The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Manufacturing Hate
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From Donald Trump’s swearing in January 201 through the Spring of 2020, public opinion on whether racial relations were getting better or worse in the US improved from a net worse of 65% to a net worse of just 24%. Perceived net racial acrimony was reduced to a third of what it had been three years prior, a three year period including the notorious Charlottesville rally:

The fire of racial tension must be stoked. When the flames stop licking and the embers begin to show, the regime’s corporate media arm instinctively starts rummaging around for kindling. They found that kindling in Breonna Taylor, Ahmed Arbery, and George Floyd. The were the logs tossed on the fire, a fire now burning as hot and brightly as it did when Trump was elected.

It may be impossible for this multiracial polyglot to function well but it could obviously function better than it does with the media merchants of mendacity so relentlessly peddling their blood-soaked wares.

 
Hide 125 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. The (((media merchants))) are assiduously peddling their blood soaked wares – just licking their chops waiting for the next White cop, black criminal “lynching”. One of these days, those (((media merchants))) are going to be running scared, perhaps even begging for mercy. Whether that mercy is granted will remain to be seen.

  2. I’ve never been a fan of the media, but more and more, I’ve come to see them as not just being politically-biased, lazy, corrupt, or superficial, but as actually being criminal organizations, where crime has to work its way up or down a hierarchy.

    In many countries, I think they would simply be arrested.

    • Thanks: TomSchmidt
    • Replies: @MattinLA
    @songbird

    Yes, they truly are enemies of the people.

  3. … the notorious Charlottesville rally …

    “Notorious” is one word for it. Other words that come to mind are “fictional” and “falsely reported.”

    But I suppose that the false reports achieved their aim, which I believe was your point.

    • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
    • Replies: @Feryl
    @V. K. Ovelund

    The feds (and VA state police, gov Terry McAuliffe is a long time Clinton minion) appear to have had a big hand in the organization of Charlottesville. It looked like a sabotaging of the Alt-Right , via intentionally creating violence and chaos and then blaming it exclusively on the Right. And it worked, with most people running like hell from the Alt right label subsequent to the event.

    In addition to some of the attendees being themselves agent provocateurs, there was also the fact that the authorities didn't provide separate escape routes for either side (those attempting to get away from the opposing mob were actually blocked by the cops and told to turn around and go toward the opposition). So both sides were funneled together, creating ample opportunity for confrontations. It also looked like the police "stood down" while some of these confrontations took place.

    I knew the rally was a horrible idea from the start, given the fact that no institution in America wants to fully reject Left identity politics. This, any explicit large gathering of true non-libertarian reactionaries is likely going to attract opposition (and Fed infiltrators) from all levels. Just ask Steve King (the one from Iowa).

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @A123

  4. @songbird
    I've never been a fan of the media, but more and more, I've come to see them as not just being politically-biased, lazy, corrupt, or superficial, but as actually being criminal organizations, where crime has to work its way up or down a hierarchy.

    In many countries, I think they would simply be arrested.

    Replies: @MattinLA

    Yes, they truly are enemies of the people.

  5. Ruling class to black and white working class. Lets you and him fight.

    • Thanks: WorkingClass
    • Replies: @Greta Handel
    @WorkingClass

    It’s good that you’re back, offering this perspective. Several of the authors here at Unz, wittingly or not, also do their part to Divide & Conquer:

    - Red/Blue
    - black/white
    - male/female
    - religion
    - ancestry
    - police/arrestees
    - RussiaBad/ChinaBad/IranBad
    - Covid-19 origin(s)
    - Covid-19 prevention and treatment

    And we all need to keep in mind that it’s always easier to see how those on the other side of these divisions are being played.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

  6. anonymous[139] • Disclaimer says:

    media merchants of mendacity so relentlessly peddling their blood-soaked wares.

    We’ve been subjected to one of the most relentless media campaigns promoting hate and divisiveness these past few years. They were willing to burn the country down just to get rid of Trump? It shows how masses of people out there are manipulable and can be stampeded in one way or another. The media have become very sinister indeed. They apparently can hype the country into a civil war or any other kind of mass panic. The media monopolies need to be broken up for the good of the country.

  7. anonymous[521] • Disclaimer says:

    They are people with good intentions seeking to create a better society through kindling antiracism by stoking hatred for whites. Eventually antiracism will lead to absorption of people of color by whites like a Bounty paper towel on a spill making a new race. The end state will be harmonious. Give it 150 years.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @anonymous


    Eventually antiracism will lead to absorption of people of color by whites like a Bounty paper towel on a spill making a new race. The end state will be harmonious. Give it 150 years.
     
    Americans did not ask to be the experimental subject of a grand experiment in miscegenation. I do not want a new race. I was happy with the old one.
  8. but it could obviously function better than it does with the media merchants of mendacity

    Function better for whom?

  9. flight or fight?
    it is much worse this time.
    White flight destroyed thousands of lives,neighborhoods,towns and cities, for decades,this time it will be much worse, socity has never recovered from massive events,never gone back to normal after AIDS,911 and wars, we are never going back to anything close to normal ,until this civil war is over and you see couples dancing in the streets like the 911 Jews.

  10. @WorkingClass
    Ruling class to black and white working class. Lets you and him fight.

    Replies: @Greta Handel

    It’s good that you’re back, offering this perspective. Several of the authors here at Unz, wittingly or not, also do their part to Divide & Conquer:

    – Red/Blue
    – black/white
    – male/female
    – religion
    – ancestry
    – police/arrestees
    – RussiaBad/ChinaBad/IranBad
    – Covid-19 origin(s)
    – Covid-19 prevention and treatment

    And we all need to keep in mind that it’s always easier to see how those on the other side of these divisions are being played.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @Greta Handel


    Several of the authors here at Unz, wittingly or not, also do their part to Divide & Conquer:...
     
    I do not wish to do my part.

    – Red/Blue
     
    Is it not necessary that the Blues, too, wish to coëxist? The Reds can hardly coëxist without reciprocation. As matters stand, the Blues already have what they want; namely, the upper hand over the Reds.

    – black/white
     
    Few blacks have agency. Most are moral children.

    – male/female
     
    Marriage.

    – religion
     
    Could you be more specific?

    – ancestry
     
    In the United States, white people have interests.

    – police/arrestees
     
    I hold no brief for police, but it seems to me that division between police and arrestees is probably necessary.

    – RussiaBad/ChinaBad/IranBad
     
    China is a great rival by sheer force of geopolitical circumstance. The United States has been foolish however since 1989 to fail to cultivate Russia and Iran as friends.

    So have I unwittingly done my part to Divide & Conquer?

    Replies: @Greta Handel

  11. Mr Epigone says:

    The fire of racial tension must be stoked. When the flames stop licking and the embers begin to show, the regime’s corporate media arm instinctively starts rummaging around for kindling. They found that kindling in Breonna Taylor, Ahmed Arbery, and George Floyd. The were the logs tossed on the fire, a fire now burning as hot and brightly as it did when Trump was elected.

    I say:

    The JEW/WASP Ruling Class of the American Empire will not TAPER the anti-White animosity emanating from the corporate propaganda apparatus nor will the privately-controlled Federal Reserve Bank taper the monetary extremism keeping the asset bubbles in stocks and bonds and real estate lofty and expanding.

    The European Christian nations — USA, England, France, Germany, Australia, Canada…etc. — are all using monetary extremism and mass immigration and accusations of so-called “racism” and so-called “anti-Semitism” and other nonsense to deliberately destroy national sovereignty and to concentrate loot and political power in the hands of the evil globalizer plutocrats and the nasty and vile White Upper Middle Class Snot Brats.

    The Chinese and Japanese national ruling classes are also utilizing their central banker shysters to retain power and to remain in power and the globalized central banker shysters are deliberately using monetary policy to increase income inequality and to concentrate loot and power in the hands of money-grubbing scumbags such as Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos and the Koch boys and all the rest of the billionaire dirtbags.

    Message from the JEW/WASP Ruling Class of the American Empire to the corporate propaganda apparatus:

    DO NOT TAPER THE ANTI-WHITE ANIMOSITY

    DO NOT TAPER THE ANTI-WHITE PROPAGANDA

    Message from the JEW/WASP Ruling Class of the American Empire to the Federal Reserve Bank:

    DO NOT TAPER THE ASSET PURCHASES

    DO NOT TAPER THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK BALANCE SHEET BALLOONING

    DO NOT TAPER THE DOLLAR SWAPS

    DO NOT TAPER THE PURCHASES OF MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES

    DO NOT TAPER THE PURCHASE OF GOVERNMENT DEBT

    BREAK ON THROUGH TO THE OTHER SIDE OF MONETARY POLICY MADNESS

    Tweet from 2015:

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
    @Charles Pewitt

    All these 'crises' end up rewarding the hyper-rich parasites and screwing the 90%. They are NEVER 'mistakes'. They know precisely what they are doing.

  12. I remember CNN’s coverage of the rioting in Ferguson Mo. Their delight that they had incited it vanished when they had to do live on scene reports.

    Jake Tappers fear was impossible to conceal as the white eyes and teeth of negroes emerged out of the night behind him. That it wasn’t just property in danger but his own sorry ass that could be burned down.

  13. Michael Lind writes:

    Woke speech is simply a ruling-class dialect, which must be updated frequently to keep the lower orders from breaking the code and successfully imitating their betters.

    https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/new-national-american-elite

    Van Morrison sings:

    Need to make some real connection

    Baby something’s just got to give

    ’cause I’ve been too long in exile

    I’ve been grinding at the mill

    Too long to decode all the secrets

    Have to get some elbow room

    Most people think that everything

    Is just what they assume

    I say:

    The filthy Murdoch minion three dollar propaganda whore at the treasonous globalizer shitrag called Wall Street Journal who recently attacked Van Morrison is cordially invited to find a body of water and then go SOAK YOUR GODDAMN HEAD!

    The WSJ is pure corporate media evil of the worst sort. The WSJ is worse than the New York Times, DAMMIT!

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/latest-record-project-volume-1-by-van-morrison-review-songs-in-the-key-of-conspiracy-11620074425

    • Replies: @Curmudgeon
    @Charles Pewitt

    I'll see your Van Morrison and raise you a Rolling Stones:

    I watched with glee
    While your kings and queens
    Fought for ten decades
    For the gods they made

    Just as every cop is a criminal
    And all the sinners saints
    As heads is tails
    Just call me Lucifer
    Cause I'm in need of some restraint

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAP1GHNuwQ8

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt

    , @YetAnotherAnon
    @Charles Pewitt

    Van's latest didn't go down well in the Guardian

    https://www.theguardian.com/music/2021/may/06/van-morrison-new-record-project-volume-one-review

    "depressing rants by tinfoil milliner"

    "The veteran bluesman loudly wakes up the sheeple with this boring and paranoid double album, reminiscent of a dinner party with a bitter divorcee"


    Even a man as implacably opposed to lockdown as Van Morrison – who spent 2020 releasing songs rubbishing science as “crooked facts”, mocking people for wearing masks and describing the government as “fascist bullies” while also invoking the Berlin Wall – might be forced to concede it had its advantages. After all, it gave him the time to write the material for Latest Record Project Volume 1, a 28-song, two-hour-plus opus that allows him to set out his latterday worldview more fully than any previous work.

    Morrison’s longstanding sense of distrust – the result of some dubious contracts he signed in the 1960s – long ago calcified into a weltanschauung in which everyone was lying, with the exception of a certain Northern Irish singer. He’s sounded like a conspiracy theorist before – on 2005’s They Sold Me Out, he averred that being “sold out for a few shekels” was “the oldest story that’s ever been told”; “brainwashed the suckers again and perpetrated the myth,” he sang on 2008’s School of Hard Knocks, “propaganda far and wide” – but on Latest Record Project Volume 1, the sheeple are truly awoken.

    It’s MI5 this and mind-control that, secret “meetings in the forest”, mainstream media lies and Kool Aid being drunk by the gallon. On Western Man, there’s some troubling alt-right-y stuff about how the west’s “rewards” have been “stolen” by foreigners unknown and we should be “prepared to fight”. And he’s convinced that the shadowy forces of the establishment are engaged in efforts to silence him: “You have to be careful of everything you say”, “I’m a targeted individual”. The latter seems a fairly weird claim to make in the middle of a two-hour long album released by a major label: as far as can be ascertained, Sony is a multinational conglomerate with interests in banking and insurance, rather than an anarchist collective devoted to fearlessly speaking truth to power. Clearly the shadowy forces of the establishment need to up their game a bit.
     

    Sounds worth a listen!

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @Charles Pewitt, @Mulga Mumblebrain

  14. @Charles Pewitt
    Michael Lind writes:

    Woke speech is simply a ruling-class dialect, which must be updated frequently to keep the lower orders from breaking the code and successfully imitating their betters.

    https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/new-national-american-elite

    Van Morrison sings:

    Need to make some real connection

    Baby something's just got to give

    'cause I've been too long in exile

    I've been grinding at the mill

    Too long to decode all the secrets

    Have to get some elbow room

    Most people think that everything

    Is just what they assume

    https://youtu.be/D26UbyG9O28

    I say:

    The filthy Murdoch minion three dollar propaganda whore at the treasonous globalizer shitrag called Wall Street Journal who recently attacked Van Morrison is cordially invited to find a body of water and then go SOAK YOUR GODDAMN HEAD!

    The WSJ is pure corporate media evil of the worst sort. The WSJ is worse than the New York Times, DAMMIT!

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/latest-record-project-volume-1-by-van-morrison-review-songs-in-the-key-of-conspiracy-11620074425

    Replies: @Curmudgeon, @YetAnotherAnon

    I’ll see your Van Morrison and raise you a Rolling Stones:

    I watched with glee
    While your kings and queens
    Fought for ten decades
    For the gods they made

    Just as every cop is a criminal
    And all the sinners saints
    As heads is tails
    Just call me Lucifer
    Cause I’m in need of some restraint

    • Replies: @Charles Pewitt
    @Curmudgeon

    Cause I’m in need of some restraint

    The JEW/WASP Ruling Class of the American Empire sorely needs some restraint and the new political party called White Core America shall deliver it.

    EXPLICIT WHITE IDENTITY POLITICS is the answer to the lack of representation that the European Christian ancestral core of the USA currently endures.

    The European Christian ancestral core of the USA only endures this anti-White regime in Swamp City DC because good sized portions of the Whites are bought off by the asset bubbles in stocks and bonds and real estate created by the monetary extremism of the Federal Reserve Bank.

    The JEW/WASP Ruling Class must be restrained from further attacks upon the historic American nation by an external force. The JEW/WASP Ruling Class is feeling its oats at the moment and they feel unbounded by externalities. When the asset bubbles implode the JEW/WASP Ruling Class will be financially liquidated and then they will be legally and forcibly exiled to a fetid and humid and hot portion of sub-Saharan Africa.

    Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates -- and his soon to be loaded with loot wife -- and Mark Zuckerberg and Paul Singer and the Koch crowd and Tom Steyer and Mike Bloomberg and all the rest of the treasonous globalizer plutocrats must be financially liquidated and they must be legally put in walled and fenced compounds in sub-Saharan Africa.

    https://youtu.be/HjMUImaiAhQ

  15. Lets ignore that fact that the handful of corporations that own all the mass media outlets are all run by jews. Who actually runs these corporations is not relevant to the discussion, you have to be a crazed conspiracy theorist to believe this.

    • Replies: @A123
    @neutral

    Let us acknowledge the fact that the Fake Stream Media has massive pro-Islamic bias and strongly opposes traditional Judeo-Christian values.

    Why else would the national Fake Stream Media [FSM] give no coverage to Muslim violence in the U.S.? For example: (1)


    Nashville: Muslim Gunman Ambushes, Opens Fire On Police Officers

    A Metro Nashville Police officer was injured while responding to a reported active shooter at a home in South Nashville. But police say it was a “setup” and when officers arrived the suspect opened fire on officers.

    Three officers knocked on the door, but when they began to enter the home, [The gunman, 22-year-old Salman Mohamed] opened fire, injuring Officer Brian Sherman, according to MNPD Spokesman Don Aaron.
     

    If Police Officers had been set-up by an observant Jew, the national, sharia compliant, FSM would have launched into an immediate frenzy with wall-to-wall coverage.

    Everybody sees the double standards of the Muslim-Left media firms.

    PEACE 😇
    __________

    (1) https://gellerreport.com/2021/05/muslim-gunman-opens-fire-on-cops.html/

    Replies: @neutral, @Mulga Mumblebrain

    , @Not only wrathful
    @neutral

    Germany has just as high a proportion of its population as immigrants as the US and will likely elect the avowedly open borders Green Party at the next election. Why is that?

    Replies: @neutral, @A123

  16. @Charles Pewitt
    Michael Lind writes:

    Woke speech is simply a ruling-class dialect, which must be updated frequently to keep the lower orders from breaking the code and successfully imitating their betters.

    https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/new-national-american-elite

    Van Morrison sings:

    Need to make some real connection

    Baby something's just got to give

    'cause I've been too long in exile

    I've been grinding at the mill

    Too long to decode all the secrets

    Have to get some elbow room

    Most people think that everything

    Is just what they assume

    https://youtu.be/D26UbyG9O28

    I say:

    The filthy Murdoch minion three dollar propaganda whore at the treasonous globalizer shitrag called Wall Street Journal who recently attacked Van Morrison is cordially invited to find a body of water and then go SOAK YOUR GODDAMN HEAD!

    The WSJ is pure corporate media evil of the worst sort. The WSJ is worse than the New York Times, DAMMIT!

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/latest-record-project-volume-1-by-van-morrison-review-songs-in-the-key-of-conspiracy-11620074425

    Replies: @Curmudgeon, @YetAnotherAnon

    Van’s latest didn’t go down well in the Guardian

    https://www.theguardian.com/music/2021/may/06/van-morrison-new-record-project-volume-one-review

    “depressing rants by tinfoil milliner”

    “The veteran bluesman loudly wakes up the sheeple with this boring and paranoid double album, reminiscent of a dinner party with a bitter divorcee”

    Even a man as implacably opposed to lockdown as Van Morrison – who spent 2020 releasing songs rubbishing science as “crooked facts”, mocking people for wearing masks and describing the government as “fascist bullies” while also invoking the Berlin Wall – might be forced to concede it had its advantages. After all, it gave him the time to write the material for Latest Record Project Volume 1, a 28-song, two-hour-plus opus that allows him to set out his latterday worldview more fully than any previous work.

    Morrison’s longstanding sense of distrust – the result of some dubious contracts he signed in the 1960s – long ago calcified into a weltanschauung in which everyone was lying, with the exception of a certain Northern Irish singer. He’s sounded like a conspiracy theorist before – on 2005’s They Sold Me Out, he averred that being “sold out for a few shekels” was “the oldest story that’s ever been told”; “brainwashed the suckers again and perpetrated the myth,” he sang on 2008’s School of Hard Knocks, “propaganda far and wide” – but on Latest Record Project Volume 1, the sheeple are truly awoken.

    It’s MI5 this and mind-control that, secret “meetings in the forest”, mainstream media lies and Kool Aid being drunk by the gallon. On Western Man, there’s some troubling alt-right-y stuff about how the west’s “rewards” have been “stolen” by foreigners unknown and we should be “prepared to fight”. And he’s convinced that the shadowy forces of the establishment are engaged in efforts to silence him: “You have to be careful of everything you say”, “I’m a targeted individual”. The latter seems a fairly weird claim to make in the middle of a two-hour long album released by a major label: as far as can be ascertained, Sony is a multinational conglomerate with interests in banking and insurance, rather than an anarchist collective devoted to fearlessly speaking truth to power. Clearly the shadowy forces of the establishment need to up their game a bit.

    Sounds worth a listen!

    • Agree: Sick 'n Tired
    • Replies: @Charles Pewitt
    @YetAnotherAnon

    The Guardian and MI5 can go straight to the hottest pits of fiery Hell!

    Van Morrison is a peppery song man by way of Belfast and Van Morrison still has guts and heart and balls and the ruling class skanks don't like it.

    The Wall Street Journal is a disgusting rumpswab propaganda sheet for money-grubbing globalizer dirtbags with a circulation of over a million print and another million or more electronic and The Guardian has a little over a hundred thousand circulation and both the filthy globalizer turds at the The Guardian and the Wall Street Journal aren't fit to hold Van Morrison's hat.

    MI5 is a bunch of assholes like the FBI and MI6 are bunch of government worker shitheads like the CIA.

    The answer to concentrated corporate media scum who attack guys like Van Morrison is to bust up the mass media and then use the monetary power of the central banks to dole out guaranteed monthly loot to all eligible English and Americans.

    All English citizens with all ancestry born in England before 1924 should get the equivalent to ten thousand dollars a month. Tax free. Wales and Northern Ireland and Scotland can do what they will without the BOE. Good Luck!

    All eligible Americans shall get the PCLP.

    The Pewitt Conjured Loot Portion(PCLP) will pay each American who has all blood ancestry born in colonial America or the USA before 1924 a cool ten thousand dollars a month. The US Treasury and the Federal Reserve Bank shall work together to conjure up the cash out of thin air, just like the ruling class is doing now.

    Government worker assholes who are evil and overpaid have too much power and regular citizens must use the monetary power of the central banks to form their own intelligence agencies with police powers and the ability to operate overseas.

    England and the USA are under TOTALITARIAN LOCKDOWN.

    Dump The Jute!

    Dump the arrogant cunt government workers at the FBI and the CIA and MI5 and MI6 and destroy the Wall Street Journal and The Guardian!

    , @Charles Pewitt
    @YetAnotherAnon

    Upon further internet review it seems The Guardian has a large electronic following much more larger than the hundred thousand circulation number and the Wall Street Journal is close to three million readership when electronic versions are taken into account.

    So The Guardian and the Wall Street Journal with significant readership decided to launch vicious and disgusting attacks on Van Morrison and then another guy who is half Scottish named Trump is kept off of Facebook by fat-faced asshole Clegg and Jew billionaire Mark Zuckerberg and the Tories and the Republican Party Ruling Class won't do anything about censorship because the corporate media is protecting them.

    Van Morrison has Scottish blood and so does Trump and they got those same Scottish eyes like Annie Lennox.

    , @Mulga Mumblebrain
    @YetAnotherAnon

    Imagine a Guardian presstitute from that sewer of MI6/Jewish Board of Deputies lying propaganda attacking van the Man for pointing out the falsity of the powers that be, which the Guardian slime serves so slavishly-or else. I do know where I hope that Chinese rocket lands, I must say, but it needs to break into two fragments over London.

  17. A123 says:
    @neutral
    Lets ignore that fact that the handful of corporations that own all the mass media outlets are all run by jews. Who actually runs these corporations is not relevant to the discussion, you have to be a crazed conspiracy theorist to believe this.

    Replies: @A123, @Not only wrathful

    Let us acknowledge the fact that the Fake Stream Media has massive pro-Islamic bias and strongly opposes traditional Judeo-Christian values.

    Why else would the national Fake Stream Media [FSM] give no coverage to Muslim violence in the U.S.? For example: (1)

    Nashville: Muslim Gunman Ambushes, Opens Fire On Police Officers

    A Metro Nashville Police officer was injured while responding to a reported active shooter at a home in South Nashville. But police say it was a “setup” and when officers arrived the suspect opened fire on officers.

    Three officers knocked on the door, but when they began to enter the home, [The gunman, 22-year-old Salman Mohamed] opened fire, injuring Officer Brian Sherman, according to MNPD Spokesman Don Aaron.

    If Police Officers had been set-up by an observant Jew, the national, sharia compliant, FSM would have launched into an immediate frenzy with wall-to-wall coverage.

    Everybody sees the double standards of the Muslim-Left media firms.

    PEACE 😇
    __________

    (1) https://gellerreport.com/2021/05/muslim-gunman-opens-fire-on-cops.html/

    • Troll: Mulga Mumblebrain
    • Replies: @neutral
    @A123

    Is this the best the Hasbara can produce? Hardly a secret that jews love Muslims, sure they try to get the patriotard types to believe that Israel exists to fight against Muslims, but for everyone else it is clear how useful Muslims are to them. And it is not Muslims running those corporations btw, no amount of deflection tactics can hide the fact who really does.

    Replies: @A123

    , @Mulga Mumblebrain
    @A123

    You desperately need psychiatric attention, dear. Before its too late. It is, isn't it. Poor old Zionazis-such a poor quality of stooges these days.

  18. @A123
    @neutral

    Let us acknowledge the fact that the Fake Stream Media has massive pro-Islamic bias and strongly opposes traditional Judeo-Christian values.

    Why else would the national Fake Stream Media [FSM] give no coverage to Muslim violence in the U.S.? For example: (1)


    Nashville: Muslim Gunman Ambushes, Opens Fire On Police Officers

    A Metro Nashville Police officer was injured while responding to a reported active shooter at a home in South Nashville. But police say it was a “setup” and when officers arrived the suspect opened fire on officers.

    Three officers knocked on the door, but when they began to enter the home, [The gunman, 22-year-old Salman Mohamed] opened fire, injuring Officer Brian Sherman, according to MNPD Spokesman Don Aaron.
     

    If Police Officers had been set-up by an observant Jew, the national, sharia compliant, FSM would have launched into an immediate frenzy with wall-to-wall coverage.

    Everybody sees the double standards of the Muslim-Left media firms.

    PEACE 😇
    __________

    (1) https://gellerreport.com/2021/05/muslim-gunman-opens-fire-on-cops.html/

    Replies: @neutral, @Mulga Mumblebrain

    Is this the best the Hasbara can produce? Hardly a secret that jews love Muslims, sure they try to get the patriotard types to believe that Israel exists to fight against Muslims, but for everyone else it is clear how useful Muslims are to them. And it is not Muslims running those corporations btw, no amount of deflection tactics can hide the fact who really does.

    • Replies: @A123
    @neutral

    SJW Elites pushing Islamic goals via BLM & Antifa have recruited & deployed Infidel "useful idiots" to cover the actual Muslim roots of these movements. What is surprising is how many people buy into the Taqiyya con job -- Hook, Line, & Sinker.

    It is no secret that the pro-Islamic Fake Steam Media hates non-elite Jews, especially Israeli Jews. These BLM-Palestine banners openly declare the Left-Muslim alliance. There are so many I used the [MORE] tag.

    PEACE 😇

     
    https://www.investigativeproject.org/pics/large/4796.jpg

     
    https://www.globalafricanworker.com/sites/default/files/BLM%20Palestine%20Workers.org_.jpg

     
    https://artistsspace.org/media/pages/programs/palestine-blm-and-boycott-in-the-arts/3059500900-1572557337/qjtL0nb7a3.jpg

     
    https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-MsuSIhub1k8/XwnC1qZTj_I/AAAAAAAA0_A/8oL1H7mdxNgSCP5mpJzUzWWTr8rT7F_tgCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/Black%2BLives%2BMatter%2BDemonstration%2BBrighton%2B11.7.20%2B%252833%2529.jpg

     
    http://www.palestineposterproject.org/sites/default/files/blm_palestine_pppa.jpg

     

    http://www.palestineposterproject.org/sites/default/files/caribbean_against_apartheid_in_palestine_pppa.jpg

  19. The “strength of diversity” for the enemy is the breaking up of communities.
    Strong communities fight )))their((( advances and looting.

    Its up to US to see to it that )))they((( are branded as the Rich and the “elite”.
    Make them fight each other. Sic their “pets” on )))them(((.

    Tell every diverse person you meet that the Jews and Zionists run society.
    Tell them )))they((( are the Rich and Powerful.

    Its mostly true, and will just kill their Anti-White narrative.
    Let the Marxists EAT THE RICH. They are not US.

  20. The Woke War is simply a distraction from economic truths.
    The economy has already collapsed under the stupidity of enemy looting.

    )))They((( have again slit their own throats by attacking the Middle Class.
    The Weimar Republic 2.0 is about to hyperinflate out of existence.

    )))They((( cannot stop it now. The New Order is already an idea whose time has come.
    )))They((( cannot help themselves. )))They((( are stupid and greedy.

    Show no mercy to the enemy. They must be completely destroyed this time.
    To the last of them. The only solution to the problems is to annihilate them.

    )))They((( cannot stop themselves. They are a Cancer to the Whole World.
    There will never be peace while they exist amongst US.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @Dr. Doom


    There will never be peace while they exist amongst US.
     
    Jews will always exist among us. They always have, since deep in the Colonial era; so your statement amounts to, “There will never be peace,” doesn't it?

    Well, strife is a fundamental in this fallen world, so you are right to that extent. “Only the dead have seen the end of war,” saith Plato per MacArthur.

    However, what I seek is a mutually respectful accommodation with the Jews. Regrettably, I no longer believe that one can reach a mutually respectful accommodation as long as

        * Jews can invent malicious tales about us while
        * we may say only complimentary things about Jews.

    My back is up. Until Jews admit that the Holocaust is in significant measure a malicious fable and that Jews have lied the United States into a long series of wars since 1942 to advance Jewish interests at immense cost in American gentile blood—or at least until Jews stop so frenetically promoting such deceit and destroying the lives of any American who dares to question it—U.S. anti-Semitism is destined to grow.

    Most of us used to like Jews. I certainly did. Many of us still do, but the trend is in the wrong direction for the Semites. I don't fancy the Jews' prospects if they persist.

    The last will provoke white-hot rage, stirring such anger as is felt by a villain whose scheme had seemed within reach but whose plans only now begin to collapse; but that is not my fault. I didn't start this. I only sent a grandfather and his brothers to fight for Jewish interests in World War II and a son to fight for Jewish interests in Iraq, so Jews who hate my stance can go to hell.

    Or they can come back from hell and decide that they would rather just decently get along (at least until the next historic cycle of Jew-versus-gentile conflict repeats, a century hence). That is what I recommend.

  21. A123 says:
    @neutral
    @A123

    Is this the best the Hasbara can produce? Hardly a secret that jews love Muslims, sure they try to get the patriotard types to believe that Israel exists to fight against Muslims, but for everyone else it is clear how useful Muslims are to them. And it is not Muslims running those corporations btw, no amount of deflection tactics can hide the fact who really does.

    Replies: @A123

    SJW Elites pushing Islamic goals via BLM & Antifa have recruited & deployed Infidel “useful idiots” to cover the actual Muslim roots of these movements. What is surprising is how many people buy into the Taqiyya con job — Hook, Line, & Sinker.

    It is no secret that the pro-Islamic Fake Steam Media hates non-elite Jews, especially Israeli Jews. These BLM-Palestine banners openly declare the Left-Muslim alliance. There are so many I used the [MORE] tag.

    PEACE 😇

     
     

    [MORE]

     
     
     
     

  22. @neutral
    Lets ignore that fact that the handful of corporations that own all the mass media outlets are all run by jews. Who actually runs these corporations is not relevant to the discussion, you have to be a crazed conspiracy theorist to believe this.

    Replies: @A123, @Not only wrathful

    Germany has just as high a proportion of its population as immigrants as the US and will likely elect the avowedly open borders Green Party at the next election. Why is that?

    • Replies: @neutral
    @Not only wrathful

    Germany become a ZOG state in 1945, how else could it end but like this?

    Replies: @Not only wrathful

    , @A123
    @Not only wrathful

    The world leaders of SJW Globalism are German Elites. They exported their crazy Open Muslim Borders ideals to the U.S. GW Bush and Obama were followers, not leaders.

    While German Elites can obtain submission from the German people, their influence over other nations is waning: (1)


    France saw a myriad of terrorist attacks between May 2020 and April 2021. In the months of September and October, alone, four people were wounded (two seriously) after a radical Islamic terrorist from Pakistan attacked them with a butcher knife outside of the old Charlie Hebdo headquarters; the history teacher Samuel Paty was beheaded by a Chechen Islamist migrant after showing caricatures of the Muslim prophet as a part a class on freedom of speech; three Christians were murdered in the Basilica of Notre-Dame in Nice by a Tunisian boat migrant; and a Greek orthodox priest was wounded seriously after being shot by an assailant.

    The populist leader Marine Le Pen — who enjoys widespread support among police officers and the military for her hardline positions on crime and migration — undoubtedly see opportunity in the poll numbers. A survey published last month by the French cable channel BMFTV showed that 48 percent of those questioned about France’s 2022 presidential election said that Marine Le Pen’s victory was “probable”.
     
    The bald faced lies by SJW Islamic Globalist Media firms have lost credibility. The TRUTH has reached Les Deplorables in France. Accurate information about Muslim violence against Christian children is propelling Le Pen to front runner status.

    PEACE 😇
    __________

    (1) https://rmx.news/article/article/poll-nearly-9-in-10-french-citizens-say-terrorism-and-security-are-major-issues-in-2022-election

  23. @Not only wrathful
    @neutral

    Germany has just as high a proportion of its population as immigrants as the US and will likely elect the avowedly open borders Green Party at the next election. Why is that?

    Replies: @neutral, @A123

    Germany become a ZOG state in 1945, how else could it end but like this?

    • Replies: @Not only wrathful
    @neutral

    By what magic are they controlled?

    Replies: @neutral, @Rosie, @Audacious Epigone

  24. @Dr. Doom
    The Woke War is simply a distraction from economic truths.
    The economy has already collapsed under the stupidity of enemy looting.

    )))They((( have again slit their own throats by attacking the Middle Class.
    The Weimar Republic 2.0 is about to hyperinflate out of existence.

    )))They((( cannot stop it now. The New Order is already an idea whose time has come.
    )))They((( cannot help themselves. )))They((( are stupid and greedy.

    Show no mercy to the enemy. They must be completely destroyed this time.
    To the last of them. The only solution to the problems is to annihilate them.

    )))They((( cannot stop themselves. They are a Cancer to the Whole World.
    There will never be peace while they exist amongst US.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    There will never be peace while they exist amongst US.

    Jews will always exist among us. They always have, since deep in the Colonial era; so your statement amounts to, “There will never be peace,” doesn’t it?

    Well, strife is a fundamental in this fallen world, so you are right to that extent. “Only the dead have seen the end of war,” saith Plato per MacArthur.

    However, what I seek is a mutually respectful accommodation with the Jews. Regrettably, I no longer believe that one can reach a mutually respectful accommodation as long as

        * Jews can invent malicious tales about us while
        * we may say only complimentary things about Jews.

    My back is up. Until Jews admit that the Holocaust is in significant measure a malicious fable and that Jews have lied the United States into a long series of wars since 1942 to advance Jewish interests at immense cost in American gentile blood—or at least until Jews stop so frenetically promoting such deceit and destroying the lives of any American who dares to question it—U.S. anti-Semitism is destined to grow.

    Most of us used to like Jews. I certainly did. Many of us still do, but the trend is in the wrong direction for the Semites. I don’t fancy the Jews’ prospects if they persist.

    The last will provoke white-hot rage, stirring such anger as is felt by a villain whose scheme had seemed within reach but whose plans only now begin to collapse; but that is not my fault. I didn’t start this. I only sent a grandfather and his brothers to fight for Jewish interests in World War II and a son to fight for Jewish interests in Iraq, so Jews who hate my stance can go to hell.

    Or they can come back from hell and decide that they would rather just decently get along (at least until the next historic cycle of Jew-versus-gentile conflict repeats, a century hence). That is what I recommend.

    • Agree: V. Hickel
    • Disagree: Corvinus
  25. @YetAnotherAnon
    @Charles Pewitt

    Van's latest didn't go down well in the Guardian

    https://www.theguardian.com/music/2021/may/06/van-morrison-new-record-project-volume-one-review

    "depressing rants by tinfoil milliner"

    "The veteran bluesman loudly wakes up the sheeple with this boring and paranoid double album, reminiscent of a dinner party with a bitter divorcee"


    Even a man as implacably opposed to lockdown as Van Morrison – who spent 2020 releasing songs rubbishing science as “crooked facts”, mocking people for wearing masks and describing the government as “fascist bullies” while also invoking the Berlin Wall – might be forced to concede it had its advantages. After all, it gave him the time to write the material for Latest Record Project Volume 1, a 28-song, two-hour-plus opus that allows him to set out his latterday worldview more fully than any previous work.

    Morrison’s longstanding sense of distrust – the result of some dubious contracts he signed in the 1960s – long ago calcified into a weltanschauung in which everyone was lying, with the exception of a certain Northern Irish singer. He’s sounded like a conspiracy theorist before – on 2005’s They Sold Me Out, he averred that being “sold out for a few shekels” was “the oldest story that’s ever been told”; “brainwashed the suckers again and perpetrated the myth,” he sang on 2008’s School of Hard Knocks, “propaganda far and wide” – but on Latest Record Project Volume 1, the sheeple are truly awoken.

    It’s MI5 this and mind-control that, secret “meetings in the forest”, mainstream media lies and Kool Aid being drunk by the gallon. On Western Man, there’s some troubling alt-right-y stuff about how the west’s “rewards” have been “stolen” by foreigners unknown and we should be “prepared to fight”. And he’s convinced that the shadowy forces of the establishment are engaged in efforts to silence him: “You have to be careful of everything you say”, “I’m a targeted individual”. The latter seems a fairly weird claim to make in the middle of a two-hour long album released by a major label: as far as can be ascertained, Sony is a multinational conglomerate with interests in banking and insurance, rather than an anarchist collective devoted to fearlessly speaking truth to power. Clearly the shadowy forces of the establishment need to up their game a bit.
     

    Sounds worth a listen!

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @Charles Pewitt, @Mulga Mumblebrain

    The Guardian and MI5 can go straight to the hottest pits of fiery Hell!

    Van Morrison is a peppery song man by way of Belfast and Van Morrison still has guts and heart and balls and the ruling class skanks don’t like it.

    The Wall Street Journal is a disgusting rumpswab propaganda sheet for money-grubbing globalizer dirtbags with a circulation of over a million print and another million or more electronic and The Guardian has a little over a hundred thousand circulation and both the filthy globalizer turds at the The Guardian and the Wall Street Journal aren’t fit to hold Van Morrison’s hat.

    MI5 is a bunch of assholes like the FBI and MI6 are bunch of government worker shitheads like the CIA.

    The answer to concentrated corporate media scum who attack guys like Van Morrison is to bust up the mass media and then use the monetary power of the central banks to dole out guaranteed monthly loot to all eligible English and Americans.

    All English citizens with all ancestry born in England before 1924 should get the equivalent to ten thousand dollars a month. Tax free. Wales and Northern Ireland and Scotland can do what they will without the BOE. Good Luck!

    All eligible Americans shall get the PCLP.

    The Pewitt Conjured Loot Portion(PCLP) will pay each American who has all blood ancestry born in colonial America or the USA before 1924 a cool ten thousand dollars a month. The US Treasury and the Federal Reserve Bank shall work together to conjure up the cash out of thin air, just like the ruling class is doing now.

    Government worker assholes who are evil and overpaid have too much power and regular citizens must use the monetary power of the central banks to form their own intelligence agencies with police powers and the ability to operate overseas.

    England and the USA are under TOTALITARIAN LOCKDOWN.

    Dump The Jute!

    Dump the arrogant cunt government workers at the FBI and the CIA and MI5 and MI6 and destroy the Wall Street Journal and The Guardian!

  26. @YetAnotherAnon
    @Charles Pewitt

    Van's latest didn't go down well in the Guardian

    https://www.theguardian.com/music/2021/may/06/van-morrison-new-record-project-volume-one-review

    "depressing rants by tinfoil milliner"

    "The veteran bluesman loudly wakes up the sheeple with this boring and paranoid double album, reminiscent of a dinner party with a bitter divorcee"


    Even a man as implacably opposed to lockdown as Van Morrison – who spent 2020 releasing songs rubbishing science as “crooked facts”, mocking people for wearing masks and describing the government as “fascist bullies” while also invoking the Berlin Wall – might be forced to concede it had its advantages. After all, it gave him the time to write the material for Latest Record Project Volume 1, a 28-song, two-hour-plus opus that allows him to set out his latterday worldview more fully than any previous work.

    Morrison’s longstanding sense of distrust – the result of some dubious contracts he signed in the 1960s – long ago calcified into a weltanschauung in which everyone was lying, with the exception of a certain Northern Irish singer. He’s sounded like a conspiracy theorist before – on 2005’s They Sold Me Out, he averred that being “sold out for a few shekels” was “the oldest story that’s ever been told”; “brainwashed the suckers again and perpetrated the myth,” he sang on 2008’s School of Hard Knocks, “propaganda far and wide” – but on Latest Record Project Volume 1, the sheeple are truly awoken.

    It’s MI5 this and mind-control that, secret “meetings in the forest”, mainstream media lies and Kool Aid being drunk by the gallon. On Western Man, there’s some troubling alt-right-y stuff about how the west’s “rewards” have been “stolen” by foreigners unknown and we should be “prepared to fight”. And he’s convinced that the shadowy forces of the establishment are engaged in efforts to silence him: “You have to be careful of everything you say”, “I’m a targeted individual”. The latter seems a fairly weird claim to make in the middle of a two-hour long album released by a major label: as far as can be ascertained, Sony is a multinational conglomerate with interests in banking and insurance, rather than an anarchist collective devoted to fearlessly speaking truth to power. Clearly the shadowy forces of the establishment need to up their game a bit.
     

    Sounds worth a listen!

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @Charles Pewitt, @Mulga Mumblebrain

    Upon further internet review it seems The Guardian has a large electronic following much more larger than the hundred thousand circulation number and the Wall Street Journal is close to three million readership when electronic versions are taken into account.

    So The Guardian and the Wall Street Journal with significant readership decided to launch vicious and disgusting attacks on Van Morrison and then another guy who is half Scottish named Trump is kept off of Facebook by fat-faced asshole Clegg and Jew billionaire Mark Zuckerberg and the Tories and the Republican Party Ruling Class won’t do anything about censorship because the corporate media is protecting them.

    Van Morrison has Scottish blood and so does Trump and they got those same Scottish eyes like Annie Lennox.

  27. A123 says:
    @Not only wrathful
    @neutral

    Germany has just as high a proportion of its population as immigrants as the US and will likely elect the avowedly open borders Green Party at the next election. Why is that?

    Replies: @neutral, @A123

    The world leaders of SJW Globalism are German Elites. They exported their crazy Open Muslim Borders ideals to the U.S. GW Bush and Obama were followers, not leaders.

    While German Elites can obtain submission from the German people, their influence over other nations is waning: (1)

    France saw a myriad of terrorist attacks between May 2020 and April 2021. In the months of September and October, alone, four people were wounded (two seriously) after a radical Islamic terrorist from Pakistan attacked them with a butcher knife outside of the old Charlie Hebdo headquarters; the history teacher Samuel Paty was beheaded by a Chechen Islamist migrant after showing caricatures of the Muslim prophet as a part a class on freedom of speech; three Christians were murdered in the Basilica of Notre-Dame in Nice by a Tunisian boat migrant; and a Greek orthodox priest was wounded seriously after being shot by an assailant.

    The populist leader Marine Le Pen — who enjoys widespread support among police officers and the military for her hardline positions on crime and migration — undoubtedly see opportunity in the poll numbers. A survey published last month by the French cable channel BMFTV showed that 48 percent of those questioned about France’s 2022 presidential election said that Marine Le Pen’s victory was “probable”.

    The bald faced lies by SJW Islamic Globalist Media firms have lost credibility. The TRUTH has reached Les Deplorables in France. Accurate information about Muslim violence against Christian children is propelling Le Pen to front runner status.

    PEACE 😇
    __________

    (1) https://rmx.news/article/article/poll-nearly-9-in-10-french-citizens-say-terrorism-and-security-are-major-issues-in-2022-election

  28. @neutral
    @Not only wrathful

    Germany become a ZOG state in 1945, how else could it end but like this?

    Replies: @Not only wrathful

    By what magic are they controlled?

    • Replies: @neutral
    @Not only wrathful

    Military occupation by the US, government system created by the US, cultural norms forced on to them at gunpoint. Not magic, being a colony to the the USA makes you a ZOG state.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Not only wrathful

    , @Rosie
    @Not only wrathful


    By what magic are they controlled?
     
    Well, there is the threat of economic sanctions, for one. Failing that, there's always the threat of good old-fashioned bombing campaigns. According to General Wesley Clark,

    ...there is no place in modern Europe for ethnically pure states. That's a 19th century idea, and we are trying to transition into the 21st century, and we are going to do it with multiethnic states."
     
    https://www.thesocialcontract.com/artman2/publish/tsc0904/article_805_printer.shtml

    Replies: @Not only wrathful

    , @Audacious Epigone
    @Not only wrathful

    The "blacks fail because whites" and "whites fail because Jews" takes have a lot in common.

  29. A123 says:

    Here are the details on how European Islamic SJW ideology was introduced to the U.S. (1)

    Inside The Foreign-Funded ‘Hub Project’ To Transform America

    The most important megadonor you have never heard of

    It is a story that goes to the very heart of the left’s mountains of shadowy funding and professional activism: a foreign billionaire infamous for illegally funding Democrats, backing ghoulish medical treatments resulting in multiple deaths, and bankrolling a multi-million-dollar “dark money” campaign to transform America.

    Meet Swiss-born Hansjörg Wyss (pronounced “Veese”), perhaps the most important megadonor you’ve never heard of. His Wyss Foundation, founded in 1998, quietly commands a stunning $2.2 billion in assets (as of 2018) and annually pours out tens of millions of dollars to activist groups—more than half a billion dollars between 2000 and 2018—so it’s little wonder that he’s been called the “new George Soros.”

    The Hub Project: Born in “Dark Money”

    The story begins in 2015, when the consulting firm Civitas Public Affairs Group—whose clients include the pro-gun control Brady Campaign and Democratic get-out-the-vote group Voter Participation Center—produced a private report for the Wyss Foundation outlining a plan for a “communications hub.” (It’s unknown exactly how much the foundation paid for the report, but between 2015 and 2018 it paid over $442,000 to Civitas.)

    From the start, the hub was “solely funded by The Wyss Foundation,” yet its ties to the foundation were intentionally hidden. The Civitas report even recommends it be disassociated with the Wyss Foundation so as to “give the foundation appropriate separation from the hub’s work” and “allow the hub to engage in a more robust way than it could if it was based within the foundation.”

    In other words, the hub was designed to allow the foundation to bypass the IRS prohibition on intervening in elections.

    It is a lengthy article, but well worth the read. It explains how European SJW Islamic values are illegally weaponized in U.S. political campaigns.

    PEACE 😇
    __________

    (1) https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/inside-the-foreign-funded-hub-project-to-transform-america/

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @A123

    Did I miss something?


    Here are the details on how European Islamic SJW ideology was introduced to the U.S.
     
    The article you link seems to mention neither Muslims or Islam.

    The article fails to refer to George Soros as the IslamoSoros, if that is what you mean; but isn't this only because the article was written by someone other than you?

    I don't get the connection.

    Replies: @A123, @Mario Partisan

  30. Manufacturing hate but who is consuming it? The mindful manufactures ‘hate’, and the mindless consume it.

    Power is about the mindful leading the mindless. This explains why the Power wants the young and the status-driven to be so ‘woke’. Mindless minions are far more useful than thinking and questioning individuals. They can be led like hounds whose emotions come before reason, whose faith comes before doubt. But as ‘wokeness’ is disseminated in colleges, it comes with the veneer of higher knowledge. But then, educational institutions throughout the ages have been more about indoctrination than real intellectual curiosity. And to many ‘woke’ students, what they are taught may indeed seem ‘intellectually’ and ‘critically’ stimulating because they are the products of simpleminded religious upbringing, milquetoast middle class values(mostly bland), idiotic pop culture, silly peer pressure, or the like. Thus, even though PC has only the veneer of intellectual pedigree, so many young ones are fooled because college was the FIRST TIME they encountered any ‘intellectual’ idea. There is also the ‘revenge of the uncool’ factor. From kindergarten to high school, most of the positive attention goes to the ‘cool’ or ‘popular’ kids, the ones who do better in sports, making friends, and the looks department. The smart kids, loners, nerds, wallflowers, and outcasts get little love. But in college, the more cerebral, eccentric, deviant, and/or dweeby types finally begin to feel they matter; so, they dominate and set the agenda, and they just love the power. They feel like Bolshevik Jews unleashed on post-Tsarist Russia.

    Now, when I say power is about the mindful leading the mindless, ‘mindful’ doesn’t necessarily mean being thoughtful, mentally sound, contemplative, and/or intellectually honest. Rather, it means to be in-the-know about the cold, calculating, and ruthless nature of power. Also, it especially applies to those whose First Emotion is tribal as one’s identity and roots are the most crucial foundation of power. It’s like Russian-ness and Chinese-ness have outlasted the ideologies of Marxism-Leninism, and all those Jews who once used to be socialist, communist, anarchist, or libertarian have gravitated back to Jewishness. Real power is about ideology serving, not sacrificing, identity.

    Power cannot be about the mindless leading the mindless. The mindless of their own accord will go nuts, drive off the road, and self-destruct sooner than later. Can anyone imagine Antifa leading anything? Or BLM? Or insane feminist wenches? On their own, they’ll end up like the morons of the Jim Jones Cult, a case of the mindless leading the mindless, and it soon turned into a total disaster.
    Also, the mindless cannot lead the mindful, especially those who are mindful in a good way that is thoughtful and critical. The mindful ask too many questions, are too skeptical & rational, and critically demand the evidence to be carefully weighed.
    How about the mindful leading the mindful? This is possible ONLY IF the elites are mindful in a positive way. Imagine an enlightened and principled elite that is concerned with truth, justice, and fairness and is imbued with humility, sense of limits, and healthy dose of realism. Such a positively mindful elite can use its power of academia and media to foster a generally mindful society where the populace is encouraged to know more, think harder, and ask serious questions. Such an elite wouldn’t be obsessed only with power, wealth, and privilege. They would want to be good leaders than misleaders.

    But what if the elites are negatively mindful, much like today’s Jewish Supremacist ruling caste whose worldview is (David)Mametian. Mamet is profoundly Jewish in that his First Emotion is Jewish This, Jewish That, Jewish Everything. His ‘libertarian’ shtick is just that, shtick. He’s a conman through and through(yet sufficiently honest as an artist to explore the ways of power, though he doesn’t really spell it out and dabbles in esoterics). According to people like Mamet(and Alan Dershowitz), Jews are the master race and deserve to rule. Why? They got the combination of covenant, chutzpah, and sense(especially in intelligence). Now, the master-race perspective can still be enlightened, i.e. Jews can believe that their higher intelligence obligates them to use their smarts responsibly for the betterment of all mankind, like what Peter Parker’s uncle told the kid who would become Spiderman. But, Jewish master race worldview is closer to the Nazi-kind though Jews hide it better. It is based on arrogance, contempt, resentment, and even murderous genocidal hatred. It’s like what a certain Israeli rabbi told his flock: “Goyim only exist to serve Jews who should have all the power and wealth and eat like effendi.” Now, not all Jews think this way, but the Jews of Power, or JOPs, most certainly do. It’s like that piece of turd Jerry Nadler who used his influence to get a terrorist Jewess sprung from jail but lying through his teeth about Russia Collusion and calling it the worst thing since Pearl Harbor. Imagine that, a lie upon a lie. Charles Schumer, being a Democrat, is supposedly a ‘liberal’, and his ilk whine about ‘white supremacism’, but his agenda is to maintain white servitude toward Jews to ensure America’s total support of Zionist supremacism.
    So, the US is certainly not about the positively mindful leading the mindful, or the mindful promoting mindfulness among the masses. Rather, it’s about the negatively mindful Jews(who are in-the-know and mainly obsessed with tribal power, privilege, and wealth) turning the people into mindless minions who make ideal suckers. Their #1 goal is Jewish supremacism, and it doesn’t matter if it’s so-called ‘neo-conservative’ Jews or ‘liberal’ Jews. Scratch the surface of both Jews, and what you find is Jewish tribal supremacism. Unlike idiot white libby-dibs and white conzo-wonzos who really hate one another because they think in terms of ‘ideology'(or worship different idols), Jewish ‘conservatives’ and Jewish ‘liberals’ are simply two arms of the same person. They work together in a quasi-fascist understanding that REAL POWER is the fusion of left and right, not the opposition of one against the other. Of course, Jews inflame animus between goy left and goy right, and it is to weaken them. Keep the goy house divided unto itself. If Jews feared fascism the most, it was because certain goyim finally figured out that the proper formula is “right + left in service of blood and soil”. But then, white fascism failed because the cult of personality around Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler encouraged mindless servility among the masses willing to do the bidding of Il Duce or Der Fuhrer without asking questions. Zionism is smarter in that it doesn’t ask the Jewish masses to become sheep in blind obedience to some Jewish super-leader. It doesn’t say the Jewish masses should turn off their minds in total obeisance to the great leader with the one true mind.

    Just think. Why would the negatively mindful Jewish elites(into Mametian power games) want to encourage and support a positively mindful population? It wouldn’t be good for Jewish Supremacism. After all, people who are taught and trained to be skeptical, rational, factual, and critical cannot so easily be fooled and manipulated. They are likely to be curious and listen to all sides. They are likely to be doubting thomases who question the narratives dropped from above. They are prone to oppose dogmatism and fanaticism. They’d be wary of sacred cows and taboos. They would ponder how the power really works and wonder as to who really controls the most influential institutions and most powerful industries.
    Such a positively mindful educated populace wouldn’t be very useful to Jewish Power. Indeed, they could be downright problematic on the matter of supporting the Jewish globalist agenda that is often slanderous, hateful, contemptuous, perverse, corrupt, demented, murderous, and even close to genocidal.
    It’s like kids begin to question parents and adults in general once they get over Santa Claus and the Bogeyman. They aren’t so easy to manipulate anymore. If adults try to put one over on the kids, the kids want to know, “Where’s the beef?” Therefore, the power tends to reinforce certain infantilizing tendencies among the populace. On certain issues and topics, control them through mechanisms of magic, dreams, hopes, taboos, and superstitions that aren’t all that different from a child’s starry-eyed faith in Santa, fairies, demons, and superheroes. It’s been the same with the Catholic Church. Even though the Church did much to further learning, thought, arts, culture, and science, it also controlled the faithful through myths and miracles. But that is to be expected of religion as its primary foundation is faith and the supernatural. But when it comes to the modern world and secular education, a truly positively mindful society requires people to be rational, thoughtful, skeptical, and critical. A truly free mind mustn’t be clouded with flaky mumbo-jumbo or stricken with rigid dogma or demented fanaticism. But Jewish Power promotes such idiocy because it controls the academia, media, and the state. Of course, such nuttery could be bad for Jews IF anti-Jewish elements controlled the state, media, and education. In National Socialist Germany, the anti-critical cult of Hitler as god-man and savior of the nation was controlled by Josef Goebbels and the like. So, irrationality was to the advantage of anti-Jewish elements. And of course, the Christian Church long relied on mysticism and dogma against the Jews. As Church doctrine was sacrosanct, it couldn’t or wasn’t questioned by many people. Against such unquestioning power of devotion/faith, Jews(as ‘Christ-Killers’) could find themselves in precarious situations. This is one reason why Jewish intellectuals came up with Critical Theory. Initially, there was promise in the project, not least because Jewish intellectuals not only questioned the shibboleths of the Goy Right but raised questions about the problems of Marxism and why things weren’t likely to turn out as Karl Marx had prophesied. As Paul Gottfried said, certain members of the original Critical Theory were genuine intellectuals. As long as Jews lacked dominance in societies still burdened by unquestioned power and unexamined customs, habits, & attitudes, Critical Theory could do some good. It could contribute to the conversation, and it did. But over time, Jews became the most powerful group, and unsurprisingly, Critical Theory went from an acute questioning of the structures of power to a means of safeguarding and expanding the newly dominant power of the Tribe. It went from being critical of power to being critical of those questioning the power; it effectively turned into Censorial Theory.
    It’s like Franz Kafka’s works read differently today. Back in the early 20th century, Kafka’s writings represented the neurosis of the Jew in a dark, hostile, and bewildering world. Today, the writings come across more as a Power Manual for the Jewish elites. Look around, and it’s especially the dissident-rightists and Palestinians who are made to feel like Joseph K’s. Meanwhile, Jews, flush with power, concoct some of the weirdest (il)logic to defend and expand on their mechanisms of information, law, finance, and the state to supplant reality with their brand of surreality. Consider the Covid hysteria and the utterly Kafkaesque 2020 election. Medicine and Law, once highly respected, have turned into Games-Jews-Play. BLM and Antifa that have led to burning cities and more dead people are promoted as ‘justice’. When a man says he’s a ‘woman’, that is ‘true’, but if you correct him and say he’s a man, you are ‘misgendering’ him. Legal logic, moral logic, they no longer make sense because the premise of current American Thought is “Is it good for Jews?” than “Is it true?” Jew-over-true.
    Indeed, why would Jews want us to think honestly with transparent access to facts and figures? People might finally realize that Zionism is acting evil and that Jews are the biggest hypocrites.

    Consider the current illogic. The Jewish Way is to berate whites about ‘racism’ and make whites feel sorry for having discriminated against blacks. This would indicate ‘racism’, the favoring of one race over another, is bad. But do Jews allow whites any moral agency? If whites had any, they’d think, “It was wrong to favor whites over blacks, that was ‘racism’. So, against the injustice of ‘racism’, we whites must use our moral agency to not favor one people over another.” Of course, such consistency of moral logic would mean it’s wrong for whites to favor Jews over Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims, and/or Iranians, that is IF whites had moral agency as free-thinking people of principle. But Jews don’t want that. Jews preach against ‘white racism’ not to change and elevate white moral agency but to rob them of it in shylock manner. In other words, guilty whites must hock or hand over their ‘moral agency’ to Jewish justice-pawnbrokers. Thus, Jews get to decide how white morality shall operate. It’s like Donald Trump hocked much of his authority to Jared Kushner to placate the few Jewish bigwigs on his side. Now, what do Jews do with their possession of white morality? Do they use this outsourced material in a good way? No, they pervert, corrupt, and use it to serve Jewish supremacist ends: Hatred against Russia and Iran, support for Zionist ‘genocide’ of Palestinians, more Wars for Israel, endless hosannas to Jews, and NO noticing whatsoever of Jewish Power and its vile agendas. Of course, sucking up to Jews-and-Israel per se isn’t sufficient to appease Jewish Power. Tucker Carlson is a cucker dweeb who sucks up to Jews and Israel all the time. Still, he is positively mindful enough at times to question the globalist agenda pushed by Jews. This is enough to trigger the nasty Jews at ADL who work hand-in-glove with other powerful Jews to suppress and censor free inquiry and thought. ADL wants the US to remain a shlomocracy, not a democracy.
    When whites hocked or outsourced their moral agency to Jews, they pretty much lost everything. After all, it’s not the end of the world to be criticized and judged. If Jews were sincere in their moral criticism of whites and if whites freely used their moral agency to do good, things might have turned out rather well. But Jews didn’t want this because a self-improving white morality would not only criticize what is bad about whites but what is bad about Jews, blacks, and any other group. A truly moral person is both self-critical and critical of badness everywhere and in everyone. True morality doesn’t turn a blind eye to certain bad things and certain good things. It praises goodness of all kinds and condemns badness of all kinds. Jews didn’t want this. Jews wanted whites to see only the good about Jews and only the bad about Palestinians and Iranians. On the matter of Russian history, Jews demand that whites see Jews only as innocent victims and see Russians only as baddies; Jewish attitude toward Russia is not unlike Hitler’s insane animus toward the Slavs, but then, it’s only natural as both Nazi ‘Aryans’ and Jewish ‘Semites’ share the vile conviction that inferior backward Slavs should be ruled by the Other. Even when Zionist soldiers beat up Palestinian kids struggling for independence, Jews insist that whites see Jewish victims and Palestinian ‘terrorists’. It’s like, even though blacks beat up whites and non-blacks, Jews insist that we only see poor innocent blacks being terrorized by ‘white supremacism’.
    Of course, Jewish Power knows all of this is bogus. No mindful Jew ever believed in Russia-gate. That was for the goy birds, the suckers and chums. It’s like Mamet’s con-men know exactly what they’re doing. They are mindful, mindful of the game where the players know while the played don’t know. To Jews of Power or JOPs, it’s all a House of Games.
    But they are negatively mindful as they’re like gangsters than gentlemen. They got the power and money and want more, then more and more. So, what Jews now push as ‘critical theory’ is the biggest ‘punching down’ operation in history. It’s Jews punching down on whites but with whites propped up as Goliath. Imagine a boxer who’s down for the count. Suppose this boxer is lifted up and tied to a pole to create the illusion that he’s still in the fight. And so, it’s game to keep punching him. Of course, the real champion in the ring is the vicious Jew, but he tells others that the propped up white palooka is still the Evil White Supremacist Champ who must be punched and KO’ed. At this point, whites might as well be scarecrows. Jews use Critical Theory to defend their power and to attack its critics, but the very notion of ‘critical theory’ lends the impression that it’s about ‘fighting the power’. It’s rather like a human making dogs chase a fox. It’s the human who has power over the dogs, but the dogs fixate on the fox as the biggest problem in the world that must be snuffed out.

    Now, one wonders how so many people could have gotten suckered over the years. Aren’t there more college graduates than ever? But perhaps, larger college bodies led to dumbing down of the curriculum and replacement of intellectual pursuit with easily digestible nonsense. Quantity isn’t quality. Still, the core real problem is Jewish Power. Jewish monopoly of the media and dominance in the academia(that also trains people to work in media) led to all information, idols, icons, ‘facts’, and narratives being molded by Jews.
    Still, it wouldn’t have been so bad IF people could at least discuss Jewish Power. After all, there was once a time when Anglo-Americans dominated most things, but people could still name the power, blame the power, and shame the power. If anything, Jews led in this exposure and criticism of WASP power. At the very least, Anglo-Americans didn’t make themselves out to be sacrosanct and above criticism. But Jews have been different. With increasing power, they pathologized any honest discussion of Jewish Power and influence as ‘antisemitism’. Look around today, and Jews throw the label ‘nazi’ and ‘white supremacist’ at anyone. If anyone notices Jewish Power, he is said to be spreading ‘antisemitic tropes’. In the minds of the ADL and SPLC, there’s hardly any difference between Adolf Hitler and some normal person who notices Jewish Power.

    Jewish supremacist pathology pathologized ANY view that is critical of Jewish Power as ‘antisemitic’. This has been the crux of the problem. Not only did Jews gain monopoly in media and dominance in academia BUT used the power to forbid honest discussion of the extent of Jewish Power and its abuses and corruptions. Why, any such talk would be ‘nazi’ or ‘antisemitic’! So, that means Jews in media and academia(and the state) were able to push narratives, promote idols, and spread dogmas with hardly any opposition. Over the years, the accumulative force of such lies fed to generations of goyim led to the current state of mindless ‘wokeness’ among whites. They are mindless because they don’t play the game but are played by the game. Indeed, they don’t even know the game exists. As mindless minions in the game, they see themselves as the ‘resistance’ fighting Nazi dragons and ‘white supremacist’ goblins in defense of the race of Anne Franks, the race of Emmett Tills, and people of tutti-fruity. They are terribly easy to activate and manipulate because they are easily triggered by a handful of signals. Jews only need to push a few buttons, and the ‘woke’ mobs pour into the streets in the name of globo-homo or Noble Negro, just like Mao needed to flash a few signals to bring out millions of Red Guard youths on the eve of the Cultural Revolution. The mindful leading the mindless. If whites weren’t so mindless, would the negatively mindful Jews be able to control them so easily? No wonder Jews spread mindlessness as the New Normal in ‘thought’. With the ‘woke’ idiots, Jews only need to yell ‘racism’, ‘white supremacism’, or ‘nazi’ to get them barking and running wild for another fox hunt. Those signals don’t induce thought among whites. Rather, they trigger certain emotional responses that fuel ‘woke’ rage. Much of ‘wokeness’ owes more to idolatry than ideology, and as such, it’s more like a cult or quasi-religion than a thought system. It’s like the Catholic Church never proved that God is real or Jesus is the Messiah. There is no factual basis for such claims, but so many people came to believe because of the emotional responses stirred by the combination of storytelling, magic, music, ritualism, and spectacle. All those whites who grew up weeping over the mountain-sized Negro who wuvs a little white mouse(and may indeed be god hisself) in THE GREEN MILE have been rendered incapable of rational thoughts about the Negro.

    In a way, the current mindlessness is appealing because of its three-chord narrative. Just like people prefer pop songs over symphonies with their range and depth, most people prefer a few potent themes that ring loud and clear. It’s amazing how many hit songs were composed of mere three chords, outselling the far more complex musical works. Pop songs are mostly mindless, but that is the appeal. One need not invest oneself in a pop song. It’s all there, the essence of melody, harmony, and beat.
    And ‘wokeness’ is structured that way. The three narrative chords are Sacred Semites, Noble Negroes, and Holy Homos. For all the talk of diversity, the main chords in the same old/new song is Jews, Negroes, and Homos… Jews, Negroes, and Homos. The holy trinity of PC.
    As for the villains, they are ‘anti-semites'(anyone who notices Jewish Power), ‘racists'(anyone who notices black crime and thuggery), and ‘homophobes'(anyone who says sodomy is ewwww or that a tranny isn’t a woman). The three evils are like ‘lions, tigers, and bears’ in THE WIZARD OF OZ, an apt movie in our age when fools are indeed being played by hidden forces. (Come to think of it, was Trump really anything more than the Cowardly Lion in a Duck-Soup-like musical orchestrated by Jews? All growl, no bite.)

    If domestically, the villains are ‘anti-semites’, ‘racists’, and ‘homophobes’, around the world the usual baddies are Russia, Iran, and China(if only as a distraction from Jewish Power).

    PC may be stupid, but it’s easily digestible and uncomplicated. To be ‘woke’, you need not think. Just chant along, march along, and tag along. All you have to do is suck Jewish pud,, kiss homo ass, and wash black feet. And in ‘lions, tigers, and bears’ fashion, all you have to do is shudder about the dangers of ‘antisemites, racists, and homophobes’. And such mindlessness might as well be manna from heaven for Jewish Power. The negatively mindful leading the hordes of the mindless whose buttons are so easy to push.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @Priss Factor

    About halfway through your long comment, you write:


    Back in the early 20th century, Kafka’s writings represented the neurosis of the Jew in a dark, hostile, and bewildering world. Today, the writings come across more as a Power Manual for the Jewish elites.
     
    It was worth reading halfway for this passage alone, but I never got to the second half. Too long.

    Consider cutting out 60 percent and organizing the remaining 40 percent more clearly with better discipline. It'd make a pretty good article then.

  31. @Greta Handel
    @WorkingClass

    It’s good that you’re back, offering this perspective. Several of the authors here at Unz, wittingly or not, also do their part to Divide & Conquer:

    - Red/Blue
    - black/white
    - male/female
    - religion
    - ancestry
    - police/arrestees
    - RussiaBad/ChinaBad/IranBad
    - Covid-19 origin(s)
    - Covid-19 prevention and treatment

    And we all need to keep in mind that it’s always easier to see how those on the other side of these divisions are being played.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    Several of the authors here at Unz, wittingly or not, also do their part to Divide & Conquer:…

    I do not wish to do my part.

    [MORE]

    – Red/Blue

    Is it not necessary that the Blues, too, wish to coëxist? The Reds can hardly coëxist without reciprocation. As matters stand, the Blues already have what they want; namely, the upper hand over the Reds.

    – black/white

    Few blacks have agency. Most are moral children.

    – male/female

    Marriage.

    – religion

    Could you be more specific?

    – ancestry

    In the United States, white people have interests.

    – police/arrestees

    I hold no brief for police, but it seems to me that division between police and arrestees is probably necessary.

    – RussiaBad/ChinaBad/IranBad

    China is a great rival by sheer force of geopolitical circumstance. The United States has been foolish however since 1989 to fail to cultivate Russia and Iran as friends.

    So have I unwittingly done my part to Divide & Conquer?

    • Replies: @Greta Handel
    @V. K. Ovelund

    If you don’t appreciate how all of these wedges are used by an Establishment that, in fact, cares nothing about the people on either side, then I believe that yes, you are.

  32. @Priss Factor
    Manufacturing hate but who is consuming it? The mindful manufactures 'hate', and the mindless consume it.

    Power is about the mindful leading the mindless. This explains why the Power wants the young and the status-driven to be so 'woke'. Mindless minions are far more useful than thinking and questioning individuals. They can be led like hounds whose emotions come before reason, whose faith comes before doubt. But as 'wokeness' is disseminated in colleges, it comes with the veneer of higher knowledge. But then, educational institutions throughout the ages have been more about indoctrination than real intellectual curiosity. And to many 'woke' students, what they are taught may indeed seem 'intellectually' and 'critically' stimulating because they are the products of simpleminded religious upbringing, milquetoast middle class values(mostly bland), idiotic pop culture, silly peer pressure, or the like. Thus, even though PC has only the veneer of intellectual pedigree, so many young ones are fooled because college was the FIRST TIME they encountered any 'intellectual' idea. There is also the 'revenge of the uncool' factor. From kindergarten to high school, most of the positive attention goes to the 'cool' or 'popular' kids, the ones who do better in sports, making friends, and the looks department. The smart kids, loners, nerds, wallflowers, and outcasts get little love. But in college, the more cerebral, eccentric, deviant, and/or dweeby types finally begin to feel they matter; so, they dominate and set the agenda, and they just love the power. They feel like Bolshevik Jews unleashed on post-Tsarist Russia.

    Now, when I say power is about the mindful leading the mindless, 'mindful' doesn't necessarily mean being thoughtful, mentally sound, contemplative, and/or intellectually honest. Rather, it means to be in-the-know about the cold, calculating, and ruthless nature of power. Also, it especially applies to those whose First Emotion is tribal as one's identity and roots are the most crucial foundation of power. It's like Russian-ness and Chinese-ness have outlasted the ideologies of Marxism-Leninism, and all those Jews who once used to be socialist, communist, anarchist, or libertarian have gravitated back to Jewishness. Real power is about ideology serving, not sacrificing, identity.

    Power cannot be about the mindless leading the mindless. The mindless of their own accord will go nuts, drive off the road, and self-destruct sooner than later. Can anyone imagine Antifa leading anything? Or BLM? Or insane feminist wenches? On their own, they'll end up like the morons of the Jim Jones Cult, a case of the mindless leading the mindless, and it soon turned into a total disaster.
    Also, the mindless cannot lead the mindful, especially those who are mindful in a good way that is thoughtful and critical. The mindful ask too many questions, are too skeptical & rational, and critically demand the evidence to be carefully weighed.
    How about the mindful leading the mindful? This is possible ONLY IF the elites are mindful in a positive way. Imagine an enlightened and principled elite that is concerned with truth, justice, and fairness and is imbued with humility, sense of limits, and healthy dose of realism. Such a positively mindful elite can use its power of academia and media to foster a generally mindful society where the populace is encouraged to know more, think harder, and ask serious questions. Such an elite wouldn't be obsessed only with power, wealth, and privilege. They would want to be good leaders than misleaders.

    But what if the elites are negatively mindful, much like today's Jewish Supremacist ruling caste whose worldview is (David)Mametian. Mamet is profoundly Jewish in that his First Emotion is Jewish This, Jewish That, Jewish Everything. His 'libertarian' shtick is just that, shtick. He's a conman through and through(yet sufficiently honest as an artist to explore the ways of power, though he doesn't really spell it out and dabbles in esoterics). According to people like Mamet(and Alan Dershowitz), Jews are the master race and deserve to rule. Why? They got the combination of covenant, chutzpah, and sense(especially in intelligence). Now, the master-race perspective can still be enlightened, i.e. Jews can believe that their higher intelligence obligates them to use their smarts responsibly for the betterment of all mankind, like what Peter Parker's uncle told the kid who would become Spiderman. But, Jewish master race worldview is closer to the Nazi-kind though Jews hide it better. It is based on arrogance, contempt, resentment, and even murderous genocidal hatred. It's like what a certain Israeli rabbi told his flock: "Goyim only exist to serve Jews who should have all the power and wealth and eat like effendi." Now, not all Jews think this way, but the Jews of Power, or JOPs, most certainly do. It's like that piece of turd Jerry Nadler who used his influence to get a terrorist Jewess sprung from jail but lying through his teeth about Russia Collusion and calling it the worst thing since Pearl Harbor. Imagine that, a lie upon a lie. Charles Schumer, being a Democrat, is supposedly a 'liberal', and his ilk whine about 'white supremacism', but his agenda is to maintain white servitude toward Jews to ensure America's total support of Zionist supremacism.
    So, the US is certainly not about the positively mindful leading the mindful, or the mindful promoting mindfulness among the masses. Rather, it's about the negatively mindful Jews(who are in-the-know and mainly obsessed with tribal power, privilege, and wealth) turning the people into mindless minions who make ideal suckers. Their #1 goal is Jewish supremacism, and it doesn't matter if it's so-called 'neo-conservative' Jews or 'liberal' Jews. Scratch the surface of both Jews, and what you find is Jewish tribal supremacism. Unlike idiot white libby-dibs and white conzo-wonzos who really hate one another because they think in terms of 'ideology'(or worship different idols), Jewish 'conservatives' and Jewish 'liberals' are simply two arms of the same person. They work together in a quasi-fascist understanding that REAL POWER is the fusion of left and right, not the opposition of one against the other. Of course, Jews inflame animus between goy left and goy right, and it is to weaken them. Keep the goy house divided unto itself. If Jews feared fascism the most, it was because certain goyim finally figured out that the proper formula is "right + left in service of blood and soil". But then, white fascism failed because the cult of personality around Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler encouraged mindless servility among the masses willing to do the bidding of Il Duce or Der Fuhrer without asking questions. Zionism is smarter in that it doesn't ask the Jewish masses to become sheep in blind obedience to some Jewish super-leader. It doesn't say the Jewish masses should turn off their minds in total obeisance to the great leader with the one true mind.

    Just think. Why would the negatively mindful Jewish elites(into Mametian power games) want to encourage and support a positively mindful population? It wouldn't be good for Jewish Supremacism. After all, people who are taught and trained to be skeptical, rational, factual, and critical cannot so easily be fooled and manipulated. They are likely to be curious and listen to all sides. They are likely to be doubting thomases who question the narratives dropped from above. They are prone to oppose dogmatism and fanaticism. They'd be wary of sacred cows and taboos. They would ponder how the power really works and wonder as to who really controls the most influential institutions and most powerful industries.
    Such a positively mindful educated populace wouldn't be very useful to Jewish Power. Indeed, they could be downright problematic on the matter of supporting the Jewish globalist agenda that is often slanderous, hateful, contemptuous, perverse, corrupt, demented, murderous, and even close to genocidal.
    It's like kids begin to question parents and adults in general once they get over Santa Claus and the Bogeyman. They aren't so easy to manipulate anymore. If adults try to put one over on the kids, the kids want to know, "Where's the beef?" Therefore, the power tends to reinforce certain infantilizing tendencies among the populace. On certain issues and topics, control them through mechanisms of magic, dreams, hopes, taboos, and superstitions that aren't all that different from a child's starry-eyed faith in Santa, fairies, demons, and superheroes. It's been the same with the Catholic Church. Even though the Church did much to further learning, thought, arts, culture, and science, it also controlled the faithful through myths and miracles. But that is to be expected of religion as its primary foundation is faith and the supernatural. But when it comes to the modern world and secular education, a truly positively mindful society requires people to be rational, thoughtful, skeptical, and critical. A truly free mind mustn't be clouded with flaky mumbo-jumbo or stricken with rigid dogma or demented fanaticism. But Jewish Power promotes such idiocy because it controls the academia, media, and the state. Of course, such nuttery could be bad for Jews IF anti-Jewish elements controlled the state, media, and education. In National Socialist Germany, the anti-critical cult of Hitler as god-man and savior of the nation was controlled by Josef Goebbels and the like. So, irrationality was to the advantage of anti-Jewish elements. And of course, the Christian Church long relied on mysticism and dogma against the Jews. As Church doctrine was sacrosanct, it couldn't or wasn't questioned by many people. Against such unquestioning power of devotion/faith, Jews(as 'Christ-Killers') could find themselves in precarious situations. This is one reason why Jewish intellectuals came up with Critical Theory. Initially, there was promise in the project, not least because Jewish intellectuals not only questioned the shibboleths of the Goy Right but raised questions about the problems of Marxism and why things weren't likely to turn out as Karl Marx had prophesied. As Paul Gottfried said, certain members of the original Critical Theory were genuine intellectuals. As long as Jews lacked dominance in societies still burdened by unquestioned power and unexamined customs, habits, & attitudes, Critical Theory could do some good. It could contribute to the conversation, and it did. But over time, Jews became the most powerful group, and unsurprisingly, Critical Theory went from an acute questioning of the structures of power to a means of safeguarding and expanding the newly dominant power of the Tribe. It went from being critical of power to being critical of those questioning the power; it effectively turned into Censorial Theory.
    It's like Franz Kafka's works read differently today. Back in the early 20th century, Kafka's writings represented the neurosis of the Jew in a dark, hostile, and bewildering world. Today, the writings come across more as a Power Manual for the Jewish elites. Look around, and it's especially the dissident-rightists and Palestinians who are made to feel like Joseph K's. Meanwhile, Jews, flush with power, concoct some of the weirdest (il)logic to defend and expand on their mechanisms of information, law, finance, and the state to supplant reality with their brand of surreality. Consider the Covid hysteria and the utterly Kafkaesque 2020 election. Medicine and Law, once highly respected, have turned into Games-Jews-Play. BLM and Antifa that have led to burning cities and more dead people are promoted as 'justice'. When a man says he's a 'woman', that is 'true', but if you correct him and say he's a man, you are 'misgendering' him. Legal logic, moral logic, they no longer make sense because the premise of current American Thought is "Is it good for Jews?" than "Is it true?" Jew-over-true.
    Indeed, why would Jews want us to think honestly with transparent access to facts and figures? People might finally realize that Zionism is acting evil and that Jews are the biggest hypocrites.

    Consider the current illogic. The Jewish Way is to berate whites about 'racism' and make whites feel sorry for having discriminated against blacks. This would indicate 'racism', the favoring of one race over another, is bad. But do Jews allow whites any moral agency? If whites had any, they'd think, "It was wrong to favor whites over blacks, that was 'racism'. So, against the injustice of 'racism', we whites must use our moral agency to not favor one people over another." Of course, such consistency of moral logic would mean it's wrong for whites to favor Jews over Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims, and/or Iranians, that is IF whites had moral agency as free-thinking people of principle. But Jews don't want that. Jews preach against 'white racism' not to change and elevate white moral agency but to rob them of it in shylock manner. In other words, guilty whites must hock or hand over their 'moral agency' to Jewish justice-pawnbrokers. Thus, Jews get to decide how white morality shall operate. It's like Donald Trump hocked much of his authority to Jared Kushner to placate the few Jewish bigwigs on his side. Now, what do Jews do with their possession of white morality? Do they use this outsourced material in a good way? No, they pervert, corrupt, and use it to serve Jewish supremacist ends: Hatred against Russia and Iran, support for Zionist 'genocide' of Palestinians, more Wars for Israel, endless hosannas to Jews, and NO noticing whatsoever of Jewish Power and its vile agendas. Of course, sucking up to Jews-and-Israel per se isn't sufficient to appease Jewish Power. Tucker Carlson is a cucker dweeb who sucks up to Jews and Israel all the time. Still, he is positively mindful enough at times to question the globalist agenda pushed by Jews. This is enough to trigger the nasty Jews at ADL who work hand-in-glove with other powerful Jews to suppress and censor free inquiry and thought. ADL wants the US to remain a shlomocracy, not a democracy.
    When whites hocked or outsourced their moral agency to Jews, they pretty much lost everything. After all, it's not the end of the world to be criticized and judged. If Jews were sincere in their moral criticism of whites and if whites freely used their moral agency to do good, things might have turned out rather well. But Jews didn't want this because a self-improving white morality would not only criticize what is bad about whites but what is bad about Jews, blacks, and any other group. A truly moral person is both self-critical and critical of badness everywhere and in everyone. True morality doesn't turn a blind eye to certain bad things and certain good things. It praises goodness of all kinds and condemns badness of all kinds. Jews didn't want this. Jews wanted whites to see only the good about Jews and only the bad about Palestinians and Iranians. On the matter of Russian history, Jews demand that whites see Jews only as innocent victims and see Russians only as baddies; Jewish attitude toward Russia is not unlike Hitler's insane animus toward the Slavs, but then, it's only natural as both Nazi 'Aryans' and Jewish 'Semites' share the vile conviction that inferior backward Slavs should be ruled by the Other. Even when Zionist soldiers beat up Palestinian kids struggling for independence, Jews insist that whites see Jewish victims and Palestinian 'terrorists'. It's like, even though blacks beat up whites and non-blacks, Jews insist that we only see poor innocent blacks being terrorized by 'white supremacism'.
    Of course, Jewish Power knows all of this is bogus. No mindful Jew ever believed in Russia-gate. That was for the goy birds, the suckers and chums. It's like Mamet's con-men know exactly what they're doing. They are mindful, mindful of the game where the players know while the played don't know. To Jews of Power or JOPs, it's all a House of Games.
    But they are negatively mindful as they're like gangsters than gentlemen. They got the power and money and want more, then more and more. So, what Jews now push as 'critical theory' is the biggest 'punching down' operation in history. It's Jews punching down on whites but with whites propped up as Goliath. Imagine a boxer who's down for the count. Suppose this boxer is lifted up and tied to a pole to create the illusion that he's still in the fight. And so, it's game to keep punching him. Of course, the real champion in the ring is the vicious Jew, but he tells others that the propped up white palooka is still the Evil White Supremacist Champ who must be punched and KO'ed. At this point, whites might as well be scarecrows. Jews use Critical Theory to defend their power and to attack its critics, but the very notion of 'critical theory' lends the impression that it's about 'fighting the power'. It's rather like a human making dogs chase a fox. It's the human who has power over the dogs, but the dogs fixate on the fox as the biggest problem in the world that must be snuffed out.

    Now, one wonders how so many people could have gotten suckered over the years. Aren't there more college graduates than ever? But perhaps, larger college bodies led to dumbing down of the curriculum and replacement of intellectual pursuit with easily digestible nonsense. Quantity isn't quality. Still, the core real problem is Jewish Power. Jewish monopoly of the media and dominance in the academia(that also trains people to work in media) led to all information, idols, icons, 'facts', and narratives being molded by Jews.
    Still, it wouldn't have been so bad IF people could at least discuss Jewish Power. After all, there was once a time when Anglo-Americans dominated most things, but people could still name the power, blame the power, and shame the power. If anything, Jews led in this exposure and criticism of WASP power. At the very least, Anglo-Americans didn't make themselves out to be sacrosanct and above criticism. But Jews have been different. With increasing power, they pathologized any honest discussion of Jewish Power and influence as 'antisemitism'. Look around today, and Jews throw the label 'nazi' and 'white supremacist' at anyone. If anyone notices Jewish Power, he is said to be spreading 'antisemitic tropes'. In the minds of the ADL and SPLC, there's hardly any difference between Adolf Hitler and some normal person who notices Jewish Power.

    Jewish supremacist pathology pathologized ANY view that is critical of Jewish Power as 'antisemitic'. This has been the crux of the problem. Not only did Jews gain monopoly in media and dominance in academia BUT used the power to forbid honest discussion of the extent of Jewish Power and its abuses and corruptions. Why, any such talk would be 'nazi' or 'antisemitic'! So, that means Jews in media and academia(and the state) were able to push narratives, promote idols, and spread dogmas with hardly any opposition. Over the years, the accumulative force of such lies fed to generations of goyim led to the current state of mindless 'wokeness' among whites. They are mindless because they don't play the game but are played by the game. Indeed, they don't even know the game exists. As mindless minions in the game, they see themselves as the 'resistance' fighting Nazi dragons and 'white supremacist' goblins in defense of the race of Anne Franks, the race of Emmett Tills, and people of tutti-fruity. They are terribly easy to activate and manipulate because they are easily triggered by a handful of signals. Jews only need to push a few buttons, and the 'woke' mobs pour into the streets in the name of globo-homo or Noble Negro, just like Mao needed to flash a few signals to bring out millions of Red Guard youths on the eve of the Cultural Revolution. The mindful leading the mindless. If whites weren't so mindless, would the negatively mindful Jews be able to control them so easily? No wonder Jews spread mindlessness as the New Normal in 'thought'. With the 'woke' idiots, Jews only need to yell 'racism', 'white supremacism', or 'nazi' to get them barking and running wild for another fox hunt. Those signals don't induce thought among whites. Rather, they trigger certain emotional responses that fuel 'woke' rage. Much of 'wokeness' owes more to idolatry than ideology, and as such, it's more like a cult or quasi-religion than a thought system. It's like the Catholic Church never proved that God is real or Jesus is the Messiah. There is no factual basis for such claims, but so many people came to believe because of the emotional responses stirred by the combination of storytelling, magic, music, ritualism, and spectacle. All those whites who grew up weeping over the mountain-sized Negro who wuvs a little white mouse(and may indeed be god hisself) in THE GREEN MILE have been rendered incapable of rational thoughts about the Negro.

    In a way, the current mindlessness is appealing because of its three-chord narrative. Just like people prefer pop songs over symphonies with their range and depth, most people prefer a few potent themes that ring loud and clear. It's amazing how many hit songs were composed of mere three chords, outselling the far more complex musical works. Pop songs are mostly mindless, but that is the appeal. One need not invest oneself in a pop song. It's all there, the essence of melody, harmony, and beat.
    And 'wokeness' is structured that way. The three narrative chords are Sacred Semites, Noble Negroes, and Holy Homos. For all the talk of diversity, the main chords in the same old/new song is Jews, Negroes, and Homos... Jews, Negroes, and Homos. The holy trinity of PC.
    As for the villains, they are 'anti-semites'(anyone who notices Jewish Power), 'racists'(anyone who notices black crime and thuggery), and 'homophobes'(anyone who says sodomy is ewwww or that a tranny isn't a woman). The three evils are like 'lions, tigers, and bears' in THE WIZARD OF OZ, an apt movie in our age when fools are indeed being played by hidden forces. (Come to think of it, was Trump really anything more than the Cowardly Lion in a Duck-Soup-like musical orchestrated by Jews? All growl, no bite.)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NecK4MwOfeI&ab_channel=WBMoviesOnline

    If domestically, the villains are 'anti-semites', 'racists', and 'homophobes', around the world the usual baddies are Russia, Iran, and China(if only as a distraction from Jewish Power).

    PC may be stupid, but it's easily digestible and uncomplicated. To be 'woke', you need not think. Just chant along, march along, and tag along. All you have to do is suck Jewish pud,, kiss homo ass, and wash black feet. And in 'lions, tigers, and bears' fashion, all you have to do is shudder about the dangers of 'antisemites, racists, and homophobes'. And such mindlessness might as well be manna from heaven for Jewish Power. The negatively mindful leading the hordes of the mindless whose buttons are so easy to push.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    About halfway through your long comment, you write:

    Back in the early 20th century, Kafka’s writings represented the neurosis of the Jew in a dark, hostile, and bewildering world. Today, the writings come across more as a Power Manual for the Jewish elites.

    It was worth reading halfway for this passage alone, but I never got to the second half. Too long.

    Consider cutting out 60 percent and organizing the remaining 40 percent more clearly with better discipline. It’d make a pretty good article then.

  33. @A123
    Here are the details on how European Islamic SJW ideology was introduced to the U.S. (1)

    Inside The Foreign-Funded ‘Hub Project’ To Transform America

    The most important megadonor you have never heard of

    It is a story that goes to the very heart of the left’s mountains of shadowy funding and professional activism: a foreign billionaire infamous for illegally funding Democrats, backing ghoulish medical treatments resulting in multiple deaths, and bankrolling a multi-million-dollar “dark money” campaign to transform America.

    Meet Swiss-born Hansjörg Wyss (pronounced “Veese”), perhaps the most important megadonor you’ve never heard of. His Wyss Foundation, founded in 1998, quietly commands a stunning $2.2 billion in assets (as of 2018) and annually pours out tens of millions of dollars to activist groups—more than half a billion dollars between 2000 and 2018—so it’s little wonder that he’s been called the “new George Soros.”

    The Hub Project: Born in “Dark Money”

    The story begins in 2015, when the consulting firm Civitas Public Affairs Group—whose clients include the pro-gun control Brady Campaign and Democratic get-out-the-vote group Voter Participation Center—produced a private report for the Wyss Foundation outlining a plan for a “communications hub.” (It’s unknown exactly how much the foundation paid for the report, but between 2015 and 2018 it paid over $442,000 to Civitas.)


    From the start, the hub was “solely funded by The Wyss Foundation,” yet its ties to the foundation were intentionally hidden. The Civitas report even recommends it be disassociated with the Wyss Foundation so as to “give the foundation appropriate separation from the hub’s work” and “allow the hub to engage in a more robust way than it could if it was based within the foundation.”

    In other words, the hub was designed to allow the foundation to bypass the IRS prohibition on intervening in elections.

     

    It is a lengthy article, but well worth the read. It explains how European SJW Islamic values are illegally weaponized in U.S. political campaigns.

    PEACE 😇
    __________

    (1) https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/inside-the-foreign-funded-hub-project-to-transform-america/

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    Did I miss something?

    Here are the details on how European Islamic SJW ideology was introduced to the U.S.

    The article you link seems to mention neither Muslims or Islam.

    The article fails to refer to George Soros as the IslamoSoros, if that is what you mean; but isn’t this only because the article was written by someone other than you?

    I don’t get the connection.

    • Replies: @A123
    @V. K. Ovelund

    I provided a refresher up in #22 that SJW = Islam. I do not have to repeat selfevident truths in every post:

    • Gravity continues to pull things down.
    • SJW is obviously Islam.
    • Water remains wet.
    • George IslamoSoros remains a devout Muslim.

    Knowledge is inherently cumulative.

    If you would like to argue that Hansjörg Wyss is Dhimmi slave. Owned & totally controlled by his Muslim masters without being a convert. I would be willing to consider the concept. I have already stated that violent Islam deceives Infidels to act against their own Christian values.
    _____

    There is still a *critical* issue that you personally must address. You have brought up the "Charlottesville Five" numerous times. Christianity now bears 100% total and undiluted responsibility their ongoing imprisonment.

    Let me edit & restate the crucial fact set and questions:


    Governor Ralph Northam refuses to pardon Charlottesville Five. There is one-and-only-one Christian totally responsible for keeping the Charlottesville Five in jail.

    Is Ralph Northam:
    -A- One Elite individual
    -B- 100% of “All Christians” in the U.S.

    • Do you believe “All Christians” are guilty due to the Elite Governor’s failure to provide a pardon?
    • If you do not believe Elite Northam’s actions define Christianity -- Why do you apply a completely different standard, believing Elite Mayorkas’s actions define Judaism?
     
    I (and others) still cannot follow your thought process.

    Blaming "100% Of All Jews Everywhere" for the misconduct of a comparatively tiny number of Elites seems like epic over reach. If your logic was consistent you would apply similar blame to "100% Of All Christians Everywhere".

    PEACE 😇
    , @Mario Partisan
    @V. K. Ovelund

    Pay123 or perhaps (((Pay123))) is a Hasbara troll. Whether he is a member of the Tribe Incorporated (TI) or not, he has joined the UR commentariat to push its agenda. Occasionally he posts a mildly interesting comment criticizing Wokism, but that serves mainly to get people to pay attention to his posts and think he is on their side. However, his main activity consists of running apologetics for Manhattan on the Mediterranean (I don't mean Palermo) and its permanent war agenda. He is basically a Breitbart Zio sojourning at UR.

    One thing I find interesting about his approach is that he routinely uses phrases like “Islamic SJWism” or “George IslamoSoros.” The latter, in particular, is entirely absurd to anyone who knows anything. The fact that even Fox News hosts immediately end the discussion once the name “George Soros” is mentioned and justify it by saying they won’t provide a platform for anti-Semitism, what does that tell you? If George Soros was a Muslim you better believe that would be a commonly known fact. Hell, the ADL says criticizing Soros is anti-semitic. So what is this IslamoSoros crap about?



    I find his approach interesting, not just because it’s so absurd, but also because it is part of the larger manufacturing hate/divide and conquer/sowing confusion agenda. It might also reflect a certain genuine division within the ranks of the establishment as well, although I am less certain about that, namely International versus National Zionism.

    If one surveys the political landscape one can clearly see that the mega corps, the Wall Street banks, the MSM media organs, and institutions of government are under the dominion of the Tribe Incorporated. Yes, there are shabbos goyim in positions of influence, but they serve at the pleasure of the effendi. Therefore, it follows that Wokism is promoted because TI believes it serves its interests, namely in demoralizing the population, atomizing individuals, and directing the frustrations of “POC” at the white gentile demographic.

    But, as you might imagine, there are some risks for TI in this approach, namely that of seriously pissing off the majority white gentile demographic and waking them up to the TI problem. Here is where National Zionism comes in.

    The Natzios role is to take up the flag of anti-Wokism, get conservative whites to view Zionism as their ally against the BLM/Antifa/Replacement Migration trifecta and develop their sympathies for Manhattan on the Mediterranean. The fact that the National Zios in the ME have done, and are doing, to the true locals exactly what the International Zios are doing to the founding Euro stock of the West is conveniently ignored. Moreover, as the Palestinian liberation cause has typically found sympathy with the Left in the West, National Zionism helps to cultivate allies on the Right against movements like BDS. The only time I have ever come across the MSM criticizing BLM for “extremism” is on those occasionss where some local branch has said something sympathetic to Palestinians.

    Part of the reason Wokism is so laughably absurd is that all of the tenets that it defends are logically and factually indefensible. Consequently, it can only operate in a clown world. But the reason it is promoted is that it serves to create a cultural fog blinding people to the ultimate truth that the West is as thoroughly occupied as Palestine. National Zionists, like Pay123, can only add to the fog by engaging in similarly clownish antics like calling George Soros a Muslim.

    By the way, his post refers to an “SJW Islamist” billionaire named Hansjorg Wyss, who seems to be engaging in actions similar to Soros on the neoliberal domestic front. Although his wikibio says he is of Swiss nationality (banking country), the last name has my TI-dar pinging. Wyss seems to be a variation on Weiss, which is a fairly common name for members of the Tribe. A Muslim indeed! Oh, look what I found:


    According to a Forbes 2018 article, 4 out of the top 10 Philanthropists are Jewish and include the following individuals:

    • Michael Bloomberg donated $1.8 Billion
    • Mark Zuckerberg donated $410 Million
    Hansjoerg Wyss donated $402 Million
    • Jim Simons donated $397 Million

    Jews comprised 40% of the top 10 U.S. philanthropists despite only being 2% of the U.S. Population.

    https://www.stopantisemitism.org/debunking-the-myth-1/antisemitic-myth-5-jews-are-greedy
     
    George Soros and Hansjorg Wyss are “Muslims” in the same way Pay123 is a “Christian.”

    Replies: @A123, @V. K. Ovelund

  34. A123 says:
    @V. K. Ovelund
    @A123

    Did I miss something?


    Here are the details on how European Islamic SJW ideology was introduced to the U.S.
     
    The article you link seems to mention neither Muslims or Islam.

    The article fails to refer to George Soros as the IslamoSoros, if that is what you mean; but isn't this only because the article was written by someone other than you?

    I don't get the connection.

    Replies: @A123, @Mario Partisan

    I provided a refresher up in #22 that SJW = Islam. I do not have to repeat selfevident truths in every post:

    • Gravity continues to pull things down.
    • SJW is obviously Islam.
    • Water remains wet.
    • George IslamoSoros remains a devout Muslim.

    Knowledge is inherently cumulative.

    If you would like to argue that Hansjörg Wyss is Dhimmi slave. Owned & totally controlled by his Muslim masters without being a convert. I would be willing to consider the concept. I have already stated that violent Islam deceives Infidels to act against their own Christian values.
    _____

    There is still a *critical* issue that you personally must address. You have brought up the “Charlottesville Five” numerous times. Christianity now bears 100% total and undiluted responsibility their ongoing imprisonment.

    Let me edit & restate the crucial fact set and questions:

    Governor Ralph Northam refuses to pardon Charlottesville Five. There is one-and-only-one Christian totally responsible for keeping the Charlottesville Five in jail.

    Is Ralph Northam:
    -A- One Elite individual
    -B- 100% of “All Christians” in the U.S.

    • Do you believe “All Christians” are guilty due to the Elite Governor’s failure to provide a pardon?
    • If you do not believe Elite Northam’s actions define Christianity — Why do you apply a completely different standard, believing Elite Mayorkas’s actions define Judaism?

    I (and others) still cannot follow your thought process.

    Blaming “100% Of All Jews Everywhere” for the misconduct of a comparatively tiny number of Elites seems like epic over reach. If your logic was consistent you would apply similar blame to “100% Of All Christians Everywhere”.

    PEACE 😇

  35. @V. K. Ovelund
    @A123

    Did I miss something?


    Here are the details on how European Islamic SJW ideology was introduced to the U.S.
     
    The article you link seems to mention neither Muslims or Islam.

    The article fails to refer to George Soros as the IslamoSoros, if that is what you mean; but isn't this only because the article was written by someone other than you?

    I don't get the connection.

    Replies: @A123, @Mario Partisan

    Pay123 or perhaps (((Pay123))) is a Hasbara troll. Whether he is a member of the Tribe Incorporated (TI) or not, he has joined the UR commentariat to push its agenda. Occasionally he posts a mildly interesting comment criticizing Wokism, but that serves mainly to get people to pay attention to his posts and think he is on their side. However, his main activity consists of running apologetics for Manhattan on the Mediterranean (I don’t mean Palermo) and its permanent war agenda. He is basically a Breitbart Zio sojourning at UR.

    One thing I find interesting about his approach is that he routinely uses phrases like “Islamic SJWism” or “George IslamoSoros.” The latter, in particular, is entirely absurd to anyone who knows anything. The fact that even Fox News hosts immediately end the discussion once the name “George Soros” is mentioned and justify it by saying they won’t provide a platform for anti-Semitism, what does that tell you? If George Soros was a Muslim you better believe that would be a commonly known fact. Hell, the ADL says criticizing Soros is anti-semitic. So what is this IslamoSoros crap about?

    [MORE]

    I find his approach interesting, not just because it’s so absurd, but also because it is part of the larger manufacturing hate/divide and conquer/sowing confusion agenda. It might also reflect a certain genuine division within the ranks of the establishment as well, although I am less certain about that, namely International versus National Zionism.

    If one surveys the political landscape one can clearly see that the mega corps, the Wall Street banks, the MSM media organs, and institutions of government are under the dominion of the Tribe Incorporated. Yes, there are shabbos goyim in positions of influence, but they serve at the pleasure of the effendi. Therefore, it follows that Wokism is promoted because TI believes it serves its interests, namely in demoralizing the population, atomizing individuals, and directing the frustrations of “POC” at the white gentile demographic.

    But, as you might imagine, there are some risks for TI in this approach, namely that of seriously pissing off the majority white gentile demographic and waking them up to the TI problem. Here is where National Zionism comes in.

    The Natzios role is to take up the flag of anti-Wokism, get conservative whites to view Zionism as their ally against the BLM/Antifa/Replacement Migration trifecta and develop their sympathies for Manhattan on the Mediterranean. The fact that the National Zios in the ME have done, and are doing, to the true locals exactly what the International Zios are doing to the founding Euro stock of the West is conveniently ignored. Moreover, as the Palestinian liberation cause has typically found sympathy with the Left in the West, National Zionism helps to cultivate allies on the Right against movements like BDS. The only time I have ever come across the MSM criticizing BLM for “extremism” is on those occasionss where some local branch has said something sympathetic to Palestinians.

    Part of the reason Wokism is so laughably absurd is that all of the tenets that it defends are logically and factually indefensible. Consequently, it can only operate in a clown world. But the reason it is promoted is that it serves to create a cultural fog blinding people to the ultimate truth that the West is as thoroughly occupied as Palestine. National Zionists, like Pay123, can only add to the fog by engaging in similarly clownish antics like calling George Soros a Muslim.

    By the way, his post refers to an “SJW Islamist” billionaire named Hansjorg Wyss, who seems to be engaging in actions similar to Soros on the neoliberal domestic front. Although his wikibio says he is of Swiss nationality (banking country), the last name has my TI-dar pinging. Wyss seems to be a variation on Weiss, which is a fairly common name for members of the Tribe. A Muslim indeed! Oh, look what I found:

    According to a Forbes 2018 article, 4 out of the top 10 Philanthropists are Jewish and include the following individuals:

    • Michael Bloomberg donated $1.8 Billion
    • Mark Zuckerberg donated $410 Million
    Hansjoerg Wyss donated $402 Million
    • Jim Simons donated $397 Million

    Jews comprised 40% of the top 10 U.S. philanthropists despite only being 2% of the U.S. Population.

    https://www.stopantisemitism.org/debunking-the-myth-1/antisemitic-myth-5-jews-are-greedy

    George Soros and Hansjorg Wyss are “Muslims” in the same way Pay123 is a “Christian.”

    • LOL: A123
    • Replies: @A123
    @Mario Partisan

    ROTFLMAO

    Mario Paedo is a known Iranian TROLL. There is no lie that he would not try to pass for his beloved master sociopath Khameni. MP's fear of God's TRUTH confirms that I am 100% correct.

    MP thank you for accidentally supporting Jesus.


    ADL says criticizing Soros is anti-semitic. So what is this IslamoSoros crap about?
     
    The Anti-Semitic Defaming League of Muhammad [ADL] is despised by non-elite Jews: (1)

    At the ADL, “not only is Foxman badly missed, his replacement has more or less destroyed the organization’s reputation,” whose “vision of the group is fundamentally that of a Democratic Party auxiliary,” Tobin has concluded. “Greenblatt is a man of the left in the purest sense, and one who holds partisan politics paramount,” conservative Jewish-American commentator Seth Mandel has agreed. Glick as well has concurred that “Greenblatt has transformed the ADL into a post-Jewish political group.”

    Greenblatt’s post-Jewish ADL became clear in its opposition to President Donald Trump’s 2018 nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the United States Supreme Court, a partisan issue unrelated to antisemitism. Greenblatt has also accused American Jews of manifesting the modern leftist sin of “white privilege.” As Center for Security Policy analyst Alex Van Ness wrote, “Greenblatt has shown himself unable to leave his old partisan circles behind.
     
    It is unsurprising that Muhammad's Anti-Semitic ADL and Anti-Semite George IslamoSoros share the same anti-Israel agenda.

    PEACE 😇
    __________

    (1) https://www.jihadwatch.org/2021/03/jonathan-greenblatt-destroys-the-adl

    Replies: @Mario Partisan, @Mulga Mumblebrain

    , @V. K. Ovelund
    @Mario Partisan

    That's quite a comment, Mario. I was trying to think of something to say in response, but believe that you have already said it a better than I could.

    I have given up on trying to pin the Hasbara label on A123. The fact is, I enjoy jousting with him, so insulting him is no more in my interest than in my disposition. The question of whether he is a Christian or a Jew (I accept his word in the matter) is the least interesting point on which he speaks. If paid, then he is paid to spar with me, so I can hardly complain; but otherwise, I subscribe to your comment without reservation.

    Replies: @Mario Partisan

  36. @Not only wrathful
    @neutral

    By what magic are they controlled?

    Replies: @neutral, @Rosie, @Audacious Epigone

    Military occupation by the US, government system created by the US, cultural norms forced on to them at gunpoint. Not magic, being a colony to the the USA makes you a ZOG state.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @neutral

    And if you don't play ball, a Color Revolution.

    , @Not only wrathful
    @neutral

    You think Germany is a US colony. Have you ever been to Europe? European countries can do as they want. Furthermore, the German people may well elect the open borders Greens as much as an anti-American statement as anything else about foreign policy. You're so confused.

    Replies: @fnn, @German_reader

  37. A123 says:
    @Mario Partisan
    @V. K. Ovelund

    Pay123 or perhaps (((Pay123))) is a Hasbara troll. Whether he is a member of the Tribe Incorporated (TI) or not, he has joined the UR commentariat to push its agenda. Occasionally he posts a mildly interesting comment criticizing Wokism, but that serves mainly to get people to pay attention to his posts and think he is on their side. However, his main activity consists of running apologetics for Manhattan on the Mediterranean (I don't mean Palermo) and its permanent war agenda. He is basically a Breitbart Zio sojourning at UR.

    One thing I find interesting about his approach is that he routinely uses phrases like “Islamic SJWism” or “George IslamoSoros.” The latter, in particular, is entirely absurd to anyone who knows anything. The fact that even Fox News hosts immediately end the discussion once the name “George Soros” is mentioned and justify it by saying they won’t provide a platform for anti-Semitism, what does that tell you? If George Soros was a Muslim you better believe that would be a commonly known fact. Hell, the ADL says criticizing Soros is anti-semitic. So what is this IslamoSoros crap about?



    I find his approach interesting, not just because it’s so absurd, but also because it is part of the larger manufacturing hate/divide and conquer/sowing confusion agenda. It might also reflect a certain genuine division within the ranks of the establishment as well, although I am less certain about that, namely International versus National Zionism.

    If one surveys the political landscape one can clearly see that the mega corps, the Wall Street banks, the MSM media organs, and institutions of government are under the dominion of the Tribe Incorporated. Yes, there are shabbos goyim in positions of influence, but they serve at the pleasure of the effendi. Therefore, it follows that Wokism is promoted because TI believes it serves its interests, namely in demoralizing the population, atomizing individuals, and directing the frustrations of “POC” at the white gentile demographic.

    But, as you might imagine, there are some risks for TI in this approach, namely that of seriously pissing off the majority white gentile demographic and waking them up to the TI problem. Here is where National Zionism comes in.

    The Natzios role is to take up the flag of anti-Wokism, get conservative whites to view Zionism as their ally against the BLM/Antifa/Replacement Migration trifecta and develop their sympathies for Manhattan on the Mediterranean. The fact that the National Zios in the ME have done, and are doing, to the true locals exactly what the International Zios are doing to the founding Euro stock of the West is conveniently ignored. Moreover, as the Palestinian liberation cause has typically found sympathy with the Left in the West, National Zionism helps to cultivate allies on the Right against movements like BDS. The only time I have ever come across the MSM criticizing BLM for “extremism” is on those occasionss where some local branch has said something sympathetic to Palestinians.

    Part of the reason Wokism is so laughably absurd is that all of the tenets that it defends are logically and factually indefensible. Consequently, it can only operate in a clown world. But the reason it is promoted is that it serves to create a cultural fog blinding people to the ultimate truth that the West is as thoroughly occupied as Palestine. National Zionists, like Pay123, can only add to the fog by engaging in similarly clownish antics like calling George Soros a Muslim.

    By the way, his post refers to an “SJW Islamist” billionaire named Hansjorg Wyss, who seems to be engaging in actions similar to Soros on the neoliberal domestic front. Although his wikibio says he is of Swiss nationality (banking country), the last name has my TI-dar pinging. Wyss seems to be a variation on Weiss, which is a fairly common name for members of the Tribe. A Muslim indeed! Oh, look what I found:


    According to a Forbes 2018 article, 4 out of the top 10 Philanthropists are Jewish and include the following individuals:

    • Michael Bloomberg donated $1.8 Billion
    • Mark Zuckerberg donated $410 Million
    Hansjoerg Wyss donated $402 Million
    • Jim Simons donated $397 Million

    Jews comprised 40% of the top 10 U.S. philanthropists despite only being 2% of the U.S. Population.

    https://www.stopantisemitism.org/debunking-the-myth-1/antisemitic-myth-5-jews-are-greedy
     
    George Soros and Hansjorg Wyss are “Muslims” in the same way Pay123 is a “Christian.”

    Replies: @A123, @V. K. Ovelund

    ROTFLMAO

    Mario Paedo is a known Iranian TROLL. There is no lie that he would not try to pass for his beloved master sociopath Khameni. MP’s fear of God’s TRUTH confirms that I am 100% correct.

    MP thank you for accidentally supporting Jesus.

    ADL says criticizing Soros is anti-semitic. So what is this IslamoSoros crap about?

    The Anti-Semitic Defaming League of Muhammad [ADL] is despised by non-elite Jews: (1)

    At the ADL, “not only is Foxman badly missed, his replacement has more or less destroyed the organization’s reputation,” whose “vision of the group is fundamentally that of a Democratic Party auxiliary,” Tobin has concluded. “Greenblatt is a man of the left in the purest sense, and one who holds partisan politics paramount,” conservative Jewish-American commentator Seth Mandel has agreed. Glick as well has concurred that “Greenblatt has transformed the ADL into a post-Jewish political group.”

    Greenblatt’s post-Jewish ADL became clear in its opposition to President Donald Trump’s 2018 nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the United States Supreme Court, a partisan issue unrelated to antisemitism. Greenblatt has also accused American Jews of manifesting the modern leftist sin of “white privilege.” As Center for Security Policy analyst Alex Van Ness wrote, “Greenblatt has shown himself unable to leave his old partisan circles behind.

    It is unsurprising that Muhammad’s Anti-Semitic ADL and Anti-Semite George IslamoSoros share the same anti-Israel agenda.

    PEACE 😇
    __________

    (1) https://www.jihadwatch.org/2021/03/jonathan-greenblatt-destroys-the-adl

    • Replies: @Mario Partisan
    @A123


    Anti-Semitic Defaming League of Muhammad [ADL]
     
    The correct acronym would be ADLM - Ashkenazim Defending Looting and Murder.
    , @Mulga Mumblebrain
    @A123

    The Sabbat Goy troll only likes some Jews-the Judeofascist and Zionazi type. As for the better members of the tribe, she is a die-hard Judeophobe, a true 'antisemite'.

  38. @Not only wrathful
    @neutral

    By what magic are they controlled?

    Replies: @neutral, @Rosie, @Audacious Epigone

    By what magic are they controlled?

    Well, there is the threat of economic sanctions, for one. Failing that, there’s always the threat of good old-fashioned bombing campaigns. According to General Wesley Clark,

    …there is no place in modern Europe for ethnically pure states. That’s a 19th century idea, and we are trying to transition into the 21st century, and we are going to do it with multiethnic states.”

    https://www.thesocialcontract.com/artman2/publish/tsc0904/article_805_printer.shtml

    • Replies: @Not only wrathful
    @Rosie

    The US can't even get Germany to not build a pipeline for Russian gas. They most certainly can't dictate which party Germans elect.

    Replies: @Rosie

  39. @neutral
    @Not only wrathful

    Military occupation by the US, government system created by the US, cultural norms forced on to them at gunpoint. Not magic, being a colony to the the USA makes you a ZOG state.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Not only wrathful

    And if you don’t play ball, a Color Revolution.

  40. @Rosie
    @Not only wrathful


    By what magic are they controlled?
     
    Well, there is the threat of economic sanctions, for one. Failing that, there's always the threat of good old-fashioned bombing campaigns. According to General Wesley Clark,

    ...there is no place in modern Europe for ethnically pure states. That's a 19th century idea, and we are trying to transition into the 21st century, and we are going to do it with multiethnic states."
     
    https://www.thesocialcontract.com/artman2/publish/tsc0904/article_805_printer.shtml

    Replies: @Not only wrathful

    The US can’t even get Germany to not build a pipeline for Russian gas. They most certainly can’t dictate which party Germans elect.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Not only wrathful


    The US can’t even get Germany to not build a pipeline for Russian gas. They most certainly can’t dictate which party Germans elect.
     
    You probably know a lot more about foreign affairs than me, but...

    I'm very skeptical about the idea that every single Western European nation decided, sua sponte, to destroy itself after WWII.

    My impression, and I'll admit it's just that, is that "liberal values" and being an "open society" is a condition of membership in the EU, which is controlled by the US.

    The thing is, it doesn't really much matter anyway. It may be that US influence is informal in the sense that we export elite cosmopolitanism via the international media. If we have learned anything over the past few generations, it's that politics is downstream of culture, and when you control the culture, you can dictate political outcomes.

    Permit me to control the flow of information and ideas in a nation, and I care not who makes its laws.

    Replies: @Not only wrathful, @Mario Partisan, @Mulga Mumblebrain

  41. @V. K. Ovelund
    @Greta Handel


    Several of the authors here at Unz, wittingly or not, also do their part to Divide & Conquer:...
     
    I do not wish to do my part.

    – Red/Blue
     
    Is it not necessary that the Blues, too, wish to coëxist? The Reds can hardly coëxist without reciprocation. As matters stand, the Blues already have what they want; namely, the upper hand over the Reds.

    – black/white
     
    Few blacks have agency. Most are moral children.

    – male/female
     
    Marriage.

    – religion
     
    Could you be more specific?

    – ancestry
     
    In the United States, white people have interests.

    – police/arrestees
     
    I hold no brief for police, but it seems to me that division between police and arrestees is probably necessary.

    – RussiaBad/ChinaBad/IranBad
     
    China is a great rival by sheer force of geopolitical circumstance. The United States has been foolish however since 1989 to fail to cultivate Russia and Iran as friends.

    So have I unwittingly done my part to Divide & Conquer?

    Replies: @Greta Handel

    If you don’t appreciate how all of these wedges are used by an Establishment that, in fact, cares nothing about the people on either side, then I believe that yes, you are.

  42. @neutral
    @Not only wrathful

    Military occupation by the US, government system created by the US, cultural norms forced on to them at gunpoint. Not magic, being a colony to the the USA makes you a ZOG state.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Not only wrathful

    You think Germany is a US colony. Have you ever been to Europe? European countries can do as they want. Furthermore, the German people may well elect the open borders Greens as much as an anti-American statement as anything else about foreign policy. You’re so confused.

    • Replies: @fnn
    @Not only wrathful

    Yes, the Germans have their choice of open borders parties, The one non-open borders party is under intense stigma and state surveillance.


    You think Germany is a US colony. Have you ever been to Europe? European countries can do as they want.
     
    Did the liars who told you this explain why NATO still exists? Why are there still US troops in Europe 30 years after the end of the Cold War?

    The Jewish Moldbug is good on the question of American Empire
    https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2008/01/how-i-stopped-believing-in-democracy/


    What Europeans call “anti-Americanism” is actually a belief, generally quite sincere, that America is not living up to her own ideals of 1945. “Anti-Americanism” might be better described as “ultra-Americanism,” or perhaps “Georgetownism.” And it certainly has nothing to do with the any pre-1940 negative perceptions of America. There is minimal cultural continuity between Europe before the war and Europe today. All the institutions were purged, all the individuals have finally kicked it. The Dutch who let you smoke weed in their cafes and the Dutch who ruled Indonesia might as well be on different planets. The former are thoroughly ashamed that they are even descended from the latter. And the latter are dead, which is probably a blessing.
     
    https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2007/08/secret-of-anti-americanism/

    First, I believe anti-Americanism is best described as an epiphenomenon of Universalism. The single most significant fact about the world today is that sixty-two years ago it was conquered by a military alliance whose leader was the United States, and whose creed of battle was this nontheistic adaptation of New England mainline Protestantism. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the European ruling class holds essentially the same perspectives that were held at Harvard in 1945. The US Army did not shoot all the professors in Europe and replace them with Yankee carpetbaggers, but the prestige of conquest is such that it might as well have.

    It makes sense to view anti-Americanism as a postwar phenomenon, because it’s hard to find anything in Europe’s prewar political scene that corresponds to it. Before WWII, a European who found American influences pernicious was most likely a man of the Right, generally either an anti-Wilsonian aristocrat or a Bonapartist nationalist demagogue. After the war, and especially since the rise of the postwar-educated generation of 1968, European anti-Americanism has been overwhelmingly on the Left. Considering the animosity between these factions, it’s hard to find any continuity between them.
     

    Replies: @Not only wrathful

    , @German_reader
    @Not only wrathful


    Furthermore, the German people may well elect the open borders Greens as much as an anti-American statement
     
    Any "anti-American" sentiment was dropped by the Greens a long time ago (at least as far as back as the 1999 Kosovo war), today they're probably the most hardcore Atlanticist party in Germany, who view American hegemony as an unalloyed good and reject any independent German foreign policy initiatives. A good example for how today's Greens think can be read in this interview:
    https://www.zeit.de/politik/2021-03/usa-transatlantic-relations-franziska-brantner-stephen-wertheim-english?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F
    So your perceptions of them as "anti-American", if they ever were correct, are 30-40 years out of date.

    Replies: @Not only wrathful

  43. @A123
    @Mario Partisan

    ROTFLMAO

    Mario Paedo is a known Iranian TROLL. There is no lie that he would not try to pass for his beloved master sociopath Khameni. MP's fear of God's TRUTH confirms that I am 100% correct.

    MP thank you for accidentally supporting Jesus.


    ADL says criticizing Soros is anti-semitic. So what is this IslamoSoros crap about?
     
    The Anti-Semitic Defaming League of Muhammad [ADL] is despised by non-elite Jews: (1)

    At the ADL, “not only is Foxman badly missed, his replacement has more or less destroyed the organization’s reputation,” whose “vision of the group is fundamentally that of a Democratic Party auxiliary,” Tobin has concluded. “Greenblatt is a man of the left in the purest sense, and one who holds partisan politics paramount,” conservative Jewish-American commentator Seth Mandel has agreed. Glick as well has concurred that “Greenblatt has transformed the ADL into a post-Jewish political group.”

    Greenblatt’s post-Jewish ADL became clear in its opposition to President Donald Trump’s 2018 nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the United States Supreme Court, a partisan issue unrelated to antisemitism. Greenblatt has also accused American Jews of manifesting the modern leftist sin of “white privilege.” As Center for Security Policy analyst Alex Van Ness wrote, “Greenblatt has shown himself unable to leave his old partisan circles behind.
     
    It is unsurprising that Muhammad's Anti-Semitic ADL and Anti-Semite George IslamoSoros share the same anti-Israel agenda.

    PEACE 😇
    __________

    (1) https://www.jihadwatch.org/2021/03/jonathan-greenblatt-destroys-the-adl

    Replies: @Mario Partisan, @Mulga Mumblebrain

    Anti-Semitic Defaming League of Muhammad [ADL]

    The correct acronym would be ADLM – Ashkenazim Defending Looting and Murder.

  44. Rosie says:
    @Not only wrathful
    @Rosie

    The US can't even get Germany to not build a pipeline for Russian gas. They most certainly can't dictate which party Germans elect.

    Replies: @Rosie

    The US can’t even get Germany to not build a pipeline for Russian gas. They most certainly can’t dictate which party Germans elect.

    You probably know a lot more about foreign affairs than me, but…

    I’m very skeptical about the idea that every single Western European nation decided, sua sponte, to destroy itself after WWII.

    My impression, and I’ll admit it’s just that, is that “liberal values” and being an “open society” is a condition of membership in the EU, which is controlled by the US.

    The thing is, it doesn’t really much matter anyway. It may be that US influence is informal in the sense that we export elite cosmopolitanism via the international media. If we have learned anything over the past few generations, it’s that politics is downstream of culture, and when you control the culture, you can dictate political outcomes.

    Permit me to control the flow of information and ideas in a nation, and I care not who makes its laws.

    • Replies: @Not only wrathful
    @Rosie


    I’m very skeptical about the idea that every single Western European nation decided, sua sponte, to destroy itself after WWII.
     
    Almost no one sees what is happening as Western Europe destroying itself. The EU is quite popular and those who oppose it don't tend to oppose it because they think it is destroying everything. They instead dislike it for much less existential reasons.

    My impression, and I’ll admit it’s just that, is that “liberal values” and being an “open society” is a condition of membership in the EU, which is controlled by the US
     
    The EU is not controlled by the US. The EU's values are those of the French, Italian, BeneLux and German political classes. If you want to ignore the "open society" and "liberal values" like Hungary and Poland do, then it is pretty easy. You just need to ignore a little hot air.

    The thing is, it doesn’t really much matter anyway. It may be that US influence is informal in the sense that we export elite cosmopolitanism via the international media. If we have learned anything over the past few generations, it’s that politics is downstream of culture, and when you control the culture, you can dictate political outcomes.
     
    Many European countries are strongly protectionist in their media industries. Yet modern peoples consume US progressive media because they like it. Elite cosmopolitans in Europe tend to be more anti-American than the general populace and yet they are much more progressive. Indeed, their progressivism is often itself anti-American.

    Bit weird therefore to blame their elite cosmopolitanism on the US.

    Permit me to control the flow of information and ideas in a nation, and I care not who makes its laws.
     
    Yet EU countries do control the flow of information and ideas into them. Control includes permitting as well as prohibiting.

    Angela Merkel is the most popular German leader ever and she inundated Germany with Middle Eastern immigrants. The people who supported that inundation tend to be anti-American while the people who opposed it tend to be quietly pro. Jews are irrelevant.

    Replies: @Rosie

    , @Mario Partisan
    @Rosie

    As my dad from “the boot” always said – “Il governo in Roma è una puttana degli Usa.”

    , @Mulga Mumblebrain
    @Rosie

    The US has gotten the dastards of the EU Parliament to scupper the investment treaty with China, on the basis of the gargantuan, racist, war-declaring, lie that the Uighurs are suffering 'genocide'. Five minutes' research shows it to be a lie, but race and cultural fear and hatred is so ingrained in Western 'elites' that they will not do it, or if they know the truth, they still go along with the equivalent of 'German troops throwing Belgian babies onto their bayonets'. Still it is good-the EU will lose far more from it than the Chinese, although further racist aggression from the Western Herrenvolk is certain.

  45. @Mario Partisan
    @V. K. Ovelund

    Pay123 or perhaps (((Pay123))) is a Hasbara troll. Whether he is a member of the Tribe Incorporated (TI) or not, he has joined the UR commentariat to push its agenda. Occasionally he posts a mildly interesting comment criticizing Wokism, but that serves mainly to get people to pay attention to his posts and think he is on their side. However, his main activity consists of running apologetics for Manhattan on the Mediterranean (I don't mean Palermo) and its permanent war agenda. He is basically a Breitbart Zio sojourning at UR.

    One thing I find interesting about his approach is that he routinely uses phrases like “Islamic SJWism” or “George IslamoSoros.” The latter, in particular, is entirely absurd to anyone who knows anything. The fact that even Fox News hosts immediately end the discussion once the name “George Soros” is mentioned and justify it by saying they won’t provide a platform for anti-Semitism, what does that tell you? If George Soros was a Muslim you better believe that would be a commonly known fact. Hell, the ADL says criticizing Soros is anti-semitic. So what is this IslamoSoros crap about?



    I find his approach interesting, not just because it’s so absurd, but also because it is part of the larger manufacturing hate/divide and conquer/sowing confusion agenda. It might also reflect a certain genuine division within the ranks of the establishment as well, although I am less certain about that, namely International versus National Zionism.

    If one surveys the political landscape one can clearly see that the mega corps, the Wall Street banks, the MSM media organs, and institutions of government are under the dominion of the Tribe Incorporated. Yes, there are shabbos goyim in positions of influence, but they serve at the pleasure of the effendi. Therefore, it follows that Wokism is promoted because TI believes it serves its interests, namely in demoralizing the population, atomizing individuals, and directing the frustrations of “POC” at the white gentile demographic.

    But, as you might imagine, there are some risks for TI in this approach, namely that of seriously pissing off the majority white gentile demographic and waking them up to the TI problem. Here is where National Zionism comes in.

    The Natzios role is to take up the flag of anti-Wokism, get conservative whites to view Zionism as their ally against the BLM/Antifa/Replacement Migration trifecta and develop their sympathies for Manhattan on the Mediterranean. The fact that the National Zios in the ME have done, and are doing, to the true locals exactly what the International Zios are doing to the founding Euro stock of the West is conveniently ignored. Moreover, as the Palestinian liberation cause has typically found sympathy with the Left in the West, National Zionism helps to cultivate allies on the Right against movements like BDS. The only time I have ever come across the MSM criticizing BLM for “extremism” is on those occasionss where some local branch has said something sympathetic to Palestinians.

    Part of the reason Wokism is so laughably absurd is that all of the tenets that it defends are logically and factually indefensible. Consequently, it can only operate in a clown world. But the reason it is promoted is that it serves to create a cultural fog blinding people to the ultimate truth that the West is as thoroughly occupied as Palestine. National Zionists, like Pay123, can only add to the fog by engaging in similarly clownish antics like calling George Soros a Muslim.

    By the way, his post refers to an “SJW Islamist” billionaire named Hansjorg Wyss, who seems to be engaging in actions similar to Soros on the neoliberal domestic front. Although his wikibio says he is of Swiss nationality (banking country), the last name has my TI-dar pinging. Wyss seems to be a variation on Weiss, which is a fairly common name for members of the Tribe. A Muslim indeed! Oh, look what I found:


    According to a Forbes 2018 article, 4 out of the top 10 Philanthropists are Jewish and include the following individuals:

    • Michael Bloomberg donated $1.8 Billion
    • Mark Zuckerberg donated $410 Million
    Hansjoerg Wyss donated $402 Million
    • Jim Simons donated $397 Million

    Jews comprised 40% of the top 10 U.S. philanthropists despite only being 2% of the U.S. Population.

    https://www.stopantisemitism.org/debunking-the-myth-1/antisemitic-myth-5-jews-are-greedy
     
    George Soros and Hansjorg Wyss are “Muslims” in the same way Pay123 is a “Christian.”

    Replies: @A123, @V. K. Ovelund

    That’s quite a comment, Mario. I was trying to think of something to say in response, but believe that you have already said it a better than I could.

    I have given up on trying to pin the Hasbara label on A123. The fact is, I enjoy jousting with him, so insulting him is no more in my interest than in my disposition. The question of whether he is a Christian or a Jew (I accept his word in the matter) is the least interesting point on which he speaks. If paid, then he is paid to spar with me, so I can hardly complain; but otherwise, I subscribe to your comment without reservation.

    • Replies: @Mario Partisan
    @V. K. Ovelund

    Apparently I don't comment enough to say "thanks," but Thanks. And I understand about just wanting to joust, being respectful and taking people at their word. For what it's worth, A123 is absolutely correct about me being a paid Iranian troll. But at least in my case my handler Khameni is getting his money's worth.

  46. @Rosie
    @Not only wrathful


    The US can’t even get Germany to not build a pipeline for Russian gas. They most certainly can’t dictate which party Germans elect.
     
    You probably know a lot more about foreign affairs than me, but...

    I'm very skeptical about the idea that every single Western European nation decided, sua sponte, to destroy itself after WWII.

    My impression, and I'll admit it's just that, is that "liberal values" and being an "open society" is a condition of membership in the EU, which is controlled by the US.

    The thing is, it doesn't really much matter anyway. It may be that US influence is informal in the sense that we export elite cosmopolitanism via the international media. If we have learned anything over the past few generations, it's that politics is downstream of culture, and when you control the culture, you can dictate political outcomes.

    Permit me to control the flow of information and ideas in a nation, and I care not who makes its laws.

    Replies: @Not only wrathful, @Mario Partisan, @Mulga Mumblebrain

    I’m very skeptical about the idea that every single Western European nation decided, sua sponte, to destroy itself after WWII.

    Almost no one sees what is happening as Western Europe destroying itself. The EU is quite popular and those who oppose it don’t tend to oppose it because they think it is destroying everything. They instead dislike it for much less existential reasons.

    My impression, and I’ll admit it’s just that, is that “liberal values” and being an “open society” is a condition of membership in the EU, which is controlled by the US

    The EU is not controlled by the US. The EU’s values are those of the French, Italian, BeneLux and German political classes. If you want to ignore the “open society” and “liberal values” like Hungary and Poland do, then it is pretty easy. You just need to ignore a little hot air.

    The thing is, it doesn’t really much matter anyway. It may be that US influence is informal in the sense that we export elite cosmopolitanism via the international media. If we have learned anything over the past few generations, it’s that politics is downstream of culture, and when you control the culture, you can dictate political outcomes.

    Many European countries are strongly protectionist in their media industries. Yet modern peoples consume US progressive media because they like it. Elite cosmopolitans in Europe tend to be more anti-American than the general populace and yet they are much more progressive. Indeed, their progressivism is often itself anti-American.

    Bit weird therefore to blame their elite cosmopolitanism on the US.

    Permit me to control the flow of information and ideas in a nation, and I care not who makes its laws.

    Yet EU countries do control the flow of information and ideas into them. Control includes permitting as well as prohibiting.

    Angela Merkel is the most popular German leader ever and she inundated Germany with Middle Eastern immigrants. The people who supported that inundation tend to be anti-American while the people who opposed it tend to be quietly pro. Jews are irrelevant.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Not only wrathful


    Almost no one sees what is happening as Western Europe destroying itself.
     
    This is a semantic issue. I can rephrase if you like:

    I’m very skeptical about the idea that every single Western European nation decided, sua sponte, to open its borders and allow a "demographic transition" to reduce their native majorities to a dispossessed minority in their own homeland.
     

    The EU’s values are those of the French, Italian, BeneLux and German political classes.
     
    OK, but then this is a coincidence that begs an explanation, does it not?

    The people who supported that inundation tend to be anti-American while the people who opposed it tend to be quietly pro.
     
    Then they are deeply deluded about what sort of entity the United States of America has become.

    Replies: @Not only wrathful

  47. @Rosie
    @Not only wrathful


    The US can’t even get Germany to not build a pipeline for Russian gas. They most certainly can’t dictate which party Germans elect.
     
    You probably know a lot more about foreign affairs than me, but...

    I'm very skeptical about the idea that every single Western European nation decided, sua sponte, to destroy itself after WWII.

    My impression, and I'll admit it's just that, is that "liberal values" and being an "open society" is a condition of membership in the EU, which is controlled by the US.

    The thing is, it doesn't really much matter anyway. It may be that US influence is informal in the sense that we export elite cosmopolitanism via the international media. If we have learned anything over the past few generations, it's that politics is downstream of culture, and when you control the culture, you can dictate political outcomes.

    Permit me to control the flow of information and ideas in a nation, and I care not who makes its laws.

    Replies: @Not only wrathful, @Mario Partisan, @Mulga Mumblebrain

    As my dad from “the boot” always said – “Il governo in Roma è una puttana degli Usa.”

  48. Rosie says:
    @Not only wrathful
    @Rosie


    I’m very skeptical about the idea that every single Western European nation decided, sua sponte, to destroy itself after WWII.
     
    Almost no one sees what is happening as Western Europe destroying itself. The EU is quite popular and those who oppose it don't tend to oppose it because they think it is destroying everything. They instead dislike it for much less existential reasons.

    My impression, and I’ll admit it’s just that, is that “liberal values” and being an “open society” is a condition of membership in the EU, which is controlled by the US
     
    The EU is not controlled by the US. The EU's values are those of the French, Italian, BeneLux and German political classes. If you want to ignore the "open society" and "liberal values" like Hungary and Poland do, then it is pretty easy. You just need to ignore a little hot air.

    The thing is, it doesn’t really much matter anyway. It may be that US influence is informal in the sense that we export elite cosmopolitanism via the international media. If we have learned anything over the past few generations, it’s that politics is downstream of culture, and when you control the culture, you can dictate political outcomes.
     
    Many European countries are strongly protectionist in their media industries. Yet modern peoples consume US progressive media because they like it. Elite cosmopolitans in Europe tend to be more anti-American than the general populace and yet they are much more progressive. Indeed, their progressivism is often itself anti-American.

    Bit weird therefore to blame their elite cosmopolitanism on the US.

    Permit me to control the flow of information and ideas in a nation, and I care not who makes its laws.
     
    Yet EU countries do control the flow of information and ideas into them. Control includes permitting as well as prohibiting.

    Angela Merkel is the most popular German leader ever and she inundated Germany with Middle Eastern immigrants. The people who supported that inundation tend to be anti-American while the people who opposed it tend to be quietly pro. Jews are irrelevant.

    Replies: @Rosie

    Almost no one sees what is happening as Western Europe destroying itself.

    This is a semantic issue. I can rephrase if you like:

    I’m very skeptical about the idea that every single Western European nation decided, sua sponte, to open its borders and allow a “demographic transition” to reduce their native majorities to a dispossessed minority in their own homeland.

    The EU’s values are those of the French, Italian, BeneLux and German political classes.

    OK, but then this is a coincidence that begs an explanation, does it not?

    The people who supported that inundation tend to be anti-American while the people who opposed it tend to be quietly pro.

    Then they are deeply deluded about what sort of entity the United States of America has become.

    • Replies: @Not only wrathful
    @Rosie


    OK, but then this is a coincidence that begs an explanation, does it not
     
    Sure, you could write an incredible amount on how cultures develop and where ideology comes from. Or you could just go "da Jews did it".

    If you do the latter then everyone even loosely affiliated to the elite will know you have no idea what you are talking about. You will then make them ignore anything else you say.

    Imagine how it comes across to someone like Angela Merkel, most powerful person in Europe for 2 decades, when she, who knows she is dependent on zero Jews and may barely ever speak to any, stumbles across some nonsense on the internet stating that Germany is ZOG!

    Or how it comes across to anyone who goes to dinner parties in any major European capital

    You might as well be blaming intergalactic reptiles

    And yet you want people in and near power to take your arguments seriously...

    I’m very skeptical about the idea that every single Western European nation decided, sua sponte, to open its borders and allow a “demographic transition” to reduce their native majorities to a dispossessed minority in their own homeland.
     
    Most people just don't care much about this. Sure they would, on average, lower immigration, they say, but only in the same way they'd increase government spending, that is if they could lower taxes at the same time/feel generous that they are letting people in and not enforce things.

    The US wanted the EU to drop out of the Iran agreement. The EU said no. It was lolz. The US wanted Germany to not build a pipeline with Russia. Germany said no. It was lolz. The US, even Barrack Obama, campaigned for the UK to stay in the EU. The UK left the EU, with the government tenaciously respecting the UK electorates wishes.

    EU countries have been lecturing the US on anti-racism since the 50s, and even before. Intellectual elites did not need Hollywood films to brainwash them.

    You can barely find an elite English person in London who doesn't think the Democratic party in the US is far too conversative on immigration. Young English Londoners vote for extreme progressive ideologues at rates that would embarrass Kim Jong Un.

    European elites have loved ruling different peoples for centuries. When they lost their colonial toys, they just brought them home. Ordinary people may not have benefited, but ordinary people didn't benefit from empire either, why would they benefit from Inpire?

    Replies: @Not only wrathful

  49. @V. K. Ovelund
    @Mario Partisan

    That's quite a comment, Mario. I was trying to think of something to say in response, but believe that you have already said it a better than I could.

    I have given up on trying to pin the Hasbara label on A123. The fact is, I enjoy jousting with him, so insulting him is no more in my interest than in my disposition. The question of whether he is a Christian or a Jew (I accept his word in the matter) is the least interesting point on which he speaks. If paid, then he is paid to spar with me, so I can hardly complain; but otherwise, I subscribe to your comment without reservation.

    Replies: @Mario Partisan

    Apparently I don’t comment enough to say “thanks,” but Thanks. And I understand about just wanting to joust, being respectful and taking people at their word. For what it’s worth, A123 is absolutely correct about me being a paid Iranian troll. But at least in my case my handler Khameni is getting his money’s worth.

  50. @Rosie
    @Not only wrathful


    Almost no one sees what is happening as Western Europe destroying itself.
     
    This is a semantic issue. I can rephrase if you like:

    I’m very skeptical about the idea that every single Western European nation decided, sua sponte, to open its borders and allow a "demographic transition" to reduce their native majorities to a dispossessed minority in their own homeland.
     

    The EU’s values are those of the French, Italian, BeneLux and German political classes.
     
    OK, but then this is a coincidence that begs an explanation, does it not?

    The people who supported that inundation tend to be anti-American while the people who opposed it tend to be quietly pro.
     
    Then they are deeply deluded about what sort of entity the United States of America has become.

    Replies: @Not only wrathful

    OK, but then this is a coincidence that begs an explanation, does it not

    Sure, you could write an incredible amount on how cultures develop and where ideology comes from. Or you could just go “da Jews did it”.

    If you do the latter then everyone even loosely affiliated to the elite will know you have no idea what you are talking about. You will then make them ignore anything else you say.

    Imagine how it comes across to someone like Angela Merkel, most powerful person in Europe for 2 decades, when she, who knows she is dependent on zero Jews and may barely ever speak to any, stumbles across some nonsense on the internet stating that Germany is ZOG!

    Or how it comes across to anyone who goes to dinner parties in any major European capital

    You might as well be blaming intergalactic reptiles

    And yet you want people in and near power to take your arguments seriously…

    I’m very skeptical about the idea that every single Western European nation decided, sua sponte, to open its borders and allow a “demographic transition” to reduce their native majorities to a dispossessed minority in their own homeland.

    Most people just don’t care much about this. Sure they would, on average, lower immigration, they say, but only in the same way they’d increase government spending, that is if they could lower taxes at the same time/feel generous that they are letting people in and not enforce things.

    The US wanted the EU to drop out of the Iran agreement. The EU said no. It was lolz. The US wanted Germany to not build a pipeline with Russia. Germany said no. It was lolz. The US, even Barrack Obama, campaigned for the UK to stay in the EU. The UK left the EU, with the government tenaciously respecting the UK electorates wishes.

    EU countries have been lecturing the US on anti-racism since the 50s, and even before. Intellectual elites did not need Hollywood films to brainwash them.

    You can barely find an elite English person in London who doesn’t think the Democratic party in the US is far too conversative on immigration. Young English Londoners vote for extreme progressive ideologues at rates that would embarrass Kim Jong Un.

    European elites have loved ruling different peoples for centuries. When they lost their colonial toys, they just brought them home. Ordinary people may not have benefited, but ordinary people didn’t benefit from empire either, why would they benefit from Inpire?

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Not only wrathful
    @Not only wrathful

    Germany won't even waive vaccine patents like Biden wants.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-57013096

    But the narrative at Unz is that the US is forcing Germany to abolish themselves!

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

  51. @Not only wrathful
    @Rosie


    OK, but then this is a coincidence that begs an explanation, does it not
     
    Sure, you could write an incredible amount on how cultures develop and where ideology comes from. Or you could just go "da Jews did it".

    If you do the latter then everyone even loosely affiliated to the elite will know you have no idea what you are talking about. You will then make them ignore anything else you say.

    Imagine how it comes across to someone like Angela Merkel, most powerful person in Europe for 2 decades, when she, who knows she is dependent on zero Jews and may barely ever speak to any, stumbles across some nonsense on the internet stating that Germany is ZOG!

    Or how it comes across to anyone who goes to dinner parties in any major European capital

    You might as well be blaming intergalactic reptiles

    And yet you want people in and near power to take your arguments seriously...

    I’m very skeptical about the idea that every single Western European nation decided, sua sponte, to open its borders and allow a “demographic transition” to reduce their native majorities to a dispossessed minority in their own homeland.
     
    Most people just don't care much about this. Sure they would, on average, lower immigration, they say, but only in the same way they'd increase government spending, that is if they could lower taxes at the same time/feel generous that they are letting people in and not enforce things.

    The US wanted the EU to drop out of the Iran agreement. The EU said no. It was lolz. The US wanted Germany to not build a pipeline with Russia. Germany said no. It was lolz. The US, even Barrack Obama, campaigned for the UK to stay in the EU. The UK left the EU, with the government tenaciously respecting the UK electorates wishes.

    EU countries have been lecturing the US on anti-racism since the 50s, and even before. Intellectual elites did not need Hollywood films to brainwash them.

    You can barely find an elite English person in London who doesn't think the Democratic party in the US is far too conversative on immigration. Young English Londoners vote for extreme progressive ideologues at rates that would embarrass Kim Jong Un.

    European elites have loved ruling different peoples for centuries. When they lost their colonial toys, they just brought them home. Ordinary people may not have benefited, but ordinary people didn't benefit from empire either, why would they benefit from Inpire?

    Replies: @Not only wrathful

    Germany won’t even waive vaccine patents like Biden wants.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-57013096

    But the narrative at Unz is that the US is forcing Germany to abolish themselves!

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @Not only wrathful


    The US wanted the EU to drop out of the Iran agreement. The EU said no. It was lolz. The US wanted Germany to not build a pipeline with Russia. Germany said no. It was lolz. The US, even Barrack Obama, campaigned for the UK to stay in the EU. The UK left the EU, with the government tenaciously respecting the UK electorates wishes.
     
    Yes, I've seldom argued against anyone who referred to the United States' bewildering variety of commitments and activities around the globe as an “empire,” because I understand the point at which they are trying to get and arguing semantics just takes too long.

    It is no empire, though. Germany is no U.S. puppet. To the extent to which the U.K. is a U.S. puppet, that's mostly because the U.K. is fixated upon an ill-requited “special relationship” with the U.S. (a relationship to which the U.S. is only half as committed), rather than because of any actual control the U.S. exercises. The puppet's strings are held not in Washington but in Whitehall.

    Replies: @dfordoom

  52. @Not only wrathful
    @Not only wrathful

    Germany won't even waive vaccine patents like Biden wants.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-57013096

    But the narrative at Unz is that the US is forcing Germany to abolish themselves!

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    The US wanted the EU to drop out of the Iran agreement. The EU said no. It was lolz. The US wanted Germany to not build a pipeline with Russia. Germany said no. It was lolz. The US, even Barrack Obama, campaigned for the UK to stay in the EU. The UK left the EU, with the government tenaciously respecting the UK electorates wishes.

    Yes, I’ve seldom argued against anyone who referred to the United States’ bewildering variety of commitments and activities around the globe as an “empire,” because I understand the point at which they are trying to get and arguing semantics just takes too long.

    It is no empire, though. Germany is no U.S. puppet. To the extent to which the U.K. is a U.S. puppet, that’s mostly because the U.K. is fixated upon an ill-requited “special relationship” with the U.S. (a relationship to which the U.S. is only half as committed), rather than because of any actual control the U.S. exercises. The puppet’s strings are held not in Washington but in Whitehall.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @V. K. Ovelund


    To the extent to which the U.K. is a U.S. puppet, that’s mostly because the U.K. is fixated upon an ill-requited “special relationship” with the U.S. (a relationship to which the U.S. is only half as committed), rather than because of any actual control the U.S. exercises. The puppet’s strings are held not in Washington but in Whitehall.
     
    Yes, there's some truth in that. America's most disgustingly grovelling lapdogs, Britain and Australia, are grovelling lapdogs because they choose to be. And because traitorous Britons and Australians have decided that these countries should behave like pathetic puppet states.

    Australia's most dangerous enemies are to be found in Canberra (with Scott Morrison being the most dangerous enemy Australia has ever faced). And in the Australia media. Especially the right-wing Australian media.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

  53. Stoke the Divide and Rule tactics. Society failing as oligarch blood-sucking goes exponential? Stoke hatred of ‘The Enemy Within’ ie other races, other classes, other ideologies etc, and the ‘External Enemy’, China, with Russia in a supporting role. The End is nigh, and the ‘Christian’ fundies are smiling their crooked grins.

  54. @Rosie
    @Not only wrathful


    The US can’t even get Germany to not build a pipeline for Russian gas. They most certainly can’t dictate which party Germans elect.
     
    You probably know a lot more about foreign affairs than me, but...

    I'm very skeptical about the idea that every single Western European nation decided, sua sponte, to destroy itself after WWII.

    My impression, and I'll admit it's just that, is that "liberal values" and being an "open society" is a condition of membership in the EU, which is controlled by the US.

    The thing is, it doesn't really much matter anyway. It may be that US influence is informal in the sense that we export elite cosmopolitanism via the international media. If we have learned anything over the past few generations, it's that politics is downstream of culture, and when you control the culture, you can dictate political outcomes.

    Permit me to control the flow of information and ideas in a nation, and I care not who makes its laws.

    Replies: @Not only wrathful, @Mario Partisan, @Mulga Mumblebrain

    The US has gotten the dastards of the EU Parliament to scupper the investment treaty with China, on the basis of the gargantuan, racist, war-declaring, lie that the Uighurs are suffering ‘genocide’. Five minutes’ research shows it to be a lie, but race and cultural fear and hatred is so ingrained in Western ‘elites’ that they will not do it, or if they know the truth, they still go along with the equivalent of ‘German troops throwing Belgian babies onto their bayonets’. Still it is good-the EU will lose far more from it than the Chinese, although further racist aggression from the Western Herrenvolk is certain.

  55. @A123
    @Mario Partisan

    ROTFLMAO

    Mario Paedo is a known Iranian TROLL. There is no lie that he would not try to pass for his beloved master sociopath Khameni. MP's fear of God's TRUTH confirms that I am 100% correct.

    MP thank you for accidentally supporting Jesus.


    ADL says criticizing Soros is anti-semitic. So what is this IslamoSoros crap about?
     
    The Anti-Semitic Defaming League of Muhammad [ADL] is despised by non-elite Jews: (1)

    At the ADL, “not only is Foxman badly missed, his replacement has more or less destroyed the organization’s reputation,” whose “vision of the group is fundamentally that of a Democratic Party auxiliary,” Tobin has concluded. “Greenblatt is a man of the left in the purest sense, and one who holds partisan politics paramount,” conservative Jewish-American commentator Seth Mandel has agreed. Glick as well has concurred that “Greenblatt has transformed the ADL into a post-Jewish political group.”

    Greenblatt’s post-Jewish ADL became clear in its opposition to President Donald Trump’s 2018 nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the United States Supreme Court, a partisan issue unrelated to antisemitism. Greenblatt has also accused American Jews of manifesting the modern leftist sin of “white privilege.” As Center for Security Policy analyst Alex Van Ness wrote, “Greenblatt has shown himself unable to leave his old partisan circles behind.
     
    It is unsurprising that Muhammad's Anti-Semitic ADL and Anti-Semite George IslamoSoros share the same anti-Israel agenda.

    PEACE 😇
    __________

    (1) https://www.jihadwatch.org/2021/03/jonathan-greenblatt-destroys-the-adl

    Replies: @Mario Partisan, @Mulga Mumblebrain

    The Sabbat Goy troll only likes some Jews-the Judeofascist and Zionazi type. As for the better members of the tribe, she is a die-hard Judeophobe, a true ‘antisemite’.

  56. @A123
    @neutral

    Let us acknowledge the fact that the Fake Stream Media has massive pro-Islamic bias and strongly opposes traditional Judeo-Christian values.

    Why else would the national Fake Stream Media [FSM] give no coverage to Muslim violence in the U.S.? For example: (1)


    Nashville: Muslim Gunman Ambushes, Opens Fire On Police Officers

    A Metro Nashville Police officer was injured while responding to a reported active shooter at a home in South Nashville. But police say it was a “setup” and when officers arrived the suspect opened fire on officers.

    Three officers knocked on the door, but when they began to enter the home, [The gunman, 22-year-old Salman Mohamed] opened fire, injuring Officer Brian Sherman, according to MNPD Spokesman Don Aaron.
     

    If Police Officers had been set-up by an observant Jew, the national, sharia compliant, FSM would have launched into an immediate frenzy with wall-to-wall coverage.

    Everybody sees the double standards of the Muslim-Left media firms.

    PEACE 😇
    __________

    (1) https://gellerreport.com/2021/05/muslim-gunman-opens-fire-on-cops.html/

    Replies: @neutral, @Mulga Mumblebrain

    You desperately need psychiatric attention, dear. Before its too late. It is, isn’t it. Poor old Zionazis-such a poor quality of stooges these days.

  57. @anonymous
    They are people with good intentions seeking to create a better society through kindling antiracism by stoking hatred for whites. Eventually antiracism will lead to absorption of people of color by whites like a Bounty paper towel on a spill making a new race. The end state will be harmonious. Give it 150 years.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    Eventually antiracism will lead to absorption of people of color by whites like a Bounty paper towel on a spill making a new race. The end state will be harmonious. Give it 150 years.

    Americans did not ask to be the experimental subject of a grand experiment in miscegenation. I do not want a new race. I was happy with the old one.

  58. fnn says:
    @Not only wrathful
    @neutral

    You think Germany is a US colony. Have you ever been to Europe? European countries can do as they want. Furthermore, the German people may well elect the open borders Greens as much as an anti-American statement as anything else about foreign policy. You're so confused.

    Replies: @fnn, @German_reader

    Yes, the Germans have their choice of open borders parties, The one non-open borders party is under intense stigma and state surveillance.

    You think Germany is a US colony. Have you ever been to Europe? European countries can do as they want.

    Did the liars who told you this explain why NATO still exists? Why are there still US troops in Europe 30 years after the end of the Cold War?

    The Jewish Moldbug is good on the question of American Empire
    https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2008/01/how-i-stopped-believing-in-democracy/

    What Europeans call “anti-Americanism” is actually a belief, generally quite sincere, that America is not living up to her own ideals of 1945. “Anti-Americanism” might be better described as “ultra-Americanism,” or perhaps “Georgetownism.” And it certainly has nothing to do with the any pre-1940 negative perceptions of America. There is minimal cultural continuity between Europe before the war and Europe today. All the institutions were purged, all the individuals have finally kicked it. The Dutch who let you smoke weed in their cafes and the Dutch who ruled Indonesia might as well be on different planets. The former are thoroughly ashamed that they are even descended from the latter. And the latter are dead, which is probably a blessing.

    https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2007/08/secret-of-anti-americanism/

    First, I believe anti-Americanism is best described as an epiphenomenon of Universalism. The single most significant fact about the world today is that sixty-two years ago it was conquered by a military alliance whose leader was the United States, and whose creed of battle was this nontheistic adaptation of New England mainline Protestantism. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the European ruling class holds essentially the same perspectives that were held at Harvard in 1945. The US Army did not shoot all the professors in Europe and replace them with Yankee carpetbaggers, but the prestige of conquest is such that it might as well have.

    It makes sense to view anti-Americanism as a postwar phenomenon, because it’s hard to find anything in Europe’s prewar political scene that corresponds to it. Before WWII, a European who found American influences pernicious was most likely a man of the Right, generally either an anti-Wilsonian aristocrat or a Bonapartist nationalist demagogue. After the war, and especially since the rise of the postwar-educated generation of 1968, European anti-Americanism has been overwhelmingly on the Left. Considering the animosity between these factions, it’s hard to find any continuity between them.

    • Replies: @Not only wrathful
    @fnn


    Yes, the Germans have their choice of open borders parties, The one non-open borders party is under intense stigma and state surveillance.
     
    Germans enforce the stigma. Germans conduct the surveillance. Germans support and run those parties. Germans also marry those Germans involved, be friends with them and freely associate with them.

    Overall, the vast majority of Germans not only implicitly support the status quo, but vocally do so. No one is forcing them. They are not brainwashed. They may be mistaken, but more than almost every other nation in the world, they control their own destiny.

    People who you consider your kin don't share your beliefs or ideological concerns. Bad luck, but live in the real world if you want to have a hope of them understanding you.


    Did the liars who told you this explain why NATO still exists? Why are there still US troops in Europe 30 years after the end of the Cold War?
     
    NATO still exists because old institutions don't go away. They grow and transform to try to stay relevant. NATO is a purposeless bureaucracy and programme of minor economic support for a few backwater European towns.

    US troops are in Europe because inertia. They would be entirely unable to impose their will even if the US government wanted to.

    Replies: @fnn, @fnn

  59. @fnn
    @Not only wrathful

    Yes, the Germans have their choice of open borders parties, The one non-open borders party is under intense stigma and state surveillance.


    You think Germany is a US colony. Have you ever been to Europe? European countries can do as they want.
     
    Did the liars who told you this explain why NATO still exists? Why are there still US troops in Europe 30 years after the end of the Cold War?

    The Jewish Moldbug is good on the question of American Empire
    https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2008/01/how-i-stopped-believing-in-democracy/


    What Europeans call “anti-Americanism” is actually a belief, generally quite sincere, that America is not living up to her own ideals of 1945. “Anti-Americanism” might be better described as “ultra-Americanism,” or perhaps “Georgetownism.” And it certainly has nothing to do with the any pre-1940 negative perceptions of America. There is minimal cultural continuity between Europe before the war and Europe today. All the institutions were purged, all the individuals have finally kicked it. The Dutch who let you smoke weed in their cafes and the Dutch who ruled Indonesia might as well be on different planets. The former are thoroughly ashamed that they are even descended from the latter. And the latter are dead, which is probably a blessing.
     
    https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2007/08/secret-of-anti-americanism/

    First, I believe anti-Americanism is best described as an epiphenomenon of Universalism. The single most significant fact about the world today is that sixty-two years ago it was conquered by a military alliance whose leader was the United States, and whose creed of battle was this nontheistic adaptation of New England mainline Protestantism. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the European ruling class holds essentially the same perspectives that were held at Harvard in 1945. The US Army did not shoot all the professors in Europe and replace them with Yankee carpetbaggers, but the prestige of conquest is such that it might as well have.

    It makes sense to view anti-Americanism as a postwar phenomenon, because it’s hard to find anything in Europe’s prewar political scene that corresponds to it. Before WWII, a European who found American influences pernicious was most likely a man of the Right, generally either an anti-Wilsonian aristocrat or a Bonapartist nationalist demagogue. After the war, and especially since the rise of the postwar-educated generation of 1968, European anti-Americanism has been overwhelmingly on the Left. Considering the animosity between these factions, it’s hard to find any continuity between them.
     

    Replies: @Not only wrathful

    Yes, the Germans have their choice of open borders parties, The one non-open borders party is under intense stigma and state surveillance.

    Germans enforce the stigma. Germans conduct the surveillance. Germans support and run those parties. Germans also marry those Germans involved, be friends with them and freely associate with them.

    Overall, the vast majority of Germans not only implicitly support the status quo, but vocally do so. No one is forcing them. They are not brainwashed. They may be mistaken, but more than almost every other nation in the world, they control their own destiny.

    People who you consider your kin don’t share your beliefs or ideological concerns. Bad luck, but live in the real world if you want to have a hope of them understanding you.

    Did the liars who told you this explain why NATO still exists? Why are there still US troops in Europe 30 years after the end of the Cold War?

    NATO still exists because old institutions don’t go away. They grow and transform to try to stay relevant. NATO is a purposeless bureaucracy and programme of minor economic support for a few backwater European towns.

    US troops are in Europe because inertia. They would be entirely unable to impose their will even if the US government wanted to.

    • Replies: @fnn
    @Not only wrathful

    Over the past 75 years, American attitudes have changed radically on issues like inter-racial marriage and homosexuality. Is this people becoming convinced cultural marxists/biological leninists/intersectionalists or people acting pragmatically and adapting to the realities of power. I think it's mostly the latter. You may know about all the "March violets" who became objects of mockery in 1933. They adapted to the realities of power and sought to prosper from it. But you may be right that Germans make the best fanatics (of all stripes) and it might be for the best that they're rapidly dying out.

    Replies: @Feryl

    , @fnn
    @Not only wrathful


    NATO still exists because old institutions don’t go away. They grow and transform to try to stay relevant. NATO is a purposeless bureaucracy and programme of minor economic support for a few backwater European towns.
     
    The allegedly powerful Germans should stamp their feet get rid of it ASAP. The Democrats are the American War Party now and are constantly seeking conflict with Russia as you may have noticed. I thought they may have just been putting on an elaborate vaudeville show during the Trump years, but
    they are now in power and still howling with the wolves.

    Replies: @Not only wrathful

  60. fnn says:
    @Not only wrathful
    @fnn


    Yes, the Germans have their choice of open borders parties, The one non-open borders party is under intense stigma and state surveillance.
     
    Germans enforce the stigma. Germans conduct the surveillance. Germans support and run those parties. Germans also marry those Germans involved, be friends with them and freely associate with them.

    Overall, the vast majority of Germans not only implicitly support the status quo, but vocally do so. No one is forcing them. They are not brainwashed. They may be mistaken, but more than almost every other nation in the world, they control their own destiny.

    People who you consider your kin don't share your beliefs or ideological concerns. Bad luck, but live in the real world if you want to have a hope of them understanding you.


    Did the liars who told you this explain why NATO still exists? Why are there still US troops in Europe 30 years after the end of the Cold War?
     
    NATO still exists because old institutions don't go away. They grow and transform to try to stay relevant. NATO is a purposeless bureaucracy and programme of minor economic support for a few backwater European towns.

    US troops are in Europe because inertia. They would be entirely unable to impose their will even if the US government wanted to.

    Replies: @fnn, @fnn

    Over the past 75 years, American attitudes have changed radically on issues like inter-racial marriage and homosexuality. Is this people becoming convinced cultural marxists/biological leninists/intersectionalists or people acting pragmatically and adapting to the realities of power. I think it’s mostly the latter. You may know about all the “March violets” who became objects of mockery in 1933. They adapted to the realities of power and sought to prosper from it. But you may be right that Germans make the best fanatics (of all stripes) and it might be for the best that they’re rapidly dying out.

    • Replies: @Feryl
    @fnn

    I think it's a case of people taking what the older generations did and accelerating it. The Greatest Gen opposed legally mandated racial segregation but permitted individuals to voluntarily continue segregation, the Silent Gen then sought to forbid private choice in the matter as they forced white kids to go to school with black kids. The Boomers pushed for "don't ask, don't tell" on sexual morality, then Gen X made it taboo to criticize homosexuals at all. Millennials pushed for non-judgementalism and lowering of standards, now Gen Z is experiencing a "mental health crisis" because they passively accepted and intensified the dumbest ideas of the Millennials.

    And there was sincerity to all of these ideological trends. People end up comforming to whoever the trend setters are in order to fit in, even if some have reservations. But some really do believe this stuff

    Replies: @dfordoom

  61. fnn says:
    @Not only wrathful
    @fnn


    Yes, the Germans have their choice of open borders parties, The one non-open borders party is under intense stigma and state surveillance.
     
    Germans enforce the stigma. Germans conduct the surveillance. Germans support and run those parties. Germans also marry those Germans involved, be friends with them and freely associate with them.

    Overall, the vast majority of Germans not only implicitly support the status quo, but vocally do so. No one is forcing them. They are not brainwashed. They may be mistaken, but more than almost every other nation in the world, they control their own destiny.

    People who you consider your kin don't share your beliefs or ideological concerns. Bad luck, but live in the real world if you want to have a hope of them understanding you.


    Did the liars who told you this explain why NATO still exists? Why are there still US troops in Europe 30 years after the end of the Cold War?
     
    NATO still exists because old institutions don't go away. They grow and transform to try to stay relevant. NATO is a purposeless bureaucracy and programme of minor economic support for a few backwater European towns.

    US troops are in Europe because inertia. They would be entirely unable to impose their will even if the US government wanted to.

    Replies: @fnn, @fnn

    NATO still exists because old institutions don’t go away. They grow and transform to try to stay relevant. NATO is a purposeless bureaucracy and programme of minor economic support for a few backwater European towns.

    The allegedly powerful Germans should stamp their feet get rid of it ASAP. The Democrats are the American War Party now and are constantly seeking conflict with Russia as you may have noticed. I thought they may have just been putting on an elaborate vaudeville show during the Trump years, but
    they are now in power and still howling with the wolves.

    • Replies: @Not only wrathful
    @fnn

    All bark and no bite

    I remember the lead up to the Iraq war and it was a massive palaver, not just a few rude words and fly overs

  62. @Curmudgeon
    @Charles Pewitt

    I'll see your Van Morrison and raise you a Rolling Stones:

    I watched with glee
    While your kings and queens
    Fought for ten decades
    For the gods they made

    Just as every cop is a criminal
    And all the sinners saints
    As heads is tails
    Just call me Lucifer
    Cause I'm in need of some restraint

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAP1GHNuwQ8

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt

    Cause I’m in need of some restraint

    The JEW/WASP Ruling Class of the American Empire sorely needs some restraint and the new political party called White Core America shall deliver it.

    EXPLICIT WHITE IDENTITY POLITICS is the answer to the lack of representation that the European Christian ancestral core of the USA currently endures.

    The European Christian ancestral core of the USA only endures this anti-White regime in Swamp City DC because good sized portions of the Whites are bought off by the asset bubbles in stocks and bonds and real estate created by the monetary extremism of the Federal Reserve Bank.

    The JEW/WASP Ruling Class must be restrained from further attacks upon the historic American nation by an external force. The JEW/WASP Ruling Class is feeling its oats at the moment and they feel unbounded by externalities. When the asset bubbles implode the JEW/WASP Ruling Class will be financially liquidated and then they will be legally and forcibly exiled to a fetid and humid and hot portion of sub-Saharan Africa.

    Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates — and his soon to be loaded with loot wife — and Mark Zuckerberg and Paul Singer and the Koch crowd and Tom Steyer and Mike Bloomberg and all the rest of the treasonous globalizer plutocrats must be financially liquidated and they must be legally put in walled and fenced compounds in sub-Saharan Africa.

  63. @fnn
    @Not only wrathful


    NATO still exists because old institutions don’t go away. They grow and transform to try to stay relevant. NATO is a purposeless bureaucracy and programme of minor economic support for a few backwater European towns.
     
    The allegedly powerful Germans should stamp their feet get rid of it ASAP. The Democrats are the American War Party now and are constantly seeking conflict with Russia as you may have noticed. I thought they may have just been putting on an elaborate vaudeville show during the Trump years, but
    they are now in power and still howling with the wolves.

    Replies: @Not only wrathful

    All bark and no bite

    I remember the lead up to the Iraq war and it was a massive palaver, not just a few rude words and fly overs

  64. @V. K. Ovelund
    @Not only wrathful


    The US wanted the EU to drop out of the Iran agreement. The EU said no. It was lolz. The US wanted Germany to not build a pipeline with Russia. Germany said no. It was lolz. The US, even Barrack Obama, campaigned for the UK to stay in the EU. The UK left the EU, with the government tenaciously respecting the UK electorates wishes.
     
    Yes, I've seldom argued against anyone who referred to the United States' bewildering variety of commitments and activities around the globe as an “empire,” because I understand the point at which they are trying to get and arguing semantics just takes too long.

    It is no empire, though. Germany is no U.S. puppet. To the extent to which the U.K. is a U.S. puppet, that's mostly because the U.K. is fixated upon an ill-requited “special relationship” with the U.S. (a relationship to which the U.S. is only half as committed), rather than because of any actual control the U.S. exercises. The puppet's strings are held not in Washington but in Whitehall.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    To the extent to which the U.K. is a U.S. puppet, that’s mostly because the U.K. is fixated upon an ill-requited “special relationship” with the U.S. (a relationship to which the U.S. is only half as committed), rather than because of any actual control the U.S. exercises. The puppet’s strings are held not in Washington but in Whitehall.

    Yes, there’s some truth in that. America’s most disgustingly grovelling lapdogs, Britain and Australia, are grovelling lapdogs because they choose to be. And because traitorous Britons and Australians have decided that these countries should behave like pathetic puppet states.

    Australia’s most dangerous enemies are to be found in Canberra (with Scott Morrison being the most dangerous enemy Australia has ever faced). And in the Australia media. Especially the right-wing Australian media.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom


    Australia’s most dangerous enemies are to be found in Canberra (with Scott Morrison being the most dangerous enemy Australia has ever faced).
     
    Admittedly, Mr. Morrison has never made a favorable impression on me, but his is not my country, so I know nothing about it. To me, his predecessor seemed more straightforward, but again, I know nothing.

    If you cared to tell a little about Morrison so that I can understand why an Australian like you might be wary of him, I would be interested.

    Replies: @dfordoom

  65. @dfordoom
    @V. K. Ovelund


    To the extent to which the U.K. is a U.S. puppet, that’s mostly because the U.K. is fixated upon an ill-requited “special relationship” with the U.S. (a relationship to which the U.S. is only half as committed), rather than because of any actual control the U.S. exercises. The puppet’s strings are held not in Washington but in Whitehall.
     
    Yes, there's some truth in that. America's most disgustingly grovelling lapdogs, Britain and Australia, are grovelling lapdogs because they choose to be. And because traitorous Britons and Australians have decided that these countries should behave like pathetic puppet states.

    Australia's most dangerous enemies are to be found in Canberra (with Scott Morrison being the most dangerous enemy Australia has ever faced). And in the Australia media. Especially the right-wing Australian media.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    Australia’s most dangerous enemies are to be found in Canberra (with Scott Morrison being the most dangerous enemy Australia has ever faced).

    Admittedly, Mr. Morrison has never made a favorable impression on me, but his is not my country, so I know nothing about it. To me, his predecessor seemed more straightforward, but again, I know nothing.

    If you cared to tell a little about Morrison so that I can understand why an Australian like you might be wary of him, I would be interested.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @V. K. Ovelund


    If you cared to tell a little about Morrison so that I can understand why an Australian like you might be wary of him, I would be interested.
     
    You mean apart from the fact that he wants to provoke a war with China? Which is, you know, totally insane. A war with China which will of course be part of a US war against China, a war that will inevitably escalate into a nuclear war.

    Whatever you think about China I'm sure you'd have to agree that a war would be a catastrophe.

    On other issues he's stock-standard neo-liberal scum. Like other "right-wing" political leaders these days he has made no attempt to take a stand against the rising tide of Wokeism.
  66. Feryl says:
    @V. K. Ovelund

    ... the notorious Charlottesville rally ...
     
    “Notorious” is one word for it. Other words that come to mind are “fictional” and “falsely reported.”

    But I suppose that the false reports achieved their aim, which I believe was your point.

    Replies: @Feryl

    The feds (and VA state police, gov Terry McAuliffe is a long time Clinton minion) appear to have had a big hand in the organization of Charlottesville. It looked like a sabotaging of the Alt-Right , via intentionally creating violence and chaos and then blaming it exclusively on the Right. And it worked, with most people running like hell from the Alt right label subsequent to the event.

    In addition to some of the attendees being themselves agent provocateurs, there was also the fact that the authorities didn’t provide separate escape routes for either side (those attempting to get away from the opposing mob were actually blocked by the cops and told to turn around and go toward the opposition). So both sides were funneled together, creating ample opportunity for confrontations. It also looked like the police “stood down” while some of these confrontations took place.

    I knew the rally was a horrible idea from the start, given the fact that no institution in America wants to fully reject Left identity politics. This, any explicit large gathering of true non-libertarian reactionaries is likely going to attract opposition (and Fed infiltrators) from all levels. Just ask Steve King (the one from Iowa).

    • Agree: 216
    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @Feryl


    The feds (and VA state police, gov Terry McAuliffe is a long time Clinton minion) appear to have had a big hand in the organization of Charlottesville. It looked like a sabotaging of the Alt-Right , via intentionally creating violence and chaos and then blaming it exclusively on the Right.
     
    That's a new theory to me. I am not sure that it fits the facts, though nothing would surprise me any longer.

    Are you saying that Jason Kessler is a fed? Doesn't add up.

    What about the earlier, smaller, peaceful Charlottesville rally?

    No one who knows anything about Gregory Conte would suspect him of being a fed.

    For both Charlottesville rallies, it looked to me as though police based their plans simply on the parade permits rather than on some secret inside knowledge of the ralliers' plans. No, I believe that the Alt-Right of 2014–17 was an organic movement that caught the feds by surprise. It was not until 2017 that the feds began to penetrate it.

    (Of course, I might be a fed for all you know, or you might be, or you and I might be two feds talking to one another on Unz.com, a federally funded website. Why, anything is possible.)

    Replies: @Feryl

    , @A123
    @Feryl

    There is some rather suspicious photo evidence about the Trump rally on January 6.

    I do not know of any direct equivalent for Charlottesville. However, corruption from the DC/Virginia FBI headquarters office would not be surprising. Between GW and Obama, the organization went 16 years without effective oversight.

    PEACE 😇

     
    https://i.imgur.com/ACHsp1Z.jpg

    Replies: @Feryl

  67. Feryl says:
    @fnn
    @Not only wrathful

    Over the past 75 years, American attitudes have changed radically on issues like inter-racial marriage and homosexuality. Is this people becoming convinced cultural marxists/biological leninists/intersectionalists or people acting pragmatically and adapting to the realities of power. I think it's mostly the latter. You may know about all the "March violets" who became objects of mockery in 1933. They adapted to the realities of power and sought to prosper from it. But you may be right that Germans make the best fanatics (of all stripes) and it might be for the best that they're rapidly dying out.

    Replies: @Feryl

    I think it’s a case of people taking what the older generations did and accelerating it. The Greatest Gen opposed legally mandated racial segregation but permitted individuals to voluntarily continue segregation, the Silent Gen then sought to forbid private choice in the matter as they forced white kids to go to school with black kids. The Boomers pushed for “don’t ask, don’t tell” on sexual morality, then Gen X made it taboo to criticize homosexuals at all. Millennials pushed for non-judgementalism and lowering of standards, now Gen Z is experiencing a “mental health crisis” because they passively accepted and intensified the dumbest ideas of the Millennials.

    And there was sincerity to all of these ideological trends. People end up comforming to whoever the trend setters are in order to fit in, even if some have reservations. But some really do believe this stuff

    • Disagree: Corvinus
    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Feryl


    And there was sincerity to all of these ideological trends.
     

    some really do believe this stuff
     
    That's an important point. Almost all of the social and cultural changes since 1945 have been motivated by good intentions. The Civil Rights Movement, the anti-war movement, feminism, Gay Liberation, the Sexual Revolution, the Great Society, the attacks on censorship, environmentalism, etc etc. All of them started with good intentions. In many cases they really were addressing actual injustices or actual social problems. They all got out of hand.

    Most of these movements would have had generally positive results if they had been pursued with moderation.

    The problem is that these movements developed their own momentum and kept going when they were no longer needed. Feminism was not entirely bad to begin with but by the 1970s all the reasonable demands of feminists had been met. There was no longer any need for feminism. By the late 80s the reasonable demands of the Gay Liberation movement had been met. Homosexuals were no longer persecuted (not even mildly persecuted), it was legal and there was no longer any significant discrimination against them.

    But if those movements had shut up shop because they were no longer necessary a lot of feminist and homosexual activists would have lost cushy jobs and would have lost their opportunity to play political power games.

    The environmentalists had some valid points in the 70s. Reducing air and water pollution was a good thing. But there were lots of environmentalists who were making out like bandits and they didn't want the gravy train to stop. So they came up with ever more bizarre conspiracy theories (the hole in the ozone layer, global warming) to ensure that they could go on collecting lots and lots of lovely money from governments and corporate donors.

    But all these movements started out as sincere efforts to improve society and the people involved were for the most part well-meaning.

    That was the point I was making about the 1950s/1960s counter-culture a while back. It was a legitimate and sincere response to things like excessive materialism, excessive social control, censorship and militarism. It may have ended in craziness but many of the initial criticisms they made about western society were perfectly valid and sincere.
  68. @Feryl
    @V. K. Ovelund

    The feds (and VA state police, gov Terry McAuliffe is a long time Clinton minion) appear to have had a big hand in the organization of Charlottesville. It looked like a sabotaging of the Alt-Right , via intentionally creating violence and chaos and then blaming it exclusively on the Right. And it worked, with most people running like hell from the Alt right label subsequent to the event.

    In addition to some of the attendees being themselves agent provocateurs, there was also the fact that the authorities didn't provide separate escape routes for either side (those attempting to get away from the opposing mob were actually blocked by the cops and told to turn around and go toward the opposition). So both sides were funneled together, creating ample opportunity for confrontations. It also looked like the police "stood down" while some of these confrontations took place.

    I knew the rally was a horrible idea from the start, given the fact that no institution in America wants to fully reject Left identity politics. This, any explicit large gathering of true non-libertarian reactionaries is likely going to attract opposition (and Fed infiltrators) from all levels. Just ask Steve King (the one from Iowa).

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @A123

    The feds (and VA state police, gov Terry McAuliffe is a long time Clinton minion) appear to have had a big hand in the organization of Charlottesville. It looked like a sabotaging of the Alt-Right , via intentionally creating violence and chaos and then blaming it exclusively on the Right.

    That’s a new theory to me. I am not sure that it fits the facts, though nothing would surprise me any longer.

    Are you saying that Jason Kessler is a fed? Doesn’t add up.

    What about the earlier, smaller, peaceful Charlottesville rally?

    No one who knows anything about Gregory Conte would suspect him of being a fed.

    For both Charlottesville rallies, it looked to me as though police based their plans simply on the parade permits rather than on some secret inside knowledge of the ralliers’ plans. No, I believe that the Alt-Right of 2014–17 was an organic movement that caught the feds by surprise. It was not until 2017 that the feds began to penetrate it.

    (Of course, I might be a fed for all you know, or you might be, or you and I might be two feds talking to one another on Unz.com, a federally funded website. Why, anything is possible.)

    • Replies: @Feryl
    @V. K. Ovelund

    As Gavin McInnes would say, they're all Feds. As in, self proclaimed white supremacists and Neo-Nazis. Its been that way since the 80's. Nobody knew what a "white supremacist" was before the 80's. Once upon a time, everybody was considered to be entitled to their own opinions about race. And then in the 80's, the rising class of Boomer leaders began making "racism" the worst of all sins. Keep in mind also to that the organic far Right of post-1980, typically rural and lower middle class, really did scare Silent and Boomer elites (who were all massive cultural liberals who created PC) who set about engineering cartoon Nazi goofballs to try and keep an eye on "right wing extremism" as well as make genuine conservatives look like complete idiots. Back in the 60's and early 70's, the Greatest Gen was too busy busting heads of rioters and Leftist terrorists to concoct phony redneck Nazi super villains.

    As we all know by know, the prole/hard luck far Right is vastly out-financed and out-influenced by the elite class which has grown more "anti-racist" with each passing generation. Police departments (whose rank and file might be the only remotely Right-wing element left in this country) are now under pressure to have residency requirements, lest evil exurban white guys pollute the cities. Antifa tells normies to get out of "their" cities. Gun toting paramilitary Left militants take over city blocks and pull motorists from cars and beat them. We'll accept anything but a restoration of social conservatism and intellectual freedom.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @V. K. Ovelund

  69. A123 says:
    @Feryl
    @V. K. Ovelund

    The feds (and VA state police, gov Terry McAuliffe is a long time Clinton minion) appear to have had a big hand in the organization of Charlottesville. It looked like a sabotaging of the Alt-Right , via intentionally creating violence and chaos and then blaming it exclusively on the Right. And it worked, with most people running like hell from the Alt right label subsequent to the event.

    In addition to some of the attendees being themselves agent provocateurs, there was also the fact that the authorities didn't provide separate escape routes for either side (those attempting to get away from the opposing mob were actually blocked by the cops and told to turn around and go toward the opposition). So both sides were funneled together, creating ample opportunity for confrontations. It also looked like the police "stood down" while some of these confrontations took place.

    I knew the rally was a horrible idea from the start, given the fact that no institution in America wants to fully reject Left identity politics. This, any explicit large gathering of true non-libertarian reactionaries is likely going to attract opposition (and Fed infiltrators) from all levels. Just ask Steve King (the one from Iowa).

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @A123

    There is some rather suspicious photo evidence about the Trump rally on January 6.

    I do not know of any direct equivalent for Charlottesville. However, corruption from the DC/Virginia FBI headquarters office would not be surprising. Between GW and Obama, the organization went 16 years without effective oversight.

    PEACE 😇

    [MORE]

     

    • Replies: @Feryl
    @A123

    Sadly, I can't find the videos off-hand but there was some research done regarding bogus protesters being seen sporting Right Wing gear at Charlottesville. I mean, the event was massive, was planned well in advance (a huge mistake, as it allowed infiltrators and counter protesters ample time to plan for it)), and was done to ostensibly bring together a movement that was (and is) weak and incoherent due to a lack of elite support. Of course it was going to be used as a bludgeon against the movement, ironically destroying the very movement it was supposed to strengthen.

    I knew based on the anti-trump forces that gathered around Trump rallies in 2016 that we were screwed. When that many idiots could raise hell when at times they only had a couple day's notice, it's no wonder so many raging "anti-racists" showed up at the Charlottesville rally. Great, tell the enemy your future position.

    Wrt Jan 6, the crowd went nuts after learning that Pence was not going to fight the election results. The whole intent of the protest was to support this fight. Again, when elites sell you out, what do you do? Most people there didn't cause trouble, but with the sheer numbers involved a few were bound to be crazy. And do people realize how delusional they sound when they say that literally no real Trump supporter could've been aggressive or criminal? Some of those who fought the cops and damaged property were in fact Trump supporters. Deal with it. Since Jan 6 of course, the Right has been demoralized. They (as in, the supposed leadership) literally let a presidential election get stolen, then let themselves be bullied into accepting it.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @A123

  70. @YetAnotherAnon
    @Charles Pewitt

    Van's latest didn't go down well in the Guardian

    https://www.theguardian.com/music/2021/may/06/van-morrison-new-record-project-volume-one-review

    "depressing rants by tinfoil milliner"

    "The veteran bluesman loudly wakes up the sheeple with this boring and paranoid double album, reminiscent of a dinner party with a bitter divorcee"


    Even a man as implacably opposed to lockdown as Van Morrison – who spent 2020 releasing songs rubbishing science as “crooked facts”, mocking people for wearing masks and describing the government as “fascist bullies” while also invoking the Berlin Wall – might be forced to concede it had its advantages. After all, it gave him the time to write the material for Latest Record Project Volume 1, a 28-song, two-hour-plus opus that allows him to set out his latterday worldview more fully than any previous work.

    Morrison’s longstanding sense of distrust – the result of some dubious contracts he signed in the 1960s – long ago calcified into a weltanschauung in which everyone was lying, with the exception of a certain Northern Irish singer. He’s sounded like a conspiracy theorist before – on 2005’s They Sold Me Out, he averred that being “sold out for a few shekels” was “the oldest story that’s ever been told”; “brainwashed the suckers again and perpetrated the myth,” he sang on 2008’s School of Hard Knocks, “propaganda far and wide” – but on Latest Record Project Volume 1, the sheeple are truly awoken.

    It’s MI5 this and mind-control that, secret “meetings in the forest”, mainstream media lies and Kool Aid being drunk by the gallon. On Western Man, there’s some troubling alt-right-y stuff about how the west’s “rewards” have been “stolen” by foreigners unknown and we should be “prepared to fight”. And he’s convinced that the shadowy forces of the establishment are engaged in efforts to silence him: “You have to be careful of everything you say”, “I’m a targeted individual”. The latter seems a fairly weird claim to make in the middle of a two-hour long album released by a major label: as far as can be ascertained, Sony is a multinational conglomerate with interests in banking and insurance, rather than an anarchist collective devoted to fearlessly speaking truth to power. Clearly the shadowy forces of the establishment need to up their game a bit.
     

    Sounds worth a listen!

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @Charles Pewitt, @Mulga Mumblebrain

    Imagine a Guardian presstitute from that sewer of MI6/Jewish Board of Deputies lying propaganda attacking van the Man for pointing out the falsity of the powers that be, which the Guardian slime serves so slavishly-or else. I do know where I hope that Chinese rocket lands, I must say, but it needs to break into two fragments over London.

  71. German_reader says:
    @Not only wrathful
    @neutral

    You think Germany is a US colony. Have you ever been to Europe? European countries can do as they want. Furthermore, the German people may well elect the open borders Greens as much as an anti-American statement as anything else about foreign policy. You're so confused.

    Replies: @fnn, @German_reader

    Furthermore, the German people may well elect the open borders Greens as much as an anti-American statement

    Any “anti-American” sentiment was dropped by the Greens a long time ago (at least as far as back as the 1999 Kosovo war), today they’re probably the most hardcore Atlanticist party in Germany, who view American hegemony as an unalloyed good and reject any independent German foreign policy initiatives. A good example for how today’s Greens think can be read in this interview:
    https://www.zeit.de/politik/2021-03/usa-transatlantic-relations-franziska-brantner-stephen-wertheim-english?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F
    So your perceptions of them as “anti-American”, if they ever were correct, are 30-40 years out of date.

    • Thanks: V. K. Ovelund
    • Replies: @Not only wrathful
    @German_reader

    No one can read that link, but fair enough, it does appear that the anti-NATO Greens are now isolated hold-outs in a party of broad EU integration and Western cooperation for social justice causes.

    Is there any part of their platform that isn't just soft left?

    A rebranded SPD without the workers?

    Replies: @German_reader

  72. @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom


    Australia’s most dangerous enemies are to be found in Canberra (with Scott Morrison being the most dangerous enemy Australia has ever faced).
     
    Admittedly, Mr. Morrison has never made a favorable impression on me, but his is not my country, so I know nothing about it. To me, his predecessor seemed more straightforward, but again, I know nothing.

    If you cared to tell a little about Morrison so that I can understand why an Australian like you might be wary of him, I would be interested.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    If you cared to tell a little about Morrison so that I can understand why an Australian like you might be wary of him, I would be interested.

    You mean apart from the fact that he wants to provoke a war with China? Which is, you know, totally insane. A war with China which will of course be part of a US war against China, a war that will inevitably escalate into a nuclear war.

    Whatever you think about China I’m sure you’d have to agree that a war would be a catastrophe.

    On other issues he’s stock-standard neo-liberal scum. Like other “right-wing” political leaders these days he has made no attempt to take a stand against the rising tide of Wokeism.

    • Thanks: V. K. Ovelund
  73. Feryl says:
    @V. K. Ovelund
    @Feryl


    The feds (and VA state police, gov Terry McAuliffe is a long time Clinton minion) appear to have had a big hand in the organization of Charlottesville. It looked like a sabotaging of the Alt-Right , via intentionally creating violence and chaos and then blaming it exclusively on the Right.
     
    That's a new theory to me. I am not sure that it fits the facts, though nothing would surprise me any longer.

    Are you saying that Jason Kessler is a fed? Doesn't add up.

    What about the earlier, smaller, peaceful Charlottesville rally?

    No one who knows anything about Gregory Conte would suspect him of being a fed.

    For both Charlottesville rallies, it looked to me as though police based their plans simply on the parade permits rather than on some secret inside knowledge of the ralliers' plans. No, I believe that the Alt-Right of 2014–17 was an organic movement that caught the feds by surprise. It was not until 2017 that the feds began to penetrate it.

    (Of course, I might be a fed for all you know, or you might be, or you and I might be two feds talking to one another on Unz.com, a federally funded website. Why, anything is possible.)

    Replies: @Feryl

    As Gavin McInnes would say, they’re all Feds. As in, self proclaimed white supremacists and Neo-Nazis. Its been that way since the 80’s. Nobody knew what a “white supremacist” was before the 80’s. Once upon a time, everybody was considered to be entitled to their own opinions about race. And then in the 80’s, the rising class of Boomer leaders began making “racism” the worst of all sins. Keep in mind also to that the organic far Right of post-1980, typically rural and lower middle class, really did scare Silent and Boomer elites (who were all massive cultural liberals who created PC) who set about engineering cartoon Nazi goofballs to try and keep an eye on “right wing extremism” as well as make genuine conservatives look like complete idiots. Back in the 60’s and early 70’s, the Greatest Gen was too busy busting heads of rioters and Leftist terrorists to concoct phony redneck Nazi super villains.

    As we all know by know, the prole/hard luck far Right is vastly out-financed and out-influenced by the elite class which has grown more “anti-racist” with each passing generation. Police departments (whose rank and file might be the only remotely Right-wing element left in this country) are now under pressure to have residency requirements, lest evil exurban white guys pollute the cities. Antifa tells normies to get out of “their” cities. Gun toting paramilitary Left militants take over city blocks and pull motorists from cars and beat them. We’ll accept anything but a restoration of social conservatism and intellectual freedom.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Feryl


    We’ll accept anything but a restoration of social conservatism and intellectual freedom.
     
    Was there ever really intellectual freedom? Every political faction, if it gains the power to do so, will attempt to suppress intellectual freedom. If you're talking about the Good Old Days before the nasty evil Boomers came along was it really a paradise of intellectual freedom? In the 50s, just as today, there was a Public Overton Window which determined which political ideas could be freely expressed and which political views could get you into trouble.

    In practice intellectual freedom always means "the freedom to express views that I agree with."

    As for social conservatism, it depends on what you mean by the term. Most people do not want the social conservatism of the 1950s. They might be willing to accept the social conservatism of the 80s.

    The social conservatism that many people here at UR pine for is something that ordinary people just don't want.

    Replies: @Feryl

    , @V. K. Ovelund
    @Feryl


    As Gavin McInnes would say, they’re all Feds.
     
    Then I must be a Fed, too.

    Being pseudonymous, I've little cause to take offense, of course. You'd just have to make up your own mind what you believe. Meanwhile, may I dispute a few of your facts?


    As in, self proclaimed white supremacists and Neo-Nazis.
     
    The American Alt-Right of 2008–17 grew from a kernel of disenchanted former libertarians, born on average during the early 1980s, who could not understand why the United States was still mucking around in Afghanistan and Iraq, who thought the general swoon over Barack Obama ridiculous, but still thought Obama an improvement over his predecessor.

    By 2011, an originally unrelated element had appeared, consisting in substantial part of irreverent 19-year-old pranksters swapping hilarious insults on 4chan's /pol/.

    By 2014, partly through common admiration for the wit and ironic insight of Twitter's Bronze Age Pervert (BAP), partly through common appreciation for the creative philosophizing of disenchanted libertarian Richard B. Spencer, partly via Ryan Dawson, Millennial Woes and others, the two movements had merged. Gavin McInnes was part of that in the periphery, as was Stephen K. Bannon. Andrew Anglin clearly had something to do with it, but I didn't read his site, so I know little about that. Whatever the sources of the various branches of the Alt-Right, though, the improbable rise of Donald J. Trump afforded Alt-Rightists elation in a common cause.

    Alt-Right antiwar activists had adopted Kek as a mascot. Alt-Right libertarians were tossing up ironic Hitler salutes. Alt-Right everybody feted Trump as the god-emperor, and at the Battle of Berkeley, April 2017, some Alt-Rightists (inspired in part by the very Gavin McInnes you have mentioned) showed up looking for an excuse to crack some skulls. Even a flamboyant homosexual like Milo Yiannopoulos bizarrely and briefly, yet genuinely, found a place in the movement—and meanwhile smokin' hot young women started showing up at Alt-Right events. Those were heady days.

    The Feds, theretofore invested in dead ends like Stormfront, had nothing to do with the Alt-Right until 2017 as far as I know. Until 2016, the rise of the Alt-Right caught the Feds entirely flatfooted; and during 2016, the Feds apparently misjudged the Alt-Right to be a convenient element that would damage the Trump campaign, so they let it be. That is what I saw, at any rate.

    Regarding the older generation of white nationalists: David Duke is an intelligent, sometimes interesting fellow, but he joined the Alt-Right late, like William H. Regnery, II, and others, when Duke, Regnery and the others saw that the movement had momentum. This is not to slight Duke or Regnery. Joining a movement with momentum is usually a smart thing to do, but I don't remember ever hearing anyone mention, say, William Pierce and Kek in the same sentence (well, I just did, didn't I? there's a first time for everything). The closest thing there was to a bridge between the old white-nationalist movement and the Alt-Right was in the beefy, working-class West Virginians who showed up to provide volunteer security, 2016–18, at Alt-Right events. If there was any Federal connection at all, that is where it likely was (nor do I slight the West Virginians by saying it: I liked those guys and was sorry to see their club break up).

    If you want to know, I entered the movement with the Spencerites.


    Its been that way since the 80’s. Nobody knew what a “white supremacist” was before the 80’s.
     
    If you literally mean “white supremacist,” then you are right, of course, for the term has fairly recently been popularized by sneaky leftists as a convenient replacement for that older, more familiar, decreasingly effective term of abuse, “racist,” which had worn out its welcome. However, substantially, you might recall George Lincoln Rockwell, George Wallace, and Hitler as exceptions to your rule.

    Replies: @Feryl

  74. @Feryl
    @fnn

    I think it's a case of people taking what the older generations did and accelerating it. The Greatest Gen opposed legally mandated racial segregation but permitted individuals to voluntarily continue segregation, the Silent Gen then sought to forbid private choice in the matter as they forced white kids to go to school with black kids. The Boomers pushed for "don't ask, don't tell" on sexual morality, then Gen X made it taboo to criticize homosexuals at all. Millennials pushed for non-judgementalism and lowering of standards, now Gen Z is experiencing a "mental health crisis" because they passively accepted and intensified the dumbest ideas of the Millennials.

    And there was sincerity to all of these ideological trends. People end up comforming to whoever the trend setters are in order to fit in, even if some have reservations. But some really do believe this stuff

    Replies: @dfordoom

    And there was sincerity to all of these ideological trends.

    some really do believe this stuff

    That’s an important point. Almost all of the social and cultural changes since 1945 have been motivated by good intentions. The Civil Rights Movement, the anti-war movement, feminism, Gay Liberation, the Sexual Revolution, the Great Society, the attacks on censorship, environmentalism, etc etc. All of them started with good intentions. In many cases they really were addressing actual injustices or actual social problems. They all got out of hand.

    Most of these movements would have had generally positive results if they had been pursued with moderation.

    The problem is that these movements developed their own momentum and kept going when they were no longer needed. Feminism was not entirely bad to begin with but by the 1970s all the reasonable demands of feminists had been met. There was no longer any need for feminism. By the late 80s the reasonable demands of the Gay Liberation movement had been met. Homosexuals were no longer persecuted (not even mildly persecuted), it was legal and there was no longer any significant discrimination against them.

    But if those movements had shut up shop because they were no longer necessary a lot of feminist and homosexual activists would have lost cushy jobs and would have lost their opportunity to play political power games.

    The environmentalists had some valid points in the 70s. Reducing air and water pollution was a good thing. But there were lots of environmentalists who were making out like bandits and they didn’t want the gravy train to stop. So they came up with ever more bizarre conspiracy theories (the hole in the ozone layer, global warming) to ensure that they could go on collecting lots and lots of lovely money from governments and corporate donors.

    But all these movements started out as sincere efforts to improve society and the people involved were for the most part well-meaning.

    That was the point I was making about the 1950s/1960s counter-culture a while back. It was a legitimate and sincere response to things like excessive materialism, excessive social control, censorship and militarism. It may have ended in craziness but many of the initial criticisms they made about western society were perfectly valid and sincere.

    • Agree: V. K. Ovelund
  75. Feryl says:
    @A123
    @Feryl

    There is some rather suspicious photo evidence about the Trump rally on January 6.

    I do not know of any direct equivalent for Charlottesville. However, corruption from the DC/Virginia FBI headquarters office would not be surprising. Between GW and Obama, the organization went 16 years without effective oversight.

    PEACE 😇

     
    https://i.imgur.com/ACHsp1Z.jpg

    Replies: @Feryl

    Sadly, I can’t find the videos off-hand but there was some research done regarding bogus protesters being seen sporting Right Wing gear at Charlottesville. I mean, the event was massive, was planned well in advance (a huge mistake, as it allowed infiltrators and counter protesters ample time to plan for it)), and was done to ostensibly bring together a movement that was (and is) weak and incoherent due to a lack of elite support. Of course it was going to be used as a bludgeon against the movement, ironically destroying the very movement it was supposed to strengthen.

    I knew based on the anti-trump forces that gathered around Trump rallies in 2016 that we were screwed. When that many idiots could raise hell when at times they only had a couple day’s notice, it’s no wonder so many raging “anti-racists” showed up at the Charlottesville rally. Great, tell the enemy your future position.

    Wrt Jan 6, the crowd went nuts after learning that Pence was not going to fight the election results. The whole intent of the protest was to support this fight. Again, when elites sell you out, what do you do? Most people there didn’t cause trouble, but with the sheer numbers involved a few were bound to be crazy. And do people realize how delusional they sound when they say that literally no real Trump supporter could’ve been aggressive or criminal? Some of those who fought the cops and damaged property were in fact Trump supporters. Deal with it. Since Jan 6 of course, the Right has been demoralized. They (as in, the supposed leadership) literally let a presidential election get stolen, then let themselves be bullied into accepting it.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Feryl


    And do people realize how delusional they sound when they say that literally no real Trump supporter could’ve been aggressive or criminal? Some of those who fought the cops and damaged property were in fact Trump supporters. Deal with it.
     
    I agree.

    Since Jan 6 of course, the Right has been demoralized. They (as in, the supposed leadership) literally let a presidential election get stolen, then let themselves be bullied into accepting it.
     
    The real failure lay in losing the election because the Democrats were better organised, more focused and more motivated. The Trump Campaign were a bunch of amateurs. Trump concentrated on rallies, which were gatherings of people who were already incredibly highly motivated to vote for Trump.

    The Democrats did what you do if you want to win an election - they concentrated on getting the vote out.

    Electoral politics is a futile game but it's like football - a professional team will always beat a bunch of amateurs.

    Replies: @Feryl, @Feryl

    , @A123
    @Feryl


    Wrt Jan 6, the crowd went nuts after learning that Pence was not going to fight the election results. The whole intent of the protest was to support this fight.
     
    It is obvious that there was no contingency plan when Pence supported the Blue Coup. It would not surprise me if Pence changed his mind after the rally was organized.

    What could possibly be achieved by entering the Capitol after their process was complete? Nothing. This is why it is believable that Antifa infiltrators led people that direction.

    #OccupySCOTUS was the only possibility that had a chance. Taking that action might lead to the Court reviewing the evidence rather than ducking on procedure. Not a great option, but one that would have made sense on the day.


    Since Jan 6 of course, the Right has been demoralized. They (as in, the supposed leadership) literally let a presidential election get stolen, then let themselves be bullied into accepting it.
     
    I have not seen any demoralization. MAGA Populism (not the right) has a new Cold Fury driving it to oppose Führer Biden's illegitimate reign. States are actively passing laws to stop Fascist Nazi-crat over reach.

    The Coup plotters created financial damage with their WUHAN-19 exaggeration. The Harris/Biden regime by stealing the White House assumed ownership of that problem. This is going to generate a huge number of MAGA votes in 2022. Add this to Redistricting and a MAGA majority in the House seem nearly inevitable.

    Opening the southern border is creating Severe problems for theoretically Blue states Arizona and New Mexico. Harris has been placed "in charge" of the crisis and has delivered nothing. The plan to have Vice Führer Harris run in 2024 has a huge problem if she auto-loses those states.

    Rigged elections pose a significant, potentially democracy killing, problem. However, the GOP beat Gerrymandering by doing it better than the opposition. There is no reason to believe MAGA cannot beat Fultoning, by doing it better than the opposition. The Constitutional provision for breaking Electoral College failures works in MAGA's favour. All that has to be done is create problems that 2020 SCOTUS precedent have made unreviewable.

    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @dfordoom

  76. @Feryl
    @V. K. Ovelund

    As Gavin McInnes would say, they're all Feds. As in, self proclaimed white supremacists and Neo-Nazis. Its been that way since the 80's. Nobody knew what a "white supremacist" was before the 80's. Once upon a time, everybody was considered to be entitled to their own opinions about race. And then in the 80's, the rising class of Boomer leaders began making "racism" the worst of all sins. Keep in mind also to that the organic far Right of post-1980, typically rural and lower middle class, really did scare Silent and Boomer elites (who were all massive cultural liberals who created PC) who set about engineering cartoon Nazi goofballs to try and keep an eye on "right wing extremism" as well as make genuine conservatives look like complete idiots. Back in the 60's and early 70's, the Greatest Gen was too busy busting heads of rioters and Leftist terrorists to concoct phony redneck Nazi super villains.

    As we all know by know, the prole/hard luck far Right is vastly out-financed and out-influenced by the elite class which has grown more "anti-racist" with each passing generation. Police departments (whose rank and file might be the only remotely Right-wing element left in this country) are now under pressure to have residency requirements, lest evil exurban white guys pollute the cities. Antifa tells normies to get out of "their" cities. Gun toting paramilitary Left militants take over city blocks and pull motorists from cars and beat them. We'll accept anything but a restoration of social conservatism and intellectual freedom.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @V. K. Ovelund

    We’ll accept anything but a restoration of social conservatism and intellectual freedom.

    Was there ever really intellectual freedom? Every political faction, if it gains the power to do so, will attempt to suppress intellectual freedom. If you’re talking about the Good Old Days before the nasty evil Boomers came along was it really a paradise of intellectual freedom? In the 50s, just as today, there was a Public Overton Window which determined which political ideas could be freely expressed and which political views could get you into trouble.

    In practice intellectual freedom always means “the freedom to express views that I agree with.”

    As for social conservatism, it depends on what you mean by the term. Most people do not want the social conservatism of the 1950s. They might be willing to accept the social conservatism of the 80s.

    The social conservatism that many people here at UR pine for is something that ordinary people just don’t want.

    • Replies: @Feryl
    @dfordoom

    The difference is that the enforced taboos of the 1950's were unanimously popular with normies. So people were happier back then. Nowadays elites specifically emphasize that which seems the most retarded and crazy to ordinary people (drag queen story hour etc.)

    By intellectual freedom, go look at the mid to late 70's. Post-Vietnam, pre-neo-lib multiculturalist 80's. Of course, that era had it's excesses and flaws, but at least there was relatively little pressure exerted to make sure that you were one of the Good Guys.

    Replies: @dfordoom

  77. Feryl says:
    @dfordoom
    @Feryl


    We’ll accept anything but a restoration of social conservatism and intellectual freedom.
     
    Was there ever really intellectual freedom? Every political faction, if it gains the power to do so, will attempt to suppress intellectual freedom. If you're talking about the Good Old Days before the nasty evil Boomers came along was it really a paradise of intellectual freedom? In the 50s, just as today, there was a Public Overton Window which determined which political ideas could be freely expressed and which political views could get you into trouble.

    In practice intellectual freedom always means "the freedom to express views that I agree with."

    As for social conservatism, it depends on what you mean by the term. Most people do not want the social conservatism of the 1950s. They might be willing to accept the social conservatism of the 80s.

    The social conservatism that many people here at UR pine for is something that ordinary people just don't want.

    Replies: @Feryl

    The difference is that the enforced taboos of the 1950’s were unanimously popular with normies. So people were happier back then. Nowadays elites specifically emphasize that which seems the most retarded and crazy to ordinary people (drag queen story hour etc.)

    By intellectual freedom, go look at the mid to late 70’s. Post-Vietnam, pre-neo-lib multiculturalist 80’s. Of course, that era had it’s excesses and flaws, but at least there was relatively little pressure exerted to make sure that you were one of the Good Guys.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Feryl


    The difference is that the enforced taboos of the 1950’s were unanimously popular with normies.
     
    If everybody had been in favour of those taboos there would have been no need for enforcement.

    If everybody had been in favour of the system as it existed at the time there would have been no need to persecute political dissidents.

    The 1950s was not Leave It To Beaver world or Ozzie and Harriet world. There was a lot of ideological, social and cultural ferment. There were regular Moral Panics. There were dissidents (political, social and cultural dissidents) and they were suppressed.

    By intellectual freedom, go look at the mid to late 70’s. Post-Vietnam, pre-neo-lib multiculturalist 80’s. Of course, that era had it’s excesses and flaws, but at least there was relatively little pressure exerted to make sure that you were one of the Good Guys.
     
    That's because no one faction had succeeded in gaining total power, so none of the competing factions had the capability to crush their opponents. Neither liberals nor conservatives, neither social liberals nor social conservatives, neither Left nor Right, neither Christians not atheists, enjoyed sufficient power to be able to crush those who disagreed with them.

    That's when you get Good Times - when no faction has too much power.

    By the 90s the Economic Right had utterly crushed its opponents, and the Cultural Left had crushed its opponents.

    Replies: @Feryl

  78. @Feryl
    @A123

    Sadly, I can't find the videos off-hand but there was some research done regarding bogus protesters being seen sporting Right Wing gear at Charlottesville. I mean, the event was massive, was planned well in advance (a huge mistake, as it allowed infiltrators and counter protesters ample time to plan for it)), and was done to ostensibly bring together a movement that was (and is) weak and incoherent due to a lack of elite support. Of course it was going to be used as a bludgeon against the movement, ironically destroying the very movement it was supposed to strengthen.

    I knew based on the anti-trump forces that gathered around Trump rallies in 2016 that we were screwed. When that many idiots could raise hell when at times they only had a couple day's notice, it's no wonder so many raging "anti-racists" showed up at the Charlottesville rally. Great, tell the enemy your future position.

    Wrt Jan 6, the crowd went nuts after learning that Pence was not going to fight the election results. The whole intent of the protest was to support this fight. Again, when elites sell you out, what do you do? Most people there didn't cause trouble, but with the sheer numbers involved a few were bound to be crazy. And do people realize how delusional they sound when they say that literally no real Trump supporter could've been aggressive or criminal? Some of those who fought the cops and damaged property were in fact Trump supporters. Deal with it. Since Jan 6 of course, the Right has been demoralized. They (as in, the supposed leadership) literally let a presidential election get stolen, then let themselves be bullied into accepting it.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @A123

    And do people realize how delusional they sound when they say that literally no real Trump supporter could’ve been aggressive or criminal? Some of those who fought the cops and damaged property were in fact Trump supporters. Deal with it.

    I agree.

    Since Jan 6 of course, the Right has been demoralized. They (as in, the supposed leadership) literally let a presidential election get stolen, then let themselves be bullied into accepting it.

    The real failure lay in losing the election because the Democrats were better organised, more focused and more motivated. The Trump Campaign were a bunch of amateurs. Trump concentrated on rallies, which were gatherings of people who were already incredibly highly motivated to vote for Trump.

    The Democrats did what you do if you want to win an election – they concentrated on getting the vote out.

    Electoral politics is a futile game but it’s like football – a professional team will always beat a bunch of amateurs.

    • Replies: @Feryl
    @dfordoom

    The Dems had their high-low coalition (yuppie professionals and spoiled government workers team up with the urban underclass to gimmick the results of some key large cities). The vote count was literally stopped in several closely contested states in the early morning hours, observers were told to go home, then 4-5 hours later the counting resumes and waddaya know, the ballots were overwhelmingly pro-Biden. Several ballot dumps contained absurdly, mathematically impossible ratios of pro-Biden ballots. Many Biden ballots contained just the presidential election vote and no other marks were made on the ballot (likely because the mass ballot forgery made it impossible to have the time to mark other elections.

    In addition, the media and politicians warned months in advance that mail-in ballots would be "favored" by Dems and would require more time than usual to process. In other words, they were priming people to accept fraud.

    Supreme court judge Sam Alito ordered PA to stop counting ballots and to keep a better custody chain of ballots because the state gov unconstitutionally extended the vote counting period and lowered standards as to which mail in ballots would be counted. But the state largely ignored him. Widespread evidence of fraud and law breaking has been generally ignored by the media and the courts.

    In the 2016 recount, they found that tallied votes exceeded paper ballots in Detroit because "incompetent" poll workers scanned the same ballot several times without resetting the counter (they also failed to perform daily reconciling of counted votes with the number of ballots as required by state law). Under Michigan law, this would've voided election results in this area had the recount gone totally through and been accepted by all parties this Trump would've won by a higher margin. Needless to say, nothing even close to this sort of recount was permitted to happen in 2020.

    Americans know that frequently black urban civil servants are lazy, inept, and spoiled. Hell, some were seen sporting Biden shirts at the polls. And a good way to make election fraud easier is to have mostly or entirely black election officials so that largely white Republican voters and observers feel inherintly out of place and threatened at urban polling locations. Some of the GOP observers who were allowed to stay and watch in 2020 were non-white, BTW. Black election officials typically assume that any white observer is a Republican. Back in the 80's the GOP actually signed an agreement with the Dems to lessen oversight of urban polling stations due to a history of the practice being "racist". In fact, during the New Deal era it was Ellis Island whites who often committed urban vote fraud and it was GOP WASPs who cried foul. But that changed around circa 1970 when the Dems became the black party.

    , @Feryl
    @dfordoom

    TLDR, the Dems use the excuse of black oppression to fight election integrity measures. This is why America has the most corrupt election process of any "first world" country. Again, Americans have a very low opinion of government and the civic process largely because standards must be kept low so that blacks have a good source of jobs and are not humiliated by more motivated and productive whites. Whites used to generally agree about this in the 1970's-1990's (even if they eventually stopped saying so in public), but the rise of the SJW Left and revisionist history has made many people way too protective of blacks.

  79. @Feryl
    @dfordoom

    The difference is that the enforced taboos of the 1950's were unanimously popular with normies. So people were happier back then. Nowadays elites specifically emphasize that which seems the most retarded and crazy to ordinary people (drag queen story hour etc.)

    By intellectual freedom, go look at the mid to late 70's. Post-Vietnam, pre-neo-lib multiculturalist 80's. Of course, that era had it's excesses and flaws, but at least there was relatively little pressure exerted to make sure that you were one of the Good Guys.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    The difference is that the enforced taboos of the 1950’s were unanimously popular with normies.

    If everybody had been in favour of those taboos there would have been no need for enforcement.

    If everybody had been in favour of the system as it existed at the time there would have been no need to persecute political dissidents.

    The 1950s was not Leave It To Beaver world or Ozzie and Harriet world. There was a lot of ideological, social and cultural ferment. There were regular Moral Panics. There were dissidents (political, social and cultural dissidents) and they were suppressed.

    By intellectual freedom, go look at the mid to late 70’s. Post-Vietnam, pre-neo-lib multiculturalist 80’s. Of course, that era had it’s excesses and flaws, but at least there was relatively little pressure exerted to make sure that you were one of the Good Guys.

    That’s because no one faction had succeeded in gaining total power, so none of the competing factions had the capability to crush their opponents. Neither liberals nor conservatives, neither social liberals nor social conservatives, neither Left nor Right, neither Christians not atheists, enjoyed sufficient power to be able to crush those who disagreed with them.

    That’s when you get Good Times – when no faction has too much power.

    By the 90s the Economic Right had utterly crushed its opponents, and the Cultural Left had crushed its opponents.

    • Replies: @Feryl
    @dfordoom

    There was practically no riots or terrorism in the 1950's America. People were happy and well-adjusted relative to other eras. It's largely been Libertarians and SJWs who retroactively deride the era. Did you know that in 1966 the Harris company began asking Americans about their satisfaction with society? It peaked in 1966 and has been declining ever since, as elites have grown increasingly disconnected.



    By the 90s the Economic Right had utterly crushed its opponents, and the Cultural Left had crushed its opponent
     
    That's what Silent and Boomer elites wanted. Whereas America nowadays is groaning from the strain felt by non-elites and post-Boomer generations who do not want the 1990's to happen over and elover again. Since Silents and early Boomers (the big winners with incentive to stay the course) are now dying en masse or at the very least are slipping into being too old to be worth listening to, we will be left with a lot of low status and disgruntled people beginning with many late Boomers and continuing with subsequent generations.

    Problem is, the now dominant SJW Left is never going to win over non-elite Americans and conservatives. Additionally, the old school economic Left is typically silenced or bought off and ends up emphasizing modern ID politics (Bernie Sanders went from a New Dealer to a modern progressive at warp speed in order to fit in) And The Right is far too incoherent and fragmented, and far too disdained by many modern elites, to put up a better fight. Thus, America won't return to the relative calm of the 1930's-1950's, or even the late 1970's-1990's, anytime soon. Too many people are frustrated and unable to gain progress toward their goals. Its not like the 1950's and 60's when institutions eventually gave rising generations what they wanted (e.g. more economic opportunity and security, less overt racism, more sexual freedom, less censorship, etc)

    Replies: @Corvinus

  80. @dfordoom
    @Feryl


    The difference is that the enforced taboos of the 1950’s were unanimously popular with normies.
     
    If everybody had been in favour of those taboos there would have been no need for enforcement.

    If everybody had been in favour of the system as it existed at the time there would have been no need to persecute political dissidents.

    The 1950s was not Leave It To Beaver world or Ozzie and Harriet world. There was a lot of ideological, social and cultural ferment. There were regular Moral Panics. There were dissidents (political, social and cultural dissidents) and they were suppressed.

    By intellectual freedom, go look at the mid to late 70’s. Post-Vietnam, pre-neo-lib multiculturalist 80’s. Of course, that era had it’s excesses and flaws, but at least there was relatively little pressure exerted to make sure that you were one of the Good Guys.
     
    That's because no one faction had succeeded in gaining total power, so none of the competing factions had the capability to crush their opponents. Neither liberals nor conservatives, neither social liberals nor social conservatives, neither Left nor Right, neither Christians not atheists, enjoyed sufficient power to be able to crush those who disagreed with them.

    That's when you get Good Times - when no faction has too much power.

    By the 90s the Economic Right had utterly crushed its opponents, and the Cultural Left had crushed its opponents.

    Replies: @Feryl

    There was practically no riots or terrorism in the 1950’s America. People were happy and well-adjusted relative to other eras. It’s largely been Libertarians and SJWs who retroactively deride the era. Did you know that in 1966 the Harris company began asking Americans about their satisfaction with society? It peaked in 1966 and has been declining ever since, as elites have grown increasingly disconnected.

    By the 90s the Economic Right had utterly crushed its opponents, and the Cultural Left had crushed its opponent

    That’s what Silent and Boomer elites wanted. Whereas America nowadays is groaning from the strain felt by non-elites and post-Boomer generations who do not want the 1990’s to happen over and elover again. Since Silents and early Boomers (the big winners with incentive to stay the course) are now dying en masse or at the very least are slipping into being too old to be worth listening to, we will be left with a lot of low status and disgruntled people beginning with many late Boomers and continuing with subsequent generations.

    Problem is, the now dominant SJW Left is never going to win over non-elite Americans and conservatives. Additionally, the old school economic Left is typically silenced or bought off and ends up emphasizing modern ID politics (Bernie Sanders went from a New Dealer to a modern progressive at warp speed in order to fit in) And The Right is far too incoherent and fragmented, and far too disdained by many modern elites, to put up a better fight. Thus, America won’t return to the relative calm of the 1930’s-1950’s, or even the late 1970’s-1990’s, anytime soon. Too many people are frustrated and unable to gain progress toward their goals. Its not like the 1950’s and 60’s when institutions eventually gave rising generations what they wanted (e.g. more economic opportunity and security, less overt racism, more sexual freedom, less censorship, etc)

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Feryl

    "People were happy and well-adjusted relative to other eras."

    Certain groups, assuredly, in the 1950's.

    "By the 90s the Economic Right had utterly crushed its opponents, and the Cultural Left had crushed its opponent. That’s what Silent and Boomer elites wanted."

    That's a far-fetched conclusion.

    "Thus, America won’t return to the relative calm of the 1930’s-1950’s..."

    The 1930's had the Great Depression, and for the first half of the 1940's, there was a world war. It's weird that you would include those two eras into the 1950's, which was a relatively calm period on the surface.

  81. @dfordoom
    @Feryl


    And do people realize how delusional they sound when they say that literally no real Trump supporter could’ve been aggressive or criminal? Some of those who fought the cops and damaged property were in fact Trump supporters. Deal with it.
     
    I agree.

    Since Jan 6 of course, the Right has been demoralized. They (as in, the supposed leadership) literally let a presidential election get stolen, then let themselves be bullied into accepting it.
     
    The real failure lay in losing the election because the Democrats were better organised, more focused and more motivated. The Trump Campaign were a bunch of amateurs. Trump concentrated on rallies, which were gatherings of people who were already incredibly highly motivated to vote for Trump.

    The Democrats did what you do if you want to win an election - they concentrated on getting the vote out.

    Electoral politics is a futile game but it's like football - a professional team will always beat a bunch of amateurs.

    Replies: @Feryl, @Feryl

    The Dems had their high-low coalition (yuppie professionals and spoiled government workers team up with the urban underclass to gimmick the results of some key large cities). The vote count was literally stopped in several closely contested states in the early morning hours, observers were told to go home, then 4-5 hours later the counting resumes and waddaya know, the ballots were overwhelmingly pro-Biden. Several ballot dumps contained absurdly, mathematically impossible ratios of pro-Biden ballots. Many Biden ballots contained just the presidential election vote and no other marks were made on the ballot (likely because the mass ballot forgery made it impossible to have the time to mark other elections.

    In addition, the media and politicians warned months in advance that mail-in ballots would be “favored” by Dems and would require more time than usual to process. In other words, they were priming people to accept fraud.

    Supreme court judge Sam Alito ordered PA to stop counting ballots and to keep a better custody chain of ballots because the state gov unconstitutionally extended the vote counting period and lowered standards as to which mail in ballots would be counted. But the state largely ignored him. Widespread evidence of fraud and law breaking has been generally ignored by the media and the courts.

    In the 2016 recount, they found that tallied votes exceeded paper ballots in Detroit because “incompetent” poll workers scanned the same ballot several times without resetting the counter (they also failed to perform daily reconciling of counted votes with the number of ballots as required by state law). Under Michigan law, this would’ve voided election results in this area had the recount gone totally through and been accepted by all parties this Trump would’ve won by a higher margin. Needless to say, nothing even close to this sort of recount was permitted to happen in 2020.

    Americans know that frequently black urban civil servants are lazy, inept, and spoiled. Hell, some were seen sporting Biden shirts at the polls. And a good way to make election fraud easier is to have mostly or entirely black election officials so that largely white Republican voters and observers feel inherintly out of place and threatened at urban polling locations. Some of the GOP observers who were allowed to stay and watch in 2020 were non-white, BTW. Black election officials typically assume that any white observer is a Republican. Back in the 80’s the GOP actually signed an agreement with the Dems to lessen oversight of urban polling stations due to a history of the practice being “racist”. In fact, during the New Deal era it was Ellis Island whites who often committed urban vote fraud and it was GOP WASPs who cried foul. But that changed around circa 1970 when the Dems became the black party.

  82. @dfordoom
    @Feryl


    And do people realize how delusional they sound when they say that literally no real Trump supporter could’ve been aggressive or criminal? Some of those who fought the cops and damaged property were in fact Trump supporters. Deal with it.
     
    I agree.

    Since Jan 6 of course, the Right has been demoralized. They (as in, the supposed leadership) literally let a presidential election get stolen, then let themselves be bullied into accepting it.
     
    The real failure lay in losing the election because the Democrats were better organised, more focused and more motivated. The Trump Campaign were a bunch of amateurs. Trump concentrated on rallies, which were gatherings of people who were already incredibly highly motivated to vote for Trump.

    The Democrats did what you do if you want to win an election - they concentrated on getting the vote out.

    Electoral politics is a futile game but it's like football - a professional team will always beat a bunch of amateurs.

    Replies: @Feryl, @Feryl

    TLDR, the Dems use the excuse of black oppression to fight election integrity measures. This is why America has the most corrupt election process of any “first world” country. Again, Americans have a very low opinion of government and the civic process largely because standards must be kept low so that blacks have a good source of jobs and are not humiliated by more motivated and productive whites. Whites used to generally agree about this in the 1970’s-1990’s (even if they eventually stopped saying so in public), but the rise of the SJW Left and revisionist history has made many people way too protective of blacks.

  83. The difference is that the enforced taboos of the 1950’s were unanimously popular with normies.

    If everybody had been in favour of those taboos there would have been no need for enforcement.

    True, yet does Feryl not still have a point?

    The taboos of the 1950s do indeed seem to have provoked a countercultural reaction, as you observe. Practically everything seems to provoke a reaction, unfortunately. By his fallen nature, man is never content to remain happy for long.

    Nevertheless, as Feryl says (if one forebears to take his adverb “unanimously” too literally), the taboos of the 1950s were chiefly pro-normal. Today, every single taboo of which I can think is anti-normal. In this sense, the circumstance of the 1950s resembled the circumstance today as white resembles black.

    There is indeed a sort of resemblance between polar opposites. White does resemble black, in a sense, but it is an inverted sense. No, I believe that Feryl’s point stands.

  84. @German_reader
    @Not only wrathful


    Furthermore, the German people may well elect the open borders Greens as much as an anti-American statement
     
    Any "anti-American" sentiment was dropped by the Greens a long time ago (at least as far as back as the 1999 Kosovo war), today they're probably the most hardcore Atlanticist party in Germany, who view American hegemony as an unalloyed good and reject any independent German foreign policy initiatives. A good example for how today's Greens think can be read in this interview:
    https://www.zeit.de/politik/2021-03/usa-transatlantic-relations-franziska-brantner-stephen-wertheim-english?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F
    So your perceptions of them as "anti-American", if they ever were correct, are 30-40 years out of date.

    Replies: @Not only wrathful

    No one can read that link, but fair enough, it does appear that the anti-NATO Greens are now isolated hold-outs in a party of broad EU integration and Western cooperation for social justice causes.

    Is there any part of their platform that isn’t just soft left?

    A rebranded SPD without the workers?

    • Replies: @German_reader
    @Not only wrathful


    No one can read that link
     
    ? It works for me (it's an interview with Green MP Franziska Brantner and American academic Stephen Wertheim in ZEIT).

    A rebranded SPD without the workers?
     
    Basically the same as "progressives" in all Western countries - leftie liberal bourgeoisie, often in state employment, pro-open borders and contemptuous of the native working class.
  85. @Feryl
    @dfordoom

    There was practically no riots or terrorism in the 1950's America. People were happy and well-adjusted relative to other eras. It's largely been Libertarians and SJWs who retroactively deride the era. Did you know that in 1966 the Harris company began asking Americans about their satisfaction with society? It peaked in 1966 and has been declining ever since, as elites have grown increasingly disconnected.



    By the 90s the Economic Right had utterly crushed its opponents, and the Cultural Left had crushed its opponent
     
    That's what Silent and Boomer elites wanted. Whereas America nowadays is groaning from the strain felt by non-elites and post-Boomer generations who do not want the 1990's to happen over and elover again. Since Silents and early Boomers (the big winners with incentive to stay the course) are now dying en masse or at the very least are slipping into being too old to be worth listening to, we will be left with a lot of low status and disgruntled people beginning with many late Boomers and continuing with subsequent generations.

    Problem is, the now dominant SJW Left is never going to win over non-elite Americans and conservatives. Additionally, the old school economic Left is typically silenced or bought off and ends up emphasizing modern ID politics (Bernie Sanders went from a New Dealer to a modern progressive at warp speed in order to fit in) And The Right is far too incoherent and fragmented, and far too disdained by many modern elites, to put up a better fight. Thus, America won't return to the relative calm of the 1930's-1950's, or even the late 1970's-1990's, anytime soon. Too many people are frustrated and unable to gain progress toward their goals. Its not like the 1950's and 60's when institutions eventually gave rising generations what they wanted (e.g. more economic opportunity and security, less overt racism, more sexual freedom, less censorship, etc)

    Replies: @Corvinus

    “People were happy and well-adjusted relative to other eras.”

    Certain groups, assuredly, in the 1950’s.

    “By the 90s the Economic Right had utterly crushed its opponents, and the Cultural Left had crushed its opponent. That’s what Silent and Boomer elites wanted.”

    That’s a far-fetched conclusion.

    “Thus, America won’t return to the relative calm of the 1930’s-1950’s…”

    The 1930’s had the Great Depression, and for the first half of the 1940’s, there was a world war. It’s weird that you would include those two eras into the 1950’s, which was a relatively calm period on the surface.

  86. @Feryl
    @V. K. Ovelund

    As Gavin McInnes would say, they're all Feds. As in, self proclaimed white supremacists and Neo-Nazis. Its been that way since the 80's. Nobody knew what a "white supremacist" was before the 80's. Once upon a time, everybody was considered to be entitled to their own opinions about race. And then in the 80's, the rising class of Boomer leaders began making "racism" the worst of all sins. Keep in mind also to that the organic far Right of post-1980, typically rural and lower middle class, really did scare Silent and Boomer elites (who were all massive cultural liberals who created PC) who set about engineering cartoon Nazi goofballs to try and keep an eye on "right wing extremism" as well as make genuine conservatives look like complete idiots. Back in the 60's and early 70's, the Greatest Gen was too busy busting heads of rioters and Leftist terrorists to concoct phony redneck Nazi super villains.

    As we all know by know, the prole/hard luck far Right is vastly out-financed and out-influenced by the elite class which has grown more "anti-racist" with each passing generation. Police departments (whose rank and file might be the only remotely Right-wing element left in this country) are now under pressure to have residency requirements, lest evil exurban white guys pollute the cities. Antifa tells normies to get out of "their" cities. Gun toting paramilitary Left militants take over city blocks and pull motorists from cars and beat them. We'll accept anything but a restoration of social conservatism and intellectual freedom.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @V. K. Ovelund

    As Gavin McInnes would say, they’re all Feds.

    Then I must be a Fed, too.

    Being pseudonymous, I’ve little cause to take offense, of course. You’d just have to make up your own mind what you believe. Meanwhile, may I dispute a few of your facts?

    [MORE]

    As in, self proclaimed white supremacists and Neo-Nazis.

    The American Alt-Right of 2008–17 grew from a kernel of disenchanted former libertarians, born on average during the early 1980s, who could not understand why the United States was still mucking around in Afghanistan and Iraq, who thought the general swoon over Barack Obama ridiculous, but still thought Obama an improvement over his predecessor.

    By 2011, an originally unrelated element had appeared, consisting in substantial part of irreverent 19-year-old pranksters swapping hilarious insults on 4chan’s /pol/.

    By 2014, partly through common admiration for the wit and ironic insight of Twitter’s Bronze Age Pervert (BAP), partly through common appreciation for the creative philosophizing of disenchanted libertarian Richard B. Spencer, partly via Ryan Dawson, Millennial Woes and others, the two movements had merged. Gavin McInnes was part of that in the periphery, as was Stephen K. Bannon. Andrew Anglin clearly had something to do with it, but I didn’t read his site, so I know little about that. Whatever the sources of the various branches of the Alt-Right, though, the improbable rise of Donald J. Trump afforded Alt-Rightists elation in a common cause.

    Alt-Right antiwar activists had adopted Kek as a mascot. Alt-Right libertarians were tossing up ironic Hitler salutes. Alt-Right everybody feted Trump as the god-emperor, and at the Battle of Berkeley, April 2017, some Alt-Rightists (inspired in part by the very Gavin McInnes you have mentioned) showed up looking for an excuse to crack some skulls. Even a flamboyant homosexual like Milo Yiannopoulos bizarrely and briefly, yet genuinely, found a place in the movement—and meanwhile smokin’ hot young women started showing up at Alt-Right events. Those were heady days.

    The Feds, theretofore invested in dead ends like Stormfront, had nothing to do with the Alt-Right until 2017 as far as I know. Until 2016, the rise of the Alt-Right caught the Feds entirely flatfooted; and during 2016, the Feds apparently misjudged the Alt-Right to be a convenient element that would damage the Trump campaign, so they let it be. That is what I saw, at any rate.

    Regarding the older generation of white nationalists: David Duke is an intelligent, sometimes interesting fellow, but he joined the Alt-Right late, like William H. Regnery, II, and others, when Duke, Regnery and the others saw that the movement had momentum. This is not to slight Duke or Regnery. Joining a movement with momentum is usually a smart thing to do, but I don’t remember ever hearing anyone mention, say, William Pierce and Kek in the same sentence (well, I just did, didn’t I? there’s a first time for everything). The closest thing there was to a bridge between the old white-nationalist movement and the Alt-Right was in the beefy, working-class West Virginians who showed up to provide volunteer security, 2016–18, at Alt-Right events. If there was any Federal connection at all, that is where it likely was (nor do I slight the West Virginians by saying it: I liked those guys and was sorry to see their club break up).

    If you want to know, I entered the movement with the Spencerites.

    Its been that way since the 80’s. Nobody knew what a “white supremacist” was before the 80’s.

    If you literally mean “white supremacist,” then you are right, of course, for the term has fairly recently been popularized by sneaky leftists as a convenient replacement for that older, more familiar, decreasingly effective term of abuse, “racist,” which had worn out its welcome. However, substantially, you might recall George Lincoln Rockwell, George Wallace, and Hitler as exceptions to your rule.

    • Replies: @Feryl
    @V. K. Ovelund

    Well, I generally stuck to the blogs I knew and loved before the Alt Right era, during the Alt Right era while watching some of the videos being out out by Alex Jones (who in any even vastly predated the Alt Right and historically focused on anti-elite conspiracy theories), Gavin and Milo mostly for entertainment purposes. I never dove totally into the Alt Right, mostly because I generally don't believe in multi-level ideogical organizations and social movements, preferring to remain an outsider and skeptic

    I knew from the beginning that the Alt Right was doomed because it never had institutional support aside from maybe Breitbart (who eventually retracted their support) and Tucker to an extent. I also knew that Charlottesville stank because #1 it was a horrible idea and #2 it felt like a set-up (it's pretty much proven that state authorities up to the governor himself were deeply involved in "planning" and "monitoring" the event) being so close to the D.C. swamp and all that. You don't "unite the right" when you're ideological misfits with delusions of mass appeal who, contrary to what Steve Bannon was blabbering about, have zero chance of reaching 99% of well educated (powerful) Americans and thus will be rendered powerless (revolutions are launched by elites, not peasants though such revolutionaries typically pretend to be proles.

    Trump won in 2016 by appealing to Rust Belt whites (one of Clinton's cabinet members said as much in the immediate aftermath of the election). The youth demographic is not a reliable voting Bloc and people don't vote based on memes.

    Am I a fed? Joking aside, I've been on Aud's blog for years, never been arrested, never worked for or in the military or government, and come from a lineage of stubborn, skeptical, and independent Midwestern men. That lineage is also strongly Teutonic, and Germanic Americans have had far less power in this country than the Anglos and Celts (part of the reason Germans are over-represented in both Antifa and the paleo-conservative Right, and I suspect that the Midwest and West are both hotbeds of genuine dissident thought, as opposed to astro-turfed horse crap engineered by the Anglo-Celt-Jew ruling class back East).

  87. German_reader says:
    @Not only wrathful
    @German_reader

    No one can read that link, but fair enough, it does appear that the anti-NATO Greens are now isolated hold-outs in a party of broad EU integration and Western cooperation for social justice causes.

    Is there any part of their platform that isn't just soft left?

    A rebranded SPD without the workers?

    Replies: @German_reader

    No one can read that link

    ? It works for me (it’s an interview with Green MP Franziska Brantner and American academic Stephen Wertheim in ZEIT).

    A rebranded SPD without the workers?

    Basically the same as “progressives” in all Western countries – leftie liberal bourgeoisie, often in state employment, pro-open borders and contemptuous of the native working class.

  88. Feryl says:
    @V. K. Ovelund
    @Feryl


    As Gavin McInnes would say, they’re all Feds.
     
    Then I must be a Fed, too.

    Being pseudonymous, I've little cause to take offense, of course. You'd just have to make up your own mind what you believe. Meanwhile, may I dispute a few of your facts?


    As in, self proclaimed white supremacists and Neo-Nazis.
     
    The American Alt-Right of 2008–17 grew from a kernel of disenchanted former libertarians, born on average during the early 1980s, who could not understand why the United States was still mucking around in Afghanistan and Iraq, who thought the general swoon over Barack Obama ridiculous, but still thought Obama an improvement over his predecessor.

    By 2011, an originally unrelated element had appeared, consisting in substantial part of irreverent 19-year-old pranksters swapping hilarious insults on 4chan's /pol/.

    By 2014, partly through common admiration for the wit and ironic insight of Twitter's Bronze Age Pervert (BAP), partly through common appreciation for the creative philosophizing of disenchanted libertarian Richard B. Spencer, partly via Ryan Dawson, Millennial Woes and others, the two movements had merged. Gavin McInnes was part of that in the periphery, as was Stephen K. Bannon. Andrew Anglin clearly had something to do with it, but I didn't read his site, so I know little about that. Whatever the sources of the various branches of the Alt-Right, though, the improbable rise of Donald J. Trump afforded Alt-Rightists elation in a common cause.

    Alt-Right antiwar activists had adopted Kek as a mascot. Alt-Right libertarians were tossing up ironic Hitler salutes. Alt-Right everybody feted Trump as the god-emperor, and at the Battle of Berkeley, April 2017, some Alt-Rightists (inspired in part by the very Gavin McInnes you have mentioned) showed up looking for an excuse to crack some skulls. Even a flamboyant homosexual like Milo Yiannopoulos bizarrely and briefly, yet genuinely, found a place in the movement—and meanwhile smokin' hot young women started showing up at Alt-Right events. Those were heady days.

    The Feds, theretofore invested in dead ends like Stormfront, had nothing to do with the Alt-Right until 2017 as far as I know. Until 2016, the rise of the Alt-Right caught the Feds entirely flatfooted; and during 2016, the Feds apparently misjudged the Alt-Right to be a convenient element that would damage the Trump campaign, so they let it be. That is what I saw, at any rate.

    Regarding the older generation of white nationalists: David Duke is an intelligent, sometimes interesting fellow, but he joined the Alt-Right late, like William H. Regnery, II, and others, when Duke, Regnery and the others saw that the movement had momentum. This is not to slight Duke or Regnery. Joining a movement with momentum is usually a smart thing to do, but I don't remember ever hearing anyone mention, say, William Pierce and Kek in the same sentence (well, I just did, didn't I? there's a first time for everything). The closest thing there was to a bridge between the old white-nationalist movement and the Alt-Right was in the beefy, working-class West Virginians who showed up to provide volunteer security, 2016–18, at Alt-Right events. If there was any Federal connection at all, that is where it likely was (nor do I slight the West Virginians by saying it: I liked those guys and was sorry to see their club break up).

    If you want to know, I entered the movement with the Spencerites.


    Its been that way since the 80’s. Nobody knew what a “white supremacist” was before the 80’s.
     
    If you literally mean “white supremacist,” then you are right, of course, for the term has fairly recently been popularized by sneaky leftists as a convenient replacement for that older, more familiar, decreasingly effective term of abuse, “racist,” which had worn out its welcome. However, substantially, you might recall George Lincoln Rockwell, George Wallace, and Hitler as exceptions to your rule.

    Replies: @Feryl

    Well, I generally stuck to the blogs I knew and loved before the Alt Right era, during the Alt Right era while watching some of the videos being out out by Alex Jones (who in any even vastly predated the Alt Right and historically focused on anti-elite conspiracy theories), Gavin and Milo mostly for entertainment purposes. I never dove totally into the Alt Right, mostly because I generally don’t believe in multi-level ideogical organizations and social movements, preferring to remain an outsider and skeptic

    I knew from the beginning that the Alt Right was doomed because it never had institutional support aside from maybe Breitbart (who eventually retracted their support) and Tucker to an extent. I also knew that Charlottesville stank because #1 it was a horrible idea and #2 it felt like a set-up (it’s pretty much proven that state authorities up to the governor himself were deeply involved in “planning” and “monitoring” the event) being so close to the D.C. swamp and all that. You don’t “unite the right” when you’re ideological misfits with delusions of mass appeal who, contrary to what Steve Bannon was blabbering about, have zero chance of reaching 99% of well educated (powerful) Americans and thus will be rendered powerless (revolutions are launched by elites, not peasants though such revolutionaries typically pretend to be proles.

    Trump won in 2016 by appealing to Rust Belt whites (one of Clinton’s cabinet members said as much in the immediate aftermath of the election). The youth demographic is not a reliable voting Bloc and people don’t vote based on memes.

    Am I a fed? Joking aside, I’ve been on Aud’s blog for years, never been arrested, never worked for or in the military or government, and come from a lineage of stubborn, skeptical, and independent Midwestern men. That lineage is also strongly Teutonic, and Germanic Americans have had far less power in this country than the Anglos and Celts (part of the reason Germans are over-represented in both Antifa and the paleo-conservative Right, and I suspect that the Midwest and West are both hotbeds of genuine dissident thought, as opposed to astro-turfed horse crap engineered by the Anglo-Celt-Jew ruling class back East).

    • Thanks: V. K. Ovelund
  89. A123 says:
    @Feryl
    @A123

    Sadly, I can't find the videos off-hand but there was some research done regarding bogus protesters being seen sporting Right Wing gear at Charlottesville. I mean, the event was massive, was planned well in advance (a huge mistake, as it allowed infiltrators and counter protesters ample time to plan for it)), and was done to ostensibly bring together a movement that was (and is) weak and incoherent due to a lack of elite support. Of course it was going to be used as a bludgeon against the movement, ironically destroying the very movement it was supposed to strengthen.

    I knew based on the anti-trump forces that gathered around Trump rallies in 2016 that we were screwed. When that many idiots could raise hell when at times they only had a couple day's notice, it's no wonder so many raging "anti-racists" showed up at the Charlottesville rally. Great, tell the enemy your future position.

    Wrt Jan 6, the crowd went nuts after learning that Pence was not going to fight the election results. The whole intent of the protest was to support this fight. Again, when elites sell you out, what do you do? Most people there didn't cause trouble, but with the sheer numbers involved a few were bound to be crazy. And do people realize how delusional they sound when they say that literally no real Trump supporter could've been aggressive or criminal? Some of those who fought the cops and damaged property were in fact Trump supporters. Deal with it. Since Jan 6 of course, the Right has been demoralized. They (as in, the supposed leadership) literally let a presidential election get stolen, then let themselves be bullied into accepting it.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @A123

    Wrt Jan 6, the crowd went nuts after learning that Pence was not going to fight the election results. The whole intent of the protest was to support this fight.

    It is obvious that there was no contingency plan when Pence supported the Blue Coup. It would not surprise me if Pence changed his mind after the rally was organized.

    What could possibly be achieved by entering the Capitol after their process was complete? Nothing. This is why it is believable that Antifa infiltrators led people that direction.

    #OccupySCOTUS was the only possibility that had a chance. Taking that action might lead to the Court reviewing the evidence rather than ducking on procedure. Not a great option, but one that would have made sense on the day.

    Since Jan 6 of course, the Right has been demoralized. They (as in, the supposed leadership) literally let a presidential election get stolen, then let themselves be bullied into accepting it.

    I have not seen any demoralization. MAGA Populism (not the right) has a new Cold Fury driving it to oppose Führer Biden’s illegitimate reign. States are actively passing laws to stop Fascist Nazi-crat over reach.

    The Coup plotters created financial damage with their WUHAN-19 exaggeration. The Harris/Biden regime by stealing the White House assumed ownership of that problem. This is going to generate a huge number of MAGA votes in 2022. Add this to Redistricting and a MAGA majority in the House seem nearly inevitable.

    Opening the southern border is creating Severe problems for theoretically Blue states Arizona and New Mexico. Harris has been placed “in charge” of the crisis and has delivered nothing. The plan to have Vice Führer Harris run in 2024 has a huge problem if she auto-loses those states.

    Rigged elections pose a significant, potentially democracy killing, problem. However, the GOP beat Gerrymandering by doing it better than the opposition. There is no reason to believe MAGA cannot beat Fultoning, by doing it better than the opposition. The Constitutional provision for breaking Electoral College failures works in MAGA’s favour. All that has to be done is create problems that 2020 SCOTUS precedent have made unreviewable.

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @A123


    Add this to Redistricting and a MAGA majority in the House seem nearly inevitable.
     
    Is that like Trump's second term, which you also told us was inevitable?

    Replies: @A123

  90. Feryl says:

    What could possibly be achieved by entering the Capitol after their process was complete? Nothing. This is why it is believable that Antifa infiltrators led people that direction.

    Most of those arrested had debt problems and/or failed businesses/investments. Many attendees were also well into middle age and had families This is not the profile of Antifa who are generally under 40, childless, and motivated by deviant psychosis, not a sense of trying to live the American Dream but getting gypped along the way. Were there stealth agitators? Probably, but that doesn’t change the fact that some of the Trumpers present were really pissed off and came unglued (though the lack of weapons brought indicates that it was intended to be peaceful, and again I think Pence ought to be blamed for inciting the protest by being a coward).

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Feryl


    I think Pence ought to be blamed for inciting the protest by being a coward
     
    I despise Pence but in that situation he had no choice. Trying to overturn the election result would have been tantamount to staging a coup. You don't stage a coup unless you're very very confident it will succeed. Even if Pence had had the desire to stage a coup I'm sure he understood very clearly that it would have failed. And I'm sure he was aware of what happens to people who stage unsuccessful coups.

    The idea that the election result could have been overturned at that stage was wildly unrealistic.

    Which was the problem with the MAGA Brigade - they were incapable of accepting the reality that the election result could not have been overturned on January 6th.

    I'm not taking any position on whether the election was fair or not but by January 6th it was a done deal.

    Replies: @Feryl, @A123

  91. @A123
    @Feryl


    Wrt Jan 6, the crowd went nuts after learning that Pence was not going to fight the election results. The whole intent of the protest was to support this fight.
     
    It is obvious that there was no contingency plan when Pence supported the Blue Coup. It would not surprise me if Pence changed his mind after the rally was organized.

    What could possibly be achieved by entering the Capitol after their process was complete? Nothing. This is why it is believable that Antifa infiltrators led people that direction.

    #OccupySCOTUS was the only possibility that had a chance. Taking that action might lead to the Court reviewing the evidence rather than ducking on procedure. Not a great option, but one that would have made sense on the day.


    Since Jan 6 of course, the Right has been demoralized. They (as in, the supposed leadership) literally let a presidential election get stolen, then let themselves be bullied into accepting it.
     
    I have not seen any demoralization. MAGA Populism (not the right) has a new Cold Fury driving it to oppose Führer Biden's illegitimate reign. States are actively passing laws to stop Fascist Nazi-crat over reach.

    The Coup plotters created financial damage with their WUHAN-19 exaggeration. The Harris/Biden regime by stealing the White House assumed ownership of that problem. This is going to generate a huge number of MAGA votes in 2022. Add this to Redistricting and a MAGA majority in the House seem nearly inevitable.

    Opening the southern border is creating Severe problems for theoretically Blue states Arizona and New Mexico. Harris has been placed "in charge" of the crisis and has delivered nothing. The plan to have Vice Führer Harris run in 2024 has a huge problem if she auto-loses those states.

    Rigged elections pose a significant, potentially democracy killing, problem. However, the GOP beat Gerrymandering by doing it better than the opposition. There is no reason to believe MAGA cannot beat Fultoning, by doing it better than the opposition. The Constitutional provision for breaking Electoral College failures works in MAGA's favour. All that has to be done is create problems that 2020 SCOTUS precedent have made unreviewable.

    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @dfordoom

    Add this to Redistricting and a MAGA majority in the House seem nearly inevitable.

    Is that like Trump’s second term, which you also told us was inevitable?

    • Replies: @A123
    @dfordoom



    Add this to Redistricting and a MAGA majority in the House seem nearly inevitable.
     
    Is that like Trump’s second term, which you also told us was inevitable?
     
    As a matter of objective fact Trump Won / Biden Lost.

    No one anticipated:
    • The sheer volume of DNC ballot fraud.
    • GOP officials abandoning GOP voters (e.g. Georgia Gov. Kemp, VP Pence).
    • SCOTUS refusal to examine the Constitutional violations.

    With two years of lead time, the MAGA party will be ready for these problems:
    × For every ballot the DNC fabricates, MAGA will create two (or three or five).
    × There will be many fewer GOP(e) sellouts as the swampies are being primaried & routed from the MAGA party.
    × SCOTUS will be paralyzed by the precedents they created in 2020.
    ______

    Admittedly, there is one risk -- The DNC could come up with an entirely new Unconstitutional scam to steal the 2022 House elections. The SJW Globalists cannot win on the merits, but they are among the most unethical & immoral thieves this planet has ever known.

    PEACE 😇
  92. @Feryl

    What could possibly be achieved by entering the Capitol after their process was complete? Nothing. This is why it is believable that Antifa infiltrators led people that direction.
     
    Most of those arrested had debt problems and/or failed businesses/investments. Many attendees were also well into middle age and had families This is not the profile of Antifa who are generally under 40, childless, and motivated by deviant psychosis, not a sense of trying to live the American Dream but getting gypped along the way. Were there stealth agitators? Probably, but that doesn't change the fact that some of the Trumpers present were really pissed off and came unglued (though the lack of weapons brought indicates that it was intended to be peaceful, and again I think Pence ought to be blamed for inciting the protest by being a coward).

    Replies: @dfordoom

    I think Pence ought to be blamed for inciting the protest by being a coward

    I despise Pence but in that situation he had no choice. Trying to overturn the election result would have been tantamount to staging a coup. You don’t stage a coup unless you’re very very confident it will succeed. Even if Pence had had the desire to stage a coup I’m sure he understood very clearly that it would have failed. And I’m sure he was aware of what happens to people who stage unsuccessful coups.

    The idea that the election result could have been overturned at that stage was wildly unrealistic.

    Which was the problem with the MAGA Brigade – they were incapable of accepting the reality that the election result could not have been overturned on January 6th.

    I’m not taking any position on whether the election was fair or not but by January 6th it was a done deal.

    • Agree: V. K. Ovelund
    • Replies: @Feryl
    @dfordoom

    It was about venting frustration and also showing strength via sheer numbers But it all boilled over when it eventually became clear that the election was not going to be over-turned. BTW, I knew that was the case after every Supreme Court judge appointed by Trump refused to intervene. If you don't have the Supreme Court, you have almost nothing (and Trump could've said "you're gonna have to haul me outta here" and the Pentagon and DC police would've totally turned against him, arrested him, and Trump likely would've faced serious charges). Trump wanted to emulate Andrew Jackson, but Trump has far less institutional and elite support than even Jackson did. You could make a credible argument that Trump is the least elite supported president we've ever had.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    , @A123
    @dfordoom


    Trying to overturn the election result would have been tantamount to staging a coup.
     
    So to avoid the "appearance of a coup", Pence participated in an actual coup? That makes very little sense.

    Taking steps to deal with rampant vote fraud would have been Constitutional, not a coup.

    the election result could not have been overturned on January 6th.
     
    If VP Pence had upheld the Constitution while there was a crowd demanding justice adjacent to the Supreme Court building -- The two most likely out comes would have been :

    -1- Supreme Court inaction allowing VP Pence's count for Trump, matching actual legitimate votes, to stand.
    -2- An Electoral College failure resulting in the House selecting Trump by 26+ states.

    It was not over until traitor Pence knowingly supported the Blue Coup by accepting the obviously tainted, illegitimate Electoral College fraud.

    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @Feryl

  93. Feryl says:
    @dfordoom
    @Feryl


    I think Pence ought to be blamed for inciting the protest by being a coward
     
    I despise Pence but in that situation he had no choice. Trying to overturn the election result would have been tantamount to staging a coup. You don't stage a coup unless you're very very confident it will succeed. Even if Pence had had the desire to stage a coup I'm sure he understood very clearly that it would have failed. And I'm sure he was aware of what happens to people who stage unsuccessful coups.

    The idea that the election result could have been overturned at that stage was wildly unrealistic.

    Which was the problem with the MAGA Brigade - they were incapable of accepting the reality that the election result could not have been overturned on January 6th.

    I'm not taking any position on whether the election was fair or not but by January 6th it was a done deal.

    Replies: @Feryl, @A123

    It was about venting frustration and also showing strength via sheer numbers But it all boilled over when it eventually became clear that the election was not going to be over-turned. BTW, I knew that was the case after every Supreme Court judge appointed by Trump refused to intervene. If you don’t have the Supreme Court, you have almost nothing (and Trump could’ve said “you’re gonna have to haul me outta here” and the Pentagon and DC police would’ve totally turned against him, arrested him, and Trump likely would’ve faced serious charges). Trump wanted to emulate Andrew Jackson, but Trump has far less institutional and elite support than even Jackson did. You could make a credible argument that Trump is the least elite supported president we’ve ever had.

    • Agree: dfordoom
    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Feryl


    I knew that was the case after every Supreme Court judge appointed by Trump refused to intervene. If you don’t have the Supreme Court, you have almost nothing (and Trump could’ve said “you’re gonna have to haul me outta here” and the Pentagon and DC police would’ve totally turned against him, arrested him, and Trump likely would’ve faced serious charges).
     
    Yep. It amazed me that so many dissident rightists and so many of the MAGA Hat Brigade really did think they were going to overturn the election result. The Supreme Court was never going to overturn an election result.

    And it amazed me that so many dissident rightists and so many of the MAGA Hat Brigade really did believe that the police and the military were going to support them. That kind of delusion thinking is really sad.

    Pence understood the situation. He understood that if he made any move to overturn the election result he would have been arrested and would have spent the rest of his life in prison. And he understood that the police and the military would have treated it as a coup attempt and there was the potential for people to get killed. When the police and the military respond to what they see as a coup the result is lots of people getting killed and lots and lots of people getting rounded up and imprisoned. And in a coup situation you can forget about fair trials.

    Pence was not prepared to risk such appalling consequences in a half-assed coup attempt that would certainly have failed.

    Replies: @Feryl

  94. A123 says:
    @dfordoom
    @A123


    Add this to Redistricting and a MAGA majority in the House seem nearly inevitable.
     
    Is that like Trump's second term, which you also told us was inevitable?

    Replies: @A123

    Add this to Redistricting and a MAGA majority in the House seem nearly inevitable.

    Is that like Trump’s second term, which you also told us was inevitable?

    As a matter of objective fact Trump Won / Biden Lost.

    No one anticipated:
    • The sheer volume of DNC ballot fraud.
    • GOP officials abandoning GOP voters (e.g. Georgia Gov. Kemp, VP Pence).
    • SCOTUS refusal to examine the Constitutional violations.

    With two years of lead time, the MAGA party will be ready for these problems:
    × For every ballot the DNC fabricates, MAGA will create two (or three or five).
    × There will be many fewer GOP(e) sellouts as the swampies are being primaried & routed from the MAGA party.
    × SCOTUS will be paralyzed by the precedents they created in 2020.
    ______

    Admittedly, there is one risk — The DNC could come up with an entirely new Unconstitutional scam to steal the 2022 House elections. The SJW Globalists cannot win on the merits, but they are among the most unethical & immoral thieves this planet has ever known.

    PEACE 😇

  95. @Feryl
    @dfordoom

    It was about venting frustration and also showing strength via sheer numbers But it all boilled over when it eventually became clear that the election was not going to be over-turned. BTW, I knew that was the case after every Supreme Court judge appointed by Trump refused to intervene. If you don't have the Supreme Court, you have almost nothing (and Trump could've said "you're gonna have to haul me outta here" and the Pentagon and DC police would've totally turned against him, arrested him, and Trump likely would've faced serious charges). Trump wanted to emulate Andrew Jackson, but Trump has far less institutional and elite support than even Jackson did. You could make a credible argument that Trump is the least elite supported president we've ever had.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    I knew that was the case after every Supreme Court judge appointed by Trump refused to intervene. If you don’t have the Supreme Court, you have almost nothing (and Trump could’ve said “you’re gonna have to haul me outta here” and the Pentagon and DC police would’ve totally turned against him, arrested him, and Trump likely would’ve faced serious charges).

    Yep. It amazed me that so many dissident rightists and so many of the MAGA Hat Brigade really did think they were going to overturn the election result. The Supreme Court was never going to overturn an election result.

    And it amazed me that so many dissident rightists and so many of the MAGA Hat Brigade really did believe that the police and the military were going to support them. That kind of delusion thinking is really sad.

    Pence understood the situation. He understood that if he made any move to overturn the election result he would have been arrested and would have spent the rest of his life in prison. And he understood that the police and the military would have treated it as a coup attempt and there was the potential for people to get killed. When the police and the military respond to what they see as a coup the result is lots of people getting killed and lots and lots of people getting rounded up and imprisoned. And in a coup situation you can forget about fair trials.

    Pence was not prepared to risk such appalling consequences in a half-assed coup attempt that would certainly have failed.

    • Replies: @Feryl
    @dfordoom

    It would've been the beginning of Civil War 2.0 had Pence, The Supreme Court, the Pentagon brass etc overturned the election. Remember, DC already was boarded up in anticipation of untermenschen riots should Trump have won (which would've been a prelude to an increased anti-MAGA insurgency).

    Then, when the MAGAs marched en masse to protest the 2020 election result (and eventually mock-beseiged the capitol), a quite understanble fear of a possible elite aided election reversal led to the swamp totally militarizing DC and doing loyalty checks on military personnel.

    The reality is that we were but a few stubborn generals and politicians away from the opening salvo of another Civil War. And this is what the swamp understands, but quite few normies dont. As Doom says, Pence (and essentially all of the conservative elites) took a relatively amicable path to spare us a bloody war. So what we have now is domination by SJW ideology and it's Democrat and business tycoon enforcers. When only one side is playing to win, that's what happens.

    Replies: @dfordoom

  96. @Charles Pewitt
    Mr Epigone says:

    The fire of racial tension must be stoked. When the flames stop licking and the embers begin to show, the regime’s corporate media arm instinctively starts rummaging around for kindling. They found that kindling in Breonna Taylor, Ahmed Arbery, and George Floyd. The were the logs tossed on the fire, a fire now burning as hot and brightly as it did when Trump was elected.

    I say:

    The JEW/WASP Ruling Class of the American Empire will not TAPER the anti-White animosity emanating from the corporate propaganda apparatus nor will the privately-controlled Federal Reserve Bank taper the monetary extremism keeping the asset bubbles in stocks and bonds and real estate lofty and expanding.

    The European Christian nations -- USA, England, France, Germany, Australia, Canada...etc. -- are all using monetary extremism and mass immigration and accusations of so-called "racism" and so-called "anti-Semitism" and other nonsense to deliberately destroy national sovereignty and to concentrate loot and political power in the hands of the evil globalizer plutocrats and the nasty and vile White Upper Middle Class Snot Brats.

    The Chinese and Japanese national ruling classes are also utilizing their central banker shysters to retain power and to remain in power and the globalized central banker shysters are deliberately using monetary policy to increase income inequality and to concentrate loot and power in the hands of money-grubbing scumbags such as Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos and the Koch boys and all the rest of the billionaire dirtbags.

    Message from the JEW/WASP Ruling Class of the American Empire to the corporate propaganda apparatus:

    DO NOT TAPER THE ANTI-WHITE ANIMOSITY

    DO NOT TAPER THE ANTI-WHITE PROPAGANDA

    Message from the JEW/WASP Ruling Class of the American Empire to the Federal Reserve Bank:

    DO NOT TAPER THE ASSET PURCHASES

    DO NOT TAPER THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK BALANCE SHEET BALLOONING

    DO NOT TAPER THE DOLLAR SWAPS

    DO NOT TAPER THE PURCHASES OF MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES

    DO NOT TAPER THE PURCHASE OF GOVERNMENT DEBT

    BREAK ON THROUGH TO THE OTHER SIDE OF MONETARY POLICY MADNESS

    https://twitter.com/NorthmanTrader/status/1390289444943638537?s=20

    https://twitter.com/NorthmanTrader/status/1390237682186522633?s=20

    Tweet from 2015:

    https://twitter.com/CharlesPewitt/status/629075933132103680?s=20

    Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain

    All these ‘crises’ end up rewarding the hyper-rich parasites and screwing the 90%. They are NEVER ‘mistakes’. They know precisely what they are doing.

  97. A123 says:
    @dfordoom
    @Feryl


    I think Pence ought to be blamed for inciting the protest by being a coward
     
    I despise Pence but in that situation he had no choice. Trying to overturn the election result would have been tantamount to staging a coup. You don't stage a coup unless you're very very confident it will succeed. Even if Pence had had the desire to stage a coup I'm sure he understood very clearly that it would have failed. And I'm sure he was aware of what happens to people who stage unsuccessful coups.

    The idea that the election result could have been overturned at that stage was wildly unrealistic.

    Which was the problem with the MAGA Brigade - they were incapable of accepting the reality that the election result could not have been overturned on January 6th.

    I'm not taking any position on whether the election was fair or not but by January 6th it was a done deal.

    Replies: @Feryl, @A123

    Trying to overturn the election result would have been tantamount to staging a coup.

    So to avoid the “appearance of a coup”, Pence participated in an actual coup? That makes very little sense.

    Taking steps to deal with rampant vote fraud would have been Constitutional, not a coup.

    the election result could not have been overturned on January 6th.

    If VP Pence had upheld the Constitution while there was a crowd demanding justice adjacent to the Supreme Court building — The two most likely out comes would have been :

    -1- Supreme Court inaction allowing VP Pence’s count for Trump, matching actual legitimate votes, to stand.
    -2- An Electoral College failure resulting in the House selecting Trump by 26+ states.

    It was not over until traitor Pence knowingly supported the Blue Coup by accepting the obviously tainted, illegitimate Electoral College fraud.

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @Feryl
    @A123

    We will never know exactly what would've happened had Pence (or any other key figure) attempted to overturn the election. But I do know it would've gotten really, really ugly. Were talking about likely assassinations of conservative politicians and judges. Demands for removal and prosecution of those involved in overturning the election. Mass civil unrest, "autonomous" zones in every major city. Seiges and fire-bombings of local, state, and federal law enforcement. Basically, 2020 on steroids.

    It cant be over-estimated just how far to the left the Left has moved since Obama. They were unhinged over Trump's first election, imagine if he "cheated" to get four more years.

    Replies: @A123

  98. @dfordoom
    @Feryl


    I knew that was the case after every Supreme Court judge appointed by Trump refused to intervene. If you don’t have the Supreme Court, you have almost nothing (and Trump could’ve said “you’re gonna have to haul me outta here” and the Pentagon and DC police would’ve totally turned against him, arrested him, and Trump likely would’ve faced serious charges).
     
    Yep. It amazed me that so many dissident rightists and so many of the MAGA Hat Brigade really did think they were going to overturn the election result. The Supreme Court was never going to overturn an election result.

    And it amazed me that so many dissident rightists and so many of the MAGA Hat Brigade really did believe that the police and the military were going to support them. That kind of delusion thinking is really sad.

    Pence understood the situation. He understood that if he made any move to overturn the election result he would have been arrested and would have spent the rest of his life in prison. And he understood that the police and the military would have treated it as a coup attempt and there was the potential for people to get killed. When the police and the military respond to what they see as a coup the result is lots of people getting killed and lots and lots of people getting rounded up and imprisoned. And in a coup situation you can forget about fair trials.

    Pence was not prepared to risk such appalling consequences in a half-assed coup attempt that would certainly have failed.

    Replies: @Feryl

    It would’ve been the beginning of Civil War 2.0 had Pence, The Supreme Court, the Pentagon brass etc overturned the election. Remember, DC already was boarded up in anticipation of untermenschen riots should Trump have won (which would’ve been a prelude to an increased anti-MAGA insurgency).

    Then, when the MAGAs marched en masse to protest the 2020 election result (and eventually mock-beseiged the capitol), a quite understanble fear of a possible elite aided election reversal led to the swamp totally militarizing DC and doing loyalty checks on military personnel.

    The reality is that we were but a few stubborn generals and politicians away from the opening salvo of another Civil War. And this is what the swamp understands, but quite few normies dont. As Doom says, Pence (and essentially all of the conservative elites) took a relatively amicable path to spare us a bloody war. So what we have now is domination by SJW ideology and it’s Democrat and business tycoon enforcers. When only one side is playing to win, that’s what happens.

    • Agree: V. K. Ovelund
    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Feryl


    The reality is that we were but a few stubborn generals and politicians away from the opening salvo of another Civil War. And this is what the swamp understands, but quite few normies dont. As Doom says, Pence (and essentially all of the conservative elites) took a relatively amicable path to spare us a bloody war. So what we have now is domination by SJW ideology and it’s Democrat and business tycoon enforcers. When only one side is playing to win, that’s what happens.
     
    Playing to win is a great idea when you know the odds are stacked in your favour. When the odds are stacked against you it's a huge gamble which usually fails.

    When the game you're playing is an attempted revolution or an attempted coup the price for losing is very very high - anything from a bullet in the back of a head to years in prison for the leaders, and for the foot soldiers anything from getting beaten to a pulp by the cops to getting stomped in a bloodbath.

    I'd say that even if Pence had wanted to do something he had figured out that the odds of winning were very very poor indeed.

    Things might be bad now but civil wars can be a thousand times worse. Those right-wingers who yearn for civil war might care to do a bit of reading up on the Spanish Civil War, with particular reference to the massacres inflicted on the losers.

    Replies: @Feryl

  99. @A123
    @dfordoom


    Trying to overturn the election result would have been tantamount to staging a coup.
     
    So to avoid the "appearance of a coup", Pence participated in an actual coup? That makes very little sense.

    Taking steps to deal with rampant vote fraud would have been Constitutional, not a coup.

    the election result could not have been overturned on January 6th.
     
    If VP Pence had upheld the Constitution while there was a crowd demanding justice adjacent to the Supreme Court building -- The two most likely out comes would have been :

    -1- Supreme Court inaction allowing VP Pence's count for Trump, matching actual legitimate votes, to stand.
    -2- An Electoral College failure resulting in the House selecting Trump by 26+ states.

    It was not over until traitor Pence knowingly supported the Blue Coup by accepting the obviously tainted, illegitimate Electoral College fraud.

    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @Feryl

    We will never know exactly what would’ve happened had Pence (or any other key figure) attempted to overturn the election. But I do know it would’ve gotten really, really ugly. Were talking about likely assassinations of conservative politicians and judges. Demands for removal and prosecution of those involved in overturning the election. Mass civil unrest, “autonomous” zones in every major city. Seiges and fire-bombings of local, state, and federal law enforcement. Basically, 2020 on steroids.

    It cant be over-estimated just how far to the left the Left has moved since Obama. They were unhinged over Trump’s first election, imagine if he “cheated” to get four more years.

    • Agree: dfordoom
    • Replies: @A123
    @Feryl


    It cant be over-estimated just how far to the left the Left has moved since Obama. They were unhinged over Trump’s first election, imagine if he “cheated” to get four more years.
     
    So to avoid the potential for unjustifiable violence based on a false accusation of "cheating" ... VP Pence supported the Blue Coup. To "Save America", Pence killed Democracy and the Constitution.

    It does open the door to a new Constitution. One where every registered Democrat at the time of the Blue Coup is permanently barred from voting. There are a number of problems with the original document, and more importantly its interpretation by the Courts, that can be fixed via a rewrite.

    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @Feryl

  100. @Feryl
    @dfordoom

    It would've been the beginning of Civil War 2.0 had Pence, The Supreme Court, the Pentagon brass etc overturned the election. Remember, DC already was boarded up in anticipation of untermenschen riots should Trump have won (which would've been a prelude to an increased anti-MAGA insurgency).

    Then, when the MAGAs marched en masse to protest the 2020 election result (and eventually mock-beseiged the capitol), a quite understanble fear of a possible elite aided election reversal led to the swamp totally militarizing DC and doing loyalty checks on military personnel.

    The reality is that we were but a few stubborn generals and politicians away from the opening salvo of another Civil War. And this is what the swamp understands, but quite few normies dont. As Doom says, Pence (and essentially all of the conservative elites) took a relatively amicable path to spare us a bloody war. So what we have now is domination by SJW ideology and it's Democrat and business tycoon enforcers. When only one side is playing to win, that's what happens.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    The reality is that we were but a few stubborn generals and politicians away from the opening salvo of another Civil War. And this is what the swamp understands, but quite few normies dont. As Doom says, Pence (and essentially all of the conservative elites) took a relatively amicable path to spare us a bloody war. So what we have now is domination by SJW ideology and it’s Democrat and business tycoon enforcers. When only one side is playing to win, that’s what happens.

    Playing to win is a great idea when you know the odds are stacked in your favour. When the odds are stacked against you it’s a huge gamble which usually fails.

    When the game you’re playing is an attempted revolution or an attempted coup the price for losing is very very high – anything from a bullet in the back of a head to years in prison for the leaders, and for the foot soldiers anything from getting beaten to a pulp by the cops to getting stomped in a bloodbath.

    I’d say that even if Pence had wanted to do something he had figured out that the odds of winning were very very poor indeed.

    Things might be bad now but civil wars can be a thousand times worse. Those right-wingers who yearn for civil war might care to do a bit of reading up on the Spanish Civil War, with particular reference to the massacres inflicted on the losers.

    • Replies: @Feryl
    @dfordoom

    The Q Anon psyop was perfect, because it lulled a bunch of naive people into believing that "the good guys" were biding their time, until the right moment at the eleventh hour. In other words, buy MAGA apparel and sit on your butt.

    In reality, as the GOP leadership and the judiciary knows, there was a huge turn against Trump and the MAGAs by well-educated people, so they accepted defeat.

  101. A123 says:
    @Feryl
    @A123

    We will never know exactly what would've happened had Pence (or any other key figure) attempted to overturn the election. But I do know it would've gotten really, really ugly. Were talking about likely assassinations of conservative politicians and judges. Demands for removal and prosecution of those involved in overturning the election. Mass civil unrest, "autonomous" zones in every major city. Seiges and fire-bombings of local, state, and federal law enforcement. Basically, 2020 on steroids.

    It cant be over-estimated just how far to the left the Left has moved since Obama. They were unhinged over Trump's first election, imagine if he "cheated" to get four more years.

    Replies: @A123

    It cant be over-estimated just how far to the left the Left has moved since Obama. They were unhinged over Trump’s first election, imagine if he “cheated” to get four more years.

    So to avoid the potential for unjustifiable violence based on a false accusation of “cheating” … VP Pence supported the Blue Coup. To “Save America”, Pence killed Democracy and the Constitution.

    It does open the door to a new Constitution. One where every registered Democrat at the time of the Blue Coup is permanently barred from voting. There are a number of problems with the original document, and more importantly its interpretation by the Courts, that can be fixed via a rewrite.

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @Feryl
    @A123

    The Constitution was destroyed in 1946 when America "won" (let that sink in for a minute) WW2 then mutated into the successor to the British Empire. America as a nation was effectively finished, and as an Empire America has fallen into decadence remarkably fast, adamantly not doing things that make sense financially, socially, culturally, and in terms of foreign policy (ever since Korea in the 1950's, America has not totally defeated a formidable foe to long lasting favorable effect, mainly because Americans do not believe in any conflict passionately enough to absorb more casualties on their side while inflicting maximum punishment on the hated enemy).

    Also, the beginning of civil rights and PC in the 1950's was horrendous. Prior to the 1950's, Americans were largely free to "self" segregate as they saw fit (and also saw fit to freely judge and criticize various ethnic groups). But then our leaders stupidly insisted on mixing different ehnic groups together, which has badly corroded social trust and civic values (Americans use to rely heavily on ethnically homogeneous local civic and business networks) and basically mandated the building of a massive state and fedgov oriented society so as to replace now nearly non-existent local institutions. White Americans by the 70's realized that the country they built did not exist anymore. It had taken a turn for mercenary individualism and the bloated government giving people money and jobs to pacify them.

    Whites are depressed because corrupt megalomaniacs took their country right out from under them, just as soon as they could (the backyard BBQ era in the immediate aftermath of WW2). It just took some whites 70 years worth of mistakes to realize it. The origin of multi-culturalism lies in the effort to build a multi-ethnic coalition to satisfy the various ethnic groups in our empire. Pre-1946, it was perfectly alright to let whites stay in the driver's seat of their proudly modest and isolationist nation.

    Replies: @A123, @dfordoom

  102. @dfordoom
    @Feryl


    The reality is that we were but a few stubborn generals and politicians away from the opening salvo of another Civil War. And this is what the swamp understands, but quite few normies dont. As Doom says, Pence (and essentially all of the conservative elites) took a relatively amicable path to spare us a bloody war. So what we have now is domination by SJW ideology and it’s Democrat and business tycoon enforcers. When only one side is playing to win, that’s what happens.
     
    Playing to win is a great idea when you know the odds are stacked in your favour. When the odds are stacked against you it's a huge gamble which usually fails.

    When the game you're playing is an attempted revolution or an attempted coup the price for losing is very very high - anything from a bullet in the back of a head to years in prison for the leaders, and for the foot soldiers anything from getting beaten to a pulp by the cops to getting stomped in a bloodbath.

    I'd say that even if Pence had wanted to do something he had figured out that the odds of winning were very very poor indeed.

    Things might be bad now but civil wars can be a thousand times worse. Those right-wingers who yearn for civil war might care to do a bit of reading up on the Spanish Civil War, with particular reference to the massacres inflicted on the losers.

    Replies: @Feryl

    The Q Anon psyop was perfect, because it lulled a bunch of naive people into believing that “the good guys” were biding their time, until the right moment at the eleventh hour. In other words, buy MAGA apparel and sit on your butt.

    In reality, as the GOP leadership and the judiciary knows, there was a huge turn against Trump and the MAGAs by well-educated people, so they accepted defeat.

  103. @A123
    @Feryl


    It cant be over-estimated just how far to the left the Left has moved since Obama. They were unhinged over Trump’s first election, imagine if he “cheated” to get four more years.
     
    So to avoid the potential for unjustifiable violence based on a false accusation of "cheating" ... VP Pence supported the Blue Coup. To "Save America", Pence killed Democracy and the Constitution.

    It does open the door to a new Constitution. One where every registered Democrat at the time of the Blue Coup is permanently barred from voting. There are a number of problems with the original document, and more importantly its interpretation by the Courts, that can be fixed via a rewrite.

    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @Feryl

    The Constitution was destroyed in 1946 when America “won” (let that sink in for a minute) WW2 then mutated into the successor to the British Empire. America as a nation was effectively finished, and as an Empire America has fallen into decadence remarkably fast, adamantly not doing things that make sense financially, socially, culturally, and in terms of foreign policy (ever since Korea in the 1950’s, America has not totally defeated a formidable foe to long lasting favorable effect, mainly because Americans do not believe in any conflict passionately enough to absorb more casualties on their side while inflicting maximum punishment on the hated enemy).

    Also, the beginning of civil rights and PC in the 1950’s was horrendous. Prior to the 1950’s, Americans were largely free to “self” segregate as they saw fit (and also saw fit to freely judge and criticize various ethnic groups). But then our leaders stupidly insisted on mixing different ehnic groups together, which has badly corroded social trust and civic values (Americans use to rely heavily on ethnically homogeneous local civic and business networks) and basically mandated the building of a massive state and fedgov oriented society so as to replace now nearly non-existent local institutions. White Americans by the 70’s realized that the country they built did not exist anymore. It had taken a turn for mercenary individualism and the bloated government giving people money and jobs to pacify them.

    Whites are depressed because corrupt megalomaniacs took their country right out from under them, just as soon as they could (the backyard BBQ era in the immediate aftermath of WW2). It just took some whites 70 years worth of mistakes to realize it. The origin of multi-culturalism lies in the effort to build a multi-ethnic coalition to satisfy the various ethnic groups in our empire. Pre-1946, it was perfectly alright to let whites stay in the driver’s seat of their proudly modest and isolationist nation.

    • Thanks: V. K. Ovelund
    • Replies: @A123
    @Feryl

    While I have to disagree with the year 1946, some of your points are well taken.

    It might be better to say, "Pence The Betrayer delivered the last straw to the camel's back". The Constitution was already quite weak when Pence emulated Brutus.

    • The 10th Amendment was rendered meaningless long ago. Almost of the other problems tie back to this mistake.
    • The concept of 'drop location' citizenship is so absurd it should have been laughed out of court. Yet somehow 'birthright' citizenship became the law.
    • The 1st Amendment has been turned inside out to protect anti-Christians instead of Christians.
    • "Free Trade", outsourcing, H1B visas, etc. all suppressed the earning power of U.S. Citizens.

    I could go on with many more bullet points. Hopefully the new Constitution will be better, avoiding the mistakes of the last 100 years or so...

    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @dfordoom

    , @dfordoom
    @Feryl


    The Constitution was destroyed in 1946 when America “won” (let that sink in for a minute) WW2 then mutated into the successor to the British Empire. America as a nation was effectively finished
     
    There's a lot of truth in that. Among the many disastrous consequences was the National Security Act of 1947 which created the CIA. The creation of NATO in 1949 was another pernicious step. It's easy to forget that the creation of the Warsaw Pact in 1955 was a defensive response to NATO. The creation of NATO was perceived by the Soviets (correctly) as an aggressive anti-Soviet alliance. Other disastrous moves were the US-Australia Alliance and the creation of SEATO in 1954. Also the FBI was allowed to become more and more of a secret police organisation rather than a crime-fighting organisation.

    Those steps meant that the US was now an imperial power, committed to endless foreign wars and endless interference in the affairs of other nations. Those steps meant that the US would have a vast and unnecessary array of "intelligence" agencies that could easily get out of control and become a kind of unaccountable shadow government. Which is exactly what happened.

    The US became not only a conventional empire but an ideological empire, committed to spreading American ideology across the globe. But deciding exactly what that ideology was passed out of the hands of the American people and out of the hands even of the American government - it become something that got decided by shadowy secret and semi-secret agencies and by the military.

    The American empire also allowed the military-industrial complex to become a kind of shadow government. Foreign policy was no longer about what was good for America - it became all about what was good for the military and what was good for defence contractors.

    Much the same thing happened to the Roman after their victories over the Carthaginians and the Macedonians - the army became in effect the government.

    Replies: @Feryl, @Feryl, @V. K. Ovelund

  104. A123 says:
    @Feryl
    @A123

    The Constitution was destroyed in 1946 when America "won" (let that sink in for a minute) WW2 then mutated into the successor to the British Empire. America as a nation was effectively finished, and as an Empire America has fallen into decadence remarkably fast, adamantly not doing things that make sense financially, socially, culturally, and in terms of foreign policy (ever since Korea in the 1950's, America has not totally defeated a formidable foe to long lasting favorable effect, mainly because Americans do not believe in any conflict passionately enough to absorb more casualties on their side while inflicting maximum punishment on the hated enemy).

    Also, the beginning of civil rights and PC in the 1950's was horrendous. Prior to the 1950's, Americans were largely free to "self" segregate as they saw fit (and also saw fit to freely judge and criticize various ethnic groups). But then our leaders stupidly insisted on mixing different ehnic groups together, which has badly corroded social trust and civic values (Americans use to rely heavily on ethnically homogeneous local civic and business networks) and basically mandated the building of a massive state and fedgov oriented society so as to replace now nearly non-existent local institutions. White Americans by the 70's realized that the country they built did not exist anymore. It had taken a turn for mercenary individualism and the bloated government giving people money and jobs to pacify them.

    Whites are depressed because corrupt megalomaniacs took their country right out from under them, just as soon as they could (the backyard BBQ era in the immediate aftermath of WW2). It just took some whites 70 years worth of mistakes to realize it. The origin of multi-culturalism lies in the effort to build a multi-ethnic coalition to satisfy the various ethnic groups in our empire. Pre-1946, it was perfectly alright to let whites stay in the driver's seat of their proudly modest and isolationist nation.

    Replies: @A123, @dfordoom

    While I have to disagree with the year 1946, some of your points are well taken.

    It might be better to say, “Pence The Betrayer delivered the last straw to the camel’s back”. The Constitution was already quite weak when Pence emulated Brutus.

    • The 10th Amendment was rendered meaningless long ago. Almost of the other problems tie back to this mistake.
    • The concept of ‘drop location’ citizenship is so absurd it should have been laughed out of court. Yet somehow ‘birthright’ citizenship became the law.
    • The 1st Amendment has been turned inside out to protect anti-Christians instead of Christians.
    • “Free Trade”, outsourcing, H1B visas, etc. all suppressed the earning power of U.S. Citizens.

    I could go on with many more bullet points. Hopefully the new Constitution will be better, avoiding the mistakes of the last 100 years or so…

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @A123


    The 1st Amendment has been turned inside out to protect anti-Christians instead of Christians.
     
    Aren't you overlooking the whole freedom of religion thing? Freedom of religion implies freedom from religion for those who so choose. Many of the Founding Fathers were hardly Christians in any meaningful sense. The US was created as a secular state. If you want to follow a religion you should be free to do so, and you should be free to choose which religion you follow.

    You're correct in saying that the 1st Amendment gets used to attack Christianity but surely what it should be for is to protect all religious beliefs (including the beliefs of those who choose to have no religion). It should protect Christians and non-Christians.

    Replies: @A123

  105. @Feryl
    @A123

    The Constitution was destroyed in 1946 when America "won" (let that sink in for a minute) WW2 then mutated into the successor to the British Empire. America as a nation was effectively finished, and as an Empire America has fallen into decadence remarkably fast, adamantly not doing things that make sense financially, socially, culturally, and in terms of foreign policy (ever since Korea in the 1950's, America has not totally defeated a formidable foe to long lasting favorable effect, mainly because Americans do not believe in any conflict passionately enough to absorb more casualties on their side while inflicting maximum punishment on the hated enemy).

    Also, the beginning of civil rights and PC in the 1950's was horrendous. Prior to the 1950's, Americans were largely free to "self" segregate as they saw fit (and also saw fit to freely judge and criticize various ethnic groups). But then our leaders stupidly insisted on mixing different ehnic groups together, which has badly corroded social trust and civic values (Americans use to rely heavily on ethnically homogeneous local civic and business networks) and basically mandated the building of a massive state and fedgov oriented society so as to replace now nearly non-existent local institutions. White Americans by the 70's realized that the country they built did not exist anymore. It had taken a turn for mercenary individualism and the bloated government giving people money and jobs to pacify them.

    Whites are depressed because corrupt megalomaniacs took their country right out from under them, just as soon as they could (the backyard BBQ era in the immediate aftermath of WW2). It just took some whites 70 years worth of mistakes to realize it. The origin of multi-culturalism lies in the effort to build a multi-ethnic coalition to satisfy the various ethnic groups in our empire. Pre-1946, it was perfectly alright to let whites stay in the driver's seat of their proudly modest and isolationist nation.

    Replies: @A123, @dfordoom

    The Constitution was destroyed in 1946 when America “won” (let that sink in for a minute) WW2 then mutated into the successor to the British Empire. America as a nation was effectively finished

    There’s a lot of truth in that. Among the many disastrous consequences was the National Security Act of 1947 which created the CIA. The creation of NATO in 1949 was another pernicious step. It’s easy to forget that the creation of the Warsaw Pact in 1955 was a defensive response to NATO. The creation of NATO was perceived by the Soviets (correctly) as an aggressive anti-Soviet alliance. Other disastrous moves were the US-Australia Alliance and the creation of SEATO in 1954. Also the FBI was allowed to become more and more of a secret police organisation rather than a crime-fighting organisation.

    Those steps meant that the US was now an imperial power, committed to endless foreign wars and endless interference in the affairs of other nations. Those steps meant that the US would have a vast and unnecessary array of “intelligence” agencies that could easily get out of control and become a kind of unaccountable shadow government. Which is exactly what happened.

    The US became not only a conventional empire but an ideological empire, committed to spreading American ideology across the globe. But deciding exactly what that ideology was passed out of the hands of the American people and out of the hands even of the American government – it become something that got decided by shadowy secret and semi-secret agencies and by the military.

    The American empire also allowed the military-industrial complex to become a kind of shadow government. Foreign policy was no longer about what was good for America – it became all about what was good for the military and what was good for defence contractors.

    Much the same thing happened to the Roman after their victories over the Carthaginians and the Macedonians – the army became in effect the government.

    • Replies: @Feryl
    @dfordoom

    Also, Americans were more pro-war before 1946 because such things were perceived by Americans to be at least partially rooted in genuine defense of America, as opposed to purely offensive and cynical actual and threatened foreign conflicts.

    As for woke imperialism, all empires have that ideology (e.g., the empire's values are a ray of enlightened sunshine). You muscle in on a particular place or tribe, then buy off the leaders by making them feel valued and special. Uncooperative cheiftans are demonized, suppressed, or killed.

    Peter Turchin says that growth in layers of institutional bureaucracy are an indicator of rising greed and corruption. Too many wannabe champions and fat cats, not enough people comfortable being average Joes. And as you said, bully enforcers of an arrogant elite attitude.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    , @Feryl
    @dfordoom


    Those steps meant that the US was now an imperial power, committed to endless foreign wars and endless interference in the affairs of other nations. Those steps meant that the US would have a vast and unnecessary array of “intelligence” agencies that could easily get out of control and become a kind of unaccountable shadow government. Which is exactly what happened
     
    And all the major media outlets, especially MSNBC, now routinely have current and former intelligence officials whose claims are rarely scrutinized. We went from having few of these people (pre-WW2), to being skeptical of them (1946-1990's), to the post-9/11 disaster.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    , @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom

    It's ancient history now, so please do not think that I am defending more recent American aggression. Moreover, excessive disputation over long-dead quarrels, when one is in the midst during 2021 of a live civilizational crisis, is unbefitting, so I shall try not to do that! However, ...


    The creation of NATO was perceived by the Soviets (correctly) as an aggressive anti-Soviet alliance.
     
    ... every alliance is probably aggressive anti-somebody. I thought and still think that the Soviet Union of 1949 was pernicious and dangerous. Measures were necessary. NATO was as good a measure as any. Better yet, NATO achieved its original aim.

    I just wish that my countrymen would realize that the Soviet Union is now quite dead, instead of desperately imagining Putler to be Lenin's protégé.

    Replies: @dfordoom

  106. @A123
    @Feryl

    While I have to disagree with the year 1946, some of your points are well taken.

    It might be better to say, "Pence The Betrayer delivered the last straw to the camel's back". The Constitution was already quite weak when Pence emulated Brutus.

    • The 10th Amendment was rendered meaningless long ago. Almost of the other problems tie back to this mistake.
    • The concept of 'drop location' citizenship is so absurd it should have been laughed out of court. Yet somehow 'birthright' citizenship became the law.
    • The 1st Amendment has been turned inside out to protect anti-Christians instead of Christians.
    • "Free Trade", outsourcing, H1B visas, etc. all suppressed the earning power of U.S. Citizens.

    I could go on with many more bullet points. Hopefully the new Constitution will be better, avoiding the mistakes of the last 100 years or so...

    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @dfordoom

    The 1st Amendment has been turned inside out to protect anti-Christians instead of Christians.

    Aren’t you overlooking the whole freedom of religion thing? Freedom of religion implies freedom from religion for those who so choose. Many of the Founding Fathers were hardly Christians in any meaningful sense. The US was created as a secular state. If you want to follow a religion you should be free to do so, and you should be free to choose which religion you follow.

    You’re correct in saying that the 1st Amendment gets used to attack Christianity but surely what it should be for is to protect all religious beliefs (including the beliefs of those who choose to have no religion). It should protect Christians and non-Christians.

    • Replies: @A123
    @dfordoom


    Aren’t you overlooking the whole freedom of religion thing? Freedom of religion implies freedom from religion for those who so choose. Many of the Founding Fathers were hardly Christians in any meaningful sense. The US was created as a secular state.
     
    The 1st Amendment was aimed at the risk of a formal "state church" in the U.S. After fighting for Christian freedom, there was a desire to prevent losing that to other Christians. To illustrate, they did not want a Church of Virginia or Church of America to form that worked like the Church of England [CoE].

    Some of the Founding Fathers were not particularly enthusiastic Christians. However, it is overreach to say that the were trying to create "safe spaces" to protect those who would undermine the new Christian nation The document would have never been signed with protections for anti-Christians (e.g. Satanists). Similiarly, there is no way the Founding Fathers would have signed to protect aggressive anti-Christian secularism (e.g.. "freedom from religion"). The Constitution is not a club that Atheists can wield to beat down Christians

    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @dfordoom, @anon

  107. @dfordoom
    @Feryl


    The Constitution was destroyed in 1946 when America “won” (let that sink in for a minute) WW2 then mutated into the successor to the British Empire. America as a nation was effectively finished
     
    There's a lot of truth in that. Among the many disastrous consequences was the National Security Act of 1947 which created the CIA. The creation of NATO in 1949 was another pernicious step. It's easy to forget that the creation of the Warsaw Pact in 1955 was a defensive response to NATO. The creation of NATO was perceived by the Soviets (correctly) as an aggressive anti-Soviet alliance. Other disastrous moves were the US-Australia Alliance and the creation of SEATO in 1954. Also the FBI was allowed to become more and more of a secret police organisation rather than a crime-fighting organisation.

    Those steps meant that the US was now an imperial power, committed to endless foreign wars and endless interference in the affairs of other nations. Those steps meant that the US would have a vast and unnecessary array of "intelligence" agencies that could easily get out of control and become a kind of unaccountable shadow government. Which is exactly what happened.

    The US became not only a conventional empire but an ideological empire, committed to spreading American ideology across the globe. But deciding exactly what that ideology was passed out of the hands of the American people and out of the hands even of the American government - it become something that got decided by shadowy secret and semi-secret agencies and by the military.

    The American empire also allowed the military-industrial complex to become a kind of shadow government. Foreign policy was no longer about what was good for America - it became all about what was good for the military and what was good for defence contractors.

    Much the same thing happened to the Roman after their victories over the Carthaginians and the Macedonians - the army became in effect the government.

    Replies: @Feryl, @Feryl, @V. K. Ovelund

    Also, Americans were more pro-war before 1946 because such things were perceived by Americans to be at least partially rooted in genuine defense of America, as opposed to purely offensive and cynical actual and threatened foreign conflicts.

    As for woke imperialism, all empires have that ideology (e.g., the empire’s values are a ray of enlightened sunshine). You muscle in on a particular place or tribe, then buy off the leaders by making them feel valued and special. Uncooperative cheiftans are demonized, suppressed, or killed.

    Peter Turchin says that growth in layers of institutional bureaucracy are an indicator of rising greed and corruption. Too many wannabe champions and fat cats, not enough people comfortable being average Joes. And as you said, bully enforcers of an arrogant elite attitude.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Feryl


    Peter Turchin says that growth in layers of institutional bureaucracy are an indicator of rising greed and corruption. Too many wannabe champions and fat cats, not enough people comfortable being average Joes. And as you said, bully enforcers of an arrogant elite attitude.
     
    The Cold War encouraged that even further. It encouraged the growth of a massive foreign policy and "defence" bureaucracy which gorged itself on corrupt payments from defence contractors. And politicians became enmeshed in the web of corruption.

    The Cold War was very corrupting. Empires are very corrupting.

    And then you have think tanks, all of which are simply propaganda outlets and conduits for even more corruption. And think tanks are another example of shadow governments.

    Shutting down the CIA and the FBI and all the other "national security" agencies is something that needs to be done. They serve no useful purpose so, in order to justify their existence, they create new enemies. They have played a major part in creating totally unnecessary new Cold Wars against Russia and China, embroiling the US in stupid unnecessary wars and they have created totally imaginary new domestic enemies. They need to be shut down. And think tanks need to be shut down.
  108. @dfordoom
    @Feryl


    The Constitution was destroyed in 1946 when America “won” (let that sink in for a minute) WW2 then mutated into the successor to the British Empire. America as a nation was effectively finished
     
    There's a lot of truth in that. Among the many disastrous consequences was the National Security Act of 1947 which created the CIA. The creation of NATO in 1949 was another pernicious step. It's easy to forget that the creation of the Warsaw Pact in 1955 was a defensive response to NATO. The creation of NATO was perceived by the Soviets (correctly) as an aggressive anti-Soviet alliance. Other disastrous moves were the US-Australia Alliance and the creation of SEATO in 1954. Also the FBI was allowed to become more and more of a secret police organisation rather than a crime-fighting organisation.

    Those steps meant that the US was now an imperial power, committed to endless foreign wars and endless interference in the affairs of other nations. Those steps meant that the US would have a vast and unnecessary array of "intelligence" agencies that could easily get out of control and become a kind of unaccountable shadow government. Which is exactly what happened.

    The US became not only a conventional empire but an ideological empire, committed to spreading American ideology across the globe. But deciding exactly what that ideology was passed out of the hands of the American people and out of the hands even of the American government - it become something that got decided by shadowy secret and semi-secret agencies and by the military.

    The American empire also allowed the military-industrial complex to become a kind of shadow government. Foreign policy was no longer about what was good for America - it became all about what was good for the military and what was good for defence contractors.

    Much the same thing happened to the Roman after their victories over the Carthaginians and the Macedonians - the army became in effect the government.

    Replies: @Feryl, @Feryl, @V. K. Ovelund

    Those steps meant that the US was now an imperial power, committed to endless foreign wars and endless interference in the affairs of other nations. Those steps meant that the US would have a vast and unnecessary array of “intelligence” agencies that could easily get out of control and become a kind of unaccountable shadow government. Which is exactly what happened

    And all the major media outlets, especially MSNBC, now routinely have current and former intelligence officials whose claims are rarely scrutinized. We went from having few of these people (pre-WW2), to being skeptical of them (1946-1990’s), to the post-9/11 disaster.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Feryl


    And all the major media outlets, especially MSNBC, now routinely have current and former intelligence officials whose claims are rarely scrutinized. We went from having few of these people (pre-WW2), to being skeptical of them (1946-1990’s), to the post-9/11 disaster.
     
    Yes.

    One of the most depressing things about recent history is that back in the 60s and 70s the Left knew and understood that the CIA and the FBI were evil and untrustworthy. The Old Left knew that, and in the 70s even the New Left understood that. Now we have a "Left" that worships the FBI and the CIA.

    It's not just a US thing. It's an Anglosphere thing. The healthy scepticism that the British Left used to have of outfits like MI5 and MI6 has largely vanished. It's the same in Australia. Worship of the spook agencies (ASIO and ASIS), worship of the military, a complete subservience to a foreign policy establishment that is rabidly pro-American Empire.

    The disappearance of the anti-war Left has been a catastrophe. It means there's nobody to oppose imperial policies.
  109. @Feryl
    @dfordoom

    Also, Americans were more pro-war before 1946 because such things were perceived by Americans to be at least partially rooted in genuine defense of America, as opposed to purely offensive and cynical actual and threatened foreign conflicts.

    As for woke imperialism, all empires have that ideology (e.g., the empire's values are a ray of enlightened sunshine). You muscle in on a particular place or tribe, then buy off the leaders by making them feel valued and special. Uncooperative cheiftans are demonized, suppressed, or killed.

    Peter Turchin says that growth in layers of institutional bureaucracy are an indicator of rising greed and corruption. Too many wannabe champions and fat cats, not enough people comfortable being average Joes. And as you said, bully enforcers of an arrogant elite attitude.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    Peter Turchin says that growth in layers of institutional bureaucracy are an indicator of rising greed and corruption. Too many wannabe champions and fat cats, not enough people comfortable being average Joes. And as you said, bully enforcers of an arrogant elite attitude.

    The Cold War encouraged that even further. It encouraged the growth of a massive foreign policy and “defence” bureaucracy which gorged itself on corrupt payments from defence contractors. And politicians became enmeshed in the web of corruption.

    The Cold War was very corrupting. Empires are very corrupting.

    And then you have think tanks, all of which are simply propaganda outlets and conduits for even more corruption. And think tanks are another example of shadow governments.

    Shutting down the CIA and the FBI and all the other “national security” agencies is something that needs to be done. They serve no useful purpose so, in order to justify their existence, they create new enemies. They have played a major part in creating totally unnecessary new Cold Wars against Russia and China, embroiling the US in stupid unnecessary wars and they have created totally imaginary new domestic enemies. They need to be shut down. And think tanks need to be shut down.

  110. @Feryl
    @dfordoom


    Those steps meant that the US was now an imperial power, committed to endless foreign wars and endless interference in the affairs of other nations. Those steps meant that the US would have a vast and unnecessary array of “intelligence” agencies that could easily get out of control and become a kind of unaccountable shadow government. Which is exactly what happened
     
    And all the major media outlets, especially MSNBC, now routinely have current and former intelligence officials whose claims are rarely scrutinized. We went from having few of these people (pre-WW2), to being skeptical of them (1946-1990's), to the post-9/11 disaster.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    And all the major media outlets, especially MSNBC, now routinely have current and former intelligence officials whose claims are rarely scrutinized. We went from having few of these people (pre-WW2), to being skeptical of them (1946-1990’s), to the post-9/11 disaster.

    Yes.

    One of the most depressing things about recent history is that back in the 60s and 70s the Left knew and understood that the CIA and the FBI were evil and untrustworthy. The Old Left knew that, and in the 70s even the New Left understood that. Now we have a “Left” that worships the FBI and the CIA.

    It’s not just a US thing. It’s an Anglosphere thing. The healthy scepticism that the British Left used to have of outfits like MI5 and MI6 has largely vanished. It’s the same in Australia. Worship of the spook agencies (ASIO and ASIS), worship of the military, a complete subservience to a foreign policy establishment that is rabidly pro-American Empire.

    The disappearance of the anti-war Left has been a catastrophe. It means there’s nobody to oppose imperial policies.

  111. @dfordoom
    @Feryl


    The Constitution was destroyed in 1946 when America “won” (let that sink in for a minute) WW2 then mutated into the successor to the British Empire. America as a nation was effectively finished
     
    There's a lot of truth in that. Among the many disastrous consequences was the National Security Act of 1947 which created the CIA. The creation of NATO in 1949 was another pernicious step. It's easy to forget that the creation of the Warsaw Pact in 1955 was a defensive response to NATO. The creation of NATO was perceived by the Soviets (correctly) as an aggressive anti-Soviet alliance. Other disastrous moves were the US-Australia Alliance and the creation of SEATO in 1954. Also the FBI was allowed to become more and more of a secret police organisation rather than a crime-fighting organisation.

    Those steps meant that the US was now an imperial power, committed to endless foreign wars and endless interference in the affairs of other nations. Those steps meant that the US would have a vast and unnecessary array of "intelligence" agencies that could easily get out of control and become a kind of unaccountable shadow government. Which is exactly what happened.

    The US became not only a conventional empire but an ideological empire, committed to spreading American ideology across the globe. But deciding exactly what that ideology was passed out of the hands of the American people and out of the hands even of the American government - it become something that got decided by shadowy secret and semi-secret agencies and by the military.

    The American empire also allowed the military-industrial complex to become a kind of shadow government. Foreign policy was no longer about what was good for America - it became all about what was good for the military and what was good for defence contractors.

    Much the same thing happened to the Roman after their victories over the Carthaginians and the Macedonians - the army became in effect the government.

    Replies: @Feryl, @Feryl, @V. K. Ovelund

    It’s ancient history now, so please do not think that I am defending more recent American aggression. Moreover, excessive disputation over long-dead quarrels, when one is in the midst during 2021 of a live civilizational crisis, is unbefitting, so I shall try not to do that! However, …

    The creation of NATO was perceived by the Soviets (correctly) as an aggressive anti-Soviet alliance.

    … every alliance is probably aggressive anti-somebody. I thought and still think that the Soviet Union of 1949 was pernicious and dangerous. Measures were necessary. NATO was as good a measure as any. Better yet, NATO achieved its original aim.

    I just wish that my countrymen would realize that the Soviet Union is now quite dead, instead of desperately imagining Putler to be Lenin’s protégé.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @V. K. Ovelund



    The creation of NATO was perceived by the Soviets (correctly) as an aggressive anti-Soviet alliance.
     
    … every alliance is probably aggressive anti-somebody. I thought and still think that the Soviet Union of 1949 was pernicious and dangerous. Measures were necessary. NATO was as good a measure as any. Better yet, NATO achieved its original aim.
     
    Yes, NATO did achieve its original aim. Its original aim was American global hegemony. Its original aim was to impose American cultural values on the entire globe.

    And to those Americans who were behind the creation of NATO American cultural values meant American liberalism. American liberalism is everything that social conservatives hate and fear.

    The reason that America is now a country that you no longer recognise as your country is the very American liberalism that NATO was created to impose on the entire world.

    Social conservatives, conservative Christians and those like yourself who wanted a white conservative America were mistaken in thinking that the United States was the good guy. The US was every bit as big a threat to western civilisation as communism. In fact, with the benefit of hindsight, it's now obvious that American liberalism was the greater long-term threat.

    I'm not blaming ordinary Americans. Ordinary Americans did not realise that the US had gone bad and that the US was becoming an evil empire that was going to destroy all the basically conservative basically Christian values that those ordinary Americans believed in.

    The anti-communist hysteria of the 1950s was created in order to distract Americans from the fact that their own elites (which at the time were mostly WASP rather than Jewish) had turned against them and that American liberalism had become an ideology that was just as much a revolutionary ideology as communism ever was. And it had become an ideology that was rabidly opposed to traditional Christian values.

    In the period from 1945 to the end of the 1970s Soviet communism gradually grew more moderate and more socially conservative. American liberalism gradually grew more extreme and more opposed to the traditional values that the average American believed in. And American liberalism gradually became more and more a dangerous radical missionary ideology that the United States was imposing on other societies.

    The irony was that by the time Reagan came along it was the Warsaw Pact that was the bastion of socially conservative traditional values. From the point of view of social conservatives, conservative Christians and traditionalist white Americans it was the United States that was the Evil Empire. But social conservatives, conservative Christians and traditionalist white Americans were so obsessed by anti-communism that they failed to understand this.

    Social conservatives, conservative Christians and traditionalist white Americans should have been praying for the Soviet Union to survive. The Soviet Union provided the only viable opposition to the American Empire.

    The US victory in the Cold War and the destruction of the Soviet Union led inevitably to the triumph of everything that people like yourself hated and feared (with considerable justification). It led inevitably to what Steve Sailer calls The Great Awokening.

    NATO was, from the start, a force for evil.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

  112. @dfordoom
    @A123


    The 1st Amendment has been turned inside out to protect anti-Christians instead of Christians.
     
    Aren't you overlooking the whole freedom of religion thing? Freedom of religion implies freedom from religion for those who so choose. Many of the Founding Fathers were hardly Christians in any meaningful sense. The US was created as a secular state. If you want to follow a religion you should be free to do so, and you should be free to choose which religion you follow.

    You're correct in saying that the 1st Amendment gets used to attack Christianity but surely what it should be for is to protect all religious beliefs (including the beliefs of those who choose to have no religion). It should protect Christians and non-Christians.

    Replies: @A123

    Aren’t you overlooking the whole freedom of religion thing? Freedom of religion implies freedom from religion for those who so choose. Many of the Founding Fathers were hardly Christians in any meaningful sense. The US was created as a secular state.

    The 1st Amendment was aimed at the risk of a formal “state church” in the U.S. After fighting for Christian freedom, there was a desire to prevent losing that to other Christians. To illustrate, they did not want a Church of Virginia or Church of America to form that worked like the Church of England [CoE].

    Some of the Founding Fathers were not particularly enthusiastic Christians. However, it is overreach to say that the were trying to create “safe spaces” to protect those who would undermine the new Christian nation The document would have never been signed with protections for anti-Christians (e.g. Satanists). Similiarly, there is no way the Founding Fathers would have signed to protect aggressive anti-Christian secularism (e.g.. “freedom from religion”). The Constitution is not a club that Atheists can wield to beat down Christians

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @A123


    Some of the Founding Fathers were not particularly enthusiastic Christians.
     
    LOL. Many were not Christians at all.

    However, it is overreach to say that the were trying to create “safe spaces” to protect those who would undermine the new Christian nation The document would have never been signed with protections for anti-Christians (e.g. Satanists). Similiarly, there is no way the Founding Fathers would have signed to protect aggressive anti-Christian secularism (e.g.. “freedom from religion”). The Constitution is not a club that Atheists can wield to beat down Christians
     
    The US was created as a secular state. There's no way you can get around that.

    The free exercise of religion implies the freedom to choose any damned religious belief you choose, including atheism and Deism.

    The document should not be used as a club to beat down anyone, Christian or non-Christian.

    The are rightists who wish that the US had been created as a Christian state, but it wasn't.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @A123

    , @anon
    @A123

    The 1st Amendment was aimed at the risk of a formal “state church” in the U.S.

    The intent was to prevent a formal National Church.

    After fighting for Christian freedom, there was a desire to prevent losing that to other Christians. To illustrate, they did not want a Church of Virginia or Church of America to form that worked like the Church of England [CoE].

    A Church of Virginia would have been just fine, it's the "Church of the United States" that was regarded as dangerous, and rightly so, circa 1795. Church taxes were still being collected in New England into the early 19th century, these taxes were used to support the state church of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, etc.

    See this article.
    https://www.uscivilliberties.org/historical-overview/3703-disestablishment-of-state-churches-in-the-late-eighteenth-century-and-early-nineteenth-century.html

    Some of the Founding Fathers were not particularly enthusiastic Christians.

    It is more accurate to state that some of them were Deists, this was not at all uncommon in the 18th century.

    However, it is overreach to say that the were trying to create “safe spaces” to protect those who would undermine the new Christian nation

    This is accurate.

  113. @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom

    It's ancient history now, so please do not think that I am defending more recent American aggression. Moreover, excessive disputation over long-dead quarrels, when one is in the midst during 2021 of a live civilizational crisis, is unbefitting, so I shall try not to do that! However, ...


    The creation of NATO was perceived by the Soviets (correctly) as an aggressive anti-Soviet alliance.
     
    ... every alliance is probably aggressive anti-somebody. I thought and still think that the Soviet Union of 1949 was pernicious and dangerous. Measures were necessary. NATO was as good a measure as any. Better yet, NATO achieved its original aim.

    I just wish that my countrymen would realize that the Soviet Union is now quite dead, instead of desperately imagining Putler to be Lenin's protégé.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    The creation of NATO was perceived by the Soviets (correctly) as an aggressive anti-Soviet alliance.

    … every alliance is probably aggressive anti-somebody. I thought and still think that the Soviet Union of 1949 was pernicious and dangerous. Measures were necessary. NATO was as good a measure as any. Better yet, NATO achieved its original aim.

    Yes, NATO did achieve its original aim. Its original aim was American global hegemony. Its original aim was to impose American cultural values on the entire globe.

    And to those Americans who were behind the creation of NATO American cultural values meant American liberalism. American liberalism is everything that social conservatives hate and fear.

    The reason that America is now a country that you no longer recognise as your country is the very American liberalism that NATO was created to impose on the entire world.

    Social conservatives, conservative Christians and those like yourself who wanted a white conservative America were mistaken in thinking that the United States was the good guy. The US was every bit as big a threat to western civilisation as communism. In fact, with the benefit of hindsight, it’s now obvious that American liberalism was the greater long-term threat.

    I’m not blaming ordinary Americans. Ordinary Americans did not realise that the US had gone bad and that the US was becoming an evil empire that was going to destroy all the basically conservative basically Christian values that those ordinary Americans believed in.

    The anti-communist hysteria of the 1950s was created in order to distract Americans from the fact that their own elites (which at the time were mostly WASP rather than Jewish) had turned against them and that American liberalism had become an ideology that was just as much a revolutionary ideology as communism ever was. And it had become an ideology that was rabidly opposed to traditional Christian values.

    In the period from 1945 to the end of the 1970s Soviet communism gradually grew more moderate and more socially conservative. American liberalism gradually grew more extreme and more opposed to the traditional values that the average American believed in. And American liberalism gradually became more and more a dangerous radical missionary ideology that the United States was imposing on other societies.

    The irony was that by the time Reagan came along it was the Warsaw Pact that was the bastion of socially conservative traditional values. From the point of view of social conservatives, conservative Christians and traditionalist white Americans it was the United States that was the Evil Empire. But social conservatives, conservative Christians and traditionalist white Americans were so obsessed by anti-communism that they failed to understand this.

    Social conservatives, conservative Christians and traditionalist white Americans should have been praying for the Soviet Union to survive. The Soviet Union provided the only viable opposition to the American Empire.

    The US victory in the Cold War and the destruction of the Soviet Union led inevitably to the triumph of everything that people like yourself hated and feared (with considerable justification). It led inevitably to what Steve Sailer calls The Great Awokening.

    NATO was, from the start, a force for evil.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom

    Your presentation builds up such a head of steam, one fears to impede it! It would flatten anyone who stood in its path.

    Seriously, you make several sound points, nor is the manner in which you present the points merely stitched together. It is seamless.

    I have noted before that your concept of life in the United States is in some ways decades out of date, but that's always how it is, isn't it? My concept of life in, say, Mexico is undoubtedly decades out of date. We are all like that.

    And that suggests that, when I was a young, fiercely patriotic, enlisted cold warrior during the 1980s, absolutely convinced that I was fighting for good over evil, my concept of life in the Soviet Union was decades out of date.

    I cannot subscribe to your entire interpretation. The United States during the 1970s and 1980s remained a free country, while the Soviet citizen as far as I know still suffered from internal passport controls, bread queues, and so on. The Gulags had not then been wholly emptied; and Guantanamo was then a naval station, not a prison. It is hard to dispute in any case that the numbers of persons fleeing westward out of the Soviet bloc dwarfed the number fleeing eastward into it.

    The main reason I cannot subscribe, however, is simply that I am and remain an American.

    Anyway, thanks for the post. There is plenty to think about there.

    Replies: @dfordoom

  114. @A123
    @dfordoom


    Aren’t you overlooking the whole freedom of religion thing? Freedom of religion implies freedom from religion for those who so choose. Many of the Founding Fathers were hardly Christians in any meaningful sense. The US was created as a secular state.
     
    The 1st Amendment was aimed at the risk of a formal "state church" in the U.S. After fighting for Christian freedom, there was a desire to prevent losing that to other Christians. To illustrate, they did not want a Church of Virginia or Church of America to form that worked like the Church of England [CoE].

    Some of the Founding Fathers were not particularly enthusiastic Christians. However, it is overreach to say that the were trying to create "safe spaces" to protect those who would undermine the new Christian nation The document would have never been signed with protections for anti-Christians (e.g. Satanists). Similiarly, there is no way the Founding Fathers would have signed to protect aggressive anti-Christian secularism (e.g.. "freedom from religion"). The Constitution is not a club that Atheists can wield to beat down Christians

    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @dfordoom, @anon

    Some of the Founding Fathers were not particularly enthusiastic Christians.

    LOL. Many were not Christians at all.

    However, it is overreach to say that the were trying to create “safe spaces” to protect those who would undermine the new Christian nation The document would have never been signed with protections for anti-Christians (e.g. Satanists). Similiarly, there is no way the Founding Fathers would have signed to protect aggressive anti-Christian secularism (e.g.. “freedom from religion”). The Constitution is not a club that Atheists can wield to beat down Christians

    The US was created as a secular state. There’s no way you can get around that.

    The free exercise of religion implies the freedom to choose any damned religious belief you choose, including atheism and Deism.

    The document should not be used as a club to beat down anyone, Christian or non-Christian.

    The are rightists who wish that the US had been created as a Christian state, but it wasn’t.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom


    The US was created as a secular state. There’s no way you can get around that.
     
    It is unnecessary to get around it, because it isn't true. Post-Revolutionary Mexico was created as a secular state, but the US is not Mexico.

    The several US states agreed that the federal power they had created would establish a currency and a navy but not a church. That's it. Americans did not understand that they were creating a secular state, but rather that New England Puritans would not try to interfere with Maryland's Catholicism, that Maryland Catholics would not dispute New Jersey's anti-Catholicism, and so on.

    It was not until the 14th Amendment, 1868, during the era of Andrew Johnson, 17th president, that Americans gained a federal right to free religion.

    , @A123
    @dfordoom


    The US was created as a secular state. There’s no way you can get around that.
     
    The U.S. was created to not have a "National Church" or "State Churches". The U.S. was explicitly designed to be Christian.

    The Constitution would never have been signed if it promised anti-Christian secularism. There is no way you can get around that. The idea of "freedom from religion" is a modern concept erroneously misinterpreted into the Constitution.
    _____

    VK,

    During the edit window, I notice that you posted something quite similar. Thanks.

    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @dfordoom

  115. anon[273] • Disclaimer says:
    @A123
    @dfordoom


    Aren’t you overlooking the whole freedom of religion thing? Freedom of religion implies freedom from religion for those who so choose. Many of the Founding Fathers were hardly Christians in any meaningful sense. The US was created as a secular state.
     
    The 1st Amendment was aimed at the risk of a formal "state church" in the U.S. After fighting for Christian freedom, there was a desire to prevent losing that to other Christians. To illustrate, they did not want a Church of Virginia or Church of America to form that worked like the Church of England [CoE].

    Some of the Founding Fathers were not particularly enthusiastic Christians. However, it is overreach to say that the were trying to create "safe spaces" to protect those who would undermine the new Christian nation The document would have never been signed with protections for anti-Christians (e.g. Satanists). Similiarly, there is no way the Founding Fathers would have signed to protect aggressive anti-Christian secularism (e.g.. "freedom from religion"). The Constitution is not a club that Atheists can wield to beat down Christians

    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @dfordoom, @anon

    The 1st Amendment was aimed at the risk of a formal “state church” in the U.S.

    The intent was to prevent a formal National Church.

    After fighting for Christian freedom, there was a desire to prevent losing that to other Christians. To illustrate, they did not want a Church of Virginia or Church of America to form that worked like the Church of England [CoE].

    A Church of Virginia would have been just fine, it’s the “Church of the United States” that was regarded as dangerous, and rightly so, circa 1795. Church taxes were still being collected in New England into the early 19th century, these taxes were used to support the state church of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, etc.

    See this article.
    https://www.uscivilliberties.org/historical-overview/3703-disestablishment-of-state-churches-in-the-late-eighteenth-century-and-early-nineteenth-century.html

    Some of the Founding Fathers were not particularly enthusiastic Christians.

    It is more accurate to state that some of them were Deists, this was not at all uncommon in the 18th century.

    However, it is overreach to say that the were trying to create “safe spaces” to protect those who would undermine the new Christian nation

    This is accurate.

  116. @dfordoom
    @V. K. Ovelund



    The creation of NATO was perceived by the Soviets (correctly) as an aggressive anti-Soviet alliance.
     
    … every alliance is probably aggressive anti-somebody. I thought and still think that the Soviet Union of 1949 was pernicious and dangerous. Measures were necessary. NATO was as good a measure as any. Better yet, NATO achieved its original aim.
     
    Yes, NATO did achieve its original aim. Its original aim was American global hegemony. Its original aim was to impose American cultural values on the entire globe.

    And to those Americans who were behind the creation of NATO American cultural values meant American liberalism. American liberalism is everything that social conservatives hate and fear.

    The reason that America is now a country that you no longer recognise as your country is the very American liberalism that NATO was created to impose on the entire world.

    Social conservatives, conservative Christians and those like yourself who wanted a white conservative America were mistaken in thinking that the United States was the good guy. The US was every bit as big a threat to western civilisation as communism. In fact, with the benefit of hindsight, it's now obvious that American liberalism was the greater long-term threat.

    I'm not blaming ordinary Americans. Ordinary Americans did not realise that the US had gone bad and that the US was becoming an evil empire that was going to destroy all the basically conservative basically Christian values that those ordinary Americans believed in.

    The anti-communist hysteria of the 1950s was created in order to distract Americans from the fact that their own elites (which at the time were mostly WASP rather than Jewish) had turned against them and that American liberalism had become an ideology that was just as much a revolutionary ideology as communism ever was. And it had become an ideology that was rabidly opposed to traditional Christian values.

    In the period from 1945 to the end of the 1970s Soviet communism gradually grew more moderate and more socially conservative. American liberalism gradually grew more extreme and more opposed to the traditional values that the average American believed in. And American liberalism gradually became more and more a dangerous radical missionary ideology that the United States was imposing on other societies.

    The irony was that by the time Reagan came along it was the Warsaw Pact that was the bastion of socially conservative traditional values. From the point of view of social conservatives, conservative Christians and traditionalist white Americans it was the United States that was the Evil Empire. But social conservatives, conservative Christians and traditionalist white Americans were so obsessed by anti-communism that they failed to understand this.

    Social conservatives, conservative Christians and traditionalist white Americans should have been praying for the Soviet Union to survive. The Soviet Union provided the only viable opposition to the American Empire.

    The US victory in the Cold War and the destruction of the Soviet Union led inevitably to the triumph of everything that people like yourself hated and feared (with considerable justification). It led inevitably to what Steve Sailer calls The Great Awokening.

    NATO was, from the start, a force for evil.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    Your presentation builds up such a head of steam, one fears to impede it! It would flatten anyone who stood in its path.

    Seriously, you make several sound points, nor is the manner in which you present the points merely stitched together. It is seamless.

    I have noted before that your concept of life in the United States is in some ways decades out of date, but that’s always how it is, isn’t it? My concept of life in, say, Mexico is undoubtedly decades out of date. We are all like that.

    And that suggests that, when I was a young, fiercely patriotic, enlisted cold warrior during the 1980s, absolutely convinced that I was fighting for good over evil, my concept of life in the Soviet Union was decades out of date.

    I cannot subscribe to your entire interpretation. The United States during the 1970s and 1980s remained a free country, while the Soviet citizen as far as I know still suffered from internal passport controls, bread queues, and so on. The Gulags had not then been wholly emptied; and Guantanamo was then a naval station, not a prison. It is hard to dispute in any case that the numbers of persons fleeing westward out of the Soviet bloc dwarfed the number fleeing eastward into it.

    The main reason I cannot subscribe, however, is simply that I am and remain an American.

    Anyway, thanks for the post. There is plenty to think about there.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @V. K. Ovelund


    And that suggests that, when I was a young, fiercely patriotic, enlisted cold warrior during the 1980s, absolutely convinced that I was fighting for good over evil, my concept of life in the Soviet Union was decades out of date.

     

    I think that almost all Americans (and almost all Britons and almost all Australians) back in the 80s had a concept of the Soviet Union that was decades out of date. Most people still believed that the Soviet Union in the 80s was exactly the way it had been under Stalin.

    I'm not suggesting that the Soviet Union in 1980 was a paradise, a land of milk and honey, but it wasn't the way it had been under Stalin. People definitely had a lower material of standard of living compared to the West, but that was because the Soviets were forced to spend so much money on the military because they believed (correctly) that the United States represented a serious danger to them. They had no choice.

    It was a moderately authoritarian state but the authoritarianism was gradually becoming more moderate.

    The United States during the 1970s and 1980s remained a free country
     
    Life in the West was, on the whole, pretty good in the 70s and 80s. There was freedom of speech (remember freedom of speech?) and generally speaking people were free to live their lives the way they wanted to. I remember those days in Australia and the extent of freedom of speech was extraordinary compared to today.

    But American liberalism had already become a crazed missionary religion and by the 90s freedom of speech was under serious attack. At the very time that Americans (and Australians) were celebrating the triumph of Freedom and Democracy in Russia and the Fall of the Berlin Wall Americans (and Australians) were starting to lose their freedoms. By the 90s it was already becoming necessary to self-censor.

    American liberalism had at one time been idealistic, but it was always an idealism mixed with dangerous amounts of naïvete and fanaticism. It was always disconnected from reality. Even in the 1950s Europeans had been alarmed by the complete inability of American liberals to understand the real world. Wokeness was the inevitable end-point of American liberalism.

    In the entire post-war period American foreign policy was motivated by arrogance combined with breathtaking naïvete. It was motivated by a childish belief that foreign policy could be reduced to a struggle between the Good Guys (who were of course America) and the Bad Guys (anyone who opposed American hegemony).
  117. @dfordoom
    @A123


    Some of the Founding Fathers were not particularly enthusiastic Christians.
     
    LOL. Many were not Christians at all.

    However, it is overreach to say that the were trying to create “safe spaces” to protect those who would undermine the new Christian nation The document would have never been signed with protections for anti-Christians (e.g. Satanists). Similiarly, there is no way the Founding Fathers would have signed to protect aggressive anti-Christian secularism (e.g.. “freedom from religion”). The Constitution is not a club that Atheists can wield to beat down Christians
     
    The US was created as a secular state. There's no way you can get around that.

    The free exercise of religion implies the freedom to choose any damned religious belief you choose, including atheism and Deism.

    The document should not be used as a club to beat down anyone, Christian or non-Christian.

    The are rightists who wish that the US had been created as a Christian state, but it wasn't.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @A123

    The US was created as a secular state. There’s no way you can get around that.

    It is unnecessary to get around it, because it isn’t true. Post-Revolutionary Mexico was created as a secular state, but the US is not Mexico.

    The several US states agreed that the federal power they had created would establish a currency and a navy but not a church. That’s it. Americans did not understand that they were creating a secular state, but rather that New England Puritans would not try to interfere with Maryland’s Catholicism, that Maryland Catholics would not dispute New Jersey’s anti-Catholicism, and so on.

    It was not until the 14th Amendment, 1868, during the era of Andrew Johnson, 17th president, that Americans gained a federal right to free religion.

  118. A123 says:
    @dfordoom
    @A123


    Some of the Founding Fathers were not particularly enthusiastic Christians.
     
    LOL. Many were not Christians at all.

    However, it is overreach to say that the were trying to create “safe spaces” to protect those who would undermine the new Christian nation The document would have never been signed with protections for anti-Christians (e.g. Satanists). Similiarly, there is no way the Founding Fathers would have signed to protect aggressive anti-Christian secularism (e.g.. “freedom from religion”). The Constitution is not a club that Atheists can wield to beat down Christians
     
    The US was created as a secular state. There's no way you can get around that.

    The free exercise of religion implies the freedom to choose any damned religious belief you choose, including atheism and Deism.

    The document should not be used as a club to beat down anyone, Christian or non-Christian.

    The are rightists who wish that the US had been created as a Christian state, but it wasn't.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @A123

    The US was created as a secular state. There’s no way you can get around that.

    The U.S. was created to not have a “National Church” or “State Churches”. The U.S. was explicitly designed to be Christian.

    The Constitution would never have been signed if it promised anti-Christian secularism. There is no way you can get around that. The idea of “freedom from religion” is a modern concept erroneously misinterpreted into the Constitution.
    _____

    VK,

    During the edit window, I notice that you posted something quite similar. Thanks.

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @A123


    The U.S. was explicitly designed to be Christian.
     
    Many if not most of the Founding Fathers were Deists. In other words, they were non-Christians and they were anti-Christian. They wanted a secular society and they designed the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to ensure that the new nation would be secular.

    The U.S. was the child of the Enlightenment and the Enlightenment was anti-Christian.

    The Founding Fathers did not want the U.S. to be anti-Christian but they did not want it to be explicitly Christian either. They wanted it to be a secular society in which people could choose to be Christians if they wanted to.

    Replies: @anon, @V. K. Ovelund

  119. @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom

    Your presentation builds up such a head of steam, one fears to impede it! It would flatten anyone who stood in its path.

    Seriously, you make several sound points, nor is the manner in which you present the points merely stitched together. It is seamless.

    I have noted before that your concept of life in the United States is in some ways decades out of date, but that's always how it is, isn't it? My concept of life in, say, Mexico is undoubtedly decades out of date. We are all like that.

    And that suggests that, when I was a young, fiercely patriotic, enlisted cold warrior during the 1980s, absolutely convinced that I was fighting for good over evil, my concept of life in the Soviet Union was decades out of date.

    I cannot subscribe to your entire interpretation. The United States during the 1970s and 1980s remained a free country, while the Soviet citizen as far as I know still suffered from internal passport controls, bread queues, and so on. The Gulags had not then been wholly emptied; and Guantanamo was then a naval station, not a prison. It is hard to dispute in any case that the numbers of persons fleeing westward out of the Soviet bloc dwarfed the number fleeing eastward into it.

    The main reason I cannot subscribe, however, is simply that I am and remain an American.

    Anyway, thanks for the post. There is plenty to think about there.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    And that suggests that, when I was a young, fiercely patriotic, enlisted cold warrior during the 1980s, absolutely convinced that I was fighting for good over evil, my concept of life in the Soviet Union was decades out of date.

    I think that almost all Americans (and almost all Britons and almost all Australians) back in the 80s had a concept of the Soviet Union that was decades out of date. Most people still believed that the Soviet Union in the 80s was exactly the way it had been under Stalin.

    I’m not suggesting that the Soviet Union in 1980 was a paradise, a land of milk and honey, but it wasn’t the way it had been under Stalin. People definitely had a lower material of standard of living compared to the West, but that was because the Soviets were forced to spend so much money on the military because they believed (correctly) that the United States represented a serious danger to them. They had no choice.

    It was a moderately authoritarian state but the authoritarianism was gradually becoming more moderate.

    The United States during the 1970s and 1980s remained a free country

    Life in the West was, on the whole, pretty good in the 70s and 80s. There was freedom of speech (remember freedom of speech?) and generally speaking people were free to live their lives the way they wanted to. I remember those days in Australia and the extent of freedom of speech was extraordinary compared to today.

    But American liberalism had already become a crazed missionary religion and by the 90s freedom of speech was under serious attack. At the very time that Americans (and Australians) were celebrating the triumph of Freedom and Democracy in Russia and the Fall of the Berlin Wall Americans (and Australians) were starting to lose their freedoms. By the 90s it was already becoming necessary to self-censor.

    American liberalism had at one time been idealistic, but it was always an idealism mixed with dangerous amounts of naïvete and fanaticism. It was always disconnected from reality. Even in the 1950s Europeans had been alarmed by the complete inability of American liberals to understand the real world. Wokeness was the inevitable end-point of American liberalism.

    In the entire post-war period American foreign policy was motivated by arrogance combined with breathtaking naïvete. It was motivated by a childish belief that foreign policy could be reduced to a struggle between the Good Guys (who were of course America) and the Bad Guys (anyone who opposed American hegemony).

  120. @A123
    @dfordoom


    The US was created as a secular state. There’s no way you can get around that.
     
    The U.S. was created to not have a "National Church" or "State Churches". The U.S. was explicitly designed to be Christian.

    The Constitution would never have been signed if it promised anti-Christian secularism. There is no way you can get around that. The idea of "freedom from religion" is a modern concept erroneously misinterpreted into the Constitution.
    _____

    VK,

    During the edit window, I notice that you posted something quite similar. Thanks.

    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @dfordoom

    The U.S. was explicitly designed to be Christian.

    Many if not most of the Founding Fathers were Deists. In other words, they were non-Christians and they were anti-Christian. They wanted a secular society and they designed the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to ensure that the new nation would be secular.

    The U.S. was the child of the Enlightenment and the Enlightenment was anti-Christian.

    The Founding Fathers did not want the U.S. to be anti-Christian but they did not want it to be explicitly Christian either. They wanted it to be a secular society in which people could choose to be Christians if they wanted to.

    • Replies: @anon
    @dfordoom

    Many if not most of the Founding Fathers were Deists.

    Name them. Here, I'll start for you: "Benjamin Franklin". Now your turn.

    In other words, they were non-Christians

    Not the way you are using that term, no.

    and they were anti-Christian.

    Utter rubbish.

    They wanted a secular society

    Nope. You have obviously not read the Federalist Papers, for example.

    and they designed the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to ensure that the new nation would be secular.

    No, they did not. You are once again displaying your ignorance.

    The U.S. was the child of the Enlightenment and the Enlightenment was anti-Christian.

    Dude, this is village atheist level junk. It's not even college sophomoric, it's worse.

    The Founding Fathers did not want the U.S. to be anti-Christian

    Self contradict much?

    but they did not want it to be explicitly Christian either.

    Bollocks. Again you proudly wave your flag of ignorance.

    They wanted it to be a secular society in which people could choose to be Christians if they wanted to.

    You literally no clue about this topic. None. Zero.

    , @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom


    Many if not most of the Founding Fathers were Deists.
     
    The @anon was unnecessarily brusque, but in essence he's right. There exist varying degrees of religious fervor, of course, but I believe that you may be confusing style with substance. The Founders were not vulgar televangelists and the Constitutional Convention was not a tent revival, but the Founders were ordinary Christians and were chiefly men of reserved, gentlemanly effect.

    It is true that the Founders included a handful of doubters of various stripes, especially Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, but I have never seen a shred of evidence that it had occurred to either Franklin or Jefferson to secularize the United States. In Jefferson indeed we find evidence to the contrary.


    They wanted a secular society and they designed the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to ensure that the new nation would be secular.
     
    I am unsure that you fully understand the First Amendment. That's all right, but the Amendment's phrase “Congress shall make no law” is significant. (The 14th Amendment's “privileges or immunities” clause was, perhaps tendentiously, held by the Supreme Court to supersede the earlier phrase “Congress shall make no law,” but that came 81 years later.)

    I suppose that the U.S. could be called secular in the sense that it was not the function of the federal power to promote a religion, as long as the term religion is understood in its 18th-century context to mean approximately what denomination means today. This is the same sense in which the plumber I summon to fix my leaky sink is secular (even if the reason I have summoned that particular plumber is that I know him and his family from church).


    The U.S. was the child of the Enlightenment and the Enlightenment was anti-Christian.
     
    Admittedly, I was not there. That was a long time ago, so I can claim little more real knowledge of it than you can (even if those people were my ancestors). To my understanding, the Constitution of the United States was chiefly framed with the purpose of maintaining existing institutions, ways and manners while transferring (as smoothly as possible) the responsibilities of royalty and the aristocracy to the landed gentry. It is true that the U.S. House of Representatives preferred (though did not require) universal male suffrage from the start, but some allowance has to be made for the circumstance in which there existed no federal precedent by which to constitute a House of Representatives. It was not like Edmund Burke's Britain, which had a precedent; and even if the founders had wanted to follow Burke in this, how would they have done it? All the old rotten boroughs had been left behind in England! Some default rule had to be suggested and you are right to the extent that the Enlightenment's default rule prevailed—yet even sans the Enlightenment as such, it is not entirely clear what other rule might have been chosen under the circumstance. Even the curiate rule of the early Roman patricians had functioned partly similarly.

    However, the rest of the Constitution was deliberately poised to counterbalance the Enlightenment's default rule which, as I have noted, was not actually mandated upon the states even in the case of the House. (A state forwent representation in the House proportionally to the extent to which she deviated from the default, but was not otherwise enjoined from deviating. Anyway, as Tennessee practically proved as late as the 1950s[!], the rule could be stretched to the point of unrecognizability without effective penalty against the state: see Baker v. Carr, 1959.)

    I am delving into a lot of details here, dear and familiar to every patriotic, old-stock American of letters. These are details one finds in the Federalist Papers, mainly. However, I am neither an historian nor a legal scholar, so that's enough commentary for the moment. Moreover, insofar as the old America is busily abolishing herself, I am unsure how much any of this still matters, anyway.

    Short answer: the Enlightenment meant various things to various men in various places during various years but, to the extent to which the Enlightenment enlightened the framing of the U.S. Constitution, it neither made the Constitution secular nor thought to do so.

    Replies: @dfordoom

  121. anon[325] • Disclaimer says:
    @dfordoom
    @A123


    The U.S. was explicitly designed to be Christian.
     
    Many if not most of the Founding Fathers were Deists. In other words, they were non-Christians and they were anti-Christian. They wanted a secular society and they designed the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to ensure that the new nation would be secular.

    The U.S. was the child of the Enlightenment and the Enlightenment was anti-Christian.

    The Founding Fathers did not want the U.S. to be anti-Christian but they did not want it to be explicitly Christian either. They wanted it to be a secular society in which people could choose to be Christians if they wanted to.

    Replies: @anon, @V. K. Ovelund

    Many if not most of the Founding Fathers were Deists.

    Name them. Here, I’ll start for you: “Benjamin Franklin”. Now your turn.

    In other words, they were non-Christians

    Not the way you are using that term, no.

    and they were anti-Christian.

    Utter rubbish.

    They wanted a secular society

    Nope. You have obviously not read the Federalist Papers, for example.

    and they designed the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to ensure that the new nation would be secular.

    No, they did not. You are once again displaying your ignorance.

    The U.S. was the child of the Enlightenment and the Enlightenment was anti-Christian.

    Dude, this is village atheist level junk. It’s not even college sophomoric, it’s worse.

    The Founding Fathers did not want the U.S. to be anti-Christian

    Self contradict much?

    but they did not want it to be explicitly Christian either.

    Bollocks. Again you proudly wave your flag of ignorance.

    They wanted it to be a secular society in which people could choose to be Christians if they wanted to.

    You literally no clue about this topic. None. Zero.

  122. @dfordoom
    @A123


    The U.S. was explicitly designed to be Christian.
     
    Many if not most of the Founding Fathers were Deists. In other words, they were non-Christians and they were anti-Christian. They wanted a secular society and they designed the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to ensure that the new nation would be secular.

    The U.S. was the child of the Enlightenment and the Enlightenment was anti-Christian.

    The Founding Fathers did not want the U.S. to be anti-Christian but they did not want it to be explicitly Christian either. They wanted it to be a secular society in which people could choose to be Christians if they wanted to.

    Replies: @anon, @V. K. Ovelund

    Many if not most of the Founding Fathers were Deists.

    The was unnecessarily brusque, but in essence he’s right. There exist varying degrees of religious fervor, of course, but I believe that you may be confusing style with substance. The Founders were not vulgar televangelists and the Constitutional Convention was not a tent revival, but the Founders were ordinary Christians and were chiefly men of reserved, gentlemanly effect.

    [MORE]

    It is true that the Founders included a handful of doubters of various stripes, especially Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, but I have never seen a shred of evidence that it had occurred to either Franklin or Jefferson to secularize the United States. In Jefferson indeed we find evidence to the contrary.

    They wanted a secular society and they designed the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to ensure that the new nation would be secular.

    I am unsure that you fully understand the First Amendment. That’s all right, but the Amendment’s phrase “Congress shall make no law” is significant. (The 14th Amendment’s “privileges or immunities” clause was, perhaps tendentiously, held by the Supreme Court to supersede the earlier phrase “Congress shall make no law,” but that came 81 years later.)

    I suppose that the U.S. could be called secular in the sense that it was not the function of the federal power to promote a religion, as long as the term religion is understood in its 18th-century context to mean approximately what denomination means today. This is the same sense in which the plumber I summon to fix my leaky sink is secular (even if the reason I have summoned that particular plumber is that I know him and his family from church).

    The U.S. was the child of the Enlightenment and the Enlightenment was anti-Christian.

    Admittedly, I was not there. That was a long time ago, so I can claim little more real knowledge of it than you can (even if those people were my ancestors). To my understanding, the Constitution of the United States was chiefly framed with the purpose of maintaining existing institutions, ways and manners while transferring (as smoothly as possible) the responsibilities of royalty and the aristocracy to the landed gentry. It is true that the U.S. House of Representatives preferred (though did not require) universal male suffrage from the start, but some allowance has to be made for the circumstance in which there existed no federal precedent by which to constitute a House of Representatives. It was not like Edmund Burke’s Britain, which had a precedent; and even if the founders had wanted to follow Burke in this, how would they have done it? All the old rotten boroughs had been left behind in England! Some default rule had to be suggested and you are right to the extent that the Enlightenment’s default rule prevailed—yet even sans the Enlightenment as such, it is not entirely clear what other rule might have been chosen under the circumstance. Even the curiate rule of the early Roman patricians had functioned partly similarly.

    However, the rest of the Constitution was deliberately poised to counterbalance the Enlightenment’s default rule which, as I have noted, was not actually mandated upon the states even in the case of the House. (A state forwent representation in the House proportionally to the extent to which she deviated from the default, but was not otherwise enjoined from deviating. Anyway, as Tennessee practically proved as late as the 1950s[!], the rule could be stretched to the point of unrecognizability without effective penalty against the state: see Baker v. Carr, 1959.)

    I am delving into a lot of details here, dear and familiar to every patriotic, old-stock American of letters. These are details one finds in the Federalist Papers, mainly. However, I am neither an historian nor a legal scholar, so that’s enough commentary for the moment. Moreover, insofar as the old America is busily abolishing herself, I am unsure how much any of this still matters, anyway.

    Short answer: the Enlightenment meant various things to various men in various places during various years but, to the extent to which the Enlightenment enlightened the framing of the U.S. Constitution, it neither made the Constitution secular nor thought to do so.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @V. K. Ovelund


    the Enlightenment meant various things to various men in various places during various years but, to the extent to which the Enlightenment enlightened the framing of the U.S. Constitution, it neither made the Constitution secular nor thought to do so.
     
    I think that, as so often, the apparent disagreement between us is a matter of definitions.

    The European monarchies in the 18th century were Christian societies in the sense that kings were anointed by God which meant that Christianity was the bedrock of those societies. Even in the United Kingdom the King was the head of the Church of England. You could get way with non-belief but the assumption on which those systems of government were based were that Christianity was an essential feature of those societies. Being a non-believer made you an outsider. That's a Christian society.

    The Enlightenment was a fundamental attack on this concept. The Enlightenment view was that society should be based on Reason, not Divine Revelation. The Founding Fathers, even those who were conventional Christians, accepted this Enlightenment view. A society based on Reason is a secular society.

    It has to be emphasised that being a secular society does not mean being an anti-Christian society. Being a secular society does not mean that religious belief will get you persecuted.

    A secular society is one in which religious belief is optional. Most people might be Christians, but people have the right to opt out of religious belief if they so choose without having to fear persecution and without having to fear any loss of their legal or civil rights.

    The actual religious beliefs of the Founding Fathers is a very controversial subject made more complicated by the fact that most people with a view on the subject have an axe to grind. It seems most likely that most of them outwardly conformed to Christianity but that their actual views ranged from conventional Christianity to Christianity mixed with Deism to out-and-out Deism. Many were Christians in the sense that many people today claim to be Christians - they had a vague belief in a sort of God but they did not accept all of the essential beliefs that define true Christianity (such as a belief in Jesus as a personal saviour).

    None of which really matters all that much, since all of the Founding Fathers accepted the Enlightenment belief that society should be organised on the basis of Reason rather than Divine Revelation, which means they believed in a secular society. They did not write the Constitution on the assumption that the new society that they were intending to build should be based on Christian teaching or on the Bible. You can be a Christian and still believe in a secular society.

    No-one would be mad enough to argue that the Founding Fathers wanted to persecute Christians or extirpate Christianity or that they would have approved of the attacks on Christianity that are happening today.

    But they did not intend to create a Christian society in the sense favoured by modern Evangelicals and many of the hardline Christian commenters on UR. They intended to create a society in which people were free to choose their beliefs, whatever those beliefs might be, which implies the right to choose not to believe. And it implies a society in which no set of beliefs (including Christian moral beliefs) will be imposed on others. That's a secular society.
  123. @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom


    Many if not most of the Founding Fathers were Deists.
     
    The @anon was unnecessarily brusque, but in essence he's right. There exist varying degrees of religious fervor, of course, but I believe that you may be confusing style with substance. The Founders were not vulgar televangelists and the Constitutional Convention was not a tent revival, but the Founders were ordinary Christians and were chiefly men of reserved, gentlemanly effect.

    It is true that the Founders included a handful of doubters of various stripes, especially Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, but I have never seen a shred of evidence that it had occurred to either Franklin or Jefferson to secularize the United States. In Jefferson indeed we find evidence to the contrary.


    They wanted a secular society and they designed the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to ensure that the new nation would be secular.
     
    I am unsure that you fully understand the First Amendment. That's all right, but the Amendment's phrase “Congress shall make no law” is significant. (The 14th Amendment's “privileges or immunities” clause was, perhaps tendentiously, held by the Supreme Court to supersede the earlier phrase “Congress shall make no law,” but that came 81 years later.)

    I suppose that the U.S. could be called secular in the sense that it was not the function of the federal power to promote a religion, as long as the term religion is understood in its 18th-century context to mean approximately what denomination means today. This is the same sense in which the plumber I summon to fix my leaky sink is secular (even if the reason I have summoned that particular plumber is that I know him and his family from church).


    The U.S. was the child of the Enlightenment and the Enlightenment was anti-Christian.
     
    Admittedly, I was not there. That was a long time ago, so I can claim little more real knowledge of it than you can (even if those people were my ancestors). To my understanding, the Constitution of the United States was chiefly framed with the purpose of maintaining existing institutions, ways and manners while transferring (as smoothly as possible) the responsibilities of royalty and the aristocracy to the landed gentry. It is true that the U.S. House of Representatives preferred (though did not require) universal male suffrage from the start, but some allowance has to be made for the circumstance in which there existed no federal precedent by which to constitute a House of Representatives. It was not like Edmund Burke's Britain, which had a precedent; and even if the founders had wanted to follow Burke in this, how would they have done it? All the old rotten boroughs had been left behind in England! Some default rule had to be suggested and you are right to the extent that the Enlightenment's default rule prevailed—yet even sans the Enlightenment as such, it is not entirely clear what other rule might have been chosen under the circumstance. Even the curiate rule of the early Roman patricians had functioned partly similarly.

    However, the rest of the Constitution was deliberately poised to counterbalance the Enlightenment's default rule which, as I have noted, was not actually mandated upon the states even in the case of the House. (A state forwent representation in the House proportionally to the extent to which she deviated from the default, but was not otherwise enjoined from deviating. Anyway, as Tennessee practically proved as late as the 1950s[!], the rule could be stretched to the point of unrecognizability without effective penalty against the state: see Baker v. Carr, 1959.)

    I am delving into a lot of details here, dear and familiar to every patriotic, old-stock American of letters. These are details one finds in the Federalist Papers, mainly. However, I am neither an historian nor a legal scholar, so that's enough commentary for the moment. Moreover, insofar as the old America is busily abolishing herself, I am unsure how much any of this still matters, anyway.

    Short answer: the Enlightenment meant various things to various men in various places during various years but, to the extent to which the Enlightenment enlightened the framing of the U.S. Constitution, it neither made the Constitution secular nor thought to do so.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    the Enlightenment meant various things to various men in various places during various years but, to the extent to which the Enlightenment enlightened the framing of the U.S. Constitution, it neither made the Constitution secular nor thought to do so.

    I think that, as so often, the apparent disagreement between us is a matter of definitions.

    The European monarchies in the 18th century were Christian societies in the sense that kings were anointed by God which meant that Christianity was the bedrock of those societies. Even in the United Kingdom the King was the head of the Church of England. You could get way with non-belief but the assumption on which those systems of government were based were that Christianity was an essential feature of those societies. Being a non-believer made you an outsider. That’s a Christian society.

    The Enlightenment was a fundamental attack on this concept. The Enlightenment view was that society should be based on Reason, not Divine Revelation. The Founding Fathers, even those who were conventional Christians, accepted this Enlightenment view. A society based on Reason is a secular society.

    It has to be emphasised that being a secular society does not mean being an anti-Christian society. Being a secular society does not mean that religious belief will get you persecuted.

    A secular society is one in which religious belief is optional. Most people might be Christians, but people have the right to opt out of religious belief if they so choose without having to fear persecution and without having to fear any loss of their legal or civil rights.

    The actual religious beliefs of the Founding Fathers is a very controversial subject made more complicated by the fact that most people with a view on the subject have an axe to grind. It seems most likely that most of them outwardly conformed to Christianity but that their actual views ranged from conventional Christianity to Christianity mixed with Deism to out-and-out Deism. Many were Christians in the sense that many people today claim to be Christians – they had a vague belief in a sort of God but they did not accept all of the essential beliefs that define true Christianity (such as a belief in Jesus as a personal saviour).

    None of which really matters all that much, since all of the Founding Fathers accepted the Enlightenment belief that society should be organised on the basis of Reason rather than Divine Revelation, which means they believed in a secular society. They did not write the Constitution on the assumption that the new society that they were intending to build should be based on Christian teaching or on the Bible. You can be a Christian and still believe in a secular society.

    No-one would be mad enough to argue that the Founding Fathers wanted to persecute Christians or extirpate Christianity or that they would have approved of the attacks on Christianity that are happening today.

    But they did not intend to create a Christian society in the sense favoured by modern Evangelicals and many of the hardline Christian commenters on UR. They intended to create a society in which people were free to choose their beliefs, whatever those beliefs might be, which implies the right to choose not to believe. And it implies a society in which no set of beliefs (including Christian moral beliefs) will be imposed on others. That’s a secular society.

    • Thanks: V. K. Ovelund
  124. @Not only wrathful
    @neutral

    By what magic are they controlled?

    Replies: @neutral, @Rosie, @Audacious Epigone

    The “blacks fail because whites” and “whites fail because Jews” takes have a lot in common.

    • Agree: dfordoom

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS