the reasons for it. It would, indeed,
be extraordinary and possibly unprecedented in human history if the profound demographic changes
occurring in America did not generate reactions of various sorts. one very plausible reaction
would be the emergence of exclusivist sociopolitical movements composed largely but not only of
white males, primarily working-class and middle-class, protesting and attempting to stop or reverse
these changes and what they believe, accurately or not, to be the diminution of their social and
economic status, their loss of jobs to immigrants and foreign countries, the perversion of their
culture, the displacement of their language, and the erosion or even evaporation of the historical
identity of their country. Such movements would be both racially and culturally inspired and could
be anti-Hispanic, anti-black, and anti-immigration. They would be the heir to the many comparable
exclusivist racial and anti-foreign movements that helped define American identity in the past.
Huntington points out that should they emerge, "the new white nationalists" (the term is political
scientist Carol Swain's) will not be like the fringe extremists. They don't advocate white supremacy,
but rather "racial self-determination and self-preservation." They will reject national identity,
and locate culture in race. They don't want white culture replaced by black or brown culture.
Furthermore, whites attracted to these ideas will be those sick and tired of preferential treatment
policies that violate the American Creed and disadvantage them. They will, Huntington predicts (remember,
he wrote this in 2004), be stirred up by the loss of jobs and widening income inequality due to globalization.
And they will hate the media for using what they consider to be bias against them. Finally, immigration
may make them feel that they have their backs against the wall.
Because of several sociological factors, Huntington says that middle class and lower middle class
whites have come to see themselves as victims. He quotes another political scientist who says these
whites feel that they have no real culture or identity, so they are embracing victimization.
Whites, in sum, will start to act like any other ethnic or racial group in America. I have to
confess that reading Huntington makes me question the (yes, liberal) media narrative on this new
battlefront in the culture wars. Broadly speaking, the media construe the conflict as racist whites
reacting to minority progress. No doubt there's truth to that, but that is not the whole truth, or
even most of the truth. What we're seeing might be thought of as the entirely predictable and normal
reaction of a particular group within a pluralistic society, when members of that group come to believe
that they are losing ground. In this sense, when white grievance and protest is presented by the
media as solely a manifestation of racism, it allows others to justify dismissing those
grievances and consider themselves morally responsible for doing so.
The makings of serious white nativist movements and of intensified racial conflict exist in
America. Carol Swain probably overdramatizes the possibility, but her eloquent warning deserves
serious though. We are witnessing, she says, "the simultaneous convergence of a host of powerful
social forces." These include "changing demographics, the continued existence of racial preference
policies, the rising expectations of ethnic minorities, the continued existence of liberal immigration
policies, growing concerns about job losses associated with globalization, the demands for multiculturalism,
and the Internet's ability to enable like-minded individuals to identify with each other and to
share mutual concerns and strategies for impacting the political system." These factors can only
serve "to nourish white racial consciousness and white nationalism, the next logical stage for
identity politics in America. As a result, America is "increasingly at risk of large-scale racial
conflict unprecedented in our nation's history."
Huntington also talks about the bottoming out of public trust in government and institutions.
It's been declining since 1960s. Today,
only the military,
police, and small business are the only institutions in whom trust has been stable or grown.
Think about what that means. Aside from small business people, by far the most trusted institutions
in society are those armed and charged with defending it from foreign enemies and maintaining internal
order. If that doesn't tell you something about how our society is coming undone, you are ineducable.
Huntington puts a troubling question to his readers:
Because of the Creed, "many Americans came to believe that America could be multiracial, multiethnic,
and lack any cultural core, and yet still be a coherent nation with its identity defined solely
by the Creed. Is this, however, really the case? Can a nation be defined only by a political ideology?
Several considerations suggest the answer is no. A creed alone does not a nation make."
He says that historically, American identity has involved four key components: Race, Ethnicity,
Culture (especially language and religion), and Ideology. Race and ethnicity as a defining core of
nation is long gone. Culture is "under siege" (even more so today than when Huntington wrote his
book). All that's left is ideology -- that is, the Creed. Writes Huntington: "For the Creed to become
the sole source of national identity would be a sharp break from the past."
He points out that the only other examples we have of creedal nations are the communist countries.
This is not an encouraging thought. After the ideology failed and the coercive power of the state
collapsed, those countries more or less came apart along ethnic lines. China is the great exception,
but it held together, he says, because of the widely shared Han Chinese identity.
Huntington concludes that because the American Creed emerged from Anglo-Protestant culture, it
probably won't survive its demise.
Finally, the Harvard political scientist predicted that the rise in US religious consciousness
in the 1980s and 1990s would would increase. He was quite wrong about that, as we now know. At end
of book, Huntington cites research showing that globally, "those countries that are more religious
tend to be more nationalist." I suppose this would help explain white Evangelical support for Donald
Trump. As regular readers know, I am averse to nationalism mixing with the Christian religion, because
it can easily lead to Christians making an idol of the state. That said, the data Huntington cites
would lead one to predict that the decline of Christianity in the US will also hasten the unraveling
of the social and cultural fabric.
If Christianity, with its universalist values, is declining, then something will take its place.
Something will fill the vacuum it leaves. We should not at all be surprised if this turns out to
be a heightened, even militant, racial consciousness. This is the logical outcome of identity politics.
This is what I mean by constantly saying that Social Justice Warriors of the Left have no idea
what kind of demons they are summoning from the Right. And American elites of all kinds have no idea
what they are doing by pushing the "diversity is our strength" lie. We are seeing from this side
of the Atlantic how the resolute refusal of the European political and cultural establishments to
take the radical challenge from mass immigration seriously is opening up a big space for the radical
right to flourish. It's going to happen here too, for somewhat different reasons, ones I've explored
in this blog post.
Taboo and sacredness are among the most important words needed to understand Charlottesville
and its aftermath. Taboo refers to things that are forbidden for religious or supernatural reasons.
All traditional societies have such prohibitions -- things you must not do, touch, or eat, not
because they are bad for you directly, but because doing so is an abomination, which may bring
divine retribution. But every society also makes some things sacred, rallying around a few deeply
revered values, people, or places, which bind all members together and make them willing to sacrifice
for the common good. The past week brought violent conflict over symbols and values held sacred
-- and saw President Trump commit an act of sacrilege by violating one of our society's strongest
taboos.
More:
That torchlight march, and the main rally the next day, gave the country the shocking spectacle
of fellow Americans chanting "Jews will not replace us" while making Nazi salutes and anti-black
slurs. It was a rejection -- a desecration -- of the story shared by most Americans in which we
are not a nation based on "blood and soil," we are a nation of immigrants who accepted the American
creed. That creed includes the idea that "all men are created equal." Americans know that we do
not yet live up to our aspirations, but publicly accepting the premises of the nation's founding
documents is a requirement for political leadership in America. To deny those premises is blasphemy,
and so white supremacism, the KKK, and neo-Nazis are by definition blasphemous.
By the way he handled the Charlottesville violence (appearing to equivocate):
In that moment, Trump committed the gravest act of sacrilege of his presidency. In that moment,
the president rendered himself untouchable by all who share the belief that Nazis and the KKK
are not just bad -- they are taboo.
I'm not so sure about that. The
new ABC News/Washington Post poll shows broad disapproval of the way Trump handled Charlottesville,
but strong approval of it among Republicans. If you go
deep into the poll , you'll see that 83 percent of Americans believe it is unacceptable to hold
white supremacist views. That would appear to validate Haidt's thesis. Happily, white supremacy remains
a taboo.
But it is plain that most Republicans do not believe Trump violated that taboo. That
is no small number of Americans. Whether you believe they are right or wrong in that assessment is
not the point. The point is that on an issue of intense feeling -- a feeling that Haidt correctly
likens to religious conviction -- there is no broad agreement on what constitutes violating that
taboo. My sense is that among elites -- including Republican elites -- there is shared conviction
that Trump touched the third rail. But that sense is not shared by the broad mass of GOP voters any
more than the Republican elite's 2016 disgust by candidate Donald Trump was.
Along those lines, I would love to see polling on the extent to which whites (Southern and otherwise)
see attacks on Confederate monuments as an attack on white supremacy, and the extent to which they
see these attacks as assaults on them . Again, notice the ABC/Post poll, which
shows that an overwhelming majority of Americans reject white supremacy. The
PBS/Marist poll from last week showed that only 27 percent of all Americans believe that Confederate
monuments should be taken down. The racial breakdown is: whites 25%; blacks 40%; Latinos 24%.
It is reasonable to assume that a nation in which over 80 percent of the people believe white
supremacy is unacceptable, but only 27 percent believe the Confederate statues should come down,
is not a nation that sees those statues as symbols of white supremacy. So what do they symbolize?
And who do they symbolize? The answer is important.
In light of Samuel Huntington's book, it seems to me that the culture war has shifted into a dangerous
phase, accelerated by both Donald Trump and progressive militants, who feed off each other. Our unity
is fragile -- more fragile than people think. This is not the time to be iconoclastic towards cultural
symbols. The fact that we are seeing iconoclasm emerge, and that it is not only unchallenged, but
actually encouraged by liberal elites, is a bad sign for the future. Remember how we started this
post: with a recognition that iconoclasm usually accompanies or precedes actual violence.
The disassembling of the American Creed has been a 50-year project of American elites, but we
are all going to reap the whirlwind. You cannot destroy symbols of people's identity without calling
forth rage.
"... All correct, I'm sure, but let me add a less obvious but ultimately more important hypothesis: the sudden hysteria is a result of decades of pent up exasperation over failure at achieving racial equality. ..."
"... Think of the Monumental Madness as social engineering quackery -- it probably will accomplish little if anything but it feels better than doing nothing. What encourages this desperate quest for today's "miracle" is that so many past solutions, at least according to all the learned experts, were "guaranteed" to perform as advertised and all failed. ..."
"... A similar guaranteed cure was political empowerment, that is, the Department of Justice would ensure that blacks would live in cities run by black elected officials and self-government would cure everything from crime to joblessness. The upshot, of course, have been urban disasters like Detroit and Selma, AL. And let's not forget tough anti-discrimination laws that would ban employers from using racist job descriptions, and affirmative action programs that would temporarily give a leg up to those who began the race a few steps behind. ..."
"... All and all, genuine successes are rare, typically only cosmetic, and if there were a Museum of Failed Cures for America's Racial Problems, it would be the size of Washington's Smithsonian. ..."
"... What has permitted this quackery to explode is that Confederate statutes and similar hateful objects are everywhere and the cost of exorcizing the evil spirits is trivial vis-a-vis past solutions. Just compare the difficulties of purging racism from a police department with scrutinizing at a city map to find streets named after slave-owners and demanding that they be re-named. The especially good news is that this quest can be life-time employment. In 2016 the Southern Poverty Law Center estimates that there were some 700 Confederate statutes and monuments on public property and who knows how many schools, streets and cemetery markers similarly radiate hate ( Wall Street Journal, August 22, 2017, A3). Further add 10 Army bases names after Confederate generals. So much hate, so little time. ..."
"... The cost of this hysteria far exceeds upsetting those who cherish the Confederate legacy. Yet again the public debate will carefully dodge that Truth That Dare Not Speak Its Name: racial equality is impossible, and its quest can only generate yet more Noble Lies and, worst of all, increasingly totalitarian measures that accomplish nothing other than needlessly expand government power. But then again, perhaps this is what today's madness is all about -- far easier to rave and rant about Robert E. Lee than confront a very unpleasant reality. By that standard, tearing down statutes and re-naming schools is a great investment for those intent on keeping the racial peace. ..."
"... Occam's Razor suggests a simpler explanation: After the election of a black President, and the election of a white President, who is doing nothing to roll back racial favoritism for blacks, blacks now feel that they can move to a highly visible form of white dispossession. They feel they're on top and they want to rub whitey's nose in it. ..."
"... Racial equality is off topic here. Racial hatred worldwide and at home is caused by competition between groups having gone deeply personal. The onset of this malaise is, more often than not, heritage from a Colonial past. Very stubborn to address because of it personal aspect, it still can be lessened by reducing ongoing factors which inflame it. ..."
"... "...this quest can be life-time employment." This quote explains much of this ..."
"... All correct, I'm sure, but let me add a less obvious but ultimately more important hypothesis: the sudden hysteria is a result of decades of pent up exasperation over failure at achieving racial equality. ..."
"... I think this is exactly it. It's like when a married couple gets into a big argument over some little thing around the house – it's always really about something else. And it's never an isolated incident – it's always an accumulation of resentment, not feeling appreciated, etc. ..."
Decades from now experts will surly debate today's Summer of Monumental Hysteria. After all, by
all objective criteria -- assuming, of course, that anything can be objective if it involves race
-- it should not have happened. How many Americans really can correctly identify Robert E. Lee, let
along Roger B. Taney? (According to one recent
survey , half the American public did not know when the Civil War happened.) Do racially sensitive
African Americans even notice the names on these statutes or plaques when they encountered them?
Why now since most of these offense-giving inanimate objects have existed for decades?
Most critically, is there any evidence to suggest that the very existence of a park or a school
horning a Confederate dignitary has adversely affected anybody, regardless of race in the slightest
way? Do black children enrolled in
J.E.B. Stewart Middle
School under-perform academically compared to those attending the
Malcolm
X Academy ? Does the Jefferson Memorial emit a dangerous racial version of
Radon ? Can visitors be "protected" by having a warning: Be advised that Jefferson once owned
slaves so proceed at one's own risk." Tellingly, nobody is even interested in an evidence-based argument
regarding this toxicity. "Everybody knows" that anything about the Confederacy is hateful and all
hatefulness has to be exorcised from American life since hate, like asbestos and tobacco, is bad.
At least leftish professors don't have to invent "studies" to make this point.
Some explanations for this sudden and unexpected hysteria immediately come to mind. There are
countless
organizations skilled at turning almost any event into a fund-raiser while those obsessed with
bashing President Trump will find any excuse to condemn him. And let's not forget all those who enjoy
cheap moral highs by marching against hate and bigotry even if the source of the "hate" is a coffee
mug decorated with the stars and bars.
All correct, I'm sure, but let me add a less obvious but ultimately more important hypothesis:
the sudden hysteria is a result of decades of pent up exasperation over failure at achieving racial
equality. In a nutshell, for at least a half-century, perhaps longer, America has struggled
with its "race problem" and while proposed solutions exceed dozens, and expenditures in the trillions,
progress has been scant. In fact, on at least some indicators, for example, illegitimacy and crime,
race-related matters where better off in the 1950s. Not even electing a black President has cured
America's race strife despite all the assurances that Obama would be a "post-racial" President that
would, once and for all, bring everybody together. What we have gotten for all our efforts is Black
Lives Matter and yet even more black condemnation of whites.
This accumulated frustration can be likened to a situation where a patient with a grim prognosis
grows ever more desperate as one standard treatment after the next fails to reverse the illness.
These frantic patients often gravitate to quacks despite the low odds of a cure. Nevertheless, the
very act of visiting a faith healer or drinking a magical herbal concoction outshines passivity.
And who knows, the world abounds with testimonials to quack cures and "doing something" calms the
despair.
Think of the Monumental Madness as social engineering quackery -- it probably will accomplish
little if anything but it feels better than doing nothing. What encourages this desperate quest for
today's "miracle" is that so many past solutions, at least according to all the learned experts,
were "guaranteed" to perform as advertised and all failed. Recall when the surefire cure
was improved education -- ending segregation, equalizing school expenditures, hiring more black teachers
and administrators, altering textbooks to make it more relevant to black youngsters, intensive pre-school
(Head Start, Sesame Street) and, more recently, eradicating unconscious teacher bias and no longer
disproportionately disciplining blacks. We've had Bush's
No Child Left Behind
and Obama's Race to
the Top and countless other expensive remedies.
A similar guaranteed cure was political empowerment, that is, the Department of Justice would
ensure that blacks would live in cities run by black elected officials and self-government would
cure everything from crime to joblessness. The upshot, of course, have been urban disasters like
Detroit and Selma, AL. And let's not forget tough anti-discrimination laws that would ban employers
from using racist job descriptions, and affirmative action programs that would temporarily give a
leg up to those who began the race a few steps behind.
All and all, genuine successes are rare, typically only cosmetic, and if there were a Museum
of Failed Cures for America's Racial Problems, it would be the size of Washington's Smithsonian.
In other words, by the summer of 2017, the frustration over repeated failures plus the lack of
any more "guaranteed" solutions on the agenda had created a perfect setting for quackery. Now, as
with all serious but likely intractable problems, the marketplace supplies something to meet these
needs, and to continue our parallel with those suffering from incurable cancer, taking down statutes
of Confederate soldiers or re-naming buildings is the equivalent of using
Laetrile among countless
other bogus cures . Yes, there is no scientific evidence that past crusade against "hate" has
even helped African Americans, but given the sorry record of past efforts, why not give it a try?
Hard to resist anything that feels so good.
What has permitted this quackery to explode is that Confederate statutes and similar hateful
objects are everywhere and the cost of exorcizing the evil spirits is trivial vis-a-vis past solutions.
Just compare the difficulties of purging racism from a police department with scrutinizing at a city
map to find streets named after slave-owners and demanding that they be re-named. The especially
good news is that this quest can be life-time employment. In 2016 the Southern Poverty Law Center
estimates that there were some 700 Confederate statutes and monuments on public property and who
knows how many schools, streets and cemetery markers similarly radiate hate ( Wall Street Journal,
August 22, 2017, A3). Further add
10 Army bases names after Confederate generals. So much hate, so little time.
This is vigilante justice and everyone, regardless of training or brains, can anoint themselves
as soldiers to overcome racial inequality and win a Participation Trophy. Be a hero; just find a
statute of Stonewall Jackson hidden in storage room.
The cost of this hysteria far exceeds upsetting those who cherish the Confederate legacy.
Yet again the public debate will carefully dodge that Truth That Dare Not Speak Its Name: racial
equality is impossible, and its quest can only generate yet more
Noble Lies and, worst of all,
increasingly totalitarian measures that accomplish nothing other than needlessly expand government
power. But then again, perhaps this is what today's madness is all about -- far easier to rave and
rant about Robert E. Lee than confront a very unpleasant reality. By that standard, tearing down
statutes and re-naming schools is a great investment for those intent on keeping the racial peace.
When will BLM and other radicals demand a statue to honor John Brown? Of all the characters
in our history, he should be their hero, but he was white! The US Navy even named a ship after
the battle where US Marines (led by Robert E. Lee) crushed his violent attempt to end slavery,
and executed Brown.
Occam's Razor suggests a simpler explanation: After the election of a black President,
and the election of a white President, who is doing nothing to roll back racial favoritism for
blacks, blacks now feel that they can move to a highly visible form of white dispossession. They
feel they're on top and they want to rub whitey's nose in it.
Next step will be explicit white-to-black transfers under the guise of "reparations for slavery."
Yet again the public debate will carefully dodge that Truth That Dare Not Speak Its Name:
racial equality is impossible, and its quest can only generate yet more Noble Lies and, worst
Racial equality is off topic here. Racial hatred worldwide and at home is caused by competition
between groups having gone deeply personal. The onset of this malaise is, more often than not,
heritage from a Colonial past. Very stubborn to address because of it personal aspect, it still
can be lessened by reducing ongoing factors which inflame it.
All correct, I'm sure, but let me add a less obvious but ultimately more important hypothesis:
the sudden hysteria is a result of decades of pent up exasperation over failure at achieving
racial equality.
I think this is exactly it. It's like when a married couple gets into a big argument over
some little thing around the house – it's always really about something else. And it's never an
isolated incident – it's always an accumulation of resentment, not feeling appreciated, etc.
Blacks wouldn't feel so slighted by a Confederate monument if they weren't already feeling
so disrespected, that they are seen as inferior, they have all the menial jobs and live in the
worst neighborhoods, that white people don't want to be around them, etc.
But white people working ever harder to be extra nice to blacks won't work either, and the
niceness will just be seen as condescending and patronizing, because it is. The problem is that
white people end up being humiliating to blacks just be existing. The races are different, and
the contrast is plain to see everywhere all the time.
Granted it's primarily white liberals more than blacks who are the instigators of tearing down
these monuments. But that's just because white liberals feel bad for blacks given the realities,
and also enjoy seeing themselves in the role of the heroes.
The problem is that everyone has bought into the mid-20th-century Franz Boas anthropology hoax
that there are no genetic differences between the races. The truth is getting out though, I think
it's happening right now – this might really be it. The establishment is obviously scared, hence
the increasing attempts at censorship.
Acknowledgement of this truth actually provides a way to understand and be more sympathetic
to the Confederates and the segregationists and other white people throughout history. They weren't
evil – they thought the races were different, and they were right, and they were struggling with
what to do about it.
This doesn't mean we need to agree with their conclusions – let's not bring back slavery. But
I think we all need to start thinking seriously about what comes next once the truth is acknowledged
and how to treat blacks as fairly as possible.
I'm hopeful that the solution will be just to stick to equality of individual opportunity and
accept the unequal group outcomes, while trying to make society better for people on the low end
of the IQ bell curve regardless of race. And if I'm feeling extra optimistic, maybe acknowledging
the truth will actually dial down the hostility, because we won't have to be thrashing around
looking for scapegoats all the time to blame for the differences.
One of the side-effects of these periodic moral panics that sweep through
American society --
Trayvon ,
Ferguson , Charlottesville -- is that they unmask people -- bring
out their inner nature.
Well, two weeks ago on the podcast
I said some kind words , or at least not un -kind words, about
TV talking head Charles Krauthammer. I said that while I'd written him off for
years as a, quote, "cucky neocon Israel-first GOP establishment front man,"
more recently I've been warming to him because of the mostly sensible things
he's said on Tucker Carlson's show.
Well, I'm biting my tongue. Last Tuesday on Fox News Krauthammer reverted
to cucky type, acting scandalized that Trump dared suggest there is anything
wrong with masked anarchists throwing rocks at citizens lawfully demonstrating.
Fortunately Laura Ingraham was there to counter him. I have,
as I have often noted , a very soft spot for Ms. Ingraham. Not to be shy
about it, I would walk over hot coals for her, leap the ice floes of a swollen
river for her, wrestle alligators for her.
So OK, I yield. I got Krauthammer right the first time: cucky neocon
shill.
"Shill"? A shill is a bogus competitor employed by a casino to promote
interest in the blackjack tables. Krauthammer isn't a shill.
He's had a certain political trajectory over the years: from mainline
Democrat to dissenting Democrat to mainline Republican (a trajectory traversed
over the period running from about 1979 to 1995). There is no indication
he's ever advocated anything but what he thinks or that he favors the party
he's not formally affiliated with; his antagonism to Trump is an indicator
of the crevasse which separates starboard opinion journalists from starboard
voters.
A real shill would be someone employed by the media to play a Republican.
The WaPoo hired David Weigel to do this, but the act wasn't credible after
his private correspondence was published in the Journ-O-List scandal.
Tyler Cowen, whose public writings suggest he's consumed with anxiety
about status considerations in faculty settings, might be seen as a manifestation
of libertarian pseudo-opposition on the George Mason payroll (since he never
critiques any progtrasn sacred cows). Bruce Bartlett, the Republican whose
signature is attacking other Republicans, might be considered a shill or
a poseur depending on who is paying his bills.
And, of course, 'neocon' is a nonsense term.
Krauthammer is a Canadian-reared scion of a very prosperous family. He's
lived pretty much all his life in New York, Montreal, Boston, and Washington.
His brother spent his adult life in Los Angeles. His son lives in the Bay
Area, his niece and her husband in Washington.
Between them, his parents lived in a half-dozen countries during the
course of their lives before landing in Quebec. He does not have any natural
affinity for the Trump constituency.
The best he can do is to attempt to appreciate it, and at that he is
very hit-and-miss.
At the planned rightist march in Berkeley today, very few conservatives
or alt-righters showed up, but antifa did. From the LA
Times :
Some anti-facists protesters, known as antifa, pounced when Joey Gibson, founder of the
right-wing group Patriot Prayer, showed up with his crew. The protesters beat one man with a
shield and another person wearing an American flag.
Some of the antifa protesters also threatened to break the cameras of anyone who filmed
them, including journalists. One reporter tweeted that he had been pepper sprayed in one
scuffle.
Moderate counter protesters were upset with the violence. "We need to get antifa out of
here," said Jack Harris, who helped break up a fight.
Andrew Noruk, who was wearing a T-shirt denouncing both the Republican and Democratic
parties when two young women came up to him and started yelling at him.
"You're a Nazi," they shouted, leaving Noruk, who said he came out to protest Trump
supporters, confused.
Noruk denounced the fights breaking out near the park, claiming antifa and black bloc
anarchists have given Trump's supporters exactly what they wanted: footage of violence
perpetrated against the presidents supporters in a historically liberal city.
"We can't keep producing this audio visual propaganda," he said. "It is recruiting for the
right."
Damn right it is. Why do the police allow this? Why are they not arresting antifa and
throwing the book at them? This is outrageous, the way the Berkeley police behaved. From the
Sacramento Bee :
Black-clad anarchists on Sunday stormed into what had been a largely peaceful Berkeley
protest against hate and attacked at least five people, including the leader of a politically
conservative group who canceled an event a day earlier in San Francisco amid fears of
violence.
The group of more than 100 hooded protesters, with shields emblazoned with the words "no
hate" and waving a flag identifying themselves as anarchists, busted through police lines,
avoiding security checks by officers to take away possible weapons. Then the anarchists
blended with a crowd of 2,000 largely peaceful protesters who turned up to demonstrate in a
"Rally Against Hate" opposed to a much smaller gathering of right-wing protesters.
Berkeley police chief Andrew Greenwood defended how police handled the protest, saying
they made a strategic decision to let the anarchists enter to avoid more violence.
Greenwood said "the potential use of force became very problematic" given the thousands of
peaceful protesters in the park. Once anarchists arrived, it was clear there would not be
dueling protests between left and right so he ordered his officers out of the park and
allowed the anarchists to march in.
More:
Police pulled one supporter of President Donald Trump out of the park over a wall by his
shirt as a crowd of about two dozen counter-demonstrators surrounded him and chanted "Nazi go
home" and pushed him toward the edge of the park. At least two people were detained by
officers for wearing bandannas covering their faces.
Anti-rally protesters chanted slogans "No Trump. No KKK. No fascist USA" and carried signs
that said: "Berkeley Stands United Against Hate."
So an American man cannot peacefully state his support for the President of the United
States without a mob of bullies surrounding him and physically coercing him?
Berkeley does not stand united against hate. Berkeley hates. Keep it up, leftists. You are
doing the work of your enemies. Here's a short clip showing an antifa mob attacking a teenage
boy Trump supporter and his father in Berkeley today, plus a short interview with them after
the event. Warning: there's an f-bomb in the first few seconds of the crowd footage:
"... the reason why the US always support foreign minorities to subvert states and use domestic minorities to suppress the majority US population is because minorities are very easy to manipulate and because minorities present no threat to the real rulers of the AngloZionist Empire ..."
"... To distill it to an aphorism, "A million guys with one buck, are no match for one guy with a million bucks." ..."
"... Another point: The poorer people are, the more vulnerable they are to identity politics. ..."
"... What do all races, genders, nationalities and creeds have in common? An overwhelming majority of them are working class. That's why I am white and Nationalist but not a White Nationalist. The working class wants work and wages. The ruling class gives us war and welfare. Solidarity is the only effective defense against concentrated wealth. Absent solidarity the working class is a one legged man in an ass kicking contest. Witness the American prole. Simultaneously under the lash and at each others throats. ..."
"... Some minorities are more equal than others. The Deep State, for example. ..."
"... It's impossible to have a functional political system when the political parties themselves are allowed to decide what issues voters get to vote on, and can racially divide the electorate by providing policy packages which play to voter weaknesses. This results in absurd results like blacks in the US voting for mass unskilled immigration via the Democrats, and poor American whites voting for increased defense spending and financial liberalisation via the Republicans. ..."
My thesis is very simple: the reason why the US always support
foreign minorities to subvert states and use domestic minorities to suppress
the majority US population is because minorities are very easy to manipulate
and because minorities present no threat to the real rulers of the
AngloZionist Empire. That's all there is to it.
I think that minorities often, but not always, act and perceive things in
a way very different from the way majority groups do. Here is what I have observed:
Let's first look at minorities inside the US:
They are typically far more aware of their minority identity/status
than the majority. That is to say that if the majority is of skin color
A and the minority of skin color B, the minority will be much more acutely aware
of its skin color. They are typically much more driven and active
then the majority. This is probably due to their more acute perception of being
a minority. They are only concerned with single-issue politics , that single-issue being, of course, their minority status. Since minorities
are often unhappy with their minority-status, they are also often resentful
of the majority . Since minorities are mostly preoccupied by their minority-status
linked issue, they rarely pay attention to the 'bigger picture' and that, in
turn, means that the political agenda of the minorities typically does
not threaten the powers that be . Minorities often have a deep-seated
inferiority complex towards the putatively more successful majority.
Minorities often seek to identify other minorities with which
they can ally themselves against the majority.
To this list of characteristics, I would add one which is unique to foreign
minorities, minorities outside the US: since they have no/very little prospects
of prevailing against the majority, these minorities are very willing
to ally themselves with the AngloZionist Empire and that, in turn, often
makes them depended on the AngloZionist Empire, often even for their physical
survival.
The above are, of course, very general characterizations. Not all minorities
display all of these characteristics and many display only a few of them. But
regardless of the degree to which any single minority fits this list of characteristics,
what is obvious is that minorities are extremely easy to manipulate and that
they present no credible (full-spectrum) threat to the Empire.
The US Democratic Party is the perfect example of a party which heavily relies
on minority manipulation to maximize its power. While the Republican Party is
by and large the party of the White, Anglo, Christian and wealthy voters, the
Democrats try to cater to Blacks, women, Leftists, homosexuals, immigrants,
retirees, and all others who feel like they are not getting their fair share
of the proverbial pie. Needless to say, in reality there is only one party in
the US, you can call the the Uniparty, the Republicracts or the Demolicans,
but in reality both wings of the Big Money party stand for exactly the same
things. What I am looking at here is not at some supposed real differences,
but the way the parties present themselves. It is the combined action of these
two fundamentally identical parties which guarantees the status quo in US politics
which I like to sum up as "more of the same, only worse".
I would like to mention an important corollary of my thesis that minorities
are typically more driven than the majority. If we accept that minorities are
typically much more driven than most of the population, then we also immediately
can see why their influence over society is often out of proportion with the
numerical demographical "weight". This has nothing to do with these minorities
being more intelligent or more creative and everything to do with them willing
to being spend much more time and efforts towards their objectives than most
people.
So we have easy to manipulate, small groups, whose agenda does not threaten
the 1% (really, much less!), who like to gang up with other similar minorities
against the majority. Getting scared yet? It gets worse.
Western 'democracies' are mostly democracies only in name. In most of them
instead of "one man one vote" we see "one dollar one vote" meaning that big
money decides, not "the people". Those in real power have immense financial
resources which they cynically use to boost the already totally disproportional
power of the various minorities. Now this is really scary:
Easy to manipulate, small groups, highly driven, whose agenda does not threaten
the ruling plutocracy, who like to gang up with other similar minorities against
the majority and whose influence is vastly increased by immense sums of money
invested in them by the plutocracy. How is that for a threat to real people
power, to the ideals of democracy?!
The frightening truth is that the combination of minorities and big money
can easily hijack a supposedly 'democratic' country and subjugate the majority
of its population to the "rule of the few over the many".
Once we look this reality in the face we should also become aware of a very
rarely mentioned fact: while we are taught that democracies should uphold the
right of the minorities, the opposite is true: real democracies should
strive to protect majorities against the abuse of power from minorities!
I know, I have just committed a long list of grievous thoughtcrimes!
At those who might be angry at me, I will reply with a single sentence: please
name me a western country where the views of the majority of its people are
truly represented in the policies of their governments? And if you fail to come
up with a good example, then I need to ask you if the majority is clearly not
in power, then who is?
I submit that the plutocratic elites which govern the West have played a
very simple trick on us all: they managed to focus our attention on the many
cases in history when minorities were oppressed by majorities but completely
obfuscated the numerous cases whereminorities oppressed majorities.
Speaking of oppression: minorities are far more likely to benefit and, therefore,
use violence than the majority simply because their worldview often centers
on deeply-held resentments. To put it differently, minorities are much more
prone to settling scores for past wrongs (whether real or imagined) than a majority
which typically does not even think in minority versus majority categories
.
Not that majorities are always benign or kind towards minorities, not at
all, humans being pretty much the same everywhere, but by the fact that they
are less driven, less resentful and, I would argue, even less aware of their
"majority status" they are less likely to act on such categories.
Foreign minorities play a crucial role in US foreign policy. Since time immemorial
rulers have been acutely aware of the " divide et impera " rule, there
is nothing new here. But the US has become the uncontested leader in the art
of using national minorities to create strife and overthrow a disobedient regime.
The AngloZionist war against the Serbian nation is the perfect example of how
this is done: the US supported any minority against the Serbs, even groups that
the US classified as terrorists, as long as this was against the Serbs. And,
besides being Orthodox Slavs and traditional allies of Russia, what was the
real 'crime' of the Serbs? Being the majority of course! The Serbs had no need
of the AngloZionists to prevail against the various ethnic (Croats) and religious
(Muslims) minorities they lived with. That made the Serbs useless to the Empire.
But now that the US has created a fiction of an independent Kosovo, the Kosovo
Albanians put up a
statue of Bill Clinton in Prishtina and, more relevantly, allowed the Empire
to build the
Camp
Bondsteel mega-base in the middle of their nasty little statelet, right
on the land of the Serbian population that was ethnically cleansed during the
Kosovo war. US democracy building at its best indeed
The same goes for Russia (and, the Soviet Union) where the US went as far
as to support the right of self-determination for
non-existing
"captive nations" such as "Idel-Ural" and "Cossakia" . I would even argue
that the Empire has created several nation ex nihilo (What in the world
is a "Belarussian"?!).
I am fully aware that in the typical TV watching westerner any discussion
of minorities focusing on their negative potential immediately elicits visions
of hammers and sickles, smoking crematoria chimneys, chain gangs, lynchmobs,
etc. This is basic and primitive conditioning. Carefully engineered events such
as the recent riots in Charlottesville only further reinforce this type of mass
conditioning. This is very deliberate and, I would add, very effective. As a
result, any criticism, even just perceived criticism, of a minority immediately
triggers outraged protests and frantic virtue-signaling (not me! look how good
I am!!).
Of course, carefully using minorities is just one of the tactics used by
the ruling plutocracy. Another of their favorite tricks is to created conflicts
out of nothing or ridiculously bloat the visibility of an altogether minor topic
(example: homo-marriages). The main rule remains the same though: create tensions,
conflicts, chaos, subvert the current order (whatever that specific order might
be), basically have the serfs fight each other while we rule .
In Switzerland an often used expression to describe "the people" is "the
sovereign". This is a very accurate description of the status of the people
in a real democracy: they are "sovereign" in the sense that nobody rules over
them. In that sense, the issue in the United States is one of sovereignty: as
of today, the real sovereign of the US are the corporations, the deep state,
the Neocons, the plutocracy, the financiers, the Israel Lobby – you name it,
anybody BUT the people.
In that system of oppression, minorities play a crucial role, even if they
are totally unaware of this and even if, at the end of the day, they don't benefit
from it. Their perception or their lack of achievements in no way diminishes
the role that they play in the western pseudo-democracies.
How do with deal with this threat?
I think that the solution lies with the minorities themselves: they need
to be educated about the techniques which are used to manipulate them, and they
need to be convinced that their minority status does not, in reality, oppose
them to the majority and that both the majority and the minorities have a common
interest in together standing against those who seek to rule over them all.
Striving to remain faithful to my "Putin fanboy" reputation, I will say that
I believe that Russia under Putin is doing exactly the right thing by giving
the numerous Russian minorities a stake in the future of the Russian state and
by convincing the minorities that their interests and the interest of the majority
of the people are fundamentally the same: being a minority does not have to
mean being in opposition to the majority. It is a truism that minorities need
to be fully integrated into the fabric of society and yet this is rarely practiced
in the real world. This is certainly not what I observe today in Europe or the
US.
The French author Alain Soral has proposed what I think is a brilliant motto
to deal with this situation in France. He has called his movement "Equality
and Reconciliation" and as of right now, this is the only political movement
in France which does not want to favor one group at the expense of the other.
Everybody else either wants to oppress the "français de souche" (the native,
mostly White and Roman-Catholic majority) on behalf of the "français de branche"
(immigrants, naturalized citizens, minorities), or oppress the "français de
branche" on behalf of the "français de souche". Needless to say, the only ones
who benefit from this clash is the ruling Zionist elite (best represented by
the infamous
CRIF , which makes the US AIPAC look comparatively honorable and weak).
As for Soral, he is vilified by the official French media with no less hate
than Trump is vilified in the US by the US Ziomedia.
Still, equality and reconciliation are the two things which the majorities
absolutely must offer the minorities if they want to prevent the latter to fall
prey to the manipulation techniques used by those forces who want to turn everybody
into obedient and clueless serfs. Those majorities who delude themselves and
believe that they can simply solve the "minority problem" by expelling or otherwise
making these minorities disappear are only kidding themselves. To 'simply' solve
the "minority problem' by cracking down on these minorities inevitably
"While we all typically [have] several co-existing identities inside
us (say, German, retired, college-educated, female, Buddhist, vegetarian,
exile, resident of Brazil, etc. as opposed to just "White"), in manipulated
minorities one such identity (skin color, religion, etc.) becomes over-bloated
and trumps all the others." -- The Saker
That's a great critique of "identity politics" and one reason why identity
politics is self-limiting, maybe even self-destructive (as well as destructive
of democracy).
Another point: The poorer people are, the more vulnerable they are to identity politics.
It's like an Indian movie I once saw that was constructed as a family
history. When the family experienced many setbacks, one after another, until
they were all disheartened, the patriarch of the family spoke up, saying,
"Remember, we are Bengali!" That was the turning point in the film: after
that things began to improve for the family so that the film could have
a happy Bolliwood ending.
That was like saying, "Remember, we have a proud history!"
There was also a Yiddish joke that someone told me, like this: There
was a young Jewish man in some place like Minsk, somewhere in Eastern Europe,
and he saw an advertisement by none other than a great member of the Rothschild
banking family. The ad said "Wanted: young Jewish man for difficult and
physically challenging assignment." So the hero (or anti-hero?) of this
story set out immediately for Paris. Unfortunately, our hero experienced
many tragedies, even losing an arm and a leg. But he was determined and
he persevered, with the help of a crutch. Finally, he had to camp out in
front of the gate of the Rothschild mansion outside of Paris.
Eventually,
the great Rothschild had his carriage stop and spoke to the man, saying,
"You know, I've seen you standing here day after day what is it that you
want?"
Our hero brought out the advertisement that he had carried with him
through all his misadventures. The great Rothschild read the advertisement
and exclaimed, "What's the matter with you? Did you not read that the job
was physically challenging?" To which our hero responded, "Yes, but, Mr.
Rothschild, the ad says "young Jewish man."
Being myself a gentile, I did not at first get the joke, but eventually
I got a chuckle out of it.
What do all races, genders, nationalities and creeds have in common?
An overwhelming majority of them are working class. That's why I am white
and Nationalist but not a White Nationalist. The working class wants work
and wages. The ruling class gives us war and welfare. Solidarity is the
only effective defense against concentrated wealth. Absent solidarity the
working class is a one legged man in an ass kicking contest. Witness the
American prole. Simultaneously under the lash and at each others throats.
I also lived for 5 years in Washington, DC, which was something like
70% Black and, at the time, openly and often rudely hostile to Whites
(I never thought of myself as a color before, but I sure felt like one
during those 5 years). And now I am a "legal alien" living in the US.
Anyway, while I am "White" (what a nonsensical category!)
Nonsensical? Really? Both the DC blacks and their DC (((paymasters)))
hate your "category" but you're still confused and want to hold hands and
educate them ? Do you have children?
The French author Alain Soral has proposed what I think is a brilliant
motto to deal with this situation in France. He has called his movement
"Equality and Reconciliation" and as of right now, this is the only
political movement in France which does not want to favor one group
at the expense of the other.
Demographically speaking, the native French group ( white category
FYI) is already doomed to lose their homeland unless they reverse the invasion
and punish the plotters. Reconciling with their invaders would be assisted
suicide, surely. Almost as bad as the forced miscegenation idea proposed
by Nicolas "Jew Midget" Sarkozy a few years back.
You need to wake up and check for any vitamin/mineral deficiencies you
might have, Saker. Our ancestors butchered countless invaders to
give us the land we're standing on – they didn't reconcile it away.
One single question shows how profoundly silly The Saker's his "solution"
is:
Why would it be easier to convince resentful, envious minorities to just
get along with the majority than to convince the elites to act better, according
to the noblesse oblige principle?
Elites will always misuse their power. Minorities/majorities will always
quarrel and resent each other.
Give us (back) ethnically homogeneous states instead. No panacea, but
the besf we can hope for.
The ruling elites of US (both democrats and republicans) can be divided
into 2 categories:
1. The ones who think that they are better because of their race.
2. The ones who think that they are better because they were able to overcome
the feeling of being better because of their race. In other words – the
morally superior ubermensch instead of racially superior ubermensch.
In reality, category 2 doesn't exist (at least not among the ruling elites)
– they are all liars. They haven't been able to overcome any feeling of
superiority, they just added another one – the one of moral superiority.
Actually, the ruling elites for the most part are still category 1, only
pretending to be category 2. Not only do they feel they are superior to
other races, they feel they are superior to their own race – the poorer
members of it.
The ruling elites are manipulating the population of US into declaring
that they belong in either one of these 2 camps. Result: Charlottesville
riots.
This post would sound eminently reasonable if the white identitarians
had any kind of state blessing, but they are a de facto criminal element
being suppressed. Not for the sake of democracy, but for the sake of the
elite who are Jewish, not Zionist, and not very Anglo.
White nationalism would have zero credibility if actual white leadership
were transparently in control over the state. The wellspring of their support
comes from the fact that what whites do exist in the power structure are
absolutely and transparently subservient to other interests.
One of the problems is that the US was (and still is) a republic-with
a small r. The republican form of government assumes that the voters are
too stupid or ignorant to pass laws, so they have to hire professional political
types to write their governing laws for them. The politicos are easy targets
for the powers that be to manipulate, evidently.
The problem is – as always – with the numbers. The large influx of migrants
is changing the demographics and that changes the goals and behaviour of
each group. The minority groups can see the promised land in the future
when they will take over. The majority knows that they cannot stop it by
"equality and reconciliation" (whatever that would mean in practise, maybe
endless workshops to whine about each other?).
The numbers game has gone too far and there is no easy way to restore
stability. E.g. the labor markets in the West cannot be fixed without drastic
restrictions on supply of new labor from the Third World. The article has
some valuable insights, but the lame 'solution' it suggests is useless.
Another issue not addressed is that many minorities are a majority in
their regions leading to a geographic instability by putting borders in
question. That separation actually makes sense in many cases.
What we have had for some time are the elites behaving badly, they have
stopped being responsible and thoughtful. The best solution I can see would
be for the elites to sober up and start taking their role seriously again.
Short of that, we will have chaos, and not the fun type of chaos. Those
are the wages of the baby boomer idiocy.
Manipulated majorities are an even greater danger.
At the last French elections the political elite did anything possible to
prevent Front National getting legal political power.
With fifteen % of the votes, of those who bothered to vote, some 44%, Macron
got an absolute majority in French parliament, some 360 seats.
FN six or so.
Yet, alas, anyone knows he won the elections, but not the streets.
As his popularity goes down, Sun King habits, the strikes announced for
11 and 12 September will show who really is in power in France.
If you want to lesson the influence of minorities in western democracies,
then its essential to provide a more a la carte form of democracy that is
less open to elite manipulation. Options include getting rid of political
parties and voting directly for heads of government departments, or allowing
voters to vote on which party gets to run each of the key government departments.
It's impossible to have a functional political system when the political
parties themselves are allowed to decide what issues voters get to vote
on, and can racially divide the electorate by providing policy packages
which play to voter weaknesses. This results in absurd results like blacks
in the US voting for mass unskilled immigration via the Democrats, and poor
American whites voting for increased defense spending and financial liberalisation
via the Republicans.
There is no way around this problem without radically changing the political
system.
Easier said than done. Most minorities would support anti-majority politics
even IF they knew they were being manipulated. You severely underestimate
the human attraction to tribalism.
A more plausible plan would be to turn minorities against so-called 'AngloZionist'
values, which is already partially complete, since minorities are rarely
Anglos and therefore don't subscribe to their values as much. Have a look
at any SJW gathering. Always disproportionately white, even in very diverse
cities. It's much easier to convince even longtime resident minorities like
blacks that things like transgenderism is bullshit, than it is to convince
emotionally committed whites.
This would result in a country that allows multiple competing tribalisms,
but none of which would be very useful as pawns by the elites. Not as good
as homogeneity, but better than the current situation.
"Everybody gang up against the WEIRDs" is a nice thought and I would
love to see it, but it's just not very likely.
There is only effective way defuse the explosive potential of minorities:
Educate minorities and explain to them that they are being manipulated
Educate those joining anti-minority movements that they are also being
manipulated
Offer the minorities a future based on equality and reconciliation
Put the spotlight on those who fan the flames of conflict and try to
turn minorities and majorities against each other
Surprisingly weak and naive.
A simple question:
What's wrong with Serb approach in Kosovo before Western intervention?
Spare me "virtue signalling" .. if you can.
I think it would've worked if West hadn't stepped up with overwhelming
FORCE.
It worked in "Operation Storm". Serbs as victims but that's precisely the
point.
Perfect example how it CAN work.
So .following the same logic ..if IF .West used the same approach why
it wouldn't work?
Say .French government does exactly the same as Croats did with Serbs in
Croatia or Serbs with Albanians/whatever in Kosovo.
There is only effective way defuse the explosive potential of minorities:
Educate minorities and explain to them that they are being manipulated
Educate those joining anti-minority movements that they are also being
manipulated
While those ideas have merit, I predict they'll be impossible to implement.
Education is an active process and one cannot "be" educated in the passive
sense. People, like other creatures, can be schooled and trained, but that's
not the same as acquiring an education.
There are several reasons why the majority will never acquire any meaningful
education. Most people simply do not possess the requisite curiosity to
begin any sort of educational process and would rather make decisions based
on immediate emotions. A true education requires active questioning of the
standing myths and myths are evidently too comfortable for most to discard
or even doubt. Most folks appear too lazy and or too timid to face the hard
truths and would rather follow the dictates of some slick Peruna peddler.
A shocking percentage of people apparently love the feeling of "superiority"
of "knowing" something even if their belief is utter, easily discardable,
hogwash and actively reject any challenges to it. For example, the mindless
charge of "conspiracy theorist" is used to dismiss, without thinking, anything
but the spoon fed drivel they see on teevee.
I could go on, but this is already too long and is mostly preaching to
the choir.
Which is a key reason that things are not likely to improve for at least
a few more millennia. Accepting wages is a form of slavery, and most folks
simply cannot see beyond that trap. The system has evolved so that people
readily accept the idea of wages as a necessity (along with the extortion
and theft known as taxes). There's a huge difference between making (earning)
a living and holding a job for wages, but I doubt I'll ever be able to convince
anyone of that.
Tolstoy wrote about the concept of wage slavery over a century ago and
it makes good reading to this day.
"But in reality the abolition of serfdom and of [chattel] slavery was
only the abolition of an obsolete form of slavery that had become unnecessary,
and the substitution for it of a firmer form of slavery and one that holds
a greater number of people in bondage."
The ruling class gives us war and welfare. Solidarity is the only
effective defense against concentrated wealth. Absent solidarity the
working class is a one legged man in an ass kicking contest. Witness
the American prole. Simultaneously under the lash and at each others
throats.
All true, except the part about solidarity, which would definitely be
a huge step in the right direction for us proles and peasants, but is probably
as unobtainable as true education of the masses.
As I see it, the best an individual can do is to toss a monkey wrench
into the system whenever we can get away with it, but that requires an understanding
of who are enemies are and that seems nearly impossible to achieve. Thus
it's effective only in theory. In practice, it's probably as ephemeral as
a gas emission in a tornado.
Short of that, we will have chaos, and not the fun type of chaos.
Chaos is on the march.
It appears the minority has magically organized itself and planned
a 10-day march from Charlottesville to DC, there to demand the impeachment/removal
of Donald Trump, and to carry on a non-violent occupation (irony
alert).
Manipulated majorities are an even greater danger.
An even bigger threat is the manipulat ing minorities aka certain
(most?) elements of the money bag crowd.
This problem has been recognized for millennia and was discussed in detail
by many early Americans who nevertheless argued in favor of a constitution
and a centralized bureaucracy that favored the rich.
Virtue cannot dwell with wealth either in a city or in a house.
-Diogenes of Sinope, quoted by Stobaeus, iv. 31c. 88
But if you will take note of the mode of proceedings of men, you
will see that all those who come to great riches and great power have
obtained them either by fraud or by force; and afterwards, to hide the
ugliness of acquisition, they make it decent by applying the false title
of earnings to things they have usurped by deceit or by violence.
- Niccolo Machiavelli , HISTORY OF FLORENCE AND OF THE AFFAIRS OF
ITALY, Book 3 chap 3Para 8
" wealth is no proof of moral character; nor poverty of the want
of it. On the contrary, wealth is often the presumptive evidence of
dishonesty; and poverty the negative evidence of innocence."
THOMAS PAINE, DISSERTATION ON FIRST-PRINCIPLES OF GOVERNMENT, 1795
AfroAmericans who are descended from slaves should take into account
the fact that their ancestors were protected because they had value. As
a result they now number some 42 million and produced the last President.
Comparison with the indigenous natives who after centuries of genocide number
about 2 million and are mostly on reservations should give pause.
Nonwhites within the borders of the US are not innocent bystanders They
are enthusiastically voting The Historic Native Born White American Majority
into a violently persecuted racial minority within the borders of America..
If you have a greater identification with Muslim "Americans" and Hindu
"Americans" than European American Natives then just go back to Russia..and
take the Hindus and Muslims with you.
It wasn't very nice of you not to let my comment go through yesterday
in response to commenter Eric .on The Vineyard of the Saker
You are waging demographic warfare against my Racial Tribe .
@WorkingClass The Chinese in California are Chinese Race Nationalist
The Hindus in California are Hindu Race Nationalists You are a Civic Nationalist
Cuck.
Using minorities as an excuse to oppress majorities is a classic colonial
technique. The British set themselves up as the "protectors" of the Muslims
in India, the Turks in Cyprus and the Protestants in Ireland, for example.
Putin justifies his actions in Ukraine by claiming that he is "protecting"
the ethnic Russian minority from the dastardly ethnic Ukrainian majority.
Ditto for the various cyber-attacks on Estonia. One assumes that the same
treatment would be meted out to the Belarusians if they dared to assert
their national sovereignty. The US captive nations legislation the author
refers to includes Belarus (designated "White Ruthenia"), Ukraine and the
three Baltic republics. I am unaware of any alliance ever having existed,
or existing today, between Serbia and Russia. Like "Eurasia", that "alliance"
seems to have been invented by US neocons when they were trying to use Putin
as an "asset".
Is it ok with you that the Chinese and Hindus in California voted The
Historic Native Born White American Majority in California into a racial
minority?
"Manipulated minorities represent a major danger to democratic states."
Well, yes. But the manipulation of minorities to change legal frameworks
or disassemble governments has been ongoing since the French Revolution.
'They' first foster a sense of oppression, more or less justified, then
move to grant the new rights. Monarchies suffered the strategy. Europe should
know the drill, witness the received oral tradition "Czechoslovaquia is
another spelling for Rothschild."
Breaking up the US along racial lines is exactly what 'they' want. They
want the fighting "whites" to come out, give the reason for changes in law.
The Trump impeachment is deliberate provocation.
There has never been a 'white nation', it is a silly, ahistorical idea.
Nations are built around culture. Fight for the culture. Use the damn high
IQ.
@Issac "White nationalism would have zero credibility if actual white
leadership were transparently in control over the state."
Nope, but thanks for playing. White nationalism would have zero credibility
if the leadership actually promoted American–WASP–interests. There is no
escaping the Posterity clause, period. There is no magic dirt, no civic
nationalism, no immersion in American culture, that can replace descendants
of the English colonists that understand the importance of the Rights of
Englishmen. The US was never intended to be the world's largest rest stop
for every poor downtrodden person on Earth. Minorities now all undocumented
immigrants since 1965 (Hart-Cellar).
Homogeneous nation's are born from Heterogeneous nation's. We are witnesses
to the birth pains. The length of the labor depends on how long the majority
will tolerate the minorities. Reconciliation isn't just impossible–its not
even on the table, unless you reverse time. They. Have. To. Go. Back.
@Anon Well..you are wrong about that..America since it's inception has
always been a White Nation If you don't believe me..just ask Professor Noel
Ignatieve-the Father of White Studies. Where I differ from Professor Noel
Ignatieve:I think it's GREAT that America has historically been a White
Nation as did Socialist Labor Leader Samuel Gompers.
As far as your last two sentences go:Bring back the 1888 Chinese Legal
Immigrant Exclusion Act!!!!
Saker
The highly racialized Nonwhite Democratic Party Voting Bloc is the Voting
Bloc for War on Christian Russia not Trump's Whitey Racist Voting Bloc..
@Intelligent Dasein Damned right. If anything, he is the descendant
of African slave traders . But his skin is sort of black and he's
got a funky name, so he can pass as one of the "oppressed" minorities.
@jacques sheete 1 Timothy 5:18 ESV /
For the Scripture says, "You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the
grain," and, "The laborer deserves his wages."
Wages are as old as dirt. I can understand why you find them objectionable.
But with what will you replace them?
There's a huge difference between making (earning) a living and holding
a job for wages, but I doubt I'll ever be able to convince anyone of
that.
Try me.
I was a union man back in the day when private sector unions were active
and had support in Washington. We had a contractual relationship with employers
that was qualitatively different from serfdom or chattel slavery and a huge
improvement over the wage slavery that prevailed before the American labor
movement.
As ideologies go the Anarchists have the best of it. But even they are
Utopians. Capitalism sux. There will never be a free market utopia. But
neither will there be a workers paradise. Human beings are limited in what
they can accomplish by human nature. That's the law. I'm only interested
in what works in the real world, however imperfectly.
Nature does not know political frontiers. She first puts the living
beings on this globe and watches the free game of energies. He who is
strongest in courage and industry receives, as her favorite child, the
right to be the master of existence.
If a people limits itself to domestic colonization, at a time when
other races cling to greater and greater surfaces of the earth's soil,
it will be forced to exercise self-restriction even while other nations
will continue to increase.
For some day this case will occur, and it will arrive the earlier
the smaller the living space is that a people has at its disposal. As,
unfortunately only too frequently, the best nations, or, better still,
the really unique cultured races, the pillars of all human progress,
in their pacifistic blindness decide to renounce the acquisition of
new soil in order to content themselves with 'domestic* colonization,
while
inferior nations know full well how to secure enormous areas on this
earth for themselves, this would lead to the following result:
The culturally superior, but less ruthless, races would have to limit,
in consequence of their limited soil, their increase even at a time
when the culturally inferior, but more brutal and more natural, people,
in consequence of their greater living areas, would be able to increase
themselves without limit.
In other words: the world will, therefore, some day come into the
hands of a mankind that is
inferior in culture but superior in energy and activity.
For then there will be only two possibilities in the no matter how
distant future: either the world will be ruled according to the ideas
of our modern democracy, and then the stress of every decision falls
on the races which are stronger in numbers, or the world will be dominated
according to the law of the natural order of energy, and then the people
of brute strength will be victorious, and again, therefore, not the
nations of self-restriction.
But one may well believe that this world will still be subject to
the fiercest fights for the existence of mankind.
In the end, only the urge for self-preservation will eternally succeed.
Under its pressure so-called 'humanity,' as the expression of a mixture
of stupidity, cowardice, and an imaginary superior intelligence, will
melt like snow under the March sun. Mankind has grown strong in eternal
struggles and it will only perish through eternal peace.
Hint: today in an appearance on an internationally broadcast program,
a minion from Foundation for Defense of Democracy (FDD) dismissed as "conspiracy
theory" the suggestion that the USA/(Trump admin) is involved in Afghanistan
"because Afghanistan has vast lithium resources, which US needs for new
technologies" [see this 2010 report,
Read More
Minorities are nothing but trouble, even though political correctness
demands that we not see that or dare to say so. History offers not a single
– NOT ONE SINGLE – example of harmony and mutual love between the minorities
and the majority in any community/country/nation. Prove me wrong, cite one
significant exception.
Don't cite Italian-Americans and Polish-Americans in the American melting
pot. They came with full intent to be melted, they came white, Christian,
and western in outlook and culture. They came pre-cooked for the melting
pot. Can't say the same for the Muslims streaming in today. Nor for the
Hindus and the Orientals coming in today. Leaving aside the Muslims (not
even worth discussing in any talk of assimilation), the Hindus and Orientals
today stand aside and apart, both groups highly conscious of their groups'
share in the American pie. The Hispanics will make Spanish the lingua Franca
– already largely done in California. So what exactly can the melting of
Spanish and English languages produce? Spanglish? No, it will be one or
the other, depending on which group acquires demographic majority and sufficient
political clout. Who will melt whom?
Is it ok with you that the Chinese and Hindus in California voted
The Historic Native Born White American Majority in California into
a racial minority?
Please elaborate on what you mean. I definitely do not see myself as
a racial minority in California.
Manipulated Minorities Represent a Major Danger for Democratic States
The solution is an easy one – we must abandon the Jew Matrix of identity
politics and return to the Christian Matrix of neighborliness.
Jew thought is about biological identity, and all the fear and hate associated
with it – the Christian philosophical mindset is an intellectual entreaty
to "love your neighbor as you love yourself." Hmm – one favors gonad driven
actions – the other using our brains to overcome our biology, and make peace
and abundance.
The differences are stark and profound – we can see what the Jew way
has brought us – Jew tribalism is killing America and the West.
If we want a just kind world we cannot abandon philosophical Christianity.
Philosophical Christianity is not about "the virgin birth" and "the ascension
into heaven" – it is about a practical way to peaceably live with each other
and build an abundance for all.
@Cloak And Dagger Non-Hispanic white is now down to 37.7% of the California
population as of 2016 according to the U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts ..probably
less if you include all the uncounted illegals.
"I would even argue that the Empire has created several nation ex nihilo
(What in the world is a "Belarussian"?!)."
Hey, us Anglo-Zionists didn't create Belarus. That was an indigenous
or possibly German puppet state created (sort of) in early 1918. It was
then conquered by the Bolsheviks and reborn as the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist
Republic, a constituent republic of the USSR till it fell apart, at which
point it became (sort of) independent.
The Anglo-Zionists had nothing to do with any of this, with probable
exception of the collapse of the USSR.
@Intelligent Dasein Actually, if we go back a dozen or two generations,
it's probable most people on the planet are descended from both slaveowners
and slaves. Especially if you're a little loose with the definition of slave.
@Bragadocious If we had ever made a serious consistent effort to kill
all the Indians, they'd be gone. But there seem to be quite a few of them
still around. About 5M, in fact, considerably more than lived in the boundaries
of the USA in 1491.
Argentina had similar Indian problems during the same time period (late
19th century) we were fighting our final Indian wars. But they had a different
approach: extermination.
Quite successful at it, too. Very few Indians left in Argentina. And
they didn't import any other minorities, which means Argentina is now upwards
of 90% "white." Much more so than USA, in fact.
If we accept that minorities are typically much more driven than
most of the population, then we also immediately can see why their influence
over society is often out of proportion with the numerical demographical
"weight". This has nothing to do with these minorities being more intelligent
or more creative and everything to do with them willing to being
spend much more time and efforts towards their objectives than most
people.
It's true that there is greater activism, but the key ingredient is probably
ethnic patronage.
A.H. gave an (approving) explanation of how it works:
"In the old Austria, nothing could be done without patronage. That's
partly explained by the fact that nine million Germans were in fact rulers,
in virtue of an unwritten law, of fifty million non-Germans. This German
ruling class took strict care that places should always be found for Germans.
For them this was the only method of maintaining themselves in this
privileged situation. The Balts of German origin behaved in the same way
towards the Slav population."
Hitler's Table Talk. Conversation Nş 109, 15th-16th January 1942
American Jewry has been following the same policy since the early 1900′s,
pushing for Jewish candidates in key placings, who if successful, are expected
to return the favour. On a "level playing field" this has a ratchet effect
whereby corporate management and key media, finance and government positions
can be gradually taken over with Anglos squeezed out in a rather unobvious
way ("He wasn't the right candidate for reasons A,B,C X,Y,Z").
Educate the minorities! I have bwen hearing that for over 50 years. I
believe that was a substantial rationale for Federal Aid to education. How
has it worked? What does the US Census data show for the indicator median
education level persons over 25 years of age in 1960 demonstrate when compared
to 2010? Compare for both white and black. Wow! we all are much smarter.
Okay, as Rodney King so aptly stated it "why can' t everbody just get along?"
@Wally okay wally, i'm only going to say this once, so please pay attention.
the gas chambers were but one method by which jews were killed. starvation,
disease, forced labor, firing squads, killed legions. what if it was only
4 million jews who perished in the camps? or 3? does that make it better.
one last thing: elie wiesel is not the wonderful man he is purported to
be.
Wages are as old as dirt. I can understand why you find them objectionable.
But with what will you replace them?
Dear Sir, as I've often stated, I like what you have to say and agree
with 99% of it. I also respect the fact that your reply to me was obviously
respectful and sincere.
My usual answer to your question is to replace them with nothing. For
example if I had a case of the gleet, I'd rather not replace it; I'd rather
do without. Instead of wages and a time clock, I advocate finding other
(hopefully respectable) sources of income.
I realize that in this environment, it's nearly impossible to do without
wages, but that shows how much our system sux, hence my objection to them
and the system. I pretty much became disgusted with the concept after working
at a few jobs that were really akin to slavery or some other unsavory paid
profession, so I worked to make a living without punching time clock. That's
not to say that I did not receive money for my services, but I managed to
do without a direct boss during my earning days. Several other rather cantankerous
members of my family manged to do the same, and some still do. I'm not saying
that to brag, but to point out that it can be done.
I do admit that it now seems nearly impossible to do that sort of thing,
but a close neighbor, in his thirty's, manages to do that and does quite
well. He does have the advantage of both a good work ethic and access to
a family business though.
The bottom line for me is that it's too bad that we have to submit to
bosses for the most part to earn a living. From that we seem to learn to
submit to other forms of "authority" with little or no questioning, and
it seems to be a downhill slide from there. Also, the more power the bosses
get, they more they control, and the less chance there is for people to
become independent. that's no way to live.
Since you consider "working for wages" as not "making a living,"
That is a false statement. It is both illogical and unreasonable based
on what I actually said.
Working for wages in one of several ways of earning a living. It just
happens to be, in my way of thinking, one of the least desirable for many
reasons.
I'm curious what you would consider to constitute "making a living."
Educate the minorities! I have bwen hearing that for over 50 years.
I believe that was a substantial rationale for Federal Aid to education.
Most folks are entirely ineducable and seem to like it that way. Of course,
it's a fine sounding pretext for mass brainwashing and it's attendant bureaucracy
and source of profits.
How has it worked?
It's probably worked just as intended but not at all as advertised!
See John Taylor Gatto and Upton Sinclair's "The Goslings" and the Goosestep"
which basically describe schooling in America as a tool for corporations.
what if it was only 4 million jews who perished in the camps? or
3? does that make it better?
Well, in several countries you can go to jail, and many have, for saying
it was less than 6, so go figure. Norman Finkelstein was destroyed by the
"Holocaust Industry" for showing in the simplest terms that if you add up
the numbers of supposed "victims" and "survivors", the official figures
are patently absurd. The more you dig, the more absurd it gets.
The Saker: You are not a "minority." You are a Caucasian, the European
branch, ethnically Russian. You are Christian, specifically Orthodox. You
are one of the interesting groups that make up the Caucasian peoples. You
have nothing in common with blacks/Asians.
The Democratic party is the party of nonwhites, non-Christians, sexual
degenerates. Manipulation has nothing to do with this. Minorities know they
are inferiors. What they are doing is because they realize they can never
accomplish what Caucasians/Europeans/ Christians/neopagans have accomplished.
This means it is time for separation/deportation/repatriation.
This is coming. An RCC priest "confessed" to having been in the KKK when
he was a teenager. The US Conference of Bishops has established an ad hoc
committee to address racism. This is the final nail in the coffin of the
RCC. Homosexuals have taken over the priesthood. Priests do not preach about
hell, sin, repentance. Now that this KKK priest has been exposed, from now
on sermons will only cover "racism," the worst sin.
Caucasian Christans/pagans have to deal with the reality that world history
can be summed up in two words: IQ, which is tied to race. The past 2000
years of Western civilization united under the RCC are gone. There has to
be a new paradigm shift to deal with the future and what needs to be done.
@anonymous I hope they act like they have at every event they have been
a part of and the president acts accordingly. Trump needs to hire people
to record the whole thing and put it all up on a new website thats created
just to host the event. Dozens of live feeds from dozens of angles. All
put up on this new website just so there will be no confusion. Once the
left riots, because they will riot, National guard needs to be called and
these domestic terrorists need to be put down. He then needs to put out
an executive order to shut down all propaganda news agencies that are spinning
this, and if people want to see what happened, view the live feeds from
dozens of angles on the newly created website. And if people bitch about
how its wrong to have this up, fuck them. Its time to take off the kiddy
gloves.
@Tim Howells It was more like around 300,000 in all of the German camps
since their inception back in the mid-1930′s, according to the International
Red Cross. And that refers to all camp inmates of all ethnic backgrounds.
It is entirely possible that many Jews may have been killed on the Eastern
Front or in the Soviet Union, but that can hardly be blamed solely upon
the Germans, who were not known to be savagely cruel or vengeful- even though
the anti-partisan actions may have led to some excesses.
In any case, there is zero evidence for "millions of Jews" killed by
the Germans. There are no mass graves commensurate with such figures, nor
is there any documentary evidence of a deliberate plan of "extermination."
@jacques sheete I understand you quite well I think. I have worked on
commission. I have been self employed. For a time I was a soldier. I have
worked for wages for mom and pop business and for large corporations and
held both union and non union jobs. I did a few years working for a not
for profit homeless shelter. I am a Jack of all trades and (unfortunately)
master of none.
On union jobs (IBEW and Teamsters) I had the great benefit of having
a contract with my employer that spelled out the duties and privileges of
both the worker and the company. This meant that both labor and management
worked from the same set of rules. The path to promotion was defined as
was the possible cause for termination. Personalities had nothing to do
with anything. The boss and I followed the same rules. It was nothing like
being subject to the whims and prejudices of one man.
" For example if I had a case of the gleet, I'd rather not replace it;
I'd rather do without."
Having a "job" can be worse than the gleet.
Unfortunately a mans gotta eat.
@Ivy The white trash (as of 2016, down to 37.7% of California's population)
has simply been replaced by brown trash in California. The only question
remaining is which ethnic elite will run the state ..the jooies or the chinkies
or the hindus. Or will the ethnics simply rule via a de facto coalition?
Whitey's demise in CA is an accomplished fact ..with AZ and TX soon to follow
and eventually OR, WA, ID, and CO. The efforts of James K. Polk are soon
to be fully reversed. And yes, Ivy, you will have employment ..every Chinese
has been promised a white house boy and white concubine by 2050.
the same tolerant technology has been applied five thousand years ago
in the Sumerian civilization
what was a non semitic composed society. Few hundred years prior to the
destruction of that culture
semitic tribes were allowed to settle in, first in smaller numbers , then
in the name of tolerance larger migrating groups were allowed , and enjoyed
benefits of education, comfortable, cultured living. The original majority
of the population were builders and workers , the migrants for the most
part were users, who's interest were to find an easy way to become the more.
The complete opposite of mentality. In time the semitic migrants were able
to build up a fifth column , moved in to powerful positions such as religion
and astrology , and from then on destruction has begun. The original populous
were pushed out, part of them were forcefully crossbred , the rest of them
flee and
build new countries in Europa . The migrants of that time gained written
culture , tailored clothing ,
the benefit of toilet so not to go to the bushes to relieve themselves .
This time around there is no place left to flee.
@WorkingClass I, too, think I understand from whence you come.
I agree with the concept of labor unions but recognize that they too
can be turned against the interests of the workers, and unfortunately, have
been.
I do applaud you for your success working within the system and I have
no doubt that you did it as a sincere, able and good man. I also respect
your views and thank you for sharing them.
As for bosses, I loathe them so much that I myself never hired employees
because I didn't want to be a boss any more than I wanted to answer to one.
I almost get physically sick when I see that the window of opportunity for
youngsters to follow a independent lifestyle is next to nil and getting
tougher all the time.
I do still counsel my younger relatives to acquire as much experience
as they can so that they are in a position to have some control over their
own lives. I'm also actively involved in fortifying my grandkids with both
defiance and the attitudes and skills to back it up.
Is that attitude Utopian? No doubt to some degree it is, but so is the
attitude of submission, i.e., the wish for everything to be taken care of
so long as one submits.
There is much contention as to whether even a single jew was killed
in a gas chamber.
Not only is there much contention, but there is no credible evidence
that it really happened. Besides, the numbers are farcical.
Where do they get 6 million?
"Allowing for a maximum of 100,000 who succeeded in emigrating from
Europe, this would bring the total number of Jews under the direct rule
of Nazi Germany to about 3,200,000."
Distribution of the Jewish Population of Europe 1933-. 1940," prepared
by Mr. Moses Moskowitz
AMERICAN JEWISH YEAR BOOK 1941-1942, page 662
"I submit that the real truth is totally different. My thesis is very
simple: the reason why the US always support foreign minorities to subvert
states and use domestic minorities to suppress the majority US population
is because minorities are very easy to manipulate and because minorities
present no threat to the real rulers of the AngloZionist Empire. That's
all there is to it."
That is pretty much it, save for the origins. WASP culture's Germanic
basis began by hating the native British Isles. That set the pattern:WASPs
most hate those from whom they steal or otherwise wrong gravely. The Reformation
provided the perfect theological and philosophical justifications for that
pattern to become something much greater.
The Anglo-Saxon Puritans were Judaizing heretics. You cannot over-emphasize
that point. WASAP culture from the moment it was crystalized, truly formed,
was one that saw the world through Jewish-influenced, Jewish-fawning, eyes.
Naturally and inevitably, once the true WASPs gained total control of the
government, with the Puritan Revolution, their fearless leader, Oliver Cromwell,
allied with Jews. He took Jewish money to wage war, to exterminate cultures
and make at least virtual serfs of whole populations.
White Christian populations.
WASP culture began with an alliance with Jews, allowing Jews back into
England, with special rights and privileges that the vast majority of British
Isles native Christians did not have, that allowed the WASPs to continue
waging war to exterminate white Christian cultures.
When WASPs encountered non-whites, they began to grasp the value of using
them – non-whites and non-Christians – as tools and weapons with which to
batter the white Christians they wished to destroy.
That is the reason the 'Anglo-Zionist Empire' uses minorities as it does.
You cannot separate the Jewish Problem from the WASP Problem. You cannot
solve the Jewish Problem without solving the 'WASP Problem.
"... I once worked with someone who always had to be Winning™, and as soon as you managed to meet one set of demands a new set popped up – just for the sake of having something to win. Because *having won* didn't matter, it was the act of winning that mattered. I think the activist left is in the hands of this sort of person, and it's going to work out about as well as you'd expect. ..."
"... "It's always struck me as strange that no one reflects that the desire of the Left, to create a true multi-ethnic, multi-cultural democratic society, has never been done before." ..."
"... The problem is the falseness of the American Creed. For minorities and there empathizers it should be discarded. For conservative whites, it creates a terrible cognitive dissonance. Why have they done all the right things: got an education, worked hard, married and still ended up in a precarious situation? ..."
"... In the meantime, the globalist, rich libertarians embedded its false ideology of "equality of opportunity" in working class whites, while simultaneously moving there factories and money outside of the country as quickly as possible. ..."
"... Sure. I prefer the Leninist term, "infantile disorder." ..."
"... Thing is, Mr. grumpy realist, the Confederate statues didn't lie us into the Iraq War, bail out the Wall Street banksters, fail to stop millions of illegals from coming here, or outsource American jobs to Indians and Chinese. ..."
"... I oppose vandalism of statues. Full stop. If we are going to waste time on more culture war nonsense it should be conducted legally. But since everyone loves arguing about this crap -- The Wikipedia article on Serra seems fair and balanced, to coin a phrase. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jun%C3%ADpero_Serra ..."
"... The Confedercy killed more Americans than any foreign enemy the Republic has ever faced, and yet public statues and monuments to this vile treason, most of which were raised nearly 50 years after the war ended to commerate the (temporary) triumph of the Confederate ideology of White Supremacy, are somehow different and more noble than statues of Dzhersinsky and Lenin? Who committed crimes of the same vulgar type as the Confederate leaders (why is Longstreet not marked by statue or Beauregard? It's because Longstreet fought to defend black rights after the war, and Beauregard was creole). Now, like Communists, some good people fought for the Confederacy for good reasons (home and family in the case of your Confederate ancestor, bread and freedom in the Russian revolution. Read about some of the brutality from the Whites in the Russian Civil War. It will make your skin crawl.) So let the common soldiers be commenrated, but tear down the statues of the traitors who led them. Just as they tore down the statues of Dzhrsinsky, Lenin, and Marx after 1991. ..."
"... "Huntington's book sounds helpful but the work that continues to be even more prescient is Christopher Lasch's "The Revolt of the Elites," describing a ruling class that has severed its ties to its own cultural order as well as to the less powerful and privileged members of it. The result is incomprehension of reaction they provoke and chaos. In the short run, this may increase their illusion of control and power but the long run spells doom and replacement by more cohesive cultures." ..."
"... That's exactly the book I was thinking of in this post. He also talks about how when the "Managerial Elites" replaced the "Wasps" as the ruling class they replaced the sense of responsibility and Noblesse Oblige the Wasps had for the country w/ disregard, selfishness and greed by the managerial meritocracy. Gone is the manufacturing economy replaced by the ephemeral finance and information economy. ..."
"... Interesting interview with Andrew Young on NPR this morning ("Civil Rights Activist Argues to Keep Confederate Monuments"): "A minority cannot be provoking a racist majority that is still underemployed, undereducated, and dying faster than we are. The issue is life and death, not some stupid monument." ..."
"... I still can't get over it. Joan of Arc?!!! ..."
"... Maybe we can make a decision based on artistic merit? I mean, a lot of these statues are mass-produced pieces of sentimental kitch that make me remember the excesses of oratory during the 1890s. Is it really all that terrible if we turn them into something else? Or should we just say: "if it's a statue of some guy on a horse and has moss on it, we'll leave it alone" and impose a statuary equivalent to the legal doctrine of laches? ..."
"... If the sum total of all indicators within the context of group, racial identity and the possible demise of an anglo/protestant cultural heritage is true, then violent conflict looms on the horizon and possibly in the near foreseeable future. Yes, it will not be a fight for racial(i.e. white)supremacy but an at-all-costs battle to avoid extinction. ..."
But it is plain that most Republicans do not believe Trump violated that taboo.
That is because Hugh Hewitt stated that Trump has the right enemies. And for conservatives
they have standing behind Trump since he pursued Birtherism against the enemy.
I was reflecting on this last night and had an epiphany regarding Trump's "good people on
both sides" statement last week.
For over a week now I've been baffled by the president's remark. What "good" person
thinks, "Hey, the KKK and the Nazis are having a rally this weekend. Sounds like my kind of
party!"? But now I'm glad he said it.
What I mean is this: if you watch the videos, you'll notice a large percentage of the
participants in the Charlottesville rally were young white men, probably in their early 20's.
At this age, people are spending a lot of time trying on identities and figuring out what
they believe. This means occasionally doing foolish and embarrassing things.
Trump has basically given these guys an escape path. "Hey, I'm not really a Nazi or a
Klukker. I'm a good person who's concerned about the danger of erasing our collective
history, of throwing the baby out with the racist bathwater."
I know some will snark at that, but consider the alternative, more or less embraced by
everybody else. Howling, "racist" and throwing stones, both rhetorical and literal, only
serves to further radicalize these guys, driving them into the welcoming arms of the national
socialists. (Note the similarities between the profiles for a young white supremacist and a
domestic Islamic terrorist!) "They will hate me no matter what I do at this point," is not
where we want people to be.
I have no idea whether this was the president's intention or even on his radar at the
time, but if you back people into a corner without a path of escape, they will get desperate,
which is to say, radical and violent. "Good people," as distinct from "racist Nazis", is an
opportunity to step back from the abyss.
I am 35 years old, and I believe the country will tear itself apart in my lifetime. The
forces separating us are stronger than those keeping us together, and they are not likely to
be tamed with the weapons currently in our culture's arsenal (i.e., rote recitation of
"Diversity is Strength").
As another commenter wryly noted, I happen to possess every quality
despised by the SJWs (white, heterosexual, Christian, happily married, with four children and
a dog), and their actions/words are increasingly convincing me and my family that they'd
prefer not to share the same country as me.
That's fine; I'm happy to expend what little time
and talent I have devising a way to peacefully (again, I repeat, PEACEFULLY) separate from
those who think my very existence (aka "whiteness") is somehow a threat to their lives. At an
earlier, more naïve point in my life, I thought that we, as a country, would get through
this and start regarding each other according to the content of our character rather than the
color of our skin. Alas, it seems that there is no interest in that type of social
arrangement any longer, so I'm happy to help broker a two-state solution.
"They wouldn't stop. To them, it's a possibility to destroy things they hate and feel self
righteous at the same time. Or, and to get media cheering. Why would they miss a chance like
this?"
It's a chance to use violence to force visible, lasting change in our shared space. To
force their will on us, by violence or the threat of violence. A piece of the world that the
rest of us loved or accepted or at least tolerated is smashed or removed because that's what
they want. The rest of us are supposed to shut up and accept what they have done.
This won't last long. When it swings back in the other direction, as it inevitably will,
many of those now watching in silent rage will cheer for the thugs who come to smash their
faces in.
I once worked with someone who always had to be Winning™, and as soon as you managed to
meet one set of demands a new set popped up – just for the sake of having something to
win. Because *having won* didn't matter, it was the act of winning that mattered. I think the
activist left is in the hands of this sort of person, and it's going to work out about as
well as you'd expect.
"It's always struck me as strange that no one reflects that the
desire of the Left, to create a true multi-ethnic, multi-cultural democratic society, has
never been done before."
That society will function is taken as a given, it seems to me. And it does, if one has
enough money. But if not, there's a breakdown. And that's something I often see – some
of the work I do involves economic and community development in poor communities. There isn't
much to work with, and the language of the Left isn't particularly conducive to strengthening
communities. Generally it is about freedoms from and rights, and rarely if ever – can't
think of a recent example, actually – is it about obligation and responsibilities other
than those for one's own expression and fulfillment.
I'd like to say the Right has stepped into the void, but for the most part they have not,
they are just as insistent on freedoms from and a kind of a moral adjudication by the market,
where struggling communities deserve to die. Dreher and a few others often write about the
importance of community and the unappreciated difficulty of maintaining a civil society, but
as a general rule what they write is misunderstood as an appeal to nostalgia or racism or
both. Which is to say that reflecting on what makes a "multi-ethnic, multi-cultural
democratic society" work is so far off the radar screen for most people that they are unable
to identify a discussion about it.
Which is to say it strikes me as strange also. And then generally, Mr. Dreher, the problem
I have with Huntington is that his keen perceptiveness easily clothes itself with an aura of
prophesy. I don't attribute that to him, it's a thing I do on my own. But it's something I
have to avoid in order to do the work I do. I can imagine numerous futures, and a part of the
struggle for me is maintaining the facility of imagining one that inspires. So I repeat to
myself – It need not be this way.
What we're seeing might be thought of as the entirely predictable and normal reaction of a
particular group within a pluralistic society, when members of that group come to believe
that they are losing ground.
In terms of history, I wish historians would state the Post WW2 Boom (1948 –
1973) was the historical oddity where we saw high increase in working class wages. And any
reading of US history especially before WW1, the white race definition did not include the
latest European immigrants. (Irish, German, East European and Jewish.) In many ways modern US
is closer to American history than post war years.
Although Civil Rights was primarily led by African-Americans, there were a significant
other minorities that benefited in the long run.
In terms of minority economic gains, the area of the economy where the minority gains
have been the most is Tech and we have seen a huge conservative dislike of tech the last 3
– 5 years.
In terms of economy, over the last 15 years the primarily hit more rural WWC towns. So
it must be something and Trump ran on the Clintons free trade agreement and anti-immigrants
to win the election. (I found it strange that it was not Koch Brothers or Apple fault but did
not understand it until after the election.)
Again it is hard to predict the future as there still things vastly better today than a
generation ago. Literally nobody in 1992 stated that the US was on a verge of a historic drop
in crime.
But there is room for all of us white people to extol what is great, and there was a LOT
of great in our ancestors, while strictly denying and removing anything which seems to
highlight profound injustices in the eyes of non-whites. I am now on-board. It's the
christian thing to do. Let's retain all that is Christian about our ancestors, and let go all
of the cultural blindness, willful or not, that resulted in slavery.
I often disagree with Seven sleepers, but this is right on.
I am also noticing that not only do we not hear from black Americans on this board, we
very seldom are moved to take any account of their opinions on this matter. That's OK I
guess, I think we're all white or Asian here (not African American, I mean) but I am struck
by our very consistent blindness on this topic.
Let us suppose for a minute that your Southern, Confederate ancestor was not riding about
on a horse. Let us suppose that he was a field hand in the slave quarters, that he had been
regularly beaten (this practice has been attested to by numerous documents from the old
South), his wife had been taken by the son of the plantation owner, one of "his" children was
suspiciously light of skin, and several of his children had been sold away from him. These
things were not rare and unusual. This was the order of the day.
So now how do you feel about this "Heritage"?
Oh well, that's OK, right? The people who have good reason to feel this way are a
minority. We need not trouble ourselves too much about them. And our Christian obligation to
take care of our brothers and sisters, to love them in fact, to consider their feelings as
well as our own .what happened to that?
"So, putting together ideas from the Clarence Thomas blog and some of Huntington and Swain's
ideas here, I posit: Liberals believe in legal/economic collectivism and cultural
individualism, while conservatives believe in legal/economic individualism and cultural
collectivism. I'm sure somebody on this blog can demolish that hypothesis."
No, it's generally correct but it needs tweaking. The conservatives you describe are not
really conservatives, they're right-liberals. Patrick Deneen is the guy to read on this.
Also, I'm not sure these "conservatives" want cultural collectivism as much as they want
the freedom to reject the tyranny of left's cultural individualism. As J.W. Corrington put it
(regarding a different issue), submitting to the unalterable vicissitudes of history is one
thing. Being expected to genuflect to them is quite another. (paraphrase from memory).
Or to paraphase Fitzjames Stephen, you may not be able to resist being carried away by the
flood, but that doesn't mean you have to sing 'Hallelujah' to the river god while being swept
along.
Huh. Iconoclasts on the left, and on the right we've got the people who want to tear down the
entire political system and who are loudly applauding Trump because he "sticks it to the
conventional Republicans and the Democrats."
Is there really that much difference? We certainly have enough of the latter group on
these threads.
(And Joan of Arc? Really? Makes me think we've just got a plain anarchist who wants to
tear down all statues, period. He'll probably go after the lions at the entrance of the NYC
Public library next.)
"equality under the law, equality of opportunity (if not of result),"
I am able to recognize that those two things are lies. No African-American is going to
think they are equal under the law when the police are killing them. And no thinking American
believes they have had the same equality of opportunity as Donald Trump.
The problem is the falseness of the American Creed. For minorities and there empathizers
it should be discarded. For conservative whites, it creates a terrible cognitive dissonance.
Why have they done all the right things: got an education, worked hard, married and still
ended up in a precarious situation?
If we wanted to be a great nation, we should have adopted policies to create lots of
working class jobs and filled them with Black men, so that they could support homes and
families. But we didn't, instead we gave tepid support to stupidities like affirmative
action. Something the white majority never supported.
In the meantime, the globalist, rich libertarians embedded its false ideology of "equality
of opportunity" in working class whites, while simultaneously moving there factories and
money outside of the country as quickly as possible.
And none of this is too late to fix. The country just needs the right leadership. And it
won't come from Trump, the GOP, or the Democrats.
"Let's just put it more plainly: Trump violated another important taboo pretty much every
week of his campaign. Yet Republicans still elected him. They should be ashamed of
themselves."
Honestly at this point the only Republican response to statements like this is "we tried
thousands of times to get the "lesser of two evils in a two party system" point across to
you. NOT necessarily lesser to you with whatever values you may have, but lesser to US. If
you STILL are going to try this idiotic attempt at shaming, you can go f**** yourself."
Sorry Rod but that's about the thousandth time that's come up here with these people.
Take 'Em Down NOLA movement is demanding, among *many* other things, that Tulane
University change its name because Paul Tulane, whose land donation made the university
possible, owned slaves.
OK. Let's parse that one. One alt-right response to taking down statues of confederate
generals was "Where is it going to stop? Shall we take down statues of Washington and
Jefferson too?" And then, like many poorly-conceived self-fulfilling prophecies, infantile
disordered voices came out saying, yes, indeed we must.
In between a rational voice from a man who supported taking down confederate monuments
affirmed "There is a huge difference between celebrating a flawed man, and celebrating a
man's flaws."
Mr. Tulane has a university named after him because he donated the land for the
university, not because he owned slaves. Braxton Bragg has statues put up because he fought
against the United States of American in defense of slavery. Obvious difference. I think it
might be worthwhile to discuss renaming Fort Bragg -- its an outrage that soldiers in the army
that defeated the confederacy receive basic training at a post named after one of the
generals they defeated. I'm sure my great-great-grandfather who served in the 11th Tennessee
Cavalry, United States Army, would agree.
Can we dispense with Social "Justice" Warrior? Just as a matter of accurate
labeling/description?
Sure. I prefer the Leninist term, "infantile disorder."
By Jove, Melbourne was right–Cicero, Plato, Aristotle and all those gentlemen
were 'pro-slavery'.
Well, that aside, I think they're all greatly over-rated. Surely someone in antiquity said
things more agreeable to my seldom humble self, but his writings had not the random good
fortune to be preserved for late European antiquarians to pore over.
dd: Did you miss the ellipses at the end of my sentence?
And yes, Seven Sleepers is right on target today. There is nobody so crass I can't agree
with him now and then. Even Clarence Thomas gets a few things right. If Seven Sleepers is
Italian, he is also correct that originally his ancestors were not accepted as "white" at
all.
"I am also noticing that not only do we not hear from black Americans on this board, we very
seldom are moved to take any account of their opinions on this matter."
From what I recall Baptiste and Eliminist (I think I spelled that wrong) are black. Dancer
Girl is black, and all of them have weighed in on this.
From a footnote about a statue Joyce mentions in "The Dead": In 1701 an equestrian statue [of
William III] was erected in front of Trinity College. From then on, it was systematically
defaced, daubed, smeared, wrecked, rebuilt, protected, and finally, in 1929 blown up, as an
emblem of oppression." Irish Pat Buchanan would probably be proud of his ancestors!
I'm from Memphis, as was Nathan Bedford Forrest. I admire Forrest as a military
iconoclast, but I must say I had to laugh at the picture of the statue of Forrest mounted on
horse with some prankster's KKK hood draped on his head.
Q. "So what do they symbolize? And who do they symbolize? The answer is important."
A. Whatever I say.
Art is cathartic; hopefully, it begets catharsis, if the artist or sculptor did their job.
In the eye of the beholder it may appear as a "ministering angel" or a "demon" or may be
"just some bloke riding horseback I didn't notice nor did I even care and could care less now
because I have no connection to history or interest in it."
Imagine we had an educated collective of sovereign individuals who participated in
government and kept a watchful eye we'd be in great shape with or without religion or deism.
But, we don't. And because of this, the "American Creed" as you callit, is lost; none of
those items or those you left out exists, none of it exists, absolutely zero.
Carl Bernstein recently said in an interview that obstructing free press is the first step
toward tyranny. The Union can thank Lincoln (the tyrant) and Sherman (the tyrant's bloody
hand).
Sherman to his Adjutant:
"For my part, I believe that this war is the result of false political doctrine, for which we
are all as a people responsible, viz., that any and every people have a right to
self-government; and I would give all a chance to reflect, and, when in error, to
recant."
And
"I am willing to bear in patience that political nonsense of slave rights, State rights,
freedom of conscience, freedom of press, and such other trash, as have deluded the Southern
people into war, anarchy, bloodshed, and the foulest crimes that have disgraced any time or
any people."
"Monuments referring to "Savage" Indians defending their homeland are pretty damn offensive,
when you think about it."
====
"He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the
inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an
undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions."
The right committed an act of vandalism against America that infinitely dwarfs any vandalism
against old statuary. In a rejection of everything good and decent in America, they selected
and then elected Donald Trump. The insult and tragedy of this act only worsens with each
passing day.
And, even as Trump is actively desecrating and dismantling America's binding ideals with
the eager support of most of the right, I'm supposed to fret about how the left is
provoking them?!? That's so absurd it borders on obscene.
It's like a giant bully has me pinned on my back and is punching me relentlessly in the
face (pausing occasionally to spit in it) and Rod is watching all this from among the
gathered crowd and hollering that I just need to stop fighting back. What I need is the good
people among the crowd to get this guy off of me before it's too late!
Trump's ongoing possession of power that he is terrifyingly unfit to wield and
responsibility he is tragically unable to comprehend is a relentless and unbearable
provocation and we all know who did it and who continues to support it. The left has almost
infinitely more cause to feel aggrieved and nobody should be surprised that they latch onto
whatever avenues of protest they stumble upon.
I say none of this to justify anybody's extreme actions, only to illustrate that the blame
game cuts both ways and it cuts deeper when deployed against the right. People could knock
down every last statue in America and it wouldn't do as much deep and lasting harm to our
nation as Trump has already done and nobody knows how much worse it will get or how far the
right will enable the unfolding catastrophe that they chose.
"Huh. Iconoclasts on the left, and on the right we've got the people who want to tear down
the entire political system and who are loudly applauding Trump because he "sticks it to the
conventional Republicans and the Democrats." "
Thing is, Mr. grumpy realist, the Confederate statues didn't lie us into the Iraq War,
bail out the Wall Street banksters, fail to stop millions of illegals from coming here, or
outsource American jobs to Indians and Chinese.
If the Confederate statues had done those things you might have a point. But they just sat
there as they always have, not doing too much of anything, really, mostly just looking grand
or sorrowful or heroic or dignified or such like.
Unlike the political establishment, which has been painting a giant DayGlo target on its
capacious and diseased hind quarters for a long time.
I oppose vandalism of statues. Full stop. If we are going to waste time on more culture war
nonsense it should be conducted legally. But since everyone loves arguing about this crap --
The Wikipedia article on Serra seems fair and balanced, to coin a phrase.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jun%C3%ADpero_Serra
And it is tendentious in the extreme to say people oppose Serra because he erected
missions, unless you explain why the critics think that was a bad thing. They think it was
bad for a couple of reasons. First, they oppose the spread of Christianity by force. There
was coercion involved and massiv cruelty. Serra seems to have fallen somewhere in the middle,
endorsing some violence but opposing the more extreme versions of it.
Modern secular lefties also oppose the spread of Christianity because they see it as
inherently wrong or oppressive for Westerners to try to convert native people. In practice it
usually was coercive and monstrous in the way it was done and it is hard to separate the
actual practice of missionary activity back then from the religion which inspired the
coercion. As a Christian I think it is right to try to convert people, but if it is done via
coercion than how is it any different from the more coercive versions of Islam?
This was nearly 300 years ago. Do we really have to have another culture war about
religiously inspired conquest and violence that happened 300 years ago?
Don't know if it's the nature of the moment or the nature of this blog, but it's almost
always the whitey righty types that predict an imminent apocalypse, never those the occupy
the space between the center and, say, BadReligion. The Paranoid Style, i'd say, unless
they're all right.
"Sure, I'm paranoid but am I paranoid ENOUGH?"
Rod -- " I agree that I'm in a squishy place, being against taking down monuments in
principle, but also agreeing that it's very hard to defend them successfully as 'heritage not
hate,' which is the point of Ryan Booth's that I was agreeing with. I must agree, though,
that the iconoclastic post-Charlottesville reaction of the Left has hardened my opinion
against taking down the statues."
Please don't go down that road. This happens to be one of those issues where there really
is some reasonable middle ground that people of good will can occupy without necessarily
being in complete agreement. For instance, you can make a good case for taking down Lee and
leaving up Jefferson or you could leave Lee up but include plaques detailing his flaws or
explaining the historical circumstances in which the statues were erected. There are other
reasonable positions one could argue for on the merits.
But don't start down the path of saying that you want to side with one bunch of extremists
because there is another bunch of extremists over there that won't like you no matter what
you do. This is how we allow extremists dictate our politics. In the worst case scenario, it
is how we have civil wars.
I don't usually use the word extremist in this derogatory way because on some issues one
extreme is correct. But this isn't one of those issues. The extremists on both sides are
wrong and we shouldn't let ourselves be manipulated by them.
"He'll probably go after the lions at the entrance of the NYC Public library next.)"
Well, given that the NY Public Library lions symbolize the Lion of Judah, they will indeed
have to go. They are an obvious, obnoxious allusion to the Jewish role in the trans-Atlantic
slave trade and of course to Judah Benjamin, the Confederacy's slave-owning Jewish Secretary
of State.
By this formulation Rod, the tearing down of statues dedicated to the heroes of Communism in
Eastern Europe and Russia was iconoclasm as well. I sense that it is iconoclasm of which you
approve though
The Confedercy killed more Americans than any foreign enemy the Republic has ever faced,
and yet public statues and monuments to this vile treason, most of which were raised nearly
50 years after the war ended to commerate the (temporary) triumph of the Confederate ideology
of White Supremacy, are somehow different and more noble than statues of Dzhersinsky and
Lenin? Who committed crimes of the same vulgar type as the Confederate leaders (why is
Longstreet not marked by statue or Beauregard? It's because Longstreet fought to defend black
rights after the war, and Beauregard was creole). Now, like Communists, some good people
fought for the Confederacy for good reasons (home and family in the case of your Confederate
ancestor, bread and freedom in the Russian revolution. Read about some of the brutality from
the Whites in the Russian Civil War. It will make your skin crawl.) So let the common
soldiers be commenrated, but tear down the statues of the traitors who led them. Just as they
tore down the statues of Dzhrsinsky, Lenin, and Marx after 1991.
The difference between Nelson's Column and the statues of Lee et al, was that Nelson
fought to save Britain from foreign conquest. Lee and co. fought to defend white supremacy
and slavery. Just read what they wrote about it themselves. Anybody who can't see that is a
dope.
The taboo that was broken has less to do with not denouncing Nazis or political violence
(things that were denounced), it's not doing it in the precise way demanded by the media.
It's a denial that the media has the moral status that it claims to define the narrative and
to elicit specific responses that support the narrative.
They don't get as mad when Trump subverts the narrative with a lie as when he does so with
something that approaches the truth.
Tearing down statues that symbolize what you don't believe in is usually a crime of vandalism
punishable by law, so normally that takes care of that. But of course symbols make handy
targets during disputes and rivalries, even though, to maintain the peace, the law has to
hold.
Confederate statues are a separate matter, not because tearing them down unlawfully is OK
!
You can still be prosecuted for vandalism if you do that -- but because their very existence
threatens what we as a nation hold in common. Most were, in fact, put up as a symbol of
dissent from our national creed, specifically the part that holds "all men are created
equal." For most Americans, the Confederacy itself symbolizes that position of dissent, but
the vast majority of these statues aren't mere leftovers from that bygone historical era;most
were actually erected in the late 19th or early 20th century as symbols of the Jim Crow era
when the Ku Klux Klan was at its peak and its basic philosophy of re-asserting white
supremacy was riding high. Some others went up in the 1960s when they symbolized the South's
opposition to the black civil rights movement. It's certainly easy for me to see why state
legislatures and city councils are being asked to remove them now when white supremacists are
rallying in public yet again.
The Statues represent reconciliation. When one town can have a statue of a Union hero and
another town can have a statue of a Confederate hero while still acknowledging that both
towns are American, you have reconciliation.
That is what is being destroyed. The nation's wounds that took so long to bind are being
ripped open.
I wonder how many Belfasts and Beruits we can endure, because it's coming.
Nothing good will come from removing monuments, anymore than anything good came from removing
Mosques from Bosnia.
There is no line here. The Founders all owned slaves, the Constitution based on a division
of powers and federalism was written by evil slave-owning white men to pursue their economic
interests, and the Bill of Rights was written by Jefferson the slave owner. Everything is up
for grabs.
The Left is turning into the Westboro Baptist Church, but targeting monuments not funerals
(yet).
Re: No, the progressive assault on Confederate statues is an assault on history, memory, and
myth
History lives on in books, museums, and national monuments and parks of a historical sort.
We are not assaulting any of those. And indeed where statues have been removed by the legal
actions of civil magistrates the intent is to move them to sorts of places where history is
explicitly remembered. So if this is "an assault on history" it's an utterly incompetent
one.
As for myths, well, there are good myths and bad myths. No one, I hope, would suggest we
keep alive the wicked old calumnies (myths in their own day) of Jews poisoning wells or
sacrificing Christian children. The myth of white supremacy is of a similar sort, and it
needs to be buried at a crossroads with a stake through its heart.
The Southern states meanwhile have a 400 year old history, reckoning from Jamestown (longer
of course if we take Native Americans into account). There's much in that to celebrate. Why
obsess about the least felicitous few years out of that history?
"why is Longstreet not marked by statue or Beauregard? "
You know, Hound of Ulster, when you get your talking points from CNN you ought to
independently check them. Here's a Longstreet memorial, Gainsville.(bad orientation)
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/368028600772640099
Historical iconoclasm is actually a wondrous thing, highly advanced, anticipating by
millennia the universe of problems associated with present-day, technologically mediated,
iconophilia, including the transcendent, generation-defining problem of Internet pornography
and related dynamic image-induced mesmerizations, where the possessed image ends up gradually
possessing the unguarded possessor and entrapping him/her in the "prison house" whose very
walls are the projections of unguarded sight.
The phantasmata channeled by the fathomless
'mirror', volatilized and dynamized by an incomprehensible and untrustworthy demiurge, are
anticipated by the hyper-real "demon-possessed" anthropomorphic statues of antiquity, not to
mention the actually existing automata of that age: combining the dual extraneous potential
(i.e. enchantments) of representation-enhancing technologies and the primitive, unreflective,
libidinal human urge. As Plato wrote: "This entire allegory, I said, you may now append, dear
Glaucon, to the previous argument; the prison-house is the world of sight, the light of the
fire is the sun, and you will not misapprehend me if you interpret the journey upwards to be
the ascent of the soul into the intellectual world according to my poor belief, which, at
your desire, I have expressed whether rightly or wrongly God knows. But, whether true or
false, my opinion is that in the world of knowledge the idea of good appears last of all, and
is seen only with an effort; and, when seen, is also inferred to be the universal author of
all things beautiful and right, parent of light and of the lord of light in this visible
world, and the immediate source of reason and truth in the intellectual; and that this is the
power upon which he who would act rationally, either in public or private life must have his
eye fixed.
I agree, he said, as far as I am able to understand you.
Moreover, I said, you must not wonder that those who attain to this beatific vision are
unwilling to descend to human affairs; for their souls are ever hastening into the upper
world where they desire to dwell; which desire of theirs is very natural, if our allegory may
be trusted.
Yes, very natural.
And is there anything surprising in one who passes from divine contemplations to the evil
state of man, misbehaving himself in a ridiculous manner; if, while his eyes are blinking and
before he has become accustomed to the surrounding darkness, he is compelled to fight in
courts of law, or in other places, about the images or the shadows of images of justice, and
is endeavouring to meet the conceptions of those who have never yet seen absolute
justice?
Anything but surprising, he replied.
Any one who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments of the eyes are of two
kinds, and arise from two causes, either from coming out of the light or from going into the
light, which is true of the mind's eye, quite as much as of the bodily eye; and he who
remembers this when he sees any one whose vision is perplexed and weak, will not be too ready
to laugh; he will first ask whether that soul of man has come out of the brighter light, and
is unable to see because unaccustomed to the dark, or having turned from darkness to the day
is dazzled by excess of light. And he will count the one happy in his condition and state of
being, and he will pity the other; or, if he have a mind to laugh at the soul which comes
from below into the light, there will be more reason in this than in the laugh which greets
him who returns from above out of the light into the den."
"Huntington's book sounds helpful but the work that continues to be even more prescient is
Christopher Lasch's "The Revolt of the Elites," describing a ruling class that has severed
its ties to its own cultural order as well as to the less powerful and privileged members of
it. The result is incomprehension of reaction they provoke and chaos. In the short run, this
may increase their illusion of control and power but the long run spells doom and replacement
by more cohesive cultures."
That's exactly the book I was thinking of in this post. He also talks about how when the
"Managerial Elites" replaced the "Wasps" as the ruling class they replaced the sense of
responsibility and Noblesse Oblige the Wasps had for the country w/ disregard, selfishness
and greed by the managerial meritocracy. Gone is the manufacturing economy replaced by the
ephemeral finance and information economy.
"liberty, equality under the law, equality of opportunity (if not of result), individualism,
populism, limited government, and free-market economics. These ideas, Huntington said, came
out of Protestant England and its reception of the Enlightenment"
Bull. Neither England, nor Enlightment.
Voltaire and his "enlighted" ilk were sycophants of the absolute monarchies of the Prussian
militarist Frederic II,forerunner of the modern totalitarian state and imperialist Catherine
II, whom they idealized.
Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth destroyed primarily by Prussia, resorting even to
counterfeiting of the Polish currency, was the font of the values Huntington finds
foundational, far ahead of England.
Statutes of Cienia enacted around the time of Magna Carta, and of essentially the same
nature, were actually implemented whereas MC for a very long time remained a dead letter.
Neminem Captivabimus preceded Habeas Corpus by 143 years. Citizens with full political rights
were 5-6 times more numerous in Poland than in England of France.
Religious freedom was unparalleled, people flocked to Poland from all over the continent
running from persecutions. It was known as the country without stakes. Free markets were on
the par with England. Government was by far more limited in Poland than in any other
country.
No objective historian can claim that English freedoms could come close to that.
The English have been veritable the masters of Imperial propaganda down to the current
cult of the Queen.
Historical record of English tyranny, persecution and exploitation is glaring.
It would serve Americans, especially conservatives, well, to be more discerning when it comes
to their ideological heritage as formed by Protestant England. The Puritans running from
English persecution were persecutors themselves.
Poland and Venice are worthy of conservative reflection searching for inspiration.
Unfortunately, they do not. They were mostly erected by "Redeemers" or later incarnations
of triumphalist white supremacists (the real thing, not some unfortunate soul who gets tagged
in a 21st century virtual replay), at a time when the northern and western elites didn't care
any more, and anyone of African descent was being brutally disfranchised.
Many schools were REnamed for confederate generals as part of "massive resistance" to the
final push against Jim Crow.
That is what those statues, by and large, represent. That is why a fair number of people
want them to come down.
God hates Confederates and Antebellum American Presidents.
God has not given me any personal revelation on the subject, but from all the Christian
education I've had, God is merciful to sinners and seeks to bring all into reconciliation
with Him. He does, however, hate slavery and efforts to make war to perpetuate it. He may not
have looked kindly on the annexation of Mexican territory either, but Santa Ana was no
saint.
So let the common soldiers be commenrated, but tear down the statues of the traitors
who led them.
That would be reasonable, but it may be a little late to do it right. We need more
attention to novels like Cold Mountain, and of course to the Jones County Scouts.
Well, given that the NY Public Library lions symbolize the Lion of Judah, they will
indeed have to go. They are an obvious, obnoxious allusion to the Jewish role in the
trans-Atlantic slave trade and of course to Judah Benjamin, the Confederacy's slave-owning
Jewish Secretary of State.
Explain that to all the black churches dedicated to the Lion of Judah, considered, rightly
or wrongly, to be a reference to Jesus Christ. (Separately, I note that Lion of Judah was one
of the titles of the kings of Ethiopia).
I am well aware that the Sacred Declaration says "Savage" in reference to Indians.
Just because it's in a key founding document doesn't make it less offensive.
Nor does it mean we have to rip it up.
We don't have to accept or reject everything in a document (or anything, for that matter)
to find value. A thing, or a person, can have overwhellming good, but also some ugly
stains.
I think it would be the height of folly to reject the Declaration because it wasn't
inerrant and also folly to dogmatically accept it all as unvarnished good merely because
Jefferson wrote it.
It's like when the Constitutiin was read in toto in Congress a few years back. Some
Republicans didn't want the (now defunct) parts about slaves read; others wanted it read,
warts and all to do otherwise they would consider "whitewashing".
And no, none of them suggested burning the Constitution, or saying we must have slavery
because the original Constitution provided for it.
The line is public opinion. Large numbers of people are on board with ditching the Rebs
and race baiters. Large numbers of people are not on board with dumping the Founders. The
recent failure of the ACA repeal-and-replace effort should be an object lesson of how public
opinion really can prevent unpopular public actions from occurring, even when pushed by
powerful and wealthy people– and in this case only a fringe gang of radicals would be
pushing for what you fear.
Re: The Founders all owned slaves
All of them? Every last signer of the Declaration* and Constitution? Every officer with
rank or colonel or better in the Continental Army?
Please document this!
"The Statues represent reconciliation. When one town can have a statue of a Union hero and
another town can have a statue of a Confederate hero while still acknowledging that both
towns are American, you have reconciliation."
Remarkable. It's as if reaching reconciliation requires pretending that neither town
contains folks who are not white. Yes we are, in a sense, finally trying to begin to deal with reconciling some old history.
News flash though, it ain't about blue and gray uniforms
Interesting interview with Andrew Young on NPR this morning ("Civil Rights Activist Argues to
Keep Confederate Monuments"): "A minority cannot be provoking a racist majority that is still
underemployed, undereducated, and dying faster than we are. The issue is life and death, not
some stupid monument."
http://www.npr.org/2017/08/23/545435024/civil-rights-activist-argues-to-keep-confederate-monuments
A bit of an aside, but since ya'll are more knowledgeable than me Do you know if there are
any statues in the South to white southerners who opposed slavery?
Slavery is something like original sin, as it pertains to the founding of this country. It is
a blot that stains all the good things that came out of the revolution. Clearly, the ideals
that the Founders promoted were not practiced very well in the beginning. And for too long,
their failure to live up to the ideals they espoused was white washed away (pun intended) by
the way the white majority looked at history. Granted, the Founders were handicapped by
growing up in a different world, one that was less enlightened on matters involving race and
sex than the one we live in today. Progress does not happen as one instantaneous cultural
step change, but rather as a more fitful series of stops and starts. Of course, that isn't
adequate as an excuse for those who were on the receiving end of injustices.
Obviously, some people think that one of the outcomes of the Civil war, the freeing of
slaves, which occurred at a rather high cost of lives and treasure, would have gone a long
way to atoning for that original sin. But the follow through was clearly lacking, with racial
resentments and overt discrimination lingering on until now. Despite our long history as a
Christian nation, not enough of the mostly Christian and white majority was able to grasp
that all men, not just white men, were presumably created in God's image.
So what shall we do about this?
Right now, those on the left seem to be indulging themselves emotionally by engaging in a
frenzied purification of history, via the attack on historical personages and statues. In
some ways, this strikes me as lazy, as it isn't clear that any of this will improve lives in
struggling black communities, or solve the gang violence problems in Chicago, and other urban
areas, or enable damaged young black men to have any kind of meaningful lives, regardless of
who is to blame for the damage that they have suffered. In the same way, I don't see that
white identity politics, the adoption by whites of the same aggrieved victim mentality, will
help them advance in any meaningful way. Trump's promises to return things to the way they
were are just tempting fantasies. There are no do overs in history. All sides need to check
themselves and then focus on moving forward in the best way possible. That, unfortunately,
seems to go against human nature. Vendetta is much more attractive in the short run.
Maybe we can make a decision based on artistic merit? I mean, a lot of these statues are
mass-produced pieces of sentimental kitch that make me remember the excesses of oratory
during the 1890s. Is it really all that terrible if we turn them into something else? Or
should we just say: "if it's a statue of some guy on a horse and has moss on it, we'll leave
it alone" and impose a statuary equivalent to the legal doctrine of laches?
Actually, I think getting to the point of being totally indifferent to the statues would
be the most appropriate of all. After all, they are nothing more than huge hunks of metal
that pigeons like to sit on.
Aaron C. I am 35 years old, and I believe the country will tear itself apart in my lifetime.
Trouble with separatist scenarios in the US is that they're basically unworkable, if you
think at the practical level. Most people have multiple identities, and they will start
resisting when purists like SJWs try to enforce their will. Besides, in the real-world
identities are fluid, not fixed. Neo-Marxists are focusing on race because it's one of the
most stable component of human identity. They already failed with class war, where workers
decided that they have other identities. And in the real world, most people in the US may
already be non-white by the old 1/16th rule, and their numbers are going up daily. As for the
Left and Right divide, people are moving from one side to the next, sometimes several times
in a lifetime. Should they be forced to move *physically* too, to reach an ideologically pure
state? And how to even think about dividing the country economically? Militarily? It would be
a complete disaster, worse than any Yugoslavia.
I think it is much, much more likely that we will remain a single country. But what is
really scary is deterioration of the public discourse, the endless 'f . you!!' as a sole
argument in the debates. The outbursts of physical violence. The pretense that there are
*good* SOBs because they are on *our* side – looking at you, liberal media!
We may end up as, I hate to say, spiders in the can, destroying each other instead of
improving our country. Think about it: where do we want to be in 30 or 50 years? There is a
tremendous *potential* for science and technology for improving our lives, eliminating hard
and tedious work, reducing human pain and suffering, cleaning the environment. But instead of
looking forward and thinking how to improve, we're focused on zero-sum game of endless
reopening of the old wounds.
John Adams is on record saying with pride "I have never owned a Negro or any other slave."
McCullough's biography records that a young enslaved woman was once given to the family as a
gift, but was promptly emancipated -- which is probably a better deal for her than refusing
the gift and leaving her enslaved.
If the sum total of all indicators within the context of group, racial identity and the
possible demise of an anglo/protestant cultural heritage is true, then violent conflict looms
on the horizon and possibly in the near foreseeable future. Yes, it will not be a fight for
racial(i.e. white)supremacy but an at-all-costs battle to avoid extinction.
In Tampa, the Confederate monument now being challenged was erected c. 1912. Sure enough,
someone checked the newspaper for that day and the dedication was by a white politician
vowing that the South would never submit to being ruled by an "inferior" race.
This "war against statues" look like borrowed directly from Ukrainian Maydan, which was a
100% authentic color revolution. Conflict escalation is a major tool in staging a color
revolution.
War with statues is pretty harmless for oligarchy, but does sharply divide the people into
two camps. It much easier to remove statues, than raise wages.
The key mechanism here is that it allow escalation, necessary for color revolution to succeed
-- as some as violence occurred it doe not matter who was right and who was wrong, of if both
parties engaged in violence were wrong.
The hysteria unfolding regarding events in Charlottesville reminds me of the anti-Russia
madness that has made front page news ever since Hillary Clinton discovered that she had lost
the presidential election to Vladimir Putin. The media train is again rushing headlong into a
terra incognita with its only goal being to bring down President Donald Trump by
riding a wave of anti-right wing extremist revulsion. The establishment press is essentially
enforcing its own code of ethics, insisting that just because what the mainstream
characterizes as morally repugnant "Nazi-scum" and white nationalists exist they are
ultimately fully responsible for any violence that is required to defeat them and disrupt
their activities. For the ubiquitous talking heads like Wolf Blitzer and Rachel Maddow to
believe otherwise is to posit moral equivalency between the good guys and bad guys, something
that cannot be tolerated.
As far as I can determine, almost no one knows much about the specific agendas of the
various parties that were involved in last week's fracas in Charlottesville. My own viewpoint
extends only as far as a strong belief that the deconstruction of this nation through the
elimination of select historical monuments is wrong, particularly when said monuments
commemorate people who fought and died for their country. As I am a Vietnam-era army veteran
I would concede that my judgment in that regard is somewhat skewed.
That aside, there are several other issues that should be of general interest that have
been largely obscured by the violence that erupted and the media interpretation of the event
to fit in with its own preferred narrative.
First and foremost is the free speech issue which is being conveniently ignored by a media
and political class intent on punishing the white nationalist protesters no matter what
rights have to be trampled along the way. As far as I can determine, the primary objective of
the Unite-the-Right gathering was to protest against removing a statue, so one has to at
least assume that some demonstrators were there in good faith based on that issue. And surely
many of the counter-demonstrators were there to protest peacefully against some of the
admittedly extremist groups marching under the Unite umbrella.
"The likelihood that there were paid FBI informants on both sides of the conflict leads
me to believe that the federal government knows exactly what took place on August 12th in
Charlottesville, but perhaps no one has either the guts or requisite integrity to be honest
about it as it might be embarrassing all around. What if it turns out that the politically
more acceptable counter-demonstrators deliberately provoked the violence and were allowed
to get away with it?"
Gee you think?
Well there won't be any embarrassment because a) the Imperial media will never cover
such a story and if it leaked out anyway; b) The Empire is inherently incapable of being
embarrassed about anything.
Based on eyewitness accounts and video footage of what took place in Charlottesville,
these facts have emerged: antifa agitators came to Charlottesville impose street justice on
their 'Nazi' opponents and shut down the lawful and peaceful assembly of a conservative
minority.
This is not the first time that antifa activists have unleashed premeditated violence
upon their political adversaries.
Antifa thugs (and their political enablers) are on a dark mission: to deny the
constitutional guarantees of free speech, public assembly and free association to
racially-conscious whites. This is a totalitarian agenda.
Further, the mainstream media–using biased analysis and inflammatory
reporting–is enabling this pernicious pattern of antifa violence to spread.
Today, Americans are taught to celebrate the 'Jewish Community', the 'gay community',
the 'black community', the 'Hispanic community'.
But never the 'white community'. That is not allowed. Never–even though
Euro-Americans are the heart and soul of our extraordinary, English-speaking
civilization.
Fact: white advocacy is not 'white supremacy'.
Yet our mainstream media declares it so.
This deception does real harm. Whites are divided. Ashamed.
White children are increasingly isolated and estranged from their own roots and
community. Political self-loathing and downward mobility have become common among
whites.
White cohesion has been declared racist and uniquely evil. This may be good news for
ambitious and envious blacks, gays, Hispanics and Jews. But whites are in decline.
This worldview is partly the product of double standards. These double-standard are
underhanded.
Antifa extremism is being used by the Liberal establishment to crush if not eradicate
white memory and white continuity.
Please sign and circulate the petition to declare antifa a terrorist organization.
Another excellent essay. Mr. Giraldi, I would appreciate knowing what you think about
one particular aspect of the stagecraft.
Having watched a few (not all, especially as some have been squelched) of the videos
assembled under the parallel Cleburne article, my impression is that these so-called
Uniters of The Right may have selected the forum because they, like the Establishment
generally, desired a violent altercation.
The Friday night torchlight parade as filmed by Vice seems almost scripted, provocative
"reality TV" to stoke fear and loathing among the American manipullati. Men who look like
Haven Monohan's frat brothers chanting "Blood And Soil" (really?!), in perfect formation
behind a drum major who looks like a Viking Hell's Angel, all left undisturbed by
observers. Are these even the same people sent packing on Saturday from the park and down
the street to be abused by hundreds of counter-protestors, as seen in the Goldy video?
Gee, look at the positive side, at least if your part of the MIC or a TBTF Wall Street
Casino. The riots helped box Trump in on the Afghanistan war thing, as he now declares
we'll stay there, bombing the rubble for years to come.
That Afghan opium will keep flowing and the hundreds of billions laundered by those Wall
Street gangsters will also continue to flow.
When the hate-filled Senator Graham admires Trump's Afghan war speech, you know the
nation is in trouble.
"The media train is again rushing headlong into a terra incognita with its only goal
being to bring down President Donald Trump by riding a wave of anti-right wing extremist
revulsion".
What a load of main stream media BS!
The media is owned by the same Wall Street Zionist filth that own Trump.
This idea that Trump is an "American Firster", worked during the election, but has been
seen for the lie it truly is now.
Trump has filled his cabinet with Wall Street Zionists, continued sales of weapons to
terrorist states, has INCREASED our presence in Isreal's wars, and has continued to
antagonize Russia, while TOTALLY IGNORING MASS LATINO IMMIGRATION.
Just like with Obama, the media is playing a role as "anti-Trump", to give Trump cover
for being another Zionist puppet. When Obama was in office the ZioMedia called him the
"most liberal President", even as he took away our rights, bailed out Wall Street and sold
arms to third world despots.
Americans need to GROW UP, stop thinking the world is so black and white and see how we
are being played for fools. Zionists rule Washington, and certainly Trump. Peter Thiel and
Adleson are Trump's biggest financial supporters, are we supposed to believe THEY ARE
AMERICA FIRSTERS, please, they hate America, they are Zionists.
@Anonymous
Nobody died at Columbine. Boston Marathon 9/11 passengers, etc.
Its time Americans wake up to reclaim the nation.
Staging this kind of event is child's play for the CIA. For them, its part of the
standard regime change profile.
Mind control technology delivers activist to the place in the space to commit overt
....acts and to take in true patsy form the untraceable source of the blame for conflict of
ideas to be escalated to mayhem.
Conflict escalation [Ce} was a major tool for the Leninist plan to bring the Czar of Russia
down in February, 1917 Such Ce and it has been successfully applied in the political space
of many nations to bring down well like national leaders. Ce Chaos is the name of the game!
Chaos is one of the dispersant that can be added to separate the people of a nation from
the peace afforded to them by their political structures. Chaos unleashes abusive power the
law and order prevent. Those hidden behind the scenes have a plan..but it cannot be
implemented if the political and cultural structures of the target society remains strong
and its principles upheld . To weaken structure: opposing interest are pitted against each
other to disturb the peace and to create chaos. As the structural integrity of the target
political and cultural system begin to weaken the plan is put into action.
The nations people's support for the structure is generally strong enough to keep the
political and cultural structure in place(i.e.the people continue to adhere to the law and
order accustomed to their national society). What destroys that structure is chaos! Chaos
works because it weakens the leadership. What chaos does is to allow behind the scene
take-overs, it allows to enrage the uninformed public so, that the public itself encourages
legislatures to enact the kind of Draconian rules that self-generate chaos (i.e. limits on
free speech, curfews, and intrusions by governments of law and use of force). My fellow
Americans find themselves once again victims of a mirage staged by those who intended
chaos to be generated , the tools of the chaos generating teams were used to stir to a
frenzy, those who were sincere as to a heart-felt. I quote the article "radical groups ..
came together to demonstrate on both sides?" just as was done in 1917 Russia!
OUTCOME: chaos disperses the people caught inside of media controlled political space.. I
said to a cop a few yrs ago "Boston Marathon was a false flag" he said "Does it even
matter?"
True it doesn't matter, it is taken as real and the objective is realized anyway.
Trump didn't call out Charlottesville as a false flag, he folded to the deep state and
extended the war in Afghanistan.
"It is important to bear in mind that there is great danger in selectively endorsing
politically correct Free Speech. If either the left or right is successful and we lose our
First Amendment rights through "hate speech" legislation or other forms of state censorship
such as have been introduced in Europe it is safe to say that we will have lost our
republic."
I hate to break it to this writer but the train has already left the station, and some
time ago. The left HAS been successful beyond "endorsing politically correct Free Speech".
They now with little resistance enforce the ever expanding PC speech codes because they own
the enforcement apparatus, i.e., the MSM, the courts, the propaganda outlets that make the
shaming machinery of popular culture so efficient. They have us self-censoring. Go to any
university campus and see how far free speech takes you. At your workplace just casually
mention a politically incorrect fact, like black-on-white homicide statistics, and see
where your career goes. Technically, yes, state censorship is not yet in place, but the
left doesn't really need it that much. Plus the censorious SJWs are just one or two Supreme
Court (Democrat appointed) justices in the near future, who will mop things up by upholding
"hate speech" legislation that will criminalize speech that includes facts that hurt the
feelings of "marginalized" people -- delayed for a bit by Trump's surprise upending of
Hillary Hugo Chavez Clinton.
The left wants more than state censorship. They see the destruction of European (white)
civilization.
Philip, thanks. My local newspaper, an intelligent and literate independent, came out
against neo-Nazis today. I suspect the editor was pressured into it, because the phenomenon
of neo-Nazism as a meaningful political movement doesn't exist in my area. Neo-Nazism
doesn't exist as a meaningful political phenomenon in the United States.
Chrissake–I'm venting here–does anyone else here see an obvious parallel
between the actual historical Nazis opportunistically grasping for power after the
Reichstag fire, and the Left grasping at opportunities to efface the memory of prominent
Southerners using the trivial Charlottesville fracas as a pretext? What's that old saw: he
who accuses, excuses. The real Nazis seem to me the other guys–the Left.
@Alfa158 Yeah,
maybe some. But, almost all of this was done by corrupt, lying folks in Virginia state and
local. The Virginia governor and the (J tribe) Charlottesville VA mayor openly worked to
deny the UnitetheRight their legal right to demonstrate in Lee Park/Emancipation Park and
the local police and state national guard force the UnitetheRight Demonstrates to exit the
park to be attacked by massed mobs of Antifa/BlackLivesMatter mobs. This was deliberate. So
it wasn't all some Federal conspiracy in the Trump administration.
These college towns like Charlottesville VA or Durham (Duke) N.C. have been taken over
politically and in the faculty by hard core Leftists, anti Whites – the wealthy
alumni of these once solid Conservative Southern colleges generally doesn't care as long as
the basketball teams do well and the College rankings stay high (rankings done by Harvard
and Yale type academics).
I know the score as I went to the former Southern Conservatives University of Vanderbilt
University in Nashville TN. Vanderbilt now has a J tribe Chancellor Nicholas Zeppos who was
a former Leftist Law professor at the University of Wisconsin Madison – the same
college town that now has an openly Castro Communist mayor who just ripped out Confederate
grave stones outside of Madison.
Has anyone noticed that the so-called "white supremacists" were holding brand new,
recently unfolded flags and were wearing brand new, recently unfolded k kk regalia?
It is no secret that a jewish-owned company "Crowds On Demand" was advertising for
(left-wing) protesters for Charlottesville on craigslist.
Sorta tells you something
The "Unite the Right" promoter Kessler was an 0′bama operative
The whole thing was orchestrated in order to further demonize whites
Yes, this is confusing. One day Vladimir is coming to get us he is hiding under our beds
and infecting our computer systems. Disregard. The next day it is the Alt-Right hiding
under our beds and infecting our water supply.
It appears that the MSM and Progressive movement, no matter how well organized, are a
"one-trick pony". They can only posture one hysterical The End is Nigh meme at a
time for public consumption. This in itself should raise suspicions that these are all
pre-staged political carnivals theaters of the absurd. The question, Who is organizing and
paying for these carnivals and to what end?
To Phillip Giraldi,
You had me laughing with some of your writings. For instance, "When Hillary Clinton
discovered she had lost the election to Vladimir Putin." HA!
Also, Your style of asking questions and then giving only some of the possible answers made
me do some thinking I wouldn't have done otherwise. I hope You continue with this great
style in the future.
@Sam Shama I
don't think the Antifa protesters were "allowed" in the square.
They had no permit.
They weren't "allowed" to be anywhere around there and should have been made to disperse
and go somewhere else, with force if necessary (I mean to be made to go somewhere else to
hold their protest).
The police do this all the time.
"Cage" protesters to avoid problems they foresee.
So, WFT, C'ville Police???
McAuliffe definitely had a hand in this "standing down."
"... Knowing that the Antifa thugs were there with cans filled with cement, baseball bats and even improvised flame throwers why would the police stand down? ..."
"... One answer is because the Democrats wanted a riot to lay at President Trump's feet ..."
"... Angry White Dude ..."
"... The Establishment Strikes Back ..."
"... why was this not done in Virginia? ..."
"... The billionaires of America control our media so control the masses. So called "leftists" should be conducting antiwar marches, or marches for higher wages and single payer healthcare. However, the billionaires manipulate them to march against non-issues to keep workers fighting amongst each other. It was good to see Charles Barkley speak out and say black people never noticed confederate statues and don't care about them. ..."
"... This game begins when billionaires have someone propose removing confederate statues, then encourage groups of whites to protest, pay for a permit, and publicize the event. They have their paid agitators show up to hand out confederate and Nazi flags, give the Hitler salute, and start fights. They also organize leftist groups to have counter-demonstrations and send their black clad agitators to incite violence. Finally, they direct their media to provide massive coverage so that workers are distracted while they continue to loot the world. ..."
"... The System has won. The establishment got the anti-estblishmnet extreme right and the anti-establishment extreme left fight each other. It can't be any better. ..."
"... Antifa is a replay of the 1960s riots and Revolution . But there's a big difference: in the 60s the FBI and police fought the revolutionaries. Now they side with the revolutionaries ..."
"... I view the statue stuff as the summer replacement for transgender bathroom hysteria, all in the service of division and distraction. However, Ron Unz is doing people a great service by courageously publishing this proof of the corruption and suppression of journalism. ..."
"... The USA is now in the grip of oligarch-fostered mass hysteria, giving a large segment of the population – its AntiFa, 'left-libs', poor minorities etc – a thrill of momentary power over other human beings, to substitute for what they are being denied in their lives ..."
"... It is just like Mao's 1966 'Cultural Revolution', or poor Muslims led today to bray for the hanging of 'blasphemers' The oligarchs play on how common people will take the 'path of least resistance' to what makes them feel more powerful against vulnerable targets easy to hand, whom the plebs can feel 'safe' in attacking in the USA & the West generally, that is now of course the oligarch-run 'cultural Marxism' agenda against alleged 'bigots, racists' etc superbly distracting from how common people are being violated in a crony-corrupt economy ..."
"... Again, I see the statue controversy as manufactured distraction. ..."
"... But how many Americans who still rely on MSM are aware that the car reportedly driven by Fields struck another, which in turn struck a third, which then struck people in the street? If Heyer was hit by that third car – assuming this video is legitimate – then much of what is being reported via Establishment outlets is inarguably false. ..."
Knowing that the Antifa thugs were there with cans filled with cement, baseball bats
and even improvised flame throwers why would the police stand down?
One answer is because the Democrats wanted a riot to lay at President Trump's
feet
I would add that the Treason Lobby
wanted a pretext to launch the next stage of their internet purge against the Right, which
clearly was long planned.
Angry White Dude 's astute writer RedStaterNYC states plainly in
The
Establishment Strikes Back August 16 2017 what I think is no more than the truth
the Charlottesville chaos was obviously a setup designed specifically to corner the white
men into violent confrontation with the Establishment's hired goons, "Antifa". Then, they
would use that violence as a pretext to both suppress the rights to peaceable assembly by the
white men, and then plaster the mayhem all over the airwaves to smear them as a group of
unhinged, violent, "domestic terrorists".
The Establishment's muscle, the VA police, did their job, and then their propaganda
arm–the MSM–went right to work hysterically demanding Trump demonize the white
men
He points to the aftermath:
Since suppressing white men's right to peaceable assembly, they have now gone to fully
suppressing their rights to speech and association.
All of the prominent alt-right sites have been taken offline. We are now on day three or
four without most of them. They're just gone. And this is despite having DDOS-protection
services in place and very smart guys on the SA side of things.
Clearly, we aren't dealing with Antifa script-kiddies, but state actors who are behind
this effort to snuff this insurgent pro-white group of young men out of existence before TPTB
lose any more power to them
Expect this to go federal in short order
They are clearly scared, they clearly aren't taking any chances any more and they clearly
aren't going to be stopped by appeals to conscience.
This concurs remarkably closely with our "Charlottesville Survivor"s conclusion:
The American government, at every level, is waging a campaign of extermination against its
own people. If you protest against it, law enforcement tries to get you killed. And if you
survive that, journalists try to get you fired.
Thanks to
the self-control of the Unite The Right people, Charlottesville might well have passed off
without giving the Pogrom leaders the big incident they needed
... ... ...
Two long videos
here and here
give vivid impressions of lethal menace of the Antifa mob in Charlottesville. A week later the
Boston authorities easily
minimized violence by keeping the Antifa and their prey strictly apart. This highlights the
key question: why was this not done in Virginia?
It was because the Left's response to to the MAGA is MAAG (Make America A Gulag). And they
needed a pretext.
(No doubt I have missed useful material. Please send it in.)
The billionaires of America control our media so control the masses. So called "leftists"
should be conducting antiwar marches, or marches for higher wages and single payer
healthcare. However, the billionaires manipulate them to march against non-issues to keep
workers fighting amongst each other. It was good to see Charles Barkley speak out and say
black people never noticed confederate statues and don't care about them.
This game begins when billionaires have someone propose removing confederate statues, then
encourage groups of whites to protest, pay for a permit, and publicize the event. They have
their paid agitators show up to hand out confederate and Nazi flags, give the Hitler salute,
and start fights. They also organize leftist groups to have counter-demonstrations and send
their black clad agitators to incite violence. Finally, they direct their media to provide
massive coverage so that workers are distracted while they continue to loot the world.
Readers may be confused why "single payer" is an important issue. Our bizarre healthcare
systems cost twice as much as other modern nations and produces below average results. The
great Jimmy Dore clarifies in this video clip.
The System has won. The establishment got the anti-estblishmnet extreme right and the anti-establishment
extreme left fight each other. It can't be any better.
It is the simplest thing to set up known by police forces around the world since the 19
century.
You want to play politics you need to learn and do your homework. Start with the class
"Agent provocateurs 101."
The entire Charlottesville event was a staged event, a classic strategy of provocation
operation which is going to be used as psywar pushing for national imposition of martial law
and the deep state coup against Trump and the remnants of the Republic.
Read on.
The facts about Charlottesville that the Zionist dominated MSM do not allow:
and:Proof of staging, see video:
different cars, different driver than alleged driver Fields, photo shopped 'flying people'
& crash backgrounds, lot's more.
It's not difficult, just open your eyes.
Seen from the other side of the Atlantic the conflict seems to be over identity, who is
the real American ?
American here, in the sense hated by those in S America, of USA citizen.
When I visited the USA, and met USA citizens, the real Americans obviously were those whose
ancestors arrived on the Mayflower, and/or signed the Declaration of Independence.
Of course the ancestors of the real Americans fought on the right, that is, winning, side of
the Civil War.
These real Americans thus are of NW European, preferably British descent, they are not
Irish or catholic, and they are white.
Immigration numerically changed the USA, catholics hardly arrive any more from Europe, but
they do arrive from the South and Middle America's, speaking spanish.
Muslim immigrant also get a stronger position in USA society, their advantage is that they do
speak english.
Maybe it is this advantage that made Chaim Saban do anything to prevent that a USA Muslim
Senator became chairman of the USA democratic party, Saban also did not want Bernie Sanders,
Sanders seems to be not enough pro Israel.
So what we see now is Cold Civil War, between the voters of Trump and Deep State, and
between the 'real Americans' and those who 'just' have the USA nationality, but are not seen
by the Mayflower/ Declaration Americans as real Americans.
What confuses these two cold civil wars further are religious issues, about homosexuality,
abortion, euthanasia.
The present Dutch political problem of families with three or more parents does not even seem
to have reached the other side of the Atlantic.
I'm thinking of going to the Crissy field San Francisco demo next Saturday. It's on
federal land, the Presidio. The city of San Francisco is trying to get the Feds to revoke the
permit.
"Natural conservative" high IQ Mayor Ed Lee and the rest of the Chinese politicians are
really pushing to get the permit revoked.
So much for the natural alliance of hardworking high IQ Whites and Asians hoped for by the
conservatives who run websites imagining a future in which Whites and Asians unite against
anti White liberals.
The pro White group doing the protest is
"Patriot Prayer". I don't know much about them. But patriot? I hate America as much as George
Foxman and George Soros do. Prayer? I don't believe in God and the Christian churches are as
anti White as the government.
If it's permitted the national park rangers will be in charge of security. Generally,
neither city nor state police come on federal land.
Antifa is a replay of the 1960s riots and Revolution . But there's a big difference: in
the 60s the FBI and police fought the revolutionaries. Now they side with the
revolutionaries
"(Look at them quickly: the way things are going they will all be shut down in a few
days.)"
At least three apparently already have been. I view the statue stuff as the summer replacement for transgender bathroom hysteria, all
in the service of division and distraction. However, Ron Unz is doing people a great service
by courageously publishing this proof of the corruption and suppression of journalism.
This reminds me of the Travon Martin situation. All the main stream media came out big
time against Zimmerman. The incident with the Dodge Challenger is the same, just to pat. I
look for an unraveling to take place when it comes to the trial.
The USA is now in the grip of oligarch-fostered mass hysteria, giving a large segment of
the population – its AntiFa, 'left-libs', poor minorities etc – a thrill of
momentary power over other human beings, to substitute for what they are being denied in
their lives
It is just like Mao's 1966 'Cultural Revolution', or poor Muslims led today to bray for
the hanging of 'blasphemers' The oligarchs play on how common people will take the 'path of
least resistance' to what makes them feel more powerful against vulnerable targets easy to
hand, whom the plebs can feel 'safe' in attacking in the USA & the West generally, that
is now of course the oligarch-run 'cultural Marxism' agenda against alleged 'bigots, racists'
etc superbly distracting from how common people are being violated in a crony-corrupt
economy
Long ago, Albert Jay Nock (1870-1945), suggested that 3 things explain much of human
social behaviour:
The law of dimishing returns
That the inferior will tend to drive out & overwhelm that of higher quality
The path of least resistance
Oligarch media has put this whole AntiFa etc purge insanity on a platter, & offered it
to any miscreant who would like to power-trip over some now-vulnerable victims, formerly
'powerful' but now able to be cut down. But like any mania, this will in time burn itself out as its absurdity becomes more
obvious, probably more on the time-scale of the Cultural Marxism Maoist excesses, which Mao
himself declared 'over' in 1969 after just 3 years
What may be a more permanent legacy, tho, is the USA mass censorship that has begun,
parallel to the Chinese & to some degree also Russian internet web forum de-platforming
Big Powers Agree, control those interwebz!
I have another comment awaiting moderation, but have now watched the last (Faith Goldy)
video which appears to have captured in real time the automobile horror.
Again, I see the statue controversy as manufactured distraction.
But how many Americans
who still rely on MSM are aware that the car reportedly driven by Fields struck another,
which in turn struck a third, which then struck people in the street? If Heyer was hit by
that third car – assuming this video is legitimate – then much of what is being
reported via Establishment outlets is inarguably false.
Richard Spencer has to start throwing the "Nazi" charge back at the Antifa, the Clintons
and Obama. Point out that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton gave the direct order to organize
and fund a Neo-Nazi Coup in the Ukraine that caused the death of 15-20 Conservative Russian
Christians in the Eastern Ukraine .
Then Point out the fact that Hillary Clinton created Al QUEDA and ISIS ..
Then point out that the Antifa voted for the WAR CRIMINAL NeoNazi enablers Barack Obama
and Hillary Clinton
Spencer must be unrelenting and obsessive on these points .every day every minute denounce
Obama and the Clintons as indictable WAR CRIMINALS!!
Conspiracy theory: the Deep State is behind this and they are preparing for a coup.
Think about it.
1. In 1930s Germany, the old order collapses. The Nazi party is on the verge of splitting
apart then one faction purges the other, leaving only one left.
2. The other day, Secretary of Defense Mattis was in Silicon Valley – traveling to
Google. His excuse was something like "not wanting soldiers to be disadvantaged by
technologies on the battlefield." Does anyone buy that? Does that even make sense?
3. Youtube "adpocalypse" happens. Google uses this as an excuse to curb dissenting
political opinions. They announce that they will be shadow-banning content they disapprove of
even if it does not violate their terms of service. Many videos, and entire channels, are
mysteriously demonitized without explanation. Notoriously left-wing anti-free speech
organizations including the SPLC and the ADL, along with several foreign government NGO
fronts, are providing the information to Youtube on what channels/videos to ban.
Other Social Media follow suite: Facebook, Twitter, etc.
4. Then a potential false flag happens (Charlottesville = Reichstag fire).
Which UTR groups came "combat ready" and which did not? It would be instructive to know
why some did and some did not. Were some groups better informed?
Richard Spencer point out that the black racist organization BLM .it's leadership .made
many trips to the Obama Whitehouse where they plotted with Valerie Jarrett to racially harras
White Americans across the US .Point out the role of BLM in the post-Ferguson race riots and
the murder of White Police Officers across the US .Also point out that the SPLC was-is openly
endorsing the black racial identity politics of BLM and their enabler Valerie Jarette
However, the billionaires manipulate them to march against non-issues to keep workers
fighting amongst each other.
The verity of that concept is so glaringly obvious that it's a pity it has to be stated so
clearly.
If one really looks at the causes of WW2, that concept applies as well. Note that it was a
mass slaughtering of Christians vs Christians to a great degree. Since they haven't been able
to stir up enough hate against Muslims, I guess they'll just make up any excuse to stir the
pot. It's all against all and through it all the banksters keep rubbing their greasy grubby
hands and raking in the moolah.
Linh Dinh, in another excellent article stated it thus
Slitting each other's throat, we can't even see that our common enemy is the
American Israel Empire, or what the Saker calls the AngloZionists. (Emphasis mine.)
- Linh Dinh, Siurana, Charlottesville and Barcelona
I'm intrigued by the expression "historic American nation". What does it mean? Who is part
of it? Who isn't? Who decides whether someone is "in" or "out"? Clearly, the word "nation" is
not being used in the European sense.
The primary question is, what are the psychopaths that are losing control of us, trying to
hide with these created distractions? It must be so horrific as to boggle the mind, as these
distractions have become ever more violent, insane, and inhuman
Left IS the estabilishment, open your goddamn eyes.
Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
In the '30s, after the establishment quit bashing Commies, it became all the rage, indeed
fashionable, to support them and the establishment backed the Reds to the hilt.
Once their usefulness expired, it was back to bashing "Commies" again.
These things shift and the establishment backs what it thinks will do its bidding best.
The reason(s) they keep flip-flopping is(are) usually not too hard to discern.
I'll admit it. I'm racist. I hate the entire human race.
Today, I'd like to point a hateful middle finger at the demagogue Israel as it actively
engineers zionist-nazism within and zionist-communism beyond, its borders.
Their deceptive false flags abound, including 9/11 and Charlottesville Virginia.
Couldn't help but think of the self-serving Israel and their "friendship" with the U.S.,
while watching this particular video.
The Alt Right position on the economy:Our goal is for the Historic Native Born White
American Working Class to control-the means of production Google Microsoft the internet
belongs to OUR PEOPLE!!!
@Michael Kenny Whose out? Greater China's GENELINE in California Greater India's GENELINE
in California .Greater Korea's GENELINE in California .anyone serving in the IDF Muslim
Michigan .and this is just for starters
The nonwhite majority Democratic Party Voting Bloc in California is biological warfare
against The Historic Native Born White American Working Class
Socialist Labor Leaders Denis Kearney and Samuel Gompers had the right idea in 1888 .
I'm intrigued by the expression "historic American nation". What does it mean?
"When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what
I choose it to mean -- "
Alice in Wonderland
[During the war]words had to change their ordinary meaning and to take that which was
now given them.
Reckless audacity came to be considered the courage of a loyal ally; prudent hesitation,
specious cowardice; moderation was held to be a cloak for unmanliness; ability to see all
sides of a question, inaptness to act on any.
- Thucydides, The History of the Peloponnesian War, Chap X, ~400 BC
"How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!"
! Samuel Adams, Letter to John Pitts, January 21, 1776
@Judge Dredd Hilarious.
You largely rely on two sources for your "facts". Both notorious for their easily debunked
lies, Jew supremacist hatred of white gentiles, and their redneck Zionist control.
Science, rational thought, & logic simply demolish the 'holocaust' storyline.
And that's why there are Thought Crime Laws that imprison those who engage in free speech
about it.
Truth is hate to those that hate the truth.
[MORE]
There were the 'Nazis' with the mythological '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' and
there were the 'Nazis' without the mythological '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers'.
The '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' are scientifically impossible frauds.
see the 'holocaust' scam debunked here:
And who is it that demands massive immigration into Europe and the US, but demands that
non-Jew immigration be prevented into "that shitty little country"?
"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize."
@jacques sheete h/t to you for spotlighting Linh Dinh's concise statement of who the
adversary is.
The "Jews will not replace us" chants were jarring -- they made me cringe and made my
well-mannered Sunday-go-to-church self feel embarrassed.
But a revolution is not a tea party.
And the reality of Charlottesville is that Jews -- more appropriately, the Anglozionists -- are replacing Charlottesville's old-line, Jefferson-loving culture and elites.
Charlottesville and the DC-to-Charlottesville corridor has experienced a major increase in
federal government institutions, including outfits that monitor geospatial satellites. This
in turn draws private sector entrepreneurs in highly specialized highly-educated data and
intelligence gathering fields to the area: these are fields Israelis/Jews have traditionally
been very interested in.
If Blacks, in Charlottesville or anywhere else think that changeover will make Black lives
better, they should check their reality meters.
RobinG chides me for saying so, but imo it is also appropriate to have "Nazis" represented
in the UTR coalition. I say this because, as many of us here know, any alternative narrative
of the wars in Europe that does not comply with the Jewish narrative is censored. Therefore,
the full story has never been told; our children are taught lies, about themselves first and
foremost. The full and honest history of the era of the world wars -- the Anglozionist wars -- needs to be told.
In addition, those who study the means by which the three groups that Lindbergh cited -- the British, FDR, and Jews -- ginned up hatred of Germany/Hitler/Nazis, beginning from the
very earliest days of the 'Hitler counter-revolution,' recognize that almost exactly the same
pattern is being played out today.
The fact that the same behaviors that eventuated in war in Europe and in an alleged
holocaust of Jews is being repeated today, almost step-for-step, apparently with the same
goals -- to gin up war to perpetuate Anglozionist dominance, implies either that
a. the first holocaust did not occur as claimed; or
b. Anglozionists are so bent on killing masses of goyim that they are willing to -- or
eager to cull their own ranks as well, and are setting up the conditions for another
holocaust; or
c. that Anglozionists are so stupid that they think the same behaviors will produce a
different outcome.
Left IS the estabilishment, open your goddamn eyes.
Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
In the '30s, after the establishment quit bashing Commies, it became all the rage, indeed
fashionable, to support them and the establishment backed the Reds to the hilt.
Once their usefulness expired, it was back to bashing "Commies" again.
These things shift and the establishment backs what it thinks will do its bidding best.
The reason(s) they keep flip-flopping is(are) usually not too hard to discern. David Horowitz
and Ron and Allis Radosh are the poster children for this sort of opportunistic,
playing-both-sides switcheroo.
@anonymous "(Look at them quickly: the way things are going they will all be shut down in
a few days.)"
At least three apparently already have been.
I view the statue stuff as the summer replacement for transgender bathroom hysteria, all
in the service of division and distraction. However, Ron Unz is doing people a great service
by courageously publishing this proof of the corruption and suppression of journalism. I
agree confederate statutes are the next artificial cause after transgender bathrooms. I
wonder what the next cause will be? Probably something cooked up at Soros central. I predict
the 2018 elections will be a sweep for the Republicans. The radical democrat candidates will
repel everyone but lunatic radicals. The non White and moderate democrats will stay home. The
normal sane people will elect republicans. And the republicans will as always betray the
Whites who vote for them.
"You largely rely on two sources for your "facts". Both notorious for their easily
debunked lies"
Those "sources" are themselves sourced by dozens of other sources. Wikipedia has also been
found by recent studies to be about as accurate as most professional sources of information.
In any case, it's the point that matters, not the details. Ironically, you didn't bother to
counter anything he said. All you did was attack the messenger.
@Reveal I'm not a southerner but I used to read occidental dissent a lot. They often had
confederate flag demonstrations. The demos were all peaceful, just a few Whites with the
confederate battle flag, no police, no counter demonstaters, just a peaceful little
demonstration of the confederate heritage . They also had larger demonstrations against the
chicken and meat packing plants that hire nothing but illegal Hispanics. Good for them.
@WHAT Why are you so shortsighted? I am afraid that when the time comes you might be the
first to be manipulated and used as a useful idiot just as the left is being used right know.
Let's suppose you and your buddies on the right will learn that we are going to attack, say
Venezuela, because, say they sunk our ship. How many from the right, i.e. your buddies will
show with flags and start flag waving and how many on the right will be protesting the war?
Are you sure you and your buddies will be on the right side? The identity politics was
exactly invented to keep the left going after issues that in larger scheme of things are
irrelevant to the establishment. This is to sow the discord only. It is a perfect distractor
from all kinds of stuff that is wrong in this pathetic country of pathetic people. Do not be
like the stupid carp in the park pond that always takes a bait and goes through infinite
number of catch and release cycles.
@Wally Seriously, could you explain this "redneck Zionist" thing you keep banging on
about? Zionists, i.e., Jews, are notoriously urban in their habits and culture. Thus,
"redneck" would seem to be oxymoronic.
@jilles dykstra Jilles
You know nothing about America. The American Civil War was fought on both sides by people of
the same British and NW European background. Further, there was no "right" side, you fool.
Slavery had existed all over the USA and New Englanders brought the slaves here, not
Southerners. Slavery was just one cause of the war.
As for South Americans resenting the term "American", tough. We are not called USA citizens.
We are Americans. We won that name on the battlefield 40 years before the Latin Americans
ceased being Spanish subjects.
My advice to you is to study our history before you open your mouth.
Whatever "proof" this author may provide, one truth remains crystal clear, for those who
can see all apologists for the klanscum, and other assorted naziscum, are simply
soulless zombies. You know, sort of.
On a somewhat related note, I hear most of them zombies, are fervent pagan polytheist
human worshippers and that too a presumed white human. After all, "heaven forbid" worshipping
a "coloured" man, yeah?
A batshit deluded faith well suited for the likes of them.
@SolontoCroesus " RobinG chides me for saying so , but imo it is also appropriate
to have "Nazis" represented in the UTR coalition."
Umm, no.
First, 'chide' is not accurate. I razzed you for suggesting that I should accost my
neighbor in the same (aggressive, accusatory) manner that you routinely confront Sam
Shama.
Second, I've said nothing about 'appropriateness' of Nazi representation. My only stated
position is agreement with ACLU. (And, less directly, that the whole debacle was manipulated,
color revolution style. N.B., I said manipulated, not fake.)
Third, this misattribution of words and thoughts to me, does nothing for your status as an
analyst. Sorry.
Softpanorama
Deap says: May 26, 2021 at 11:47 am
TV says: May 26, 2021 at 12:30 pm
Steve+G says: May 26, 2021 at 4:07 pm
akaPatience says: May 26, 2021 at 12:11 pm
Fred says: May 26, 2021 at 1:03 pm
Le Comte says: May 26, 2021 at 1:15 pm
Some Dude says: May 26, 2021 at 2:18 pm
blue peacock says: May 26, 2021 at 2:55 pm
Alex says: May 27, 2021 at 7:43 am
optimax says: May 27, 2021 at 1:08 pm
Bill H. says: May 27, 2021 at 8:38 pm
© Greg Nash Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)
T Shirt Dress For Women Microsoft Ads
Cloth Clothes with Clothcture Microsoft Ads
Gap Tee Shirt Dres Microsoft Ads
Annie Cloth Shirts Microsoft Ads
Deals for Fitech Microsoft Ads
Pat Lang says: April 25, 2021 at 1:35 pm
PRC90 says: April 26, 2021 at 3:33 am
Carey says: April 26, 2021 at 1:35 pm
EEngineer says: April 25, 2021 at 11:10 am
Eric Newhill says: April 25, 2021 at 2:48 pm
John+Merryman says: April 25, 2021 at 4:07 pm
Sam says: April 25, 2021 at 4:47 pm
J says: April 26, 2021 at 6:53 am
Peter Moritz says: April 10, 2021 at 12:15 pm
Jose says: April 10, 2021 at 2:40 pm
Keith Harbaugh says: April 12, 2021 at 8:21 pm
irf520 says: April 10, 2021 at 6:33 pm
Oilman2 says: April 10, 2021 at 11:14 am
![Rand Paul wearing a suit and tie: Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)]({"default":{"load":"default","w":"80","h":"45","src":"//img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/BB1fmvAL.img?h=450&w=799&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=437&y=176"},"size3column":{"load":"default","w":"62","h":"35","src":"//img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/BB1fmvAL.img?h=351&w=624&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=437&y=176"},"size2column":{"load":"default","w":"62","h":"35","src":"//img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/BB1fmvAL.img?h=351&w=624&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=437&y=176"}})
© Greg Nash Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)
'Guardians of the Galaxy' (2014) Dir: James Gunn © Marvel Studios, Walt Disney Studios
Motion Pictures 42 Follow RT on 
Monty Python's classic 'The Life of Brian' relentlessly mocked Christianity. Now we must do the
same thing to the Church of Woke
Anti-Trump demonstrators march to Black Lives Matter plaza while joining a counter protest
against "Million MAGA March" in Washington, DC © Getty Images / Probal Rashid/LightRocket
27 Follow RT on 
In
the left's victim culture, Eva Longoria's accused of 'anti-blackness' for calling Latinas the
'real heroines' in beating Trump
By
backing housing charity's 'Jewish only' rule, UK court drops the ball. Aren't we all equal in
Britain?
FILE PHOTO; People take part in an All Black Lives Matter march in Hollywood, Los Angeles,
California, U.S., June 14, 2020. © REUTERS/Ringo Chiu REUTERS/Ringo Chiu 370 Follow RT on
Alastair Crooke
July 13, 2020 © Photo: США REUTERS/Ringo Chiu
.svg)
.svg)
WATCH: DC Police unleash on 'Black House autonomous
zone' protesters, fulfilling Trump's vow to use 'serious force'
© Getty Images / Karla Ann Cote / NurPhoto Follow RT on
'As soon as I saw the slaveowner's statue being toppled in Bristol, I knew the real anti-racism protest was OVER' 
Guilt and self-loathing pervades the 'we must do better' responses of businesses and institutions over #BLM – it's truly pathetic
'No exceptions!' Trump orders the arrest of anyone vandalizing
monuments, warns they face up to 10 years in prison
CHAZ protesters reinforce barricades & form human chains as
Seattle mayor vows to dismantle anarchic encampment (PHOTOS, VIDEO)
