The denial of evolutionary sub-speciation, encapsulated by the “race is a social construct” mantra, is not merely a product of the Progressive’s confusion of scientific theory: it is also a political organ intended to quell Nationalistic sentiments among the races and to ultimately propagate the destructive memes of racial integrationism, ever-expanding statism, and globalization. It is necessary to note that by “Nationalism” (as denoted with a capital-letter for the sake of clarity), I am referring to the solidarity and affinity that one retains towards his race, in lieu of the conventional use of the term “nationalism”, which is more or less flag-and-dirt worship. More…
Mr. Johnson’s Moses the Egyptian is yet another ill thought-out screed against Christianity worthy of the atheistkult. In fact most of Mr. Johnson’s claims are taken verbatim from atheistkult in this and other screeds. For the sake of brevity I will deal with his completely ridiculous gloss on paganism.
“Ancient polytheism did not just promote religious tolerance. It also helped promote peace between nations in an age of constant warfare and bloodshed. The idea of a universal divine order served as a foundation for international law and peace between nations. “
Despite the fact that you provide no evidence for this preposterous claim, there is absolutely no historical evidence to back it up.
“One of the common driving forces behind Nietzsche’s thinking was the desire to challenge the prevailing orthodoxy. “That which does not kill us makes us stronger,” he wrote in 1888, but the UCL students’ union wasn’t taking any chances.”
“The arrest of Mr Abdulmutallab, a former president of the Islamic Society at University College London (UCL), for allegedly trying to blow up a flight to Detroit on Christmas Day, meant he was the sixth member of a UK student Islamic Society to be arrested for suspected terrorism offences.”
“I thought I was losing my capacity to be shocked — but events in Missouri over just the last couple of hours have crossed a frightening line, one that makes me pray that this assault on fundamental American values is just the aberration of one rudderless Heartland community, and not the first symptoms of nation gone mad with high-tech weaponry to keep its own citizens in line.”—Journalist Will Bunch
The difference between what happened in Boston in the wake of the Boston Marathon explosion and what is happening now in Ferguson, Missouri, is not in the government’s response but in the community’s response.
This is what happens when you ignore the warning signs.
This is what happens when you fail to take alarm at the first experiment on your liberties.
This is what happens when you fail to challenge injustice and government overreach until the prison doors clang shut behind you.
Consider that it was just a little over a year ago that the city of Boston was locked down while police carried out a military-style manhunt for the suspects in the Boston Marathon explosion. At the time, Americans welcomed the city-wide lockdown, the routine invasion of their privacy, and the dismantling of every constitutional right intended to serve as a bulwark against government abuses.
Fast forward 14 months, and Americans are shocked at the tactics being employed to quell citizen unrest in Ferguson, Missouri—a massive SWAT team, an armored personnel carrier, men in camouflage pointing heavy artillery at the crowd, smoke bombs and tear gas—where residents are outraged and in the streets in response to a recent police shooting of one of their own: a young, unarmed college-bound black teenager who had the misfortune of being in the wrong time at the wrong place.
Fascism is abhorrent to a right wing sensibility. It is, after all, merely a slight variant of classical Marxism which retains all of that doctrine’s salient characteristics. It envisions a world in which the state is the director and protector of populations too feeble to understand their own interests or act on that understanding. At its most fundamental level fascism is nothing more than a disgusting craving for a daddy to make it all better and make the bad men go away.
If you want to know what U.S. politics will look like a few decades from now, perhaps much sooner, imagine a U.S. election with the present day bourgeois technocratic “progressives” of the Democratic Party representing “conservatism,” and the “cultural Marxist” freak show representing “liberalism,” and there you have it. Most of my work has been about developing a new radicalism that’s to the left of the left of the left. If the Democratic Party represents the center-left, and “cultural Marxism” represents the hard left, then to the left of that would be tendencies like ATS and N-AM. We are to “cultural Marxism” what Maoism is to social democracy.
Liberal Republican Party: Corporatism, neoliberalism, imperial foreign policy and an emphasis on the upper classes combined with cutting edge Cultural Left and Identity Politics, some environmentalism and a generally more sane and sober view of things. Some gays, Blacks or Hispanics who wants to wallow in their identity and stick it to the workers and the poor quite happily join this party. Neoliberalism + genderqueer. What could go wrong? Obviously from a progressive point of view, this is nearly worthless, as the Left is about economics, not the accommodation of every weirdo, freak or dysfunctional minority who comes down the pike.
The Conservative Republican Party: Corporatism and neoliberalism, albeit in a much stronger form than the Liberal Republicans push, a radical near-Libertarian out and out dismantling of government, combined with the usual rightwing nuttery such as ludicrous paranoia of Communism, socialism and the economic Left, crazy conspiracy theory, exaggeration, lies, constant propaganda, racist dog whistles for bigoted White people, homophobia, misogyny and sexism, puritanism, Fundamentalist Christianity, jingoism, xenophobia, paranoia and hatred of the state itself.
The quote below from Robert Higgs reminds us of why it is the state that is the enemy of all mankind. Regrettably, the Left focuses all of its attention on alleged oppression, whether real or imaginary, sponsored by all sorts of Isms, Archies, and Phobias. Yes, class exploitation really exists. Yes, ethnic rivalries and sectarian religious conflict can have dire social consequences. Yes, in-group/out-group conflicts can severely disadvantage marginal populations. But let’s not forget whose power comes from the barrel of a gun.
“Business corporations, even the biggest ones, do not send SWAT teams to crash into your home at night to kill you or members of your family; they do not compel you to purchase their goods and services on pain of being kidnapped and confined in a steel cage; they do not mount attacks on foreign countries whose leaders displease them; they do not drop atomic bombs on cities; they do not shower neighborhoods with cluster bombs, spray them with poisonous depleted-uranium ammunition, or incinerate them with white phosphorous artillery shells. They do not ram down your throat actions that you regard as abhorrent, forcing you to pay for them or even to participate in them; on the contrary, they strive to please you and win your ongoing patronage.
Why, then, do so-called progressives systematically seek to have the institutions that commit these crimes (and a host of others) oversee and dominate the business corporations, which do not commit such horrendous crimes. For a student of comparative institutions, the so-called progressive agenda flies in the face of reason and humanity. (Not that the so-called conservative agenda does not, mind you; but its absurdities are somewhat different.)”
You can vote “Right” and vote for protection of workers, state social programs for, pro family policies, environmental protection, promotion of small business at the expense of big business, and national protection of workers from multinational corporate Great White sharks.
Or I can vote “Left” and vote for gay pride parades, six different types of genderqueer, tax cuts for corporations and austerity.
The Thin Blue Line in the Big Apple (Andrew Burton/Getty Images)
Imagine if I were to tell you there is a large group of government employees, with generous salaries and ridiculously cushy retirement pensions covered by the taxpayer, who enjoy incredible job security and are rarely held accountable even for activities that would almost certainly earn the rest of us prison time. When there is proven misconduct, these government employees are merely reassigned and are rarely dismissed. The bill for any legal settlements concerning their errors? It, too, is covered by the taxpayers. Their unions are among the strongest in the country.
A few days back, I had the displeasure of reading a clickbait “article”, on the misleadingly named Dangerous Minds blog, concerning the Far Eastern fondness for Nazi aesthetics. I made the mistake of thinking I’d get something momentarily interesting out of doing so, only to have that meagre hope mangled upon reading the first fucking sentence:
The concept of “Asian Nazis” is, of course, an extremely WTF??? proposition from the very start.
Nope – that’d be your starting statement, dickhead!
Gazing upon that atrocity of an assertion, I prepared myself for a screed from the shortbus – and, boy, did the rest of the piece align with that realignment!
Other standout sentences from this point ‘n’ shriek parade included…
….how many of these self-styled Asian Nazis have even met a Jew? Even a single Jew?
…and the not-at-all Nazi-like sentiment…
These people should be strapped to chairs and forced to watch Schindler’s List with their eyes pinned open like Alex in A Clockwork Orange.
Ironically, by setting out to shame far-Eastern Nazi-cosplayers for their “profound ignorance” and “low intelligence”, the writer only succeeds at signalling his own, mainly by way of a geo-historical myopia and a wholesale digestion of the prevalent Saturday-morning-cartoon narrative of the Second World War.
Not long ago, I felt compelled to address the idea of self defense as a moral imperative in an article titled “Violence In The Face Of Tyranny Is Often Necessary.” My intention was to perhaps undo some of the propaganda conditioning that Americans have suffered over the decades that has taught them that “all” forms of violent action are “immoral”, including the defense of one’s person, one’s property, and one’s freedom. More…
I apologize for my lengthy prelude to Ms. McElroy’s piece, but things are moving along in a way that merits comment. It would appear that totalitarian humanism is in the process of taking over libertarianism, which is predictable enough as libertarianism left too many gaps open that ultimately allowed totalitarian humanism to crawl in. This is the likely end of any movement that a) fails to embrace a genuinely revolutionary stance, b) fails to challenge the ideological superstructure of the ruling class, d) fails to develop an appropriate class analysis, and d) fails to embrace a hierarchy of priorities that recognizes the overlords of imperialism and their political bureaucracies as the primary targets to be attacked.
The sovereign citizen movement is considered the top threat for domestic terrorism, according to a survey of state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies.
Islamist extremists and militia/patriot groups round out the top three threats to communities in the United States considered most serious by 364 officers of 175 state, local, and tribal law enforcement entities, according to a survey conducted by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START).
Look for the various contentious issues involving gender identity and sexual orientation to become a major source of conflict on the Left in the future. The key issue for pan-secessionists is to figure out how to siphon libertarian and anti-establishment leaning feminists, gays, transgenders, and other sexual/gender minorities away from the PC statist coalition, thereby dividing and weakening the ranks of the state-centric Left, while simultaneously organizing various categories of socially conservative population into the wider pan-radical alliance. Geography is likely to be the key issue. We organize rural and small town white, conservative Christians around anti-PC and anti-big government issues, and we organize socially conservative minorities, immigrants, etc. in the large cities along side sexual and gender minorities by emphasizing class issues and resistance to the police state.
On May 24th, a few dozen people gathered in a conference room at the Central Library, a century-old Georgian Revival building in downtown Portland, Oregon, for an event called Radfems Respond. The conference had been convened by a group that wanted to defend two positions that have made radical feminism anathema to much of the left. First, the organizers hoped to refute charges that the desire to ban prostitution implies hostility toward prostitutes. Then they were going to try to explain why, at a time when transgender rights are ascendant, radical feminists insist on regarding transgender women as men, who should not be allowed to use women’s facilities, such as public rest rooms, or to participate in events organized exclusively for women.
Contra Glenn, the real future of conflict in the US will not be between Left and Right as presently understood. The Right is rapidly dwindling in numbers, and while the Right will become more militant as it continues to decline, it will become increasingly irrelevant as the state and the wider society continue to move leftward. Old-fashioned white supremacists have been completely pushed to the margins. The religious right is headed in a similar direction, and the “conservative movement” will soon follow. The real conflict in the future will be between the economic elites and the growing ranks of the poor, the rival factions of the Left, and the state and enemies of the state. The radical right will eventually align itself with the libertarian left because it will have no where else to go, and the most PC elements of the libertarian left will eventually join the ranks of the progressive statists as the state increasingly moves to cultivate the PC Left as a constituency.
As I have previously stated in the “Liberty and Populism” essay, in a relatively short period of time, the progressive therapeutic statists and totalitarian humanists will be the unquestioned status quo. These progressive statists will be allies of the neoliberal plutocratic elites, and the military industrial complex. They will also have the police state bequeathed to them by Nixon, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Obama under their control. Their ideological superstructure will be human rights imperialism in foreign policy (see Samantha Power), progressive paternalism and therapeutic statism in law (see Cass Sunstein), neoliberalism with a modest welfare state in economics, and totalitarian humanism in social and cultural matters. Meanwhile, class divisions will continue to widen, social conflict will continue to sharpen, and opposition movements will continue to grow from the radical right to the radical left. It is the task of pan-anarchists, anarcho-pluralists, anarcho-populists, national-anarchists, tribal-anarchists, pan-secessionists, and anarcho-ecumenicalists to organize these scattered resistance forces into an effective fighting force.
In 1992, a 44-year-old attorney made the following remarkable assertion: “For goodness’ sake, you can’t be a lawyer if you don’t represent banks.”
The attorney was Hillary Clinton. She made the statement to journalists during her husband’s first campaign for president. Her legal representation of a shady savings and loan bank while working at a top corporate law firm in Arkansas (and her firm’s relations with then-governor Bill Clinton) had erupted briefly into a campaign controversy. More…
This issue will probably become increasingly contentious as the movement to legalize marijuana spreads to more and more states. This will also likely be a divisive issue on the Left between the libertarian left and the therapeutic statists, health fascists, and anti-smoking crusader types.
SEATTLE (Reuters) – Supporters and opponents of the federal ban on marijuana took to the pages of The New York Times this weekend with full-page color advertisements that highlight the fast-evolving debate in the United States about medical and recreational drug use.
The advertisements followed The New York Times‘ decision last month in a series of editorials to call for repealing the ban, the biggest U.S. newspaper to do so. Opinion polls show a majority of Americans now back the legalization of pot.
I suspect that at some point in the not too distant future there will be a growing movement to decriminalize or legalize prostitution, comparable to the gay rights movement in its early phase or the present movement for legalization of marijuana. This is to be welcome from an anarchist perspective, of course, but look for this to be a divisive issue on the Left between progressive statists, totalitarian humanists, and feminist-fascists on one end and the libertarian left on the other.
Whom is it safe to hate? One of the reasons the cause of same-sex civil marriage has gained so much ground in recent years is that it is no longer socially acceptable to hold gay couples in contempt. Many if not most opponents of same-sex marriage harbor no ill will toward lesbians and gays, yet opposition to the expansion of civil rights for gay people has long profited from deep-seated prejudice against them. As this prejudice has grown less common and less intense, it isn’t terribly surprising that proponents of same-sex marriage have gained the upper hand. Similarly, opposition to cannabis legalization has long rested on the belief that stoners are losers who can and should be kept on the margins of society. Now that marijuana use is associated in the public mind with cancer-stricken grandmothers and foxy celebrities, there is no going back. The stigma against marijuana use is dying, and support for keeping marijuana illegal has been slowly dying with it.
Richmond Times Dispatch
In this April 29, 1974, file photo, President Richard M. Nixon points to the transcripts of the White House tapes after he announced during a nationally-televised speech that he would turn over the transcripts to House impeachment investigators, in Washington. The last 340 hours of tapes from Nixon’s White House were released Wednesday, Aug. 21, 2013, along with more than 140,000 pages of text materials.
By MARKUS SCHMIDT
At 9:01 p.m., 40 years ago this Friday, Richard Milhous Nixon sat before a television camera in the Oval Office and announced to the American public in a live broadcast that he would resign rather than endure a humiliating Senate impeachment trial for obstruction of justice.
“I have never been a quitter,” he said in his 15-minute speech. “To leave office before my term is completed is abhorrend to every instinct in my body. But as president, I must put the interest of America first.”
I’m somewhat surprised by this reaction to the Gaza situation, as things seem to be moving faster than I expected, but it looks like what I’ve been predicting for a while is starting to happen. Cultural, demographic, and generational change in the US is also creating a political paradigm shift. One manifestation of that is that public support for Israel is not nearly as solid nowadays. The Palestinians are gaining more sympathy among Americans, and people I also look for this to be another source of conflict on the US Left, between pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian forces. That conflict has always been there, but it’s now moving into the cultural and political mainstream.
Large demonstrations against Israel’s assault on Palestinians in Gaza were staged across the US on Saturday. The public outpouring of support for Palestinians in US streets suggests that Washington’s pro-Israel policies are becoming increasingly unpopular, a trend supported by a recent poll on Israel’s latest aggression, which finds that young Americans are twice as likely to support Palestinian rights than Israeli occupation.