The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewJonathan Cook Archive
Biden Will Fail to Bring Back "Normal" Politics. What’s Needed Now Is a Populism of the Left
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


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

Analysts are still grappling with the fallout from the US election. Trumpism proved a far more enduring and alluring phenomenon than most media pundits expected. Defying predictions, Trump improved his share of the overall vote compared to his 2016 win, and he surprised even his own team by increasing his share of minority voters and women.

But most significantly, he almost held his own against Democratic challenger Joe Biden at a time when the US economy – the incumbent’s “trump” card – was in dire straits after eight months of a pandemic. Had it not been for Covid-19, Trump – not Biden – would most likely be preparing for the next four years in the White House.

Of course, much of Trump’s appeal was that he is not Biden. The Democratic party decided to run pretty much the worst candidate imaginable: an old-school machine politician, one emphatically beholden to the corporate donor class and unsuited to the new, more populist political climate. His campaigning – on the rare occasions he appeared – suggested significant cognitive decline. Biden often looked more suited to a luxury retirement home than heading the most powerful nation on earth.

But then again, if Trump could lead the world’s only superpower for four years, how hard can it really be? He showed that those tinfoil-hatted conspiracy theorists might be right after all: maybe the president is largely a figurehead, while a permanent bureaucracy runs much of the show from behind the curtain. Were Ronald Reagan and George W Bush not enough to persuade us that any halfwit who can string together a few cliches from a teleprompter will suffice?

No return to ‘normal’

The narrowly averted Trump second term has at least prompted liberal pundits to draw one significant lesson that is being endlessly repeated: Biden must avoid returning to the old “normal”, the one that existed before Trump, because that version of “normal” was exactly what delivered Trump in the first place. These commentators fear that, if Biden doesn’t play his cards wisely, we will end up in 2024 with a Trump 2.0, or even a rerun from Trump himself, reinvigorated after four years of tweet-sniping from the sidelines. They are right to be worried.

But their analysis does not properly explain the political drama that is unfolding, or where it heads next. There is a two-fold problem with the “no return to normal” argument.

The first is that the liberal media and political class making this argument are doing so in entirely bad-faith. For four years they have turned US politics and its coverage into a simple-minded, ratings-grabbing horror show. A vile, narcissist businessman, in collusion with an evil Russian mastermind, usurped the title of most powerful person on the planet that should have been bestowed on Hillary Clinton. As Krystal Ball has rightly mocked, even now the media are whipping up fears that the “Orange Mussolini” may stage some kind of cack-handed coup to block the handover to Biden.

These stories have been narrated to us by much of the corporate media over and over again – and precisely so that we do not think too hard about why Trump beat Clinton in 2016. The reality, far too troubling for most liberals to admit, is that Trump proved popular because a lot of the problems he identified were true, even if he raised them in bad faith himself and had no intention of doing anything meaningful to fix them.

Trump was right about the need for the US to stop interfering in the affairs of the rest of the world under the pretence of humanitarian concern and a supposed desire to spread democracy at the end of the barrel of a gun. In practice, however, lumbered with that permanent bureaucracy, delegating his authority to the usual war hawks like John Bolton, and eager to please the Christian evangelical and Israel lobbies, Trump did little to stop such destructive meddling. But at least he was correct rhetorically.

Equally, Trump looked all too right in berating the establishment media for promoting “fake news”, especially as coverage of his presidency was dominated by an evidence-free narrative claiming he had colluded with Russia to steal the election. Those now bleating about how dangerous his current assertions of election fraud are should remember they were the ones who smashed that particular glass house with their own volley of stones back in 2016.

Yes, Trump has been equally culpable with his Twitter barrages of fake news. And yes, he cultivated rather than spurned support from one of those major corporate outlets: the reliably rightwing Fox News. But what matters most is that swaths of the American public – unable to decide who to believe, or maybe not caring – preferred to side with a self-styled maverick, Washington outsider, the supposed “underdog”, against a class of self-satisfied, overpaid media professionals transparently prostituting themselves to the billionaire owners of the corporate media.

Once voters had decided the system was rigged – and it is rigged towards the maintenance of elite power – anyone decrying the system, whether honestly or duplicitously, was going to prove popular.

Endebted to donors

Trump’s appeal was further bolstered by styling himself a self-made man, as his campaign riffed on the long-standing myths of the American Dream. The US public was encouraged to see Trump as a rich man prepared to gamble part of his own fortune on a run for the presidency so he could bring his business acumen to USA Ltd. That contrasted starkly with Democratic party leaders like Clinton and Biden who gave every appearance of having abjectly sold their principles – and their souls – to the highest-bidding corporate “donors”.

And again, that perception – at least in relation to Clinton and Biden – wasn’t entirely wrong.


How can Biden not end up trying to resurrect the Obama years that he was so very much part of during his two terms as vice-president and that led directly to Trump? That was why corporate donors backed his campaign. They desire the kind of neoliberal “normal” that leaves them free to continue making lots more money and ensures the wealth gap grows.

It is why they and the media worked so hard to pave Biden’s path to the presidency, even doing their best to bury political stories embarrassing to the Biden campaign. Maintaining that “normal” is the very reason the modern Democratic party exists.

Even if Biden wanted to radically overhaul the existing, corporate-bonded US political system – and he doesn’t – he would be incapable of doing so. He operates within institutional, structural constraints – donors, Congress, the media, the supreme court – all there to ensure his room for manoeuvre is tightly delimited.

Had his main rival for the Democratic nomination, Bernie Sanders, been allowed to run instead and won the presidency, it would have been much the same. The important difference is that the existence of a President Sanders would have risked exposing the fact that the “world’s most powerful leader” is not really so powerful.

Sanders would have lost his battles trying to defy these structural constraints, but in the process he would have made those constraints far more visible. They would have been all too obvious had someone like Sanders been constantly hitting his head against them. That was precisely why the corporate class and the technocratic leadership of the Democratic party worked so strenuously to make sure Sanders got nowhere near the presidential race.

Resistance posturing

Biden will do his best to achieve what his donors want: a return to the neoliberal “normal” under Obama. He will offer a sprinkling of initiatives to ensure progressive liberals can put to rest their resistance posturing with a clear conscience. There will be some “woke” identity politics to prevent any focus on class politics and the struggle for real economic justice, as well as some weak, corporation-friendly Green New Deal projects, if Biden can sneak past them past a Republican-controlled Senate.

And if he can’t manage even that … well that’s the beauty of a system tailor-made to follow the path of least financial resistance, to uphold the corporate status quo, the “normal”.

But there is a second, bigger problem. A fly in the ointment. Whatever Biden and the Democratic party do to resurrect the neoliberal consensus, the old “normal”, it isn’t coming back. The smug, technocratic class that has dominated western politics for decades on behalf of the corporate elite is under serious threat. Biden looks more like a hiccough, a last burp provoked by the unexpected pandemic.

The neoliberal “normal” isn’t coming back because the economic circumstances that generated it – the post-war boom of seemingly endless growth – have disappeared.

Plutocracy entrenches

A quarter of a century ago, the Cassandras of their day – those dismissed as peddlers of false conspiracy theories – warned of “peak oil”. That was the idea that the fuel on which the global economy ran either had peaked or soon would do. As the oil ran out, or became more expensive to extract, economic growth would slow, wages would fall, and inequality between rich and poor would increase.

This was likely to have dramatic political consequences too: resource wars abroad (inevitably camouflaged as “humanitarian intervention”); more polarised domestic politics; greater popular dissatisfaction; the return of charismatic, even fascist, leaders; and a resort to violence to solve political problems.

The arguments about peak oil continue. Judged by some standards, the production peak arrived in the 1970s. Others say, with the aid of fracking and other harmful technologies, the turning-point is due about now. But the kind of world predicted by peak oil theory looks to have been unfolding since at least the 1980s. The crisis in neoliberal economics was underscored by the 2008 global economic crash, whose shockwaves are still with us.

On top of all this, there are looming ecological and climate catastrophes intimately tied to the fossil-fuel economy on which the global corporations have grown fat. This Gordian knot of globe-spanning self-harm urgently needs unpicking.

Biden has neither the temperament nor the political manoeuvre room to take on these mammoth challenges and solve them. Inequality is going to increase during his term. The technocrats are again going to be exposed once again as impotent – or complicit – as plutocracy entrenches. The ecological crisis is not going to be dealt with beyond largely empty promises and posturing.

There will be lots of talk in the media about the need to give Biden more time to show what he can do and demands that we keep quiet for fear of ushering back Trumpism. This will be designed to lose us yet more valuable months and years to address urgent problems that threaten the future of our species.

The age of populism

The ability of the technocratic class to manage growth – wealth accumulation for the rich, tempered by a little “trickle down” to stop the masses rising up – is coming to an end. Growth is over and the technocrat’s toolbox is empty.

We are now in the age of political populism – a natural response to burgeoning inequality.

On one side is the populism of the Trumpers. They are the small-minded nationalists who want to blame everyone but the real villains – the corporate elite – for the west’s declining fortunes. As ever, they will search out the easiest targets: foreigners and “immigrants”. In the US, the Republican party has been as good as taken over by the Tea party. The US right is not going to repudiate Trump for his defeat, they are going to totemise him because they understand his style of politics is the future.

There are now Trumps everywhere: Boris Johnson in the UK (and waiting in the wings, Nigel Farage); Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil; the Le Pen dynasty in France; Viktor Orban in Hungary. They are seeding the return of xenophobic, corporate fascism.

The corporate media would have us believe that this is the only kind of populism that exists. But there is a rival populism, that of the left, and one that espouses cooperation and solidarity within nations and between them.


Jeremy Corbyn in the UK and Sanders in the US are the first shoots of a global reawakening of class-conscious politics based on solidarity with the poor and oppressed; of renewed pressure for a social contract, in contrast to the worship of survival-of-the-fittest economics; of a reclaiming of the commons, communal resources that belong to us all, not just the strongmen who seized them for their own benefit; and, most importantly, of an understanding, lost sight of in our industrialised, consumption-obsessed societies, that we must find a sustainable accommodation with the rest of the living world.

This kind of leftwing populism has a long pedigree that dates back nearly 150 years. It flourished in the inter-war years in Europe; it defined the political battle-lines in Iran immediately after the Second World War; and it has been a continual feature of Latin American politics.

Warped logic

As ever, the populism of the nationalists and bigots has the upper hand. And that is no accident.

Today’s globalised wealth elite prefer neoliberal, technocratic politics that keep borders open for trade; that treat the labouring poor as human chattel, to be moved around on a global chess board as a way to force wages down; and that ensure the elite can stash its ill-gotten gains away on island sanctuaries far from the tax man.

But when technocratic politics is on its death bed, as it is now, the corporate elite will always settle for the populism of a Trump or a Farage over the populism of the left. They will do so even if rightwing populism risks constraining their financial empires, because leftwing populism does much worse: it upends the warped logic on which the corporate elite’s entire hoarded wealth depends, threatening to wipe it out.

If the corporate elite can no longer find a way to foist a neoliberal technocrat like Biden on the public, they will choose the populism of a Trump over the populism of a Sanders every time. And as they own the media, they can craft the stories we hear: about who we are, what is possible and where we are heading. If we allow it, our imaginations will be twisted and deformed in the image of the deranged totem they choose.

We can reclaim politics – a politics that cares about the future, about our species, about our planet – but to do so we must first reclaim our minds.

(Republished from Jonathan Cook by permission of author or representative)
Hide 48 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Wyatt says:

    I agree. The kind of people that would form a leftist, populist front are young people who hold socialist, progressive or outright communist views.

    A leftist populist movement would create a target rich environment 🙂

    • Replies: @obvious
  2. TGD says:

    This essay is too long and too rambling to comment on.

  3. Altai says:

    The problem is immigration has become a moral/religious issue. Trying to reduce it to the levels and kinds needed to support social democratic objectives will be very difficult, indeed it seems impossible, to do through the left, thus why it is now starting to take form through the right.

    If it wasn’t we’d already have seen it already. If you don’t believe immigration causes problems and losses for the working class, you’re incapable of understanding basic labour issues or industrial policy.

    Every nominally ‘left wing’ middle class person I’ve ever spoke to says the same John McCain ‘BuT ThOSE JoBs AREn’t CoMing BaCK’ line to excuse all manner of deindsutrialisation and globalisation. They really think you can have a healthy economy of services and other assorted office work. Services for what?

    It’s not hard to see how it happened. The left had great success through to the 80s. So much that upward mobility saw centre-left politicians go from coming from a working class background to coming from a middle class background with parents from a working class background to coming from upper middle class backgrounds from parents of middle class backgrounds. They’ve lost touch.

    And these people will also be the heart of any left-wing populist movement. You won’t be able (You won’t feel allowed) to keep them out. See Occupy Wall Street, they were unable to articulate a defense against SJWs who destroyed it when they showed up. See Bernie Sanders who had to meekly stand aside with his head down when two black SJWs just took the microphone at one of his rallies. And these people will demand open borders and thus far it seems like nobody will feel free to disagree. Sanders doesn’t dare address the topic anymore. Corbyn spoke less and less on it in recent years, knowing what would happen to him.

    That will produce low social trust and high levels of inequality as well as less per capita resources to deal with it as well as a housing crunch and the destruction of more tight knit communities that offer social capital to people with fewer resources.

    • Agree: Radicalcenter
    • Replies: @Billy Chav
  4. steiner says:

    this is pilpul attempting to generate some BS consensus that pseudo trotskyite bullcrap is going to emerge in the USA. the continual focus on removing the rooted identitarian aspects of socialist thought (i.e. christian socialism/distributism) is always the calling card of “cosmopolitans” and “new york types”. the fundamental conception of this new populism is the reaction by the white american settler population to the mass immigration of nonwhites into our society. this is basis of reaction. the “cosmopolitans” create a false dichotemy, they facilitate the introduction of foreign races into your state, then move against the power elite and replace them with their apparatus they have created during the insurgency phase.

    the basis of 21st century western populism will be racially aware rooted identitarian reactions to globalism.

    • Replies: @brabantian
    , @James O'Meara
  5. This is just wishful thinking. After Trump was elected, I thought leftists here in America would be forced to start listening to poor whites and to focus more on class issues instead of racial issues. Nope. They doubled down on racial issues. The rhetoric about race these days is even more over the top than it was back in 2016. Systemic racism? We dealt with that fifty years ago, yet it is now supposedly still a problem. Plus, those saying this are the ones in charge of the system, yet they somehow aren’t to blame. Trump is. And white supremacism? Who could possibly believe such a thing? But that is what young leftists are hearing about constantly. I doubt if any of them knows that there was a time when the left’s main focus was on class issues.

    And the left today is very nasty towards poor whites. Instead of focusing on their lack of wealth, they are being told to check their white privilege. If you’re a poor white interested in class issues, there is no particular reason to trust the left. Any money you might get from them via a redistribution of wealth will be taken away for reparations for blacks. You’re better off supporting Trump because he will create lots of jobs for you and other poor whites (and poor blacks, poor Latinos, etc.).

    As for Britain, I don’t know a lot about the situation there, but after the news finally broke about what was going on in Rotherham, I thought feminists would band together and say that the emphasis on racism needed to be dialed down, that there were other issues to think about besides racism. But nope. As far as I can tell, feminists did not say any such thing.

    There just isn’t any stopping the racial identity politics of the left.

  6. the reliably rightwing Fox News.


    • Thanks: Radicalcenter
  7. @John Pepple

    There just isn’t any stopping the racial identity politics of the left.

    Because the only concern of the Left, now, then, and always, has been the attainment of power.

    Followed by its unending and unthreatened possession. Cynically employing class works well in homogeneous societies. But once they’re infected with diversity, race is a more effective tool.

    • Replies: @animalogic
    , @John Johnson
  8. What is needed is for people to stop thinking of other people’s lives as their property. They are not Gods.

    The goal should be for mankind to LEAVE the animal world, not to arm it with technologies that empower mankind’s worst animal instincts.

  9. Based Lad says:

    “But when technocratic politics is on its death bed, as it is now, the corporate elite will always settle for the populism of a Trump or a Farage over the populism of the left.”

    This author is intentionally obtuse. Face it comrade; you are the aged hanger on of the upper class marxist delusion. It must have been difficult to avoid typing ‘capital in crisis’ at some point in this schlock. Some of us know how to find and parse real information, you aren’t fooling anyone. We all saw the massive push towards black supremacist dialogue promoted by the corporate elites this year. Working class whites will never join your homosexual negrophilic revolution. That train has left the station on a one way trip.

    • Agree: VivaLaMigra
  10. The populist right and left agree on many things about capitalism, but the left will not break bread with the right under any circumstances.

    When pushed, the left throw their principles under a bus. Take immigration as an example: shutting down immigration improves the prospects of labor, but the left don’t care. Destroying whiteness is their highest priority, labor be damned.

  11. A123 says:

    Recent attempts at Left Populism have been utter failures. Look at Syriza in Greece caving to SJW Austerity Economics mandated by Berlin & Brussels.

    SJW Elites, like Jamie Dimon, are on film kneeling before Left PoC power. Wall Street Banks and International MegaCorporations now own ‘Leftism’. And, they are antithetical to Populism.

    The #1 threat to U.S. Citizen workers is non-citizen labour. Show me a Populist Left that will restrict legal and illegal migration to protect jobs and wages. The current SJW Corporate Left is incapable of that.

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @jimmydan
    , @obvious
  12. How could there be leftist populism when the left is hell bent on wrecking nations all over the planet?

    • Replies: @Amerimutt Golems
  13. @John Pepple

    Feminists (whites all) are cowards. They aren’t about to protest muslim abuse of women. They like to fight White men only. Pointing out the rape and sexual depravity of coloreds would get the White feminist power structure cancelled, if not their offices blown up.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  14. Thomasina says:

    “Had it not been for Covid-19, Trump – not Biden – would most likely be preparing for the next four years in the White House.”

    That’s exactly what Trump is doing.

    • Replies: @Radicalcenter
  15. this piece was on-point.

    most of the comments here seem to underestimate to what extent the Class-First Left is fed-up with racial/trans grievances hijacking any chance at substantive progress; real progress, the sort that makes life better for people’s everyday lives, not the sort that Woke Capital champions to obscure how miserable everybody is.

    • Agree: dfordoom
    • Replies: @anon
  16. @John Pepple

    “After Trump was elected, I thought leftists here in America would be forced to start listening to poor whites and to focus more on class issues instead of racial issues. Nope. They doubled down on racial issues. ”
    That’s why there is basically no “Left”. They are a pseudo-left. The so-called Left are the upper middle class of professionals & academics & administrators. The aesthetes who play with the deck chairs on the Titanic. The ones who thought Trump foreshadowed the end of Civilisation as we know it.
    A real Left fights for economic & social justice. There maybe the wealthy, but they are productive, rather than exploitative (ie like the FIRE sector).
    A popular Left requires working people to take conscious control over their own lives. It requires charismatic leaders. It requires sacrifice.
    If you are one of the 95% & think you have ANY common cause with the 1% then you are deluded. You will be given – if lucky – sufficient crumbs to keep you quiet.

  17. @Reg Cæsar

    “Because the only concern of the Left, now, then, and always, has been the attainment of power. ”
    Same with the Right & center. So … that leaves … nothing ? Nothing positive anyway.
    OK, great, everyone, down tools. And pass me another beer, the wrestling coming on….

  18. @steiner

    Indeed it seems that Jewish Israeli-UK dual citizen Jonathan Cook, wants to sell a quite unpalatable Trotskyite programme of inter-national, multi-cultural, open-borders ‘socialism’ … which actually is the agenda of the ‘plutocracy’ Cook claims to be fighting

    Whereas most workers can feel the truth of what Karl Marx himself described, that aggressive induced migration, and concomitant creation of near-inevitable ethnic conflict, is an oligarch tool to ravage working class lives … something ‘leftist’ Cook doesn’t want to discuss

    With Jonathan Cook living right there in Nazareth in ground zero of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, one would like to know how ‘leftist populism’ is helping to get things sorted over in his own local ‘multi-cultural’ neighbourhood

    And given that ‘rightist populism’ is quite equally or even more ‘socialistic’ on economic issues, than many leftists, it seems that Cook’s focus here is to denounce what he calls the “small-minded nationalists and bigots”, whom he sees as leading to “xenophobic, corporate fascism” … I.e., Cook is shilling for the migrant agenda, using leftist rhetorical cover

    Cook touts Corbyn and Sanders, both of whom were ruthlessly shot down by the oligarch-backed ‘multi-cultural’ fake ‘Left’ of today, as too socialistic, despite how both grovelled before the establishment

    Yet Cook thinks somehow if he keeps selling the ‘let’s unite against plutocracy’ theme, working classes in the West will be distracted from their lives being drastically altered by the continually arriving migrant flows … migrants sent in by that same plutocracy

    • Agree: Tom Rogers
  19. @John Pepple

    As for Britain, I don’t know a lot about the situation there, but after the news finally broke about what was going on in Rotherham, I thought feminists would band together and say that the emphasis on racism needed to be dialed down, that there were other issues to think about besides racism. But nope. As far as I can tell, feminists did not say any such thing.

    It’s partly a class thing. Feminists and SJW types in the UK generally despise working class Whites like most of the abused girls.

    Those in Rotherham were even more fortunate compared to 14-year old Charlene Downes in the English seaside town of Blackpool. Police, who bungled investigations, believe she was lured by an immigrant then raped, murdered and turned into kebab meat that was sold to the pubic!

    Immigrant voters are also key to the Labour Party. In 2017 then leader Jeremy Corbyn cited above sacked Rotherham member of parliament Sarah Champion from his shadow cabinet because she was talking about Pakistanis raping English girls.

  20. @Robert Dolan

    How could there be leftist populism when the left is hell bent on wrecking nations all over the planet?

    Cook is ever incoherent. Like leftist peers he is also prone to cognitive dissonance as highlighted by Beavertales above in reference to the economics of wages and unfettered immigration.

    BTW some of Cook’s self-righteous articles are aimed at Sailer and other HBD realists on UR AKA ‘small-minded nationalists’.

    • Replies: @nokangaroos
  21. @Altai

    Cook has a wishful IdPol perspective that breaks apart on the usual fault lines of immigration and racial spoils.

    Even from his own POV, a non-fascist right wing populism that pushed hard on anti-trust and breaking up big tech is actually preferable to anything the actual left is capable of achieving.

  22. @Amerimutt Golems

    Good points.

    Populism (and, may I add, socialism 😛 ) is by definition national.
    If you have no nation (only allegiance to the rag), you are … fucked.

    And what, pray tell, is “left”?!
    Orange Man has staked out the “peace and working class” demographic
    (that he didn´t deliver is a different story)
    while the demonrats are now unabashedly the Party of warmongers, deviants and parasites;
    Bronstein himself couldn´t explain that away.

    Let´s see how this plays out 😀

    • Replies: @anon
  23. @steiner

    Exactly right. Except for the eccentric punctuation — why? One might almost think that’s a pilpul of your own, making your solid point look like they come from an internet crank.

    Anyway, disparaging “racist and nationalist” forms of populism is always the tell. “Racism” — i.e., racial awareness and self-preservation, to translate it out of Trotskyese — is main, indeed ONLY issue. Give them that, and all else — free healthcare, jobs, etc. — falls by the wayside, as the surge of black/brown Untermenschen more or less quickly produces a Third World hellhole.

  24. JackOH says:

    But then again, if Trump could lead the world’s only superpower for four years, how hard can it really be? He showed that those tinfoil-hatted conspiracy theorists might be right after all: maybe the president is largely a figurehead, while a permanent bureaucracy runs much of the show from behind the curtain.

    True. To which must be added the guidance, such as legislation-writing and boundary-setting, of America’s corporate lobbies and the media. The President and Congress provide power-brokering.

    I worked as a minor political operative for both major parties in the 1980s. I learned a lot. Not tinfoil-hatted; not a conspiracy theorist.

  25. jimmydan says:

    Good Morning. Good to see you.
    How is your parroting lessons coming along? Good job about PLO/Hamas/AlFatah lessons. This week’s lesson! European Jews (Zion) good/black jews bad/ISIS good (if doing Israel’s work).
    You will be rewarded organic treats from now on.

    This Deceptive PEACE logo is not going to hide your true colors. Why dont you do something for real peace in Palestine? instead of demonizing the entire population?

    On a serious note, what on earth you are talking about this labour or labor business in US. Read some history and successes about labor movements in early 20th century. The real threat to working class is from the profit oriented corporations. You dont even live in US

    • Replies: @A123
    , @John Pepple
  26. A123 says:


    Is that the best you can do? The Iranian Rial really is buying less and less every day.

    Are you claiming ‘Left Populist’ Syriza in Greece was a success?

    Can you name any *current* leftist movement that is succeeding since SJW Corporatism took over the Left and made it ‘woke’?

    Why dont you do something for real peace in Palestine

    Real Peace is possible in Jewish Palestine:

    -1- Understanding that the non-Palestinian Muslim Occupation of Jewish Palestine is the core problem.
    -2- Offering honourable and compensated relocation to non-Palestinian Muslims allowing them to leave Jewish Palestine and return home.

    Why does Islam claim to support a ‘Pillar of Charity’ while simultaneously acting un-charitably towards non-Palestinian Muslims trapped in foreign lands? Why prevent them from returning home? It would be a simple charitable act.

    You dont even live in US

    I am Christian American.

    You are obviously an anti-American. Most likely an Iranian Muslim. How is the weather in your Tehran?

    PEACE 😇

  27. @jimmydan

    The real threat to working class is from the profit oriented corporations.

    Sheer nonsense. We’ve been hearing this forever, and it simply isn’t true. Think about the plight of the adjuncts in academia. They work in the non-profit sector, yet they are exploited. And the people exploiting them are liberals and leftists, who dominate in academia.

  28. obvious says:

    Eventually we will make another Union Army and blast you all to smithereens. The difference between me and you is the ability to tell the difference at all.

    • Replies: @Wyatt
  29. obvious says:

    You’d have to work a day in your life first to know the difference, as though “citizenship” had something to do with it. I can barely find competent sober white people under the age of 60 at this point.

    • Replies: @A123
  30. A123 says:

    Sorry to hear that you are in Crapifornia. You live in the lower digestive tract exit of the U.S.

    Your state’s expensive over regulation, rolling blackouts, and sub-\$5.00/hr illegals have driven Citizens out. You cannot find people because your state hates workers.

    PEACE 😇

    • Agree: Radicalcenter
  31. anon[192] • Disclaimer says:
    @Big Dick Bandit

    Class-First Left is fed-up with racial/trans grievances hijacking any chance at substantive progress;

    Could you please point to examples of the Class-First Left in real life?

    • Replies: @Radicalcenter
  32. anon[192] • Disclaimer says:

    Bronstein himself couldn´t explain that away.

    It’s all the fault of Russia! Russia! Russia! and wreckers of some sort. Media Matters will sort it out for you.

  33. Trump failed big time when it came to immigration reform. He said so many inflammatory things that he killed immigration reform as an issue. So I am now convinced that the only way we will get real immigration reform is with a super woke left-wing populist like Bernie. Bernie could get away with it by pointing out how mass migration lowers American wages. He could do it without being accused of being a racist. So I hope to see a progressive leftist come along one day and Make America Great Again.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  34. @Jim Christian

    Feminists (whites all) are cowards. They aren’t about to protest muslim abuse of women.

    Their tolerance of Islam further supports the theory that feminists at the core are White women that are bitter about their limited access to White men.

    Or it’s just a grand coincidence that so few of them are attractive and pleasant to be around.

  35. @malkin_fanboy

    So I am now convinced that the only way we will get real immigration reform is with a super woke left-wing populist like Bernie

    Woke is not the way to go. Woke = blame Whitey cult.

    It would have to be an economic left-wing movement that undermines the current left.

  36. @Reg Cæsar

    Because the only concern of the Left, now, then, and always, has been the attainment of power.

    Followed by its unending and unthreatened possession. Cynically employing class works well in homogeneous societies. But once they’re infected with diversity, race is a more effective tool.

    Well the left decided that taking down Whites was more important than pushing up workers and they won’t budge from that position.

    There are too many bitter leftists in the schools and media that will happily take a scorched earth over a better world where Whites do better as well.

    They are pushing for Brazil 2.0 because that is all they can hope for.

    Most leftists know that race exists and deeply resent the “bad Whites” for being correct. That is why they are so rabidly pro-open borders. Flood the White areas with Hispanics and who cares if workers benefit or not. The bitter left wants to stick it to Whites more than they want to help workers.

  37. Early in this article, the gratuitous and obviously wrong slight on Reagan’s intelligence was a distraction and annoyance.

    Also, the notion that nationalist populist movements are invariably good for the plutocrats and big corporations and banks is unfounded — trust me, if I and the millions of other decent and hardworking but resentful regulars on this site (and among the public) take power, it will not go well for the disloyal, nation-less, cruel money-grubbers who have raped us with extortionate interest charges, unreasonable rents, exorbitant pharmaceuticals and medical devices and medical care, offshored our good-paying manufacturing jobs, and replaced decent industrious American-born whites and blacks alike with poorly assimilating foreigners in white and blue collar jobs alike. Higher tax rates will not be their most pressing concern.

    How about a Social Nationalist party that provides universal basic income to US Citizens partially funded by much higher taxes on the elite 0.1% — but defends our damn borders and doesn’t let the world come here to live off us?

    How about a Social Nationalist party that demands universal medical and dental insurance for all US Citizens, but is not hostile to entrepreneurs and has tax laws and regulations favorable to smaller family businesses over larger corporations?

    How about a Social Nationalist movement that takes our God-given natural resources and puts them back under public ownership for our benefit? Ever hear a Democrat congressman even mention such an idea? That is a large, sustained source of federal revenue that can be distributed directly to all US Citizens.

    How about a Social Nationalist party that calls for imprisoning “doctors” who help mentally ill people chop off their genitals and firing “teachers” and “guidance counselors” who push moral confusion, perversion, and sickening practices on our children in schools we pay for? A party that looks out for us, the American nation, certainly including its historic european-american founding population, and fights the sodomite/transexual/promiscuity/porn culture and wealthy connected elites alike.

    Such a movement won’t come from the likes of this guy.

  38. @Thomasina

    You are right, Thomasina.

    Mrs. Radical and I voted third-party this time, not Trump, but the evidence of drastic fraud for Harris (“Biden”) is overwhelming. If the courts are fair (gales of laughter), they will categorically disallow ballots that cannot be conclusively shown by postmark to be deposited on or before election day. The courts must also order that ballots be excluded where the election “workers” (aka co-conspirators) corrected or allowed voters to correct noncompliant ballots after they were cast (mailed).

    We need to require the close States to audit thoroughly and verify that every vote was cast by (1) a US Citizen (2) alive on election day (3) who was eligible to vote (lived in the jurisdiction and had no disenfranchising felony conviction). We will find millions of illegal illegitimate votes, likely overwhelmingly for Harris (“Biden”). If there was not massive Dem fraud, what are they afraid of? My wife and I can prove our US citizenship, residence, and qualification to vote — can the supposed Harris votes be thus verified enough to maintain the illusion of a Harris “victory”?

    Trump won Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Georgia, and he won reelection.

    If the courts or the States defend the American people and prevent the theft of this election, the ensuing violence by “leftists” will be worth it. Because if we let this slide, it will happen again and again. And the violence and threats we will see if Trump is properly continued in office is NOTHING compared to the degradation that the Africans and their vicious enablers have in mind once they have disarmed us.

  39. @anon

    A fair question. Where the heck are they? Sensible patriotic industrious Americans with traditional views and normal families who don’t consider themselves “left” could work with such a non-pervert non-white-hating non-Christian-hating populist left on important issues.

    When I discovered lefty comedian-turned-activist Jimmy Dore, I initially thought that he might be such a person. But no.

    Jimmy is entertaining alright, and it’s good to hear a “progressive” loudly calling out the Dems for their corruption, hypocrisy, and dishonesty and even telling fellow lefties not to vote for the Dems.

    I also agree with Jimmy Dore’s attitude toward heartless big banks and corporations and plutocrats who always seem to get the better of the rest of us in any tax legislation, “bailout”, or “stimulus” / “relief” bill. But he is fully on board with the BLM worship of Africans and intimidation and threatening of white Americans. He’s on board with forcing the whole country to accept the farce of homosexual “marriage”, allow the legal killing of the unborn human beings through elective abortion through all their prenatal development, let sexual deviant “married” men adopt children, prevent parents from keeping their children away from sexual deviancy, self-harm, and mental illness (“Transgenderism”), etc. He even seems to consider the idea of forcing us to pay reparations to Africans (when by this point they should be paying everyone else, of all races, for the vast disproportionate costs they continue to impose on our lives, our safety, our ability to ever have quiet and peace of mind, our culture, and our economy and taxes). He has nothing to say about Dem mayors and governors ordering police to stand by as violent misfits (“antifa”) terrify and beat us on our own streets.

    If not Jimmy Dore, where are these leftists who don’t push African privilege, excuse constant African and antifa aggression and looting, don’t support the homosexual and trasnsgender destruction of our children, and know that mass immigration drives down American wages and deprives regular people of bargaining power with their employers. Where?

  40. Wyatt says:

    Eventually we will make another Union Army

    With what? A bunch of negros that can’t shoot straight, apathetic Mexicans who don’t want to serve or white socialists with the muscle mass of a small child? The guys who know how to fight and kill dislike the left. Come a shooting war, boogaloo or Civil War 2.0, the results usually are loads and loads of dead leftists, praise be to Allah.

    The difference between me and you

    You’re stupid and I’m not?

    • Replies: @obvious
  41. obvious says:

    It will be just as the last Union Army, all of the above and many many more. In 2 days you are out of ammo and supplies, on the 3rd day it’s over.

    By all means keep deluding yourself, the tighter the corner the better the target,

    • Replies: @Wyatt
  42. Wyatt says:

    You keep saying, “Union Army” but there are so few competent white people to field it. Beyond that, warfare has changed so significantly that the US military has been bogged down fighting insurgents for years in foreign countries. What do you think is gonna happen when men who spent years fighting that turn it against the US? The Red Team planners know.

  43. @A123

    Couldn’t we also offer “honorable and compensated relocation” to the Jews so they leave Palestine?

    And if it works, can we try it in new york, new jersey, and south florida?

    • Replies: @A123
  44. @A123

    You do not write quite like a native fluent speaker of English. Just tell the truth, be whoever you are, and make your arguments or observations without the games.

    A native English speaker in the USA would write “I am A Christian American.”
    He would NOT ask “how is the weather in YOUR Teheran?”

    • Replies: @A123
  45. A123 says:

    Writing quickly on a mobile device brings limitations. The grammatical imperfections are an artifact of technology. I was going for, “I am Christian & American.” The ampersand went AWOL on me.

    I also read way above school grade level, including UK imported books. Thus I have an amalgam of British and American conventions that does not always square up with US or UK expectations.

    How is the weather in your Tehran?

    As a native English speaker, I do not see anything wrong with the form of this question.

    PEACE 😇

  46. A123 says:

    Couldn’t we also offer “honorable and compensated relocation” to the Jews so they leave Palestine?

    How would it make any sense to offer Jews money to leave:

    — Jewish Palestine?
    — The Jewish Ancestral Homeland of Judea?
    — The only Jewish Nation on the planet?

    Such an offer would be inherently immoral and thus dishonorable.

    This is totally different than giving non-Palestinian Muslims the opportunity to honorably return home ending their occupation of Jewish Palestine.

    And if it works, can we try it in new york, new jersey, and south florida?

    Do you mean Minneapolis, Pennsylvania, etc.?

    The U.S. offering honorable compensation for Muslim repatriation would also make sense. Although there would have to be serious immigration reform to achieve a Muslim intake of zero before such a plan became practical.

    One has to understand that history proves that Jerusalem is not holy to Islam. The false claims are entirely based on the incorrect location of al’Aqsa.

    The historical record incontrovertibly proves that Muhammad died before his Jihadi invasion reached Jerusalem. Placing the “Furthest” or “Westernmost” mosque at the site of Muhammad’s death means that the correct location of al’Aqsa is most likely in modern day Syria, possibly Jordan. There are a number of potentially accurate historical sites. None of them are in Jewish Palestine.

    Trading contents of al’Aqsa (even the bricks of the building if desired) to Assad in return for the Golan could be a sound basis for peace in the region, if the Shia and Sunnis would stop fighting each other.

    PEACE 😇

  47. It begs the question, “How can sanity be brought back by Biden and the political left”, since, “how can in fact, the insane bring back the sane”? It’s kind of like the question the King asks, “Can what is crooked be made straight again”?

  48. Port City says:

    You sound bigoted by the rhetoric used in your article. Your article is patronizing and filled with propaganda. You underestimate the amount of minority ethnics who are proud of their country

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Jonathan Cook Comments via RSS