RSSYou do understand that once the US stops bombing, many others will jump in to fill the gap, right? If the US hadn’t stood up to the invading communists in Korea and Vietnam, how much more blood would have been shed.? Iraq v Kuwait would have just been the beginning of Saddam’s invasions. Israel would be in a constant state of war, maybe even unleashing its nukes. The US is still the toughest guy on the block, and although it has at times been rough, it is still the most benevolent superpower in human history. The ground wasn’t salted in Germany after WW2, the Japs weren’t forced to speak English and change their religion. You guys will miss the US when its gone.
Rivers of blood would have been saved.
If the US hadn’t stood up to the invading communists in Korea and Vietnam, how much more blood would have been shed.?
Only a neocon would say such a thing.
The US is still the toughest guy on the block, and although it has at times been rough, it is still the most benevolent superpower in human history.
They count the days until that happens.
You guys will miss the US when its gone.
You are one of those people who really needs to read Martyanov’s new book, it seems.
I left the US recently, as the societal collapse has become visible (to the astute observer) at least since mid-2017. ‘Spent force’ describes the USA well.
And Europe won’t fare much better, as they are effectively just a (bunch of) US vassal states, just as all “Western” countries.
That is a bit of a logical shortcut by you.
What did bring the downfall of US society:
The US youth listening to Rock’n’Roll in the 60’s, or the Marxist ‘march through the institutions’?
The people were too doped out/indulged in their orgy of hedonism to notice what was going on around them and so the anti-West ideologues didn't face too much resistance and the resistance that they did face was mostly from the Traditionalists, whom the majority despised as traditional values didn't go well with the spirit of '69.
What did bring the downfall of US society:
The US youth listening to Rock’n’Roll in the 60’s, or the Marxist ‘march through the institutions’?
The aftermath of the Soviet collapse in the 1990s is instructive. 80% of Americans believe the U.S. is on the wrong path. But, it’s just a feeling they intuit. They don’t rationally understand the problem, because only 15% of American adults can form a high-level inference from texts. Only about 3% can function at a very high level. Even if a few key decision makers in America comprehended the relevance of previous collapses to our present situation, they could not overcome the political barriers to change course. Both the Congressional Budget Office and the FED have repeatedly warned the Federal Government that we are on an unsustainable economic path, but they get ignored by Congress and the Executive Branch. Both of these organizations have said the political barriers to changing course are unlikely to be overcome. Like the Titanic, there is not much we can do, except hope we can make it to shore or desperately swim for a lifeboat.
Ah, maybe that’s why so many Unz regulars believe all kinds of fantastical nonsense that is completely removed from reality.Replies: @Seraphim
They don’t rationally understand the problem, because only 15% of American adults can form a high-level inference from texts. Only about 3% can function at a very high level.
Look, the indignant poster, demanding perfectism from everyone, and from Solzhenitsyn in particular!
So give us your evidence, that
a) the gulags weren’t so bad
b) not 50 million (but only 20-30 million?) died victims of Soviet communism
c) Solzhenitsyn wanted the USSR nuked.
Also, tell us what about the ‘warnings about the evils of totalitarianism’ is distasteful to you: the warnings are faux, or it’s not really totalitarianism, or totalitarianism also has some overlooked good sides?
If I may make a guess, towards both you and Martyanov:
You’re both probably just blind religion-haters, that’s where your dislike of Solzhenitsyn originates from.
Wasn't aware I was demanding that.
perfectism?
In fact the entire Law Merchant worked for several centuries, despite having no enforcement power (especially across jurisdictions). People abided by the directions of this entirely-private dispute resolution mechanism, because if they failed to do so they would suffer reputational harm that would prevent them from doing business.
So in your whole essay the above quote is the only thing that attempts to handle my central question to you “how do you live in a society without a, just a little bit centralized, system of Rule of Law?”
And it’s a utopian pipedream, as usual with the know-it-all types.
To your credit [sic], you even somewhat address the fact that to “suffer reputational harm” is a method that doesn’t scale well, i.e. won’t work in multi-million headcount societies. But your shooting-from-the-hip attempt to solve that with
a variant of the totalitarian ‘social credit score’, but maintained by multiple competing firms and funded entirely by subscription
is outright hilarious, as the multiple competing [credit score] firms worked so well in the example of Moody’s, S&P, and Fitch, right??
So you failed to address ‘who controls the controllers.’
In real life, your competing [social credit score] firms would be completely corrupted within a decade, and to “fix” that you’d end up either resorting to anarchy, or with a centralized system. Again.
Interesting “interpretation” of what I didn’t write.
Yes, Germany will shut down their last 6 nuclear power plants this and next year.
Yes, on 2/11/2021 at 10:00 the German grid almost needed rolling blackouts, only by 5 GW import of electricity could that barely be avoided. In this almost real-time chart https://energy-charts.info/charts/power/chart.htm?l=en&c=DE change to week 6, then note the load curve (black line) and then activate “Import Balance” by clicking on it under the diagram.
No, Germany will not become pure green a.k.a zero carbon, not now and not by 2050.
The obvious ‘solution’ will be retained or even expanded coal, plus LPG instead of Russian gas.
Why do you ignore the inherent contradiction in your own statements:
If Germany already has the highest tariffs, why are they still competitive now, but a further increase would make them completely uncompetitive?
With regard to misconceptions of Russian/German history in America, here are a few relevant paragraphs from a 2018 article of mine:
In my unjustified arrogance, I also sometimes relished a sense of seeing obvious things that magazine or newspaper journalists got so completely wrong, mistakes which often slipped into historical narratives as well. For example, discussions of the titanic 20th century military struggles between Germany and Russia quite often made casual references to the traditional hostility between those two great peoples, who for centuries had stood as bitter rivals, representing the eternal struggle of Slav against Teuton for dominion over Eastern Europe.
Although the bloodstained history of the two world wars made that notion seem obvious, it was factually mistaken. Prior to 1914, those two great peoples had not fought against each other for the previous 150 years, and even the Seven Years’ War of the mid-18th century had involved a Russian alliance with Germanic Austria against Germanic Prussia, hardly amounting to a conflict along civilizational lines. Russians and Germans had been staunch allies during the endless Napoleonic wars and closely cooperated during the Metterich and Bismarck eras that followed, while even as late as 1904, Germany had supported Russia in its unsuccessful war against Japan. During the 1920s, Weimar Germany and Soviet Russia had a period of close military cooperation, the Hitler-Stalin Pact of 1939 marked the beginning of the Second World War, and throughout the long Cold War, the USSR had no more loyal a satellite than East Germany. Perhaps two dozen years of hostility over the last three centuries, with good relations or even outright alliance during most of the remainder, hardly suggested that Russians and Germans were hereditary enemies.
Moreover, during much of that period, Russia’s ruling elite had had a considerable Germanic tinge. Russia’s legendary Catherine the Great had been a German princess by birth, and over the centuries so many Russian rulers had taken German wives that the later Czars of the Romanov dynasty were usually more German than Russian. Russia itself had a substantial but heavily assimilated German population, which was very well represented in elite political circles, with German names being quite common among government ministers and sometimes found among important military commanders. Even a top leader of the Decembrist revolt of the early 19th century had had German ancestry but was a zealous Russian-nationalist in his ideology.
Under the governance of this mixed Russian and German ruling class, the Russian Empire had steadily risen to become one of the world’s foremost powers. Indeed, given its vast size, manpower, and resources, combined with one of the fastest economic growth rates and a natural increase in total population that was not far behind, a 1914 observer might have easily pegged it to soon dominate the European continent and perhaps even much of the world, just as Tocqueville had famously prophesized in the early decades of the 19th century. A crucial underlying cause of the First World War was Britain’s belief that only a preventative war could forestall a rising Germany, but I suspect that an important secondary cause was the parallel German notion that similar measures were necessary against a rising Russia.
https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-the-bolshevik-revolution-and-its-aftermath/
Well, we whittled them down to size, did we not, Ron? Can't remember the numbers for the two World Wars, plus the miseries afterward through the nineties and 2000s, but isn't Russia down to around 150-200 million population, and in decline at that? Tragic, staggeringly. And not necessary, except for the profit of war industries. Smedley Butler, boy did he have them pegged. He called all of it.Replies: @steinbergfeldwitzcohen
Indeed, given its vast size, manpower, and resources, combined with one of the fastest economic growth rates and a natural increase in total population that was not far behind, a 1914 observer might have easily pegged it to soon dominate the European continent and perhaps even much of the world
You are misreading the situation.
Public support for Nordstream 2 has been steadily eroding in Germeny, a result of the constant propaganda barrage (Navalny?)
Only because Merkel sees it as a “yuge” political defeat if NS2 would be stopped during her chancellorship, is it still being built.
After Oktober 2021, her likely successor Laschet will be a much weaker pillar, so a shutdown of the (completed) NS2 is not out of the range of possibility. And don’t bring up the financial issue, in this age of ‘funny money’ no politician would be stopped because of financial reasons anymore.
Good article,
but I doubt that Angela Merkel -while not a Russiaphobic- has such long-term targets.
And her successor Laschet, to which she likely pulled the strings in the background to get him crowned in their CDU party, is just as EU-centric as Merkel.
Zebras are not domesticable animals.
Unfortunately your provided link for that topic completely dances around the pink elephant in the room.
Fact: “You can’t catch a Zebra with a lasso.”
Some websites try to explain that away as a “reflex”. Wut? The Africans were hunting Zebras for so many millennia with lassos, so they developed a built-in reflex against that??
Bullschiff.
Zebras are so intelligent that they understand what the flying lasso loop might mean, and avoid it by ducking. (Now compare to horses.)
Might their non-domesticability also have something to do with that?
Africans could never tame the Zebra
Thanks for mentioning that one, KPK.
It was one of those things, where Jared becomes so clear about things that only complete morons (such as yourself) would miss the utmost importance of IQ – however he wasn’t talking about the Africans, in that specific example.
Ishchenko stresses how, “in terms of scale and impact on historical processes, this is steeper than the Battles of Stalingrad and Kursk combined.”
As Bock wrote in his diary: “I do not want to ‘capture Moscow’; I want to destroy the enemy’s army and the bulk of that army is right in front of me”. One thing is certain, had Bock’s planned attack of August 17 on Moscow gone ahead, the Soviet army would have been defending the capital with the eroded forces available at that time and place, rather than what was there 76 days later when Bock’s attack actually started–five days before the muddy season bogged it down. All this was in 1941, well before Stalingrad and Kursk.
Anyway Russia (currently fighting 300 miles from Moscow) is largely important to China as an object lesson in how to not try and take on the West.
his drive should be based on two pillars: sovereignty – that is, the good old Westphalian model
The Treaty of Westphalia happened because the Thirty Years war had ended in stalemated exhaustion with no prospect of gains for anyone by continuing or restarting the conflict; both sides agreed to limitation on the sovereignty of their proxy principalities. China is buying up ports, building nuclear power stations, and trying to get their 5G accepted in the West, which is consequently to a nontrivial extent giving up its freedom of action.
A tsunami indeed, not only of platitudes but also of meaningless hyperboles. A lot of what Putin does is indeed good and necessary... but not nearly enough. His actions are pretty much forced but they do not reduce the long-term risks for Russia which are quite serious and not so remote. Unfortunately, there's no indication that Putin is aware of it, or if he is, he hasn't found a winning strategy yet, thus the "steeper" speeches entertainment.As far as Eurocentrism goes, it was smashed not by the words of nobodies but by the sloppy trade and financial policies of the dysfunctional Western governments. Not coincidentally, those same policies built China, even Trump took part in it despite noises to the contrary. I'm waiting for a sane politician in the larger European sphere to wake up and smell the covfefe and stop pushing further into the swamp they entered some 30 years ago. Although he still comes up short, Putin is the best candidate by far, his Western counterparts are fast asleep with no signs of awakening.Replies: @Mikael_
Pepe:
(Putin's speech) is steeper than the Battles of Stalingrad and Kursk combined... (some nobody) exhaustively smashed Eurocentrism... Amidst a tsunami of platitudes...
I was also at first wondering after reading the whole speech –
but then one has to remember the place where he (virtually) gave it, and that was the most diplomatic in-your-face you can imagine.
What Pepe reads out of it I can mostly confirm; only very few times he goes one or two steps beyond what was directly stated/implied by Putin, and even then I find Pepe’s conclusions reasonable.
Hadn’t heard of “Bypass Paywalls” add-on, there is also a Firefox version that works for me.
TYVM!
Thanks, Pepe.
Need to read Putin’s whole speech now!
A tsunami indeed, not only of platitudes but also of meaningless hyperboles. A lot of what Putin does is indeed good and necessary... but not nearly enough. His actions are pretty much forced but they do not reduce the long-term risks for Russia which are quite serious and not so remote. Unfortunately, there's no indication that Putin is aware of it, or if he is, he hasn't found a winning strategy yet, thus the "steeper" speeches entertainment.As far as Eurocentrism goes, it was smashed not by the words of nobodies but by the sloppy trade and financial policies of the dysfunctional Western governments. Not coincidentally, those same policies built China, even Trump took part in it despite noises to the contrary. I'm waiting for a sane politician in the larger European sphere to wake up and smell the covfefe and stop pushing further into the swamp they entered some 30 years ago. Although he still comes up short, Putin is the best candidate by far, his Western counterparts are fast asleep with no signs of awakening.Replies: @Mikael_
Pepe:
(Putin's speech) is steeper than the Battles of Stalingrad and Kursk combined... (some nobody) exhaustively smashed Eurocentrism... Amidst a tsunami of platitudes...
If I try to parse what you wrote, I can only come up with:
– extreme socialism is [close to] anarchy
– but even in [close to] anarchy circumstances, co-op like structures form
– but then somehow those co-op like structures are not all powerful mini-states.
The self-contradiction is exactly in the ‘property’: someone owns it – if not individuals, then the co-op which becomes [locally] all powerful, just by that.
(I.e. you cannot “define away” the concept of property.)
Unhinged rant man. Wow. Take a break from the keyboard because this whole “internet” thing seems to really have you spun up.
No, I don’t think some blogger on the internet posting thoughts about a few charts really proves anything anymore. You can make charts about anything. There is no real statistical analysis in his argument and no indication that he got his information anywhere other than from other blogs… and aside from now banal observations, he just says “the same number of people died now as before”. OK, but I have no way of really knowing one way or the other if that is true. It’s like sitting in a bar and listening to a drunk tell you a Ferrari will go 187 miles per hour. It can be a fun conversation but it’s really meaningless in the grand scheme of things.
Michael Hudson makes a lot of good observations,
but then strews in some absolute bullschiff statements such as
socialism [is] the natural evolution of industrial capitalism
I really don’t know what to make of the author – is he trying to put a nice wrapper around things he believes we should target to make them more appealing to average readers, just like Marx’s messianic ‘classless society’ supposed goal?
Why can’t we have some real, honest debate about things without Orwellian redefinitions of terms, such as ‘socialism’?
To understand the psychology of a brainwashed Jew -- from Marxist to Capitalist to Zionist -- you need to understand the psychology of the Moneychanger Hebrew.
Why can’t we have some real, honest debate about things without Orwellian redefinitions of terms, such as ‘socialism’?
“I guess BEV economics don’t work out, which is why GM, Volkswagen and others are comitting to electric? The “put” is only one factor in an mult-variable economic equation.”
Of all UR commenters, I would have expected you, Mefobills, to understand that this entire BEV bubble is due to central banks. Largarde has already made fixing global warming part of the ECB mandate. Mark Carney is out shilling for it like a cheap whore. I believe Powell has also been blathering on about it. Meanwhile Musk commutes all over the planet in his gulfstream, daily.
Musk’s “earnings” were not GAP, but the result of all kinds of dishonest and illegal balance sheet and income statement manipulation. Without all the massive subsidies Tesla never would have gotten started, it if had, it never would have been able to open a plant. He has waged a ruthless and what should have been illegal war against his critics on twitter, and even went so far as calling the Australian diver who rescued the Thai spelunkers “pedo guy”. I believe this is the only time Musk has lost a case in court, which is more evidence that the Kazarian tribe of usurers has his back.
As far as GM, VW or anybody else being forced into the BEV market being evidence that this is the “future”, time will tell. I believe this is just another facet of the deliberate Cloward and Piven strategy to destroy European civilization.
As a final note, Bill “save the planet from carbon” Gates has been in a bidding war for a giant jet leasing company. All these pedo-crypto jews have yaughts and private jets and multiple houses across the planet. They clearly aren’t worried about carbon pollution. Barry Sotero has seaside houses in Martha’s Vinyard and on Oahu. If you cannot figure out that they don’t believe in global warming from all their hypocrisy, then you really deserve to have Elon Musk as your idol.
Salam brother,
As far as GM, VW or anybody else being forced into the BEV market being evidence that this is the “future”, time will tell. I believe this is just another facet of the deliberate Cloward and Piven strategy to destroy European civilization.
Absolutely correct. Tesla owes its existence solely to moronic, lunatic-leftist politicians. Oh and also dullard 'scientists' such as Tim Flannery pushing the "climate emergency" fraud. Flannery is so stupid that he couldn't get in to a science degree course so did a degree in English Lit.Replies: @Bert
"Without all the massive subsidies Tesla never would have gotten started, it if had, it never would have been able to open a plant."
“Tesla became one of the most shorted stocks of all time, forcing the price lower and causing Elon major headaches on top of his struggles with Twitter and the SEC. But the Tesla diehards believed in the company and trusted that demand for the vehicles would materialize eventually. When Tesla unexpectedly posted a quarterly profit, everything changed. The stock rocketed higher.”
Tesla is a fraud, but a fraud with a Fed put. As if wompy wheels, self-igniting batteries, suicidal FSD and the never ending drama of quality control deficiencies weren’t enough, it is Musk’s hucksterism, thuggery and blackmail of its employees that really tells the whole story. Musk should have been put in jail by the SEC years ago.
About the only admirable thing Musk has done in his entire life is shaft California and move to Texas.
A good and at times hilarious article,
but marred by the presentation of Elon Musk as “a good guy.”
Our children’s, grandchildren’s, and great grandchildren’s futures.Replies: @Mikael_
But the central question you need to work on is: What are you [peacefully] fighting for?
Gee thanks, now everyone can pick whatever they want. I mean what is there even to discuss here.
Apparently, your solution, your way out, is through religion. I won't try to debate which religion or where and how that religion will be the positive way out. Judea has genocided untold millions of Chrisitians far more devout than you, and far more devout than I could ever be. I am sorry, but I do not see a way out of this for me or my entire blood line through any religion. If the lord helps he who helps himself, then I will help the lord by helping my kin.
"I’d like to hear from you [just as I asked from the article writer], what are your ultimate positive goals, i.e. highest values?
It is extremely difficult in this vast tangle of malice, to find a positive way out. Did you find one?"
Judging by Americas newest Gen-Y and the Millenials, a thorough "woke" brainwashing requires absolutely zero detailed reasoning. Using my best logic, all my influence and their respect, I believe that I can accomplish the anti-cultural marxist indoctrination inoculation of my grandchildren without much effort. Time will tell.Replies: @Mikael_, @Ugetit
"Any attempts to inoculate them against certain ways of thinking without using painfully detailed reasoning, will likely backfire in a big way during their lives."
Apparently, your solution, your way out, is through religion.
I wouldn’t say that exactly.
I’d say my way out is ‘life is not about to be proven right, but to make the world a little bit a better place every day’, which turns out requires the abolition of perfectism belief and the acceptance of a highest value higher than oneself.
I feel I have ended up in the same place as Christianity, but I didn’t get there through religion (although that’s certainly also possible.)
And I obviously described the positive way out in one’s mindset.
What you conclude from that in practical life is an entirely different discussion – I for example, after for years considering my other options, moved out of the US last year.
Clearly, if there is a second holodomor there will be little I can accomplish to save my grand children, or children for that matter.As for my grand children my current approach is to "innoculate" them from cultural marxism to any degree that I can. I am well aware that this eventually is likely to bring them, me, or their parents problems. Here is what I am talking about:With the boys I talk about guns. I have BB and Airguns, and we have modified Nerfs. We target shoot. Their mother hates this but tolerates it. I recently watched a WWII war movie with them (instead of some drivel like Star Wars) and talked about all kinds of things in the movie with them. I explained to them that it was England that started WWI and WWII and that the bombers were murdering Germans and the pilots were in actuality war criminals.With the girls I try to keep them doing feminine things. Playing with babies, baths, kitchens, doctors, animals, etc. I also try to be more masculine and to play the alpha male around their grandmother.
“how do you give/show your grand children a positive way out.”
Please tell me, I am very interested.Replies: @Mikael_
I personally have found an answer, for me.
I believe it is best to let one’s kids make their own choices. Any attempts to innoculate them against certain ways of thinking without using painfully detailed reasoning, will likely backfire in a big way during their lives.
My answer:
The Existentialists got it right: “Life is suffering.” (1)
And everybody needs to transcend his/her suffering, to have the best chance for a meaningful and fulfilled life.
I’ll try to put it in a progression.
Note: this is an entirely rationalist-first approach. If you absolutely want to, you can easily map it onto religion early on, but try to hold your horses for a moment.
1.) Build your value hierarchy:
– When you choose between two choices, you make a (personal) statement about what you value higher than other things.
– Do this often enough using the truest truth you can conceive of and you end up with your own, more or less complete, sustainable & stable personal value hierarchy.
– For all matters and purposes, that value hierarchy is your religion.
And your highest value is your god.
If you’ve thought long and deep enough, you’ll come to very similar conclusions as other people, about those two concepts.
Apparently, your solution, your way out, is through religion. I won't try to debate which religion or where and how that religion will be the positive way out. Judea has genocided untold millions of Chrisitians far more devout than you, and far more devout than I could ever be. I am sorry, but I do not see a way out of this for me or my entire blood line through any religion. If the lord helps he who helps himself, then I will help the lord by helping my kin.
"I’d like to hear from you [just as I asked from the article writer], what are your ultimate positive goals, i.e. highest values?
It is extremely difficult in this vast tangle of malice, to find a positive way out. Did you find one?"
Judging by Americas newest Gen-Y and the Millenials, a thorough "woke" brainwashing requires absolutely zero detailed reasoning. Using my best logic, all my influence and their respect, I believe that I can accomplish the anti-cultural marxist indoctrination inoculation of my grandchildren without much effort. Time will tell.Replies: @Mikael_, @Ugetit
"Any attempts to inoculate them against certain ways of thinking without using painfully detailed reasoning, will likely backfire in a big way during their lives."
I don't have a "way out", but I do have a positive purpose. They are called grand children, born and yet to be born. I cannot imagine leading a rudderless life with out their future being my guiding star. One of my worries is when push comes to shove, how much will I be personally willing to sacrifice for their well being. Poverty? Pain? Starvation?
"to find a positive way out. Did you find one?"
Well that only extends the question to “how do you give/show your grand children a positive way out.”
I’m not trying to rub salt in a wound, just want you to focus on the key question.
(I personally have found an answer, for me.)
You wrote as introduction to your list
I will present off of the top of my head a few important milestones along my path [to reality and truth]
To me, my added examples relate to the
more and more in-your-face distribution of ever more outrageous (and transparent!) lies.
Clearly, if there is a second holodomor there will be little I can accomplish to save my grand children, or children for that matter.As for my grand children my current approach is to "innoculate" them from cultural marxism to any degree that I can. I am well aware that this eventually is likely to bring them, me, or their parents problems. Here is what I am talking about:With the boys I talk about guns. I have BB and Airguns, and we have modified Nerfs. We target shoot. Their mother hates this but tolerates it. I recently watched a WWII war movie with them (instead of some drivel like Star Wars) and talked about all kinds of things in the movie with them. I explained to them that it was England that started WWI and WWII and that the bombers were murdering Germans and the pilots were in actuality war criminals.With the girls I try to keep them doing feminine things. Playing with babies, baths, kitchens, doctors, animals, etc. I also try to be more masculine and to play the alpha male around their grandmother.
“how do you give/show your grand children a positive way out.”
Please tell me, I am very interested.Replies: @Mikael_
I personally have found an answer, for me.
While I disagree with a few points on your list (and not because I’m less deep down the rabbit hole, but because I have looked very deep into them and concluded there are variants that require much less conspiracy to get to the same outcome), and would add
– MH-17
– the Cypriot “banking crisis”
– the “surprise” attack on Pearl Harbor
– Skripal & Navalny
I’d like to hear from you [just as I asked from the article writer], what are your ultimate positive goals, i.e. highest values?
It is extremely difficult in this vast tangle of malice, to find a positive way out. Did you find one?
I don't have a "way out", but I do have a positive purpose. They are called grand children, born and yet to be born. I cannot imagine leading a rudderless life with out their future being my guiding star. One of my worries is when push comes to shove, how much will I be personally willing to sacrifice for their well being. Poverty? Pain? Starvation?
"to find a positive way out. Did you find one?"
Your waking-up and now clear-sightedness on the propaganda front is to be commended.
But the central question you need to work on is: What are you [peacefully] fighting for?
And the answer to that should be quite specific and detailed, not discretionary for the sake of maximum inclusivity.
After you found your answer comes the most difficult part, you need to find like-minded people. Or educate people about your answer, in an open-ended way, and how you got there.
Our children’s, grandchildren’s, and great grandchildren’s futures.Replies: @Mikael_
But the central question you need to work on is: What are you [peacefully] fighting for?
Not to be too pedantic, but fighting, peaceful or not, appears to be only one phase in the eternal struggle, so a better question may be "what are you struggling for?" Or is it the right time in the struggle to fight?It appears to me that the struggle also involves this approach too, as you seem to suggest,
But the central question you need to work on is: What are you [peacefully] fighting for?
H/t to "Huda," UNZ commentator for the first quote and I hope I'm using his/her gift in the spirit intended.
Allah’s Messenger said, “There will be afflictions during which a sitting person will be better than a standing one, and the standing one will be better than a walking one, and the walking one will be better than a running one, and whoever will expose himself to these afflictions, they will destroy him. So whoever can find a place of protection or refuge from them, should take shelter in it.” -Sahih al-Bukhari 7082, Vol. 9, Book 88, Hadith 203
https://sunnah.com/bukhari/92/33#!
23 A patient person puts up with things until the right time comes: but his joy will break out in the end.
24 Till the time comes he keeps his thoughts to himself…-Sirach, Ecclesiasticus, 1:23-24.https://www.catholic.org/bible/book.php?id=28&bible_chapter=1
Sorry, but to write a whole article about associations with the Reichstag Fire
but never mentioning 9/11 in that context, displays a special kind of delusion (or one-sidedness) by the author.
I was thinking the same thing. If Rasmusen is going to quote Hitler's Reichstag Fire Decree:
Sorry, but to write a whole article about associations with the Reichstag Fire but never mentioning 9/11 in that context, displays a special kind of delusion (or one-sidedness) by the author.
- Then the obvious parallel is 9/11 with the ushering in of the Patriot Act + mass NSA spying and Homeland Security. And then there's the fact that the Reichstag and 9/11 both involved fires - although accepted that the Reichstag didn't collapse. Maybe the Bolsheviks or Brownshirts or whoever forgot to bring the explosives.
It is therefore permissible to restrict the rights of personal freedom, freedom of expression, including the freedom of the press, the freedom to organize and assemble, the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications. Warrants for house searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.
“They screwed up by not stopping Wuhan flights immediately”. And Italian flights. And they should have stopped Britons returning from continental ski resorts, and, and, and.
You must have a higher opinion of politicians and civil servants than I do if you think they were likely to get such things right. Still, let’s have a law that all skiing hols must go here:
https://www.visitscotland.com/see-do/active/skiing-snowsports/centres-resorts/
Old Trumpy got Wuhan flights right and was bombarded with accusations of being xenophobic, racist, Nazi.
Our civil servants proved their incompetence by appointing the astrologer from Imperial College to the key advisory committee – the members seem to have become more a Committee of Public Safety than mere advisors.
By the way, I think the quarterly figures plotted in figure 5 here give a revealing history of our death rates which, it turns out, are equal to those of year 2000.
https://dr-no.co.uk/2021/01/14/through-a-glass-lightly/#comments
There was a good article in this morning's WSJ showing the total "excess deaths" during the epidemic across most of the countries in the world that have reliable statistics:
Has too much fuss been made of Covid-19? Many skeptics felt it was just a bad case of the flu, plus general hysteria. Of course, asking whether a seasonal epidemic is bad invites the reply: “Compared to what?”.
This indicates that American Covid-19 deaths may have been 70%(!) greater than the widely-reported totals. Since deaths have greatly accelerated since early December and our vaccination efforts have not gone well, we might even get close to a total body-count of a million before the epidemic abates.
In the U.S. alone, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data show more than 475,000 excess deaths through early December, a time frame that also included about 281,000 deaths linked to Covid-19, according to Johns Hopkins University.
This indicates that American Covid-19 deaths may have been 70%(!) greater than the widely-reported totals.
Shouldn’t we be more precise,
and clearly state those excess deaths are “deaths somehow related to Covid-19″ (i.e. also including deaths from lockdown-despair, reduced access to regular healthcare, etc.),
as opposed to
the [implicit] assumption those are all “deaths directly caused by Covid-19″?
So Ilana,
when will you close your twitter account, etc.?
Full disclosure:
I never had a twitter account, closed my fb 2 years ago, never used a large company as email provider, will close my (rarely ever used) goolag account the next days, and am considering switching from my iPhone back to my previously used Blackberry Z10 (kept exactly for such a scenario.)
You’re moving in a good direction with your thoughts.
A few things I disagree with:
– IP is not necessarily bad in itself, but it needs to be time-limited, staggered based on ‘innovation height’, but even for the top works no longer than 20 or maybe 30 years.
– You are actually talking about systems. The ultimate question on systems however is always: “What do we do about the [monopoly] system of The Rule of Law?” Which can only work if there is enforcement [at least of sentences/punishments], by some kind of… well actually government.
they really are Deep Problems touching the roots of morality and logic.
Yes!!!
They will not be solved by those unwilling to question the very existence of government.
Why not get more to the point, and state:
They will not be solved by those unwilling to question their own morality.
It’s a feature of ALL capitalism. Strive always for functional or de facto monopoly
So what’s your conclusion?
That we should eliminate capitalism altogether??
Well just because someone declares something doesn’t let it become true.
And no matter how often I read it [the quote], it doesn’t make any sense!
Thanks for not cutting out early on the quote:
Marxism places a premium on real law and order
I mean that’s just in-your-face wrong. One could maybe argue such for Communism/Leninism as the practical attempt to implement Marxism, but that the theory of Marxism has that somehow built in to it is just indefensible Orwellian prose.
I can’t take the time and space here to discuss Marxism
is then just the ultimate cop-out.
The left, given its principles, rarely resorts to this kind of deceit.
Yeah, right. Rarely.
And if someone from the left uses this kind of deceit, they are usually right-wingers wearing a leftist sheepskin. Because we all know the right lies all the time, and would honestly never state what they want!
All this proves once again that there is nobody more deluded than a true leftist.
Well you cannot just make up your own definitions of socialism and communism, and then without even stating them present derived conclusions from it.
“Well it seems to me the best philosophy that women have come up with so far is ‘Everybody gets the same.’ Which is the correct approach inside a family. But for societies it fails to account for differential productivity.”
I’d say that describes nicely the foundation of socialism (even though that was not the intent of the speaker.)
And communism/leninism is just a “solution” how to force that [socialism] on people.
Finance “capitalism” only works [for a while] with fiat currencies, where the number of unfulfillable promises is unlimited – at least up to the point when people start to not care about such ‘promises’ anymore. But that means the “money” quickly becomes more and more fake, and in that way the ‘capital’ in capitalism also dissolves, so it’s not capitalism anymore.
So I see the use of such a term ‘finance capitalism’ more as an attempt to muddy the waters even more, than to clearly define the issue.
If you disagree with anything, please provide your concise definitions!
I actually know a couple that lives in Panama, halfway up a high mountain so to get a more moderate climate.
Nice place for [early] retirees. But the country is 100% US-controlled. Security by obscurity only works up to a point.
Also not sure that is a country I would want to raise children in.
That is THE question. One can hide out just about anywhere, even under a log. But those with children will need to ask themselves if is that where and how they want to rear their children.
"Also not sure that is a country I would want to raise children in."
>Where to?
It’s a rather easy progression of thoughts to figure that out.
– as you want to escape US’ negative influence, the Five Eyes are ruled out immediately.
– beyond that, all the US allies (which are actually vassals) drop off the list as well.
– every country claiming to be neutral, but without the military might to defend themselves against US military adventurism, can be scratched too.
– that leaves Russia or China (or countries either of those two have clearly stated to help defend by all means.. maybe Belarus makes the cut here.)
Now to the second point, nobody would be thrilled to have a large influx of Americans, yes.
But if [as an American] you’ve come to realize your patriotism is not to a country but to commonly agreed upon highest values, and you therefore consider yourself not an American but a Christian, you might be more welcomed in some places.
(But are you implying Americans would establish parallel societies in Europe? Absolute hilarious!)
That’s quite a word salad.
Except that you dislike bankers and globalists and seem to like anarchy, I cannot take any straight thought out from it.
While it’s a good step in itself, I cannot consider it a victory.
To me it looks Baraitser has chosen the back-door exit, to cover her ass. And if you believe she did this on her own, without a nod from the US, I have a bridge I can sell to you.
Now we’ll get the appeal, in truly Kafkaesque fashion “because we can.”
“[Alan Ned Sabrosky] extends his heartfelt appreciation to Helen Buyinski of RT for her encouragement, advice and helpful suggestions.”
Meet “Helen of Troy”, Agent of c.h.a.o.s., An (((Irish))) lass, working for (((Russia))) today, beeting drums of “Let’s see you Americans burn your own country down!”

Learn to recognize Agitprop. Don’t waste your time on words of your enemies. This is called sound advice.
(i had to look up alan – he actually looks like a useful idiot.)

While I agree with a lot you say,
one thing self-contradicts a bit I think: What military power would that UN have, with the US military split up and/or disbanded, after a breakup of the states?
There are elements not included in this analysis. The Great Reset plans being most obvious.
The systems that people rely upon for survival are under attack – cyber attack threatening power supplies, a huge food crisis is developing. The world moves towards a dystopia described in the fourth vision in the article, but not as some outcome of civil war, instead through a steady siege war already being conducted by social planners and elites upon a docile and brainwashed public.
As I look around me, depressingly, I see people who are mostly incapable of any genuine critical thinking, they are so disconnected from physical realities that they have no experience of providing basic needs for themselves or of defending their own resources.
Unless things take an almost unimaginable turn in direction, I think that people will for the most part stay at home as they are told, watching Netflix and playing Xbox, whilst the food queues grow and the vaccinations, digital money and surveillance become mandatory requirements for getting supplies.
Drip, drip. It works.
That’s all very interesting,
but as long as you painstakingly avoid to use the word Christianity, you’ve already lost the battle you are describing.
Anarchists don't expect a utopia to arise when the system fails, and anybody who claims otherwise is doing so in bad faith and marks themselves as ignorant or a shill (or both, but not neither). Anarchists expect a system where economic outcomes are generated by voluntary transactions. It's not expected that nobody ever again makes a mistake - just that losses that arise from such mistakes will not be able to be passed on to the polity while indemnifying the people making the mistake. It's not expected that nobody ever commits a crime: just that there is less likelihood that the system will have differential results for people depending on their proximity to political power.In other words, networks of private institutions that compete for business (security, dispute resolution etc) will generate superior outcomes to the existing (captured) government monopolies. Anyone who claims to genuinely believe that "monopoly leads to expensive, lower-quality products" is a contentious statement when it applies to government, believes in magical bureaucrats who, given possession of a monopoly, do not abuse it. That's an utterly utopian (and naïve, and stupid) view.There is absolutely no expectation of 'utopia' under anarchist principles: what is expected is a system that has a greater chance of being 'fair', than the system you just spent 1800 of your 1900 words whining about like a spoilt little bitch.Replies: @RoatanBill, @Brás Cubas, @Mikael_, @Curmudgeon, @BADmejr, @foolisholdman, @John Hagan, @ns supporter
the US system of representative government has failed
Hilarious.
What you’re actually saying -but forget to mention-
is your anarchic system will be entirely voluntary, which also means everyone reserves the right to reject any, just a little bit centralized, system of Rule of Law.
Which leads to everybody has to for himself find out who he/she can trust or not. And dish out punishment for extreme misdeeds themselves, if deemed necessary.
Which is actually very close to the ‘Rule of the Jungle’, or in more sophisticated terms ‘Bellum omnium contra omnes.’
(If you see a variant how your anarchist system would still have a Rule of Law while not becoming a governed society, feel free to lay it out here.)
Otherwise: Talk about naïve, and stupid.
Nice revisionist history.
Note I’m not saying anything in those books is false, just that the complete black-or-white categorization and lack of any ambiguity (at least according to Fred’s description)
makes it just another “history is a series of lies agreed upon” variant.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1-0XKYAZII
Can ‘Mr. Global’ be stopped?
An interview with Catherine Austin Fitts.
If nothing else, watch the 3 minutes where she explains the connection between riot areas and Opportunity Zones, starting at 28:55||culture-society||
To be straight about this, you make a lot of good points.
But I have to put in a list the things you state without any evidence:
– “10 megadeaths” (on current trajectory, including vaccinations. Even Burn-Murdoch can give no support to such a claim; see also 4th point below. Also you are ignoring the “low-hanging fruit” view – how many of the persons most susceptible to bad outcomes have already been hit? A first vs. second wave severity comparison seems to give credence to that view. Also what about the possibility of near future sub-par death numbers, and their effect on life expectancy?)
– “no pre-existing herd immunity” (Are you trying to imply there was also zero pre-existing immunity? Impossible to prove or disprove without highly unethical experiments, but critical thinking should strongly doubt that number is zero or even close to zero)
– “mass variolation” (I had also for three weeks liked that idea, until I realized we have no idea about the long-term aftereffects of Corona on surviving patients!)
– “third-world undercounting” (of deaths!? Those require zero sophisticated technology to count and report.)
You completely ignore:
– critical thinking on mRNA
I also see a lot of trolling in your article. Although you give lip service to criticizing leftoids, it is clear you believe you can virtue signal your better understanding (and higher IQ) by cheap-shots on clueless folks who at least tried to think for themselves (you get my stab at leftoid NPCs here?)
Overall more a letdown than a epiphany of an article.
China: Ten Predictions for 2021, AKA
Video Link
They won’t do it of course, and so politically and economically, China is the big winner from a world wide catastrophe created by China. That is really going to make them careful with Artificial General Intelligence. I suppose we now know how the world is going to end.
This is one of the better articles on China I’ve read in awhile.
https://adamtooze.substack.com/p/chartbook-newsletter-9
It covers the increased role of State Owned Enterprises in the Chinese economy with alternate views on if this is a good thing or a bad thing.
– One would assume that SOE would decrease as China modernized since SOE’s have a bad reputation for productivity.
– Instead China is increasing its use of SOE’s with the stated goals of derisking the financial system, curbing the oligarchs, trying to extract more value with public/private partnerships, and relying on the rule of law to govern what is an increasingly complex economy.
Relying on the rule of law is the most interesting part here. It shows that China is not really governed by ideology, but more so by practicality.
If you think about it, China is facing the same kind of problems the American economy is facing. Chinas solution which focuses on the rule of law, curbing elites, and derisking financial markets sound exactly like what America should do.
The way China is mixing the state and private sector is also interesting. Instead of allowing Pharma to buy Washington, the US could instead rely on private/public partnerships in sectors where the private market extracs too much wealth from the country such as our Pharma companies.
America is gearing up to fight a China that is no longer communist and increasingly does capitalism better than America.
Nice display of your brainwashedness, from western propaganda.
You didn’t follow Saker’s link to the machine translated example, did you?
One would need a bit more than broad, completely unsubstantiated claims by you that Russian kids in large numbers actually believe those YT lies and similar.
And Lukashenko isn’t doing so bad, currently.
The idea of applying the theory of natural selection to ideas was one of Richard Dawkins' insights. Apart from being a prominent atheist, Dawkins is also the person who invented the concept of the meme as a thing that attempts to propagate itself among minds, the same way that genes attempt to propagate themselves among meatbags.
There is a Darwinism not just of biological organisms, but of ideas too. Christianity had superior “reproductive fitness” and so took over the West, while Stoicism and Cynicism became extinct.
Always so funny, when someone like you at first lists many clear-sighted observations,
but at the end takes him-/herself completely out of the discussion by undershooting even the 90IQ minds with drivel such as “eugenic cull.”
Pepe is projecting his marxist worldview onto the phenomenon of the spiritual Jesus. There is more to the world than meets your eye Pepe:
Jesus focused on the imminence of God’s kingdom.
Wrong! Jesus taught the ‘immanence’ of God’s Kingdom:
When He was asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, He answered them, “The kingdom of God does not come with observation. Nor will they say, ‘Here it is!’ or ‘There it is!’ For remember, the kingdom of God is within you.”
Luke 17:20-21
The good news Jesus preached for 3 years was this: “God is within us all, seek and you shall find.
”
Astute demonstration that you are unable to see the forest for the trees, even though you point out so many nicely observed details.
Hint: reflect on the tragic consequences of perfectism.
Mr. Escobar’s take here is almost as depressing as the comments here. The fact is, Jesus did not come to bring a political message, he deliberately eschews such statements. He tells the Jews to pay taxes, but he then uses this as a metaphor for how they are to serve God.
As for what the “Kingdom of Heaven/God” that Jesus is constantly talking about is the one that all the Jews had been waiting for. They had been waiting for the Son of David, the Messiah. This man would come and save them. What exactly this salvation looked like was not clear, but the Jews were convinced it would be a full restoration of the Davidic kingdom. They would be restored to self-rule and they would dominate the gentiles in their kingdom and beyond.
However, Jesus brought them a spiritual and ecclesiastical kingdom, not a political and military one. He was not the man they wanted. Escobar is right when he says that Jesus antagonized and threatened the power of the corrupt Jewish elites, the Sanhedrin, by challenging their legitimacy. He told people that they were hypocrites and evil, and he was totally right. Since they couldn’t refute him, they killed him.
And for those of you who refuse to believe that Christ was a miracle worker or possessed supernatural powers, note that He not only predicts His own death at the hands of the Jews, but the destruction of the Temple (Matthew 24:1-25:46). And since we know the Gospels were written before Roman Jewish war and the Temple’s destruction, along with the sack of Jersualem, we know this is an authentic prophecy. Plus, in his trial, Jesus says that He will come in judgement to destroy the Sanhedrin, comparing himself to the Son of Man (who is identified with God) mentioned in the book of Daniel. This is the blasphemy for which he is charged, though the trial was illegal. And Christ is correct, and in 70 AD, the Jews are judged and their leadership is ground beneath the heel of Rome.
We know no such thing.
And since we know the Gospels were written before Roman Jewish war and the Temple’s destruction, along with the sack of Jersualem, we know this is an authentic prophecy.
Ann,
both you and follyofwar replying to you talk about very specific practical details.
I’m concerned about the (unwritten) rules behind all things, the meta-physics, which underlie all [sustainable] developments.
As I see it, Christianity put an extra twist in its meta-interpretation -which can at first glance be seen as a weakness-, with which it surpassed Judaism.
OK Pepe –
now in a follow-up piece (maybe for next Christmas?) tell us
how Christianity surpassed Judaism!
Alinsky tactics were not designed to be a long-term strategy.
I’m not convinced that copying our enemies by going full Alinskiyite is a long-term winning strategy.
Aren’t you just dancing around an elephant?
The glaring contradiction is that using a short-term tactic without announcing it as such, will hamper you massively when trying to sell your long-term strategy as a viable moral foundation later.
It’s the usual ‘fighting for peace’ or ‘f**king for virginity’ fallacy.
Agreed--we should be "announcing it as such".
The glaring contradiction is that using a short-term tactic without announcing it as such,
While on the surface your argument is sound,
I’m not convinced that copying our enemies by going full Alinskiyite is a long-term winning strategy.
Alinsky tactics were not designed to be a long-term strategy.
I’m not convinced that copying our enemies by going full Alinskiyite is a long-term winning strategy.
Yawn, another one of those bullshiffers who accuse others of proposing anarchy, along the line:
“Without a [benevolent] government leading the sheeple, there would be total chaos everywhere!”
Can’t you come up with any less straw-manning argument?
Conspiracy theorists tend to think of themselves as smart, better informed people than most people, them being one step ahead from the rest of us. But from what I have seen recently, they are the dumbest, most gullible people on earth.
North Carolina was the last swing state that was called. Surprisingly, there were no reports of fraud, no dead people voting, no missing ballots boxes, no “dumps”, no protests, no hearings. The voting machines apparently worked just fine.
Only a dumb gullible person would believe that the fact that North Carolina was called for Trump has nothing to do with it and that Trump’s strategy, which he declared in advance and which is often employed by sulking toddlers and sore losers, was to call fraud on every swing state he lost.
Only the dumbest most gullible person would believe that a president with an approval ratings of 42%, that all polls had indicated was about to lose (including Fox News poll), was actually about to win all swing states, and win the elections in a landslide, and therefore the elections were stolen from him.
Only the dumbest most gullible person would send his money to the Trump Defense Fund, which can be used for anything the grifter in chief pleases, and only part of it was used to fund frivolous meritless lawsuits without a scintilla of evidence by the nincompoop Giuliani and his clown show for $20k/day.
Only the dumbest most gullible person believes that if someone says “I saw something”, that is a smoking gun and proof of fraud, and there’s no need for courts, cross examination or an opportunity for the defense to demonstrate that what that person saw (and assuming he is not lying) is a lot more mundane than the grand conspiracy he imagined.
I could go on and on but I’ll leave it at that. Anybody who falls for Trump’s grift is the dumbest most gullible person, not the sophisticated, informed person that he thinks himself to be.
To set the record correct
[Mikael_ wrote:]
spirituality […] can become a grab bag of thoughts
And you didn’t touch at all on my Christian key point ‘[Large-scale] Perfection is not possible in this [earthly] world’,
but at the same time happily posit
manmade religious formulations are ultimately hubristic
[…] elitism
without addressing the contradiction [to that key point.]
(BTW Do you actually agree with me that all religious formulations are manmade?)
I assume I am more on the extreme end of that thought spectrum, but I have come to find not just Humanism (or whatever you want to call ‘human rights’ and ‘scientism’ of today’s technocratic society), but also underlying Enlightenment to be aberrations of truthful philosophy/theology. But that’s a topic for an entirely separate thread.
I once watched an Orthodox Christian Archpriest state “…to accept the idea that God can be anything but power. Christianity presents a paradoxical view of God as weakness. God is frailty.”
An absolutely mind-blowing viewpoint to me, at the time. Compare to other religions.
Jesus didn’t save us from our sins. He only stated categorically that there is a way out from our sins (and those of our forefathers), by that if we truly work for our betterment our old sins will be forgiven. Meaning there is reason for hope, as we are not stuck in the dead end of Gnostic thought, among other things.
Flogging the dead horse Eusebius (or any other ‘showcase villain’) doesn’t change the fact that the ‘ossified’ Bible would never have been perfect, no matter what.
You wrote in the beginning “My perspective […] is universalistic”;
I had stated “spirituality puts less emphasis on having an as-singular-and-simple-as-possible foundation [than religion]” and I have now highlighted in bold the distinguisher, for me.
I have so far not identified any major flaws in the foundational ideas of Christianity, as applied to this earthly world.
Haggling over our understanding of the afterworld, where large-scale perfection is possible again (and spirits can live eternally), is a relatively pointless exercise to me – as it has no influence on my thought process on how to act in the earthly world.
I read something very different out of “Atlas Shrugged.”
Most of it -not all- has passed the test of time.
Good:
Hank Rearden is the archetypal man striving for the appreciation of his mother (even by his choice of wife), but never getting it. He is able to (somewhat) break out of her spell over the course of the book.
Ayn describes so clear-sightedly the typical self-destruction of: true socialism (“tragedy of the commons”), and authority structures when deceit and irresponsibility [stay quiet when you should speak up] take over, especially top-down (give the order to drive the steam locomotive into the long uphill tunnel to one person after another, until you find someone dumb enough to do it while all others who know better stay quiet.) Only years later I found indications she just varied stories of real events (often in the US!) from a few years before. But still true.
John Galt is the cold-hard truth teller. To correct the ridiculous straw-manning by Pepe above (“altruism is evil”), Ayn Rand through John Galt correctly points out that unlimited altruism without reciprocity is self-defeating. With that -formerly common sense- she hit bulls-eye, also compare to ‘white guilt’ nowadays.
Strong Caveats:
Ayn Rand’s “solutions” are hocus-pocus. (Took me 10 years to realize that.)
Galt’s Gulch is the aggrandized teenager dream of building a treehouse and retreating into it. That doesn’t work because in reality the mob will come after you, as you cannot effectively hide forever. And if you plan to first build undefeatable hiding/cloaking devices or something like that, you just went from bad to worse by replacing permanent self-isolation with god-like fantasies. But problems of a certain size require you to [try to] work together with a large group of people.
Second, as a man I now can state that perfectism oozes out of Dagny’s pores. Such a woman doesn’t, and never did, exist. You’ll have to accept you own and everyone else’s imperfections [but not capitulation/defeatism], to ever have a chance to achieve long-term content of mind.
This is a key point. Hatred of communism stems from our roots in the soi-disant 'free world', where we have been repeatedly - and largely correctly - told that communism runs counter to our most cherished beliefs, as the inheritors of the great social, political and not least economic movements that began with 'The Enlightenment', and which came to fruition in a new world, formed by several cataclysmic 'revolutions'. These began in England in the mid-seventeenth century, and proceeded through 1789 in France and thence to the great 'year of revolutions' of 1848 throughout much of Europe. The events of 1917 in Russia, however, are normally thought of as being somehow distinct from these earlier movements, when in fact they are of a piece with them, but displaying a different character.
we need to make some space available to consider what communism is, where it came from, and how it has been applied, exploited and fought up to the present
My god, what a pile of horse manure.
Class war is good. You, on the other hand, are sophomoric. The epitome of the truism, “A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.”
First of all, I still haven’t seen you explain how you define “politics”, based on which previous’ thinkers thoughts, and more important how that is in line with today’s wide understanding of “politics”, or at the very least why the common understanding is wrong including your concise argumentation. (Not Alice in Wonderland style ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’)
Beyond that, you make some good points in
Imposed religions are nothing more than a bended and warped imposition upon the spiritual awakening vis a vis Talmudic Judaism by the figure we know as Jesus. His was, much in the Essene and Gnostic traditions, a profoundly spiritual rejection of the corruptive religion of Talmudism, which was rooted in the Babylonian captivity and owed as much to Babylonian concepts as to the more exclusivist promulgations of the ancient Hebrews. Religion, whether Roman-“Christian” or Talmudic Judaism,is nothing more than ossified and even petrified spirituality.
but I feel you are also missing out on / misunderstanding a lot.
As I see it, Jesus and the thinkers behind the New Testament (forget about the writers for a moment, even if they were one and the same) defined an improved “hierarchy of highest values” as a set of meta-rules, or actually meta-physics, commonly called a religion (1). They built on Talmudism, but surpassed it (actually sublated it), especially in one key idea:
‘[Large-scale] Perfection is not possible in this [earthly] world’,
which includes
– Striving for perfection in groups or systems will always lead to bad outcomes (nowadays one would state it as “Perfection as a policy goal always leads to totalitarianism.”)
– When accepting that proposition, there is no need to declare all attempts to work towards the good to be futile (i.e. become Gnostic)
– Because even though we cannot reach perfection ever, we can still always improve things/systems a little bit, all the time, even -or especially- after inevitable setbacks.
Now every church, and to a lesser degree even the Bible, are “institutionalized” versions of the underlying religion, and are as you called them ‘ossified.’
However you fell for a call to perfectism if you now want to dispense with them entirely, as
a) the knowledge/wisdom has to be passed on, and not every person has the time (or ability) to go through decades of careful thought to come to the same conclusions on their own, and
b) nothing hinders the true deep thinker to -truthfully and consistently- “go meta” beyond church and Bible.
BTW I like to call it the ‘Greco-Judeo-Christian’ civilization with a smirk in my eyes.
As a sign of both humility and humor.
Note 1:
We may have different definitions, but I see ‘spirituality’ as different from my above definition of religion in that spirituality is more fluid, meaning it can become a grab bag of thoughts (“I like this from Buddism, that from Taoism, and that from Christianity.”) That doesn’t necessarily imply that any chosen spirituality is in itself clearly self-contradictory, but at least that spirituality puts less emphasis on having an as-singular-and-simple-as-possible foundation. I prefer religion over spirituality.
“He refuted my previous post in a way I cannot counter!
Quick, move the goalposts!!”
Never heard of an Alpha course. (Just researched it a little.)
Well you did accept without question the false dichotomy
“Either acceptance of the risen Christ as your sole route to salvation is the most important thing in your life, or we (the course instructors) are a bunch of fools”
I wouldn’t.
Secondly, you need to check your premises about
No amount of ‘striving’ will unseat the ruling oligarchy and their loyal cohorts. This is their final triumph and our enduring tragedy
regarding today, before 1945, and many other times in last few centuries.
The wrong underlying assumption is
‘[large-scale] perfection is possible in this [earthly] world’,
therefore it is a valid goal and reasonable target.
It’s not. It’s actually the central reason for most enormous man-made disasters, especially in the 20th century. But it takes a lot of humility to realize and then accept it.
I'm framing this and hanging it next to my pictures of Jesus, Hugo Chavez, Ahmadinejad, Lacey Chabert, 2Pac and Josef Stalin.
One of Chavez’s mentors was Fidel Castro. While the Cuban Revolution was founded in guerrilla warfare and a military takeover of power, the governments of Chavez and then of Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela have depended, and continue to depend, on the outcomes of elections. Were these elections done honestly or were the Venezuelan elections as corrupt and dishonest as the current US election?
Sidney Powell tends to equate her antagonism with Venezuela’s communist system with her antagonism towards the Dominion and Smartmatic vote rigging systems. Both companies retain ties with their Venezuelan founders and both companies, in the view of Sidney Powell at least, are tainted by their origins in a socialist system of governance.
Powell presents a case that the US election of 2020 included purposeful interventions from communist regimes also in Cuba, and China. Powell’s undeveloped argument about the alleged interference in the US election of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is especially fraught given a core element of Trump’s political platform. One of Trump’s main political goals has been to restore US manufacturing capacity, a capacity that was largely exported to China along with millions of decent jobs.
I really fail to see any implausibility here. Based on the supply-and-demand principle, the questions one has to ask are: Is there a demand for riggable voting machines in shitty countries? Will they sell it to other countries which happen to have a demand for similar reasons?
Does ideology play a part here? Well, on the buyer’s side, perhaps, but who cares?. On the seller’s side, the only ideology one has to assume is profit.
I was the guy who “berated you for having left out religion.”
So sorry, I still cannot make head or tails overall out of your laid-out thoughts.
Care to expand on?
While you are pretty clear about what one should run away from (communism, straight-line history interpretations including ‘the end of history’ delusions, shallow materialism)
you are rather nebulous about what to strive towards.
Traditionalism and spiritual dimensions of human existence are too ambiguous terms to me, because the goal of a stable society is to find ‘commonly agreed-upon ultimate [exact] values’ and to successfully hand them down to future generations.
And what exactly about religion is a minefield you dare not touch? [And seemingly by implication, needn’t touch?]
I think that I have done quite enough expanding, and if you cannot make sense of what I have written, that is your loss not mine.
So sorry, I still cannot make head or tails overall out of your laid-out thoughts.
Care to expand on?
I don't believe I mentioned 'running away' from anything. I was attempting to describe the circumstances in which we find ourselves.
you are pretty clear about what one should run away from
No amount of 'striving' will unseat the ruling oligarchy and their loyal cohorts. This is their final triumph and our enduring tragedy. We dwell in what I regard as a sort of 'Twilight of the Gods', Götterdämmerung having occurred on 8th May 1945. There is no discernable way back. Wotan certainly never expected to be given a second chance and for us to do so is the most naïve of conceits.
you are rather nebulous about what to strive towards.
I know more about the subject of religion than the vast majority of people, having 'survived' the notorious 'Alpha course' back in the late 1980s. Having completed the course, I immediately understood that in order to surmount the central challenge of that course I must be certain of my ground. That challenge was stated at the course thus: "Either acceptance of the risen Christ as your sole route to salvation is the most important thing in your life or we (the course instructors) are a bunch of fools".I am totally comfortable in my belief that they are, in fact, a group of, not fools perhaps, but genuinely misguided dupes. I came to this conclusion by means of an arduous journey of intense religious study, regarding which I could a tale unfold whose lightest word would harrow up thy soul, freeze thy young blood, make thy knotted and combin'ed locks to part and each particular hair to stand on end like quills upon the fretful porpentine.It's by no means the case that I 'dare not touch' this subject, but rather that it is completely unnecessary so to do. Like Dan Dennett, I am content to 'believe in belief'. Societies need religion. Christianity is perhaps an unfortunate choice for European-derived societies to have made, but at this stage it will have to serve office accordingly. I thank you for your interest in my comments.
And what exactly about religion is a minefield you dare not touch?
Really?
“My intent,” Powell assets, “has always been to expose all the fraud I could find and let the chips fall where they may—whether it be upon Republicans or Democrats.”
Yeah, Tump won, and voting for him equals voting for freedom. These inconsistencies do not instill credibility. Neither does her overblown confidence before she has accomplished anything. Release the Kraken!? We are in the comic books now?
I want the American public to know right now, we will not be intimidated. American patriots are fed up with the corruption from the local level to the highest level of our government. We are going to take this country back. We will not be intimidated. We are going to clean this mess up right now. President Trump won by a landslide. We are going to prove it. And we are going to reclaim the United States of America for the people who voted for freedom. — Sidney Powell, Washington D.C., 19 November, 2020
Who is that coming from such a gentle, temperate and nice land? This all sounds quite like a critique I heard recently from someone very close to Unz Review. Its fair comment that there is some contradiction between claiming a willingness to go after Democrats or Republicans and wanting to prove that Trump that won. But humans tend to be like that. We aren’t always totally consistent. Some of us make allowances for that. Go figure.
This is not just your usual election fraud and the Biden crew in all their diversity of constituencies and incarnations are not like any other aspirants to the power of the White House that I’ve ever seen.
Sidney Powell isn’t by any means perfect but under the circumstances she has taken this fiasco all on with gusto and measure of intelligence with a pretty compelling stage presence. She has popped up as a significant player on the grand stage of Americana and much of what she is standing for and embodying is deserving of notice and analysis. To me she seems to have what it takes to get beyond some of the constraints limiting what Giuliani can achieve.
Your final paragraph is just so familiar as it goes over some of the same ground that my Unz Review friend and I traversed not that long ago. Whither the deplorables, the Dems and the Chinese Communist Party? Wither the workers of the world? When it comes to what I know of this election fraud from a few days of hard digging, it seems to me to display malice albeit with a good deal of stupidity as well.
Lol and you call yourself a Christian. Lucifer wants me to remind you that Jesus said to never resist your enemies, but to love your enemies, in fact to love everyone on Earth as if they were your neighbor. If you want to kill your enemies and their children then you can just follow the Old Testament instead of pretending to care about the New. Maybe you’ll even get your new temple some day. Shalom.
You are a sick filthy pervert. Deserving of slow painful death.Replies: @gay troll
"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.
I always laugh out over clowns like you,
to whom the lessons from Forest Gump went straight over their heads:
“It doesn’t require high IQ to identify immoral actions.”
Thanks Tony, and I agree with your remarks and here are a few of my own inspired by this question of yours:
Why are Facebook and Google not subject to anti-trust interventions in order to restore the principle that the Internet is a public resource not subject to private ownership and control.
When I was young, words such as ‘the common good’,’ the public interest’, ‘public servants’, public utilities’, ‘the country’s armed forces’, public lands, and so on were much used and broadly understood, and perhaps unwisely were assumed as permanent sensible aspects of a democratic polity.
The word ‘monopoly’ was best represented by a board game of that name, but much of the public had somehow learned the lesson that a monopoly whatever else it was – was in part always a danger.
The words monopoly and totalitarian are kindred. In the same vein, conglomerations of corporations under unified ownership were understood as not in the best long run interests of the broad public or of the country.
The idea of ‘privatizing’ public utilities was pretty well absent from political discourse.
But how things changed. I won’t go through a long list, except to note that it is my understanding that some of the American generals far afield have in recent years employed private guards, and while I’m not sure of this as fact, I have read that Trump has employed some of his own private security alongside the Secret Service, with the latter’s reputation especially stained by participation in JFK’s public execution.
So the intrusion of Zuckerberg’s vast private fortune into the quintessential public ritual, the election process and count for public office, can be seen as yet another part in a vast increase in recent decades of the intrusion of private elite money, private elite influence , private elite power, private elite censorship, private elite dishonesty, private elite advantage, private elite profit, into the commons, the public realm. And at great cost to the public interest, and even, at the moment it seems to me, at our great peril.
It is ironic that a billionaire business man winning the presidency should be perceived by such a large assemblage of ‘top dogs’ as an existential threat to their ‘monopoly’.
The ‘meaning’ of Trump – and here I am not pretending to know his actual personal motives or intentions – is that he has thrown a dizzying array of proverbial ‘monkey wrenches’ into the System of Power that he was inserted into. While telling many lies, exaggerating much, and probably misunderstanding much, he has also been the greatest truth telling political leader of our time. He has thrown the bs prescribed international political narrative into a tizzy.
His main contribution to truth and the possibility of societal reconstruction has been his continual honest and derisive depiction of mass media – liars and fake news. But there have been so many other verbal volleys wreaking havoc on polite scripted sensibilities.
So, for example, he nailed Canada’s Prime Minister Trudeau with the apt description “very dishonest and weak”. Unheard of diplomatic behaviour, but oh so true. Trump aptly termed the annual war games off North Korea “provocative’, to howls of outrage. He refused to go along with the climate change psyop, to howls of outrage. He said mean things about European countries re NATO. He described US wars abroad, wars he very well knows are for Israel and profit and Empire, as – ill considered – harmful, wasteful, destructive, foolish, to howls of outrage.
Trump mused quite correctly that hydroxychloroquine could be very helpful re the new bio-weapon, and drew howls of outrage. Adam Shiff, prolific political purveyor of the disingenuous, becomes “Shifty Schiff.” And so on.
A few years ago I wrote a piece ‘JFK and Solzhenitsyn’. In it I noted that the Soviet Politburo was faced with a greatly discomfiting dilemma over whether to allow the publication of “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich”, the S’ novella about one person’s day/life in the gulag. The problem was that carefully maintained USSR false ‘narratives’ were inconsistent with the Denisovich tale. If a novella can make tyrants quake, how solid is the ground they have built their house on?
Trump has til recently been hated so much by the powerful because he doesn’t play by the elite prescribed bs narratives. And for all his faults, in part because he alone was willing to blurt out unscripted truths, and unscripted tweets, the public by the tens of millions warmed to him. So as with Denisovich, if one Trump can make the powerful, the billionaires, so uncomfortable, how solid is the ground they are standing on?
we need to make some space available to consider what communism is, where it came from, and how it has been applied, exploited and fought up to the present
This is a key point. Hatred of communism stems from our roots in the soi-disant ‘free world’, where we have been repeatedly – and largely correctly – told that communism runs counter to our most cherished beliefs, as the inheritors of the great social, political and not least economic movements that began with ‘The Enlightenment’, and which came to fruition in a new world, formed by several cataclysmic ‘revolutions’. These began in England in the mid-seventeenth century, and proceeded through 1789 in France and thence to the great ‘year of revolutions’ of 1848 throughout much of Europe. The events of 1917 in Russia, however, are normally thought of as being somehow distinct from these earlier movements, when in fact they are of a piece with them, but displaying a different character.
I would say the revolution began in England more than a century earlier. As EMJ likes to say, the Reformation in England was simply a massive looting operation.
These began in England in the mid-seventeenth century
now have developed a meta-political point of view
Well that’s telling, even more than ignoring my comment #133.
Not philosophical or meta-physical, but meta-political.
Politics, where there are no ultimate values, only to win by by any means necessary.
Enjoy your self-made hell.
(Which is what I believe was also trying to convey.)
Hmm, the smell of overly righteous attitude in the evening… even wrapped in “intellectual honesty.”
Actually I strongly disagree with GeeBee.
It is difficult to make a concise counter argument to the flood of information bits he wrote.
As I understand it, Marx took Feuerbach and added some messianic part towards a “classless society” to it. While Marx was likely driven somewhat by envy, I believe his main goal was to undermine and destroy [Christian] religion.
Which brings me to the most obvious deficit in GeeBee’s comment: the absence of religion, or for atheistic-inclined people “commonly agreed-upon highest values” in his analysis, and even more important how those values get handed down to the next generation. That last point also being the worst overlooked aspect by Kant.
All that and much much more can be found in “The Crisis of Modernity” by Augusto Del Noce.
Things are getting really interesting as awareness grows that this was not just yet another instance of typical marginal and inevitable election shenanigans, but a well organized, deeply planned, and widely supported, attempted coup. And the attempted coup is attempting to place into the Presidency an irredeemably corrupt and demented man. And furthermore, that President Trump in actuality had received an unprecedented outpouring of citizen support in the form of legitimate votes across the United States.
They ["most news agencies"] assume that they can help along an historic instance of election tampering without being held legally accountable for the crimes in which they are deeply complicit.
Thanks Robert Snefjella. As I worked on the essay in recent days I felt one of the most significant and underreported topics in what I discovered was how the COVID-19 media-induced hysteria has been so essential in setting up the United States for wholesale rigging of this presidential election. The same media screaming the loudest about supposed “spikes” in “cases” (based on a PCR testing procedure that is totally ineffective) are the same venues saying, don’t you dare look into the claims of the crazy people who are claiming election fraud has taken place on a massive scale.
I find important the line of analysis being pursued by Phill Kline who calls attention to the fact that Zuckerberg forked over $400,000,000 million to enforce and exploit all the COVID relaxations and eliminations of old rules designed by wise people to protect election integrity. Who is Zuckerberg really and who does he work for? Who actually created Facebook and for what ends? Who and what does Facebook serve now? Why are Facebook and Google not subject to anti-trust interventions in order to restore the principle that the Internet is a public resource not subject to private ownership and control.
Anyway, the nefarious way the COVID-19 con is being worked by the usual suspects who control the “news” should be subject to major skepticism and scrutiny right now.. Like so many other areas of this massive scandal, the political applications of the COVID scam to election rigging should already be subject to investigation by the “criminal justice system.” I appreciate seeing the attention you have brought to this subject with your comment Robert Snefjella.
In my view, all news reporters using the hackneyed, non-sensical “conspiracy theory” meme as a short form command that one should not pay attention– that one should look the other way– call attention to the possibility that journalists in question are possibly knowing participants or inadvertent dupes in genuine conspiracies.
https://www.rt.com/usa/508402-trump-veto-ndaa-section-230/
Why are Facebook and Google not subject to anti-trust interventions in order to restore the principle that the Internet is a public resource not subject to private ownership and control.
When I was young, words such as 'the common good',' the public interest', 'public servants', public utilities', 'the country's armed forces', public lands, and so on were much used and broadly understood, and perhaps unwisely were assumed as permanent sensible aspects of a democratic polity.
Why are Facebook and Google not subject to anti-trust interventions in order to restore the principle that the Internet is a public resource not subject to private ownership and control.
Likely the most confused article I have ever read from Pepe Escobar.
Chinese shehui xinyong (and by extension Mao) good, Silicon Valley digital fiefdoms bad.
That’s your deep-level analysis?
Unz puts all of the corruption of the current US ruling class in one long compilation, so that he won’t have to risk angering his pals at Facebook beyond today. It’s the classic corporate strategy of piling all the bad news that they can find from years forward and years backward into a quarterly earnings report. It’s standard accounting practice that Unz knows very well as a tool of Wall Street.
Now you anti-Semites can begin your mindless attribution of all the corruption to Israel or Zionists or Barbara Streisand, guilty of some things, no doubt, but there’s plenty to go around. A true accounting would certainly include my girl-men fellow Catholics, the corrupt Protestant World and lots of atheists. Probably not many Muslims, however.
I think Sidney Powell should have a statue on Mt Rushmore if she pulls this off. RINOS are equally as bad as the commie paert, formerly known as the Democrats. JFK and Truman would be disgusted by todays D party. Hubert Humphrey would be disgusted by them.
First, thanks to Tony Hall for this article, which touches on important aspects of the underlying reasons for the election situation – and the state of the United States.
The brazen and obviously highly planned and coordinated attempt to steal this election has engaged, and focused the attention of, and spurred outrage and concern among, tens of millions of Americans.
The ‘election hearings’ in various States that I’ve managed to look in on have featured poignant election fraud exposés, with many concerned citizens with backbone presenting many devastating revelations.
Here once again much mass media is complicit in either not giving fair and adequate coverage, or in ignoring, censoring or purveying disinformation about the proceedings. This too is being noticed by millions.
But a widespread public ‘awakening’ is a necessary prelude, within a milieu in which political corruption and dysfunction have gained the upper hand, to the renovations necessary to achieving a preponderance of political – in the broadest sense of that term – virtue.
So the brazen nature of the attempted usurpation of political power through fraud, crime, pernicious manipulation, and lies, among other evils, can be seen as a great gift to the ‘salt of earth’ public by corrupt power .
Had the attempted steal been more subtle, more nuanced, its chances of smoother success would have increased.
Another aspect of the current situation is the degree to which good people in positions of authority have joined with the ‘deplorables’ in being shaken and woken up. The “swamp” – aka the cesspool – has had a sufficient spotlight shone upon it to reveal it as wider, and deeper, and more heavily populated, and more foul, than many, including good people in official positions, had previously appreciated.
From the article:
They [“most news agencies”] assume that they can help along an historic instance of election tampering without being held legally accountable for the crimes in which they are deeply complicit.
Things are getting really interesting as awareness grows that this was not just yet another instance of typical marginal and inevitable election shenanigans, but a well organized, deeply planned, and widely supported, attempted coup. And the attempted coup is attempting to place into the Presidency an irredeemably corrupt and demented man. And furthermore, that President Trump in actuality had received an unprecedented outpouring of citizen support in the form of legitimate votes across the United States.
The active or passive support for the attempted coup by the CIA, the FBI, the DOJ and large swathes of the federal and state political elite in the United States is now starkly revealed.
The question of military loyalty, and the loyalty of police forces and national guards, becomes a critical question.
As Tony Hall has also pointed out, the situation in the United States takes place within the context of a global – in effect – coup d’etat attempt, whereby a non-existent or marginal pandemic is declared a terribly dangerous all enveloping pandemic, and normal human and civil rights in many countries are suspended.
It is illustrative of the wide reach of the planning for the ‘great reset’ – whatever madness and banality and horror are the eventual components – that here in a small community in rural Canada the iron curtain of propaganda in support of the scamdemic and against Trump, and the curtailment of counter-information, has been obvious.
Okayyy.
Extrapolation sans limite.
And you come to UNZ to read doom porn and share your nihilism / spread the misery around
…or why exactly?
What you’re actually trying to say is “There will be not a single principled judge who will follow his conscience.”
Hilarious!
(If there will be enough principled judges is not clear. It’s clearly an uphill battle for Trump and supporting lawyers. Which however is no reason at all to concede the fight.)
Nothing will come from Powell’s lawsuits.
Do not fall for this false hope.
Harris/Biden will be President. There is no Judge or State Legislature who will go against the entire Establishment/Big Tech/Wall Street.
Obama blessed over $2 TRILLION dollars of our money bailing out Wall Street without one indictment. Think about that.
How is that relevant? Obama is all over the media lately, and it’s not just to hawk his narcissistic, rambling 2nd autobiography.
Obama is back on the scene to make sure Trump is steam rolled and Wall Street is pleased. When Obama talks, the media drops to their knees. ((They)) pulled out the biggest gun they have to insure the Election Result sticks.
Look at Biden’s cabinet picks. All Deep State/Swamp things: John Kerry? Yellin?
These articles about the election fraud (which happened more likely than not) are just theoretical exercises. Band aids for a gut wound with a machete. No deus ex machina is coming to save the day.
The deus ex machina that could save the day is Russian or Chinese missiles.Replies: @TKK
No deus ex machina is coming to save the day.
According to one poll something like 30% of Democraps believe the election was rigged. If there are any Donks left with half a functional brain, they already know they're dead in the water with #beijingbiden and #fakenggaharris. Trump-hatred is the only thing keeping the illusion of shitlib unity afloat, if they sacrifice that for a losing candidate backed by an even bigger loser they're done for.The Democrap/Deep Shit's lust for power is astonishing even to those of us who know better. A clear Trump victory now only means/meant, at best, 4 more years to prepare for war. Retardicucks are finished as of 2024 since Orange-Tweety Ego-Golfer-Kushner-Dupe did zip to stop the ongoing demographic terrorism.Had fkface biden won Florida I'd be more inclined to believe it was an honest win. The lack of Donks doing all they can to prove there was no fraud is proof enough they're full of shit. War it is.Replies: @obvious
Do not fall for this false hope.
Sidney Powell makes me think of Orly Taitz. I wonder if the same outfit in Mossad is responsible for digging her up as a double edge sword whose ultimate objective is to compromise everybody who associates with her.
Your otherwise good argument suffers a little from your own inability to clearly explain what communism is, in your understanding, and why today’s CCP is still factually communist.
We are living in gumbic times.
https://spectator.us/reasons-why-the-2020-presidential-election-is-deeply-puzzling/
Now, the below can’t possibly be true.
Sat night, PA Supreme Court over-ruled Judge McCullough’s decision. PA election certification may proceed. I’ll bet the PA GOP state legislators are peeved.
In other words, they didn't rule on the substantive issues but on a technicality.
"Upon consideration of the parties’ filings in Commonwealth Court, we hereby dismiss the petition for review with prejudice based upon Petitioners’ failure to file their facial constitutional challenge in a timely manner," the order read.
The PA Supreme Court is well known for its bias against The Rule of Law. Their attempt to embrace fraud-by-mail was highly predictable.
PA Supreme Court over-ruled Judge McCullough’s decision. PA election certification may proceed.
The key swing states impacted by ballot fraud have Republican Legislatures. You can see the alignment for every state here (2).
“The Pennsylvania House of Representatives has the duty to ensure that no citizen of this Commonwealth is disenfranchised, to insist that all elections are conducted according to the law, and to satisfy the general public that every legal vote is counted accurately.”
Pennsylvania State Sen. Doug Mastriano, a Republican, said Friday that the GOP-controlled state legislature will make a bid to reclaim its power to appoint the state’s electors to the Electoral College, saying they could start the process on Nov. 30.
“So, we’re gonna do a resolution between the House and Senate, hopefully today,” he told Steve Bannon’s War Room on Friday. “I’ve spent two hours online trying to coordinate this with my colleagues. And there’s a lot of good people working this here. Saying, that the resolution saying we’re going to take our power back. We’re gonna seat the electors.
As this power is directly enumerated by The U.S. Constitution, there is no way for state executive or state judicial bodies to intervene.
Clause 2. Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress; but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office
Ever since the suspicious switch in the swing states from heavy Trump majorities to a media-declared Biden win; I have been following the flow of events very closely. Before adding my take on the article and its powerful purport, I must give kudos to Mr Redmayne-Titley and also my thanks for an amazing piece de resistance of legal research and reportorial acumen.
Key to the essayist’s analysis is this sentence: “IT DOES SEEM EVIDENT, INDEED, THAT THIS WAS ALL BY DESIGN”. The plandemic was the foundation for fraud by mostly Democrat prostiticians, aided and abetted by the mass media, social media and secretive dirty-work by the Deep $tate departments, bureaus and agencies, most particularly the central control mechanism on behalf of the bankster agenda, the CIA.
Riots all over Western Europe against the lockdowns, demonstrations by pissed-off Trump supporters and plain ordinary American citizens against an evidentially stolen election constituting a so-far mostly peaceful uprising; are signals by those who have caught on to the falsity of the Covid crisis. Though millions of the media-mesmerized masses, probably some 60 million of them, hypnotized and befuddled by control over the message by the plotters and schemers, did vote for the Harris-Biden ticket. At the same time well over 70 million voters cast their ballots for the sitting president.
Without doubt, this situation as so well delineated by the essayist is the most profound Constitutional crisis since at least the era of America’s Civil War. Faked (s)elections are a tool of the elite against the public. Lincoln’s timeless description of republican governance during his Gettysburg Address was dutifully addressed by the Pennsylvania Republican Senate majority by holding their hearing at the scene of that hallowed ground: “…that government of the people, by the people and for the people should not perish from this earth”. Or to quote the great spokesman for the original American Revolution which ultimately created this republic, Thomas Paine: “…these are the times that try men’s souls”.
Redmayne-Titley correctly pointed out that ultimately this matter will come before the Supreme Court of the United States. There will be fallout. The US District Court Judge from Georgia,.Obaminable’s appointee Eleanor Ross got her tits caught in a wringer by “overlooking” Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution. Perhaps the jurist should be sentenced to a Constitutional law remediation course by the greatest living constitutional scholar, Dr. John Whitehead. She may face more rigorous treatment, though, by being disbarred.
Another candidate for tits in a wringer, as cited by the essayist, is Michigan’s secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, who, ex-cathedra, voided Michigan’s legal requirement for a voter’s signature to cast a mail-in ballot. Redmayne-Titley notes that by doing so, Benson effectually created a new law, a power only granted to the legislature of that state. We are getting quite warm now in proving out that her action, like that of the District judge in Georgia and the authors and primary supporters of Pennsylvania’s new enabling act for mail-in ballots, which in itself violated that state’s standing laws ,points clearly towards a massive designed conspiracy, hinging on the planned plandemic crisis.
Testimonies by witnesses to Wisconsin’s Electoral Commission instructing election workers to add missing addresses to mail-in votes will also likely appear before courts of law…with the entire nation closely following the results. It does seem to be quite clear that in so doing, the commissioners violated Wisconsin Statute 6.86.
Though the essayist cited it quite briefly, the whole matter of the number of states using the Dominion voting machine system, falls to the ultimate Trump-card. Dominion is run out of Spedina Street in Toronto, Ontario, CANADA. Systems for these machines were tabulating in centers located in Spain and in Frankfurt, Germany. In the latter site, the CIA itself appears to be complicit.
Oh yes, that TRUMP-CARD: Back in 2018 the president issued an executive order regarding foreign interference in American elections. There are some teeth in that EO. Dominion, curiously, leads us back to where the bankster cabal is headquartered, City of London. The Dominion of Canada as well as those of Australia and New Zealand all are ruled ultimately by their Governors General, who is appointed by and answers to the Quean herself. Dominion, domain, domination, dome-in-nation, damnation. They all seem to chime together, do they not?
President Trump also covered his flanks against the WarDefense industry top generals and admirals in the Pentagram by naming a new Secretary of Defense and his primary Deputy. He also directed that all US special forces units are directly under their command rather than to the chains of command by the brassnosed honchos in Arlington.
We do live in interesting times. As Stickman pointed out some years back, “when machine count the votes, voters’ votes don’t count”. Those who have been closely following the election afterbirth are not likely to count out Donald J. Trump.
Spedina should be Spadina. Street should be Avenue, according to Canada's National Post. (there being a Spadina Road as well.)Sorry to harp on such picky details but it's significant enough to come up again. Otherwise great comment.Replies: @Majority of One
Dominion is run out of Spedina Street in Toronto, Ontario, CANADA.
It was the South that voted to remove themselves from the union in accordance with the understanding of state sovereignty at the time. Lincoln acted contrary to the sappy words he uttered at Gettysburg in his illegal war to suppress the desires of the voters in the south by using armed force, (to save crony capitalism). Movies are rather crappy history, but this scene is close to capturing the issue of secession and showing Lincoln for what he was, a tyrant who likely stole the 1864 election.
Lincoln’s timeless description of republican governance during his Gettysburg Address was dutifully addressed by the Pennsylvania Republican Senate majority by holding their hearing at the scene of that hallowed ground: “…that government of the people, by the people and for the people should not perish from this earth”.
Dominion, curiously, leads us back to where the bankster cabal is headquartered, City of London. The Dominion of Canada as well as those of Australia and New Zealand all are ruled ultimately by their Governors General, who is appointed by and answers to the Quean herself. Dominion, domain, domination, dome-in-nation, damnation. They all seem to chime together, do they not?
Thank you Brett. Not just for the excellent summary of ongoing challenges, but even more for being the sole author on UNZ holding up the flag of constitutionality on this issue!!
What I now wonder is: beyond tossing out the whole result per state (meaning no candidate gets that state’s electoral votes), do there exist also options for the Supreme Court to invalidate all mail-in ballots instead (because of the unconstitutional mail-in ballot legislation, plus there is no possibility to discern which mail-in ballots did comply with original valid legislation), and count the remainder of in-person votes as the result, potentially flipping the result?
By gut feeling I wouldn’t expect so, but legal analysis would be appreciated!
Addendum:
according to a quick internet search, Wisconsin has to certify its election result on Tuesday, 12/1.
Giuliani has exposed the steal in one way, showing that 700,000 more mail-in ballots were counted in Pennsylvania than were mailed out.
What would be enough to change the outcome of an election in the US
Anomalies in Vote Counts and Their Effects on Election 2020
This is to say, the believability of these updates relies on the premise that the one or two most Biden-favoring parts of the state [Michigan] (perhaps by ballot type) were counted entirely in these two batches…. it is extremely surprising that we do not see smaller vote updates with mail-in votes which favor Biden more heavily
Replies: @Mikael_
As we can see, all four of the vote updates in question (the two red points, the green points well above this line, and the farther-up yellow point), are well above even this line. Indeed, the least extreme of these points, represented by the lower red dot which is above the 99.5th percentile curve, is the 7th most co-extreme point out of all 8,954 vote updates, and represents the 99.92nd percentile.
It was a rhetoric question towards Max [Parry.]
the 2020 election is not a sporting event or academic paper, therefore evidence that instances of fraud occurred will likely not be enough for the litigation to change the outcome
Interesting statement.
Max: What would be enough to change the outcome of an election in the US, in your opinion?
Would the word “widespread” (looked at per State) make a difference?
Giuliani has exposed the steal in one way, showing that 700,000 more mail-in ballots were counted in Pennsylvania than were mailed out.
What would be enough to change the outcome of an election in the US
Anomalies in Vote Counts and Their Effects on Election 2020
This is to say, the believability of these updates relies on the premise that the one or two most Biden-favoring parts of the state [Michigan] (perhaps by ballot type) were counted entirely in these two batches…. it is extremely surprising that we do not see smaller vote updates with mail-in votes which favor Biden more heavily
Replies: @Mikael_
As we can see, all four of the vote updates in question (the two red points, the green points well above this line, and the farther-up yellow point), are well above even this line. Indeed, the least extreme of these points, represented by the lower red dot which is above the 99.5th percentile curve, is the 7th most co-extreme point out of all 8,954 vote updates, and represents the 99.92nd percentile.
You idiot. You seem to think nothing in the world exists except for the USA.
European countries, certain Indian states, Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, etc., function just fine employing socialism to better people’s lives. The people who live in these places like this. They don’t want it to stop. They want more of it.
That government-bashing is simple-minded 80s boilerplate. It don’t wash no more. I figure, if you drag out those hoary decrepit old chestnuts without a smidgeon of originality, and dare to present them as if they are real actual thoughts that an intelligent person might think, you are just a troll.
Trump’s demeanor during these crucial days
It always amazes me how someone so detail-interested can let his preconceptions get the better of him, on a small detail.
Obviously Trump is doing it exactly right here, to not let anybody seriously accuse him of unduly influencing judges etc., after he wins the legal battle.
Sorry if it sounded so, but I wasn’t indicating that every single word Fromm wrote was true. I came across Fromm from another author’s mention.
Augusto Del Noce wrote:
According to Fromm, in the second half of our [20th] century the authoritarian-obsessive- hoarding character, which appeared for the first time in the sixteenth century, was replaced by what he calls marketing character. Thereby, a true revolution took place but within the bourgeoisie (it was a transposition of the revolution into the bourgeoisie, so to speak. We can say, in words he does not use, that this transposition defines what today is called “radical society”). By “marketing character” he intends to indicate a phenomenon based on the experience of oneself as a commodity, and of one’s value not as “value of use” but as “value of exchange.” A living being becomes a commodity on display in the “personality market.” Value is established in the same way in the personality market and in the commodity market. What is on sale in the first market are personalities, in the second commodities. Thus, we reach the highest degree of reification; the reduction of people to objects becomes universal. Indeed, if the concerns of an individual center on being as desirable as possible, he will give up his I. In fact, we cannot even speak of the I as an unchangeable reality, because it must be constantly changed according to the principle of desirability. Making reification universal is clearly the same as denying ethics altogether and elevating the economic dimension to an absolute. From this perspective, efficiency becomes the only value. But this is not enough: total reification due to the marketing character coincides with the most extreme greed for things (and for other people reduced to things). Therefore, violence is absolutely dominant.
(Bold and italic mine.)
https://stream.org/i-know-sidney-powell-she-is-telling-the-truth/
I Know Sidney Powell. She Is Telling the Truth
Fervent endorsement, and fascinating background to Sidney Powell.||culture-society||
At first I found the article detailed and interesting, that Israel seems to have the same societal implosion problems as the US – I wasn’t aware.
But then coming across
In the US […] stop bothering with the Jews and Israel; they have nuisance value, but nothing more.
my B.S. meter red-lined.
And now I’m not sure anything Shamir wrote here has unbiased, honest truth in it.
Liar or retard. I think both.
Millions of Malaria deaths -mostly children- definitely occur every year (and relatively quick),
while millions of potential cancer deaths were presumably prevented – according to which scientific source(s) exactly?
Plus the world has tried to come up with any as good approach to reducing/eradicating Malaria for the last 50 years, and has gotten nowhere.
And by the way, are you aware that there was Malaria in Southern US states, and it was eradicated by using DDT in the early 60’s?
And you, as most other retards, are trying to turn the argument into a black-or-white question: “no DDT or soak everything in it”
where the correct question would be “how much can we reduce use of DDT, while still having the immensely positve Malaria suppression effect?”