It’s hard to tell them apart. The pan-anarchist movement is the way to oppose the mainstream system while moving past this kind of stupidity on the margins.
In a move reminiscent of the Los Angeles gang truce during the Rodney King protests, Baltimore area Bloods and Crips have agreed to put aside their rivalry and focus on fighting rogue police officers.
Last Saturday, both Bloods and Crips marched side by side in the Baltimore rallies against police brutality. Putting aside differences, both groups united in one voice to demand “Justice for Freddie Grey.”
Reports among members indicate that members of the Nation of Islam organization brokered the truce, much the same as happened in Los Angeles two decades ago.
“I can say with honesty those brothers demonstrated they can be united for a common good,” Carlos Muhammad, a minister at Nation of Islam’s Mosque No. 6 said.
“At the rally, they made the call that they must be united on that day. It should be commended,” he continued.
“We can unite and stop killing one another, and the Bloods and the Crips can help rebuild their community,” Muhammad said in an interview with the The Daily Beast.
A community organizer, DeRay McKesson, confirmed the ceasefire between the groups.
“The fight against police brutality has united people in many ways that we have not seen regularly, and that’s really powerful,” McKesson said.
“The reality is, police have been terrorizing black people as far back as we can remember. It will take all of us coming together to change a corrupt system,” he added.
Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake acknowledged the peace-brokering efforts of the Nation of Islam, singling them out specifically for helping to stop the violence in the community.
“I want to also thank the Nation of Islam, who have been very present in our efforts to keep calm and peace in our city,” she stated.
The mayor had nothing to say, however, about their criticisms of police violence.
*Baltimore police say three separate gangs are now working together to “take out” law enforcement officers.
In a statement Monday, the department called it a “credible threat” and said members of the Black Guerilla Family, the Bloods and the Crips have formed an alliance against the police.
The department warned other law enforcement agencies to “take appropriate precautions.”
The police statement came as mourners gathered for the funeral of Freddie Gray, who died of a mysterious spinal injury while in police custody.
Police spokesman Capt. Eric Kowalczyk would not say whether the threat is related to the death of Gray. Kowalczyk said the threat announcement has been circulated to law enforcement agencies nationwide.
Read more at http://www.eurweb.com/2015/04/baltimore-police-3-rival-gangs-uniting-to-take-out-cops/#Y2xOFd0TJq1gi2AQ.99
In 1970 country singer Lynn Anderson had a hit recording of a Joe South song that opened with the line: “I beg your pardon. I never promised you a rose garden.” I often think of that song in connection with the libertarian philosophy.
You may be asking: for heaven’s sake, why? Because it’s what I want to say to people who seem annoyed that freedom would neither cure all existing social ills immediately nor prevent new ones from arising. It’s a strange demand to make on a political philosophy—that it instantly fix everything that the opposing philosophy has broken. Moreover, I’m concerned that some libertarians, in their justifiable enthusiasm for “the market,” inadvertently lead non-libertarians to think that this unrealistic expectation is part of their philosophy. Of course, that is not good because non-libertarians won’t believe that the market would make all things right overnight, and so they’ll write off all libertarians as dogmatists.
Libertarians of all people should understand that decades—indeed, centuries—of government intervention have distorted society and the economy considerably. It’s safe to say that both would look different had that intervention not occurred. To pick one American example, the creation of an integrated continent-wide national market in the United States was in large part consciously planned by government officials (most prominently Abraham Lincoln, who embraced Henry Clay’s corporatist American System) and their corporate cronies, especially but hardly exclusively through transportation subsidies. [This is not to say they were able to dictate developments in detail; moreover, zones of entrepreneurial freedom existed, constrained though they were.] This system is American capitalism, which is to be distinguished from the spontaneous, decentralized free market.
This is a must watch. Matt Welch provides a very thorough description of how the hard Left has gone from being defenders of free speech on campuses in the 1960s to enemies of free speech comparable to 1960s-era reactionaries or Eastern European Communists.
“At some point it is inherently ridiculous when you can’t laugh at Neil Patrick Harris making jokes on the Academy Awards,” says Matt Welch, Reason Editor in Chief. At Reason Weekend 2015, the annual donor event for the nonprofit that publishes this website, Welch discussed how today’s society, full of trigger warnings and a sensitivity to opposing ideas, has lead to a watered down approach to the First Amendment.
“It’s not fun when you’re walking around policing jokes all day long, it’s not an attractive pose to people,” continues Welch.
By Aleksey Bashtavenko
John Dewey famously argued that an educated populace is the backbone of a Democratic society. The school of thought he espoused has been known as “progressive education” which promoted egalitarianism, intellectual creativity and above all, a pro-Democratic mentality. Dewey stood fiercely opposed to the traditional paradigm of education where the pedagogue provided information and the students passively received it. For him, genuine learning must always take an active form where students are free to pursue intellectual inquiry in an autonomous fashion. In his own teaching, he encouraged students to ask difficult questions, challenge conventional wisdom and display creative initiative.
At a time when our institutions of higher learning seem divorced from these ideals, one cannot refrain from asking where we must have gone wrong. Dewey was a proud political progressive and many modern liberals regard him as iconic figure of their ideology.His credentials as a forward-looking intellectual and a champion of egalitarianism are impeccable. He was the only philosopher who was alive at a time when Bertrand Russell released his famous “History of Western Philosophy” and therein, Russell claimed that he was “almost sorry to have to disagree with Dewey” because of the profound respect he had for the man. More…
Report from Saint Petersburg: Jared Taylor’s account of the Russian Conservative Forum which featured Nationalist Parties from all over Europe
How Jared viewed the main purpose of the event as a way to gain support for Russia’s foreign policy objectives
How the United State’s is the greatest force opposing Traditional ways of life overseas and posses a major threat to world peace
How Jared Taylor(from the right) and Robert Lindsay(from the left) disagree over economics and the welfare state but agree that mass immigration is a disaster for workers and the environment
How many immigration’s restrictionist movements in Europe have adopted socially liberal positions such as Geert Wilders in the Netherlands, and economically populist positions such as the National Front in France
The currents situation with African illegal immigrants in the Mediterranean and how it resembles the The Camp of the Saints Novel
Robert Lindsay ask Jared Taylor about Dr. Michio Kaku ‘s comment that high IQ immigrants are good for America
The declining fertility rate in Western Nations and why Robert Lindsay supports sub-replacement birthrates as a radical ecologist
Daryl Basarab and Aleksey Bashtavenko also call in
Jeff is interviewed by the inestimable Chris Cantwell for Some Garbage Podcast, topics include: police state savagery, victimless crimes, US foreign intervention, apalling state worship in the west, fight or flight with the US, expatriation, the Anarchapulco conference, police aggression not tolerated in Mexico, Mexico in an economic boom, mass support for capitalism in Brazil, feminism not prevalent in Mexico, men are men and women are women, race not an issue, some revealing facts about cartels, the power of community, getting out of the US, moving to Acapulco,
An absolute must listen. Tom Woods interviews John Whitehead. Listen here.
John Whitehead is an attorney and author who has written, debated and practiced widely in the area of constitutional law and human rights. He established the Rutherford Institute back in 1982 and still serves as President and spokesman.
By Dan Greene
I don’t vote anymore. I did for many years with a sincere belief that democracy was the best way for human civilisations to organize themselves. I even looked down on – and argued with – non-voters with derivations of the old “People fought for your right to vote” drivel that people now say to me. I now describe myself as a libertarian and a market anarchist.
So you can imagine how uninterested I was when the UK government called a general election on May 7th of this year. However, while talking to a minarchist friend of mine in the US he asked me the question “If you had to vote in this election then who would it be for?” I was kind of struck dumb for a second because while the Libertarian Party in the US may be a big party (although it seems to make absolutely no real impact as far as I understand it) there is nothing comparable to said party in this country.
So instead of picking a party I found myself beginning to explain how a libertarian political option just simply cannot exist right now in the UK. Yes, there is a libertarian party here but they are small, stand no candidates and many libertarians I know in the UK have more of an anarchist leaning and simply aren’t interested in them. So why can’t a strong libertarian party exist in the UK right now?
One of the first problems in the UK is that while the Labour Party pretend to be ‘centre-left’ and the Conservative Party pretend to be ‘centre-right’ the fact is that neither party has a strong ideology anymore and in reality there isn’t one on the left and one on the right, they’re bang in the middle practically embracing each other in this mixed economic mess where we have a sort of freeish market where business is taxed and regulated by government on one hand and massive state programs like our socialised health care system (the NHS) exist on the other (that would be the left hand presumably).
April the 15th marked Holocaust Memorial Day. Nearly everyone knows about the industrial killing of 6 million Jews, for no other reason than that they were Jews. “Serious historiography” of the subject has ensured that The Shoah, Holocaust in Hebrew, is “consigned to posterity”; its lessons remembered and commemorated throughout the civilized world.
Although she failed to dignify the Armenian genocide of 1915, CNN’s Christiane Amanpour certainly covered the Holocaust, the killing fields of Cambodia, Bosnia, northern Iraq, Rwanda and Darfur, for a 2008 documentary about genocide. In the interest of pacifying its Turkish allies, American officialdom has generally aped Amanpour, refusing to implicate the Ottomans in the mass murder of up to 1.5 million Armenians, 100 years ago.
Paul Gottfried sets the historical record straight in this interview with Tom Woods. Listen here.
Terms like fascist and fascism get thrown around indiscriminately by people who know how toxic they are and who want to demonize their opponents. But almost nothing and no one accused of fascism these days has the slightest connection to genuine fascism, and the result is confusion. What was fascism really all about? Paul Gottfried joins us for a lesson in intellectual history.
Delivered by Professor Denis McManus (Head of Philosophy, Head of Research)
Anarchism has taken many different forms over the centuries but this talk will look at one way in which modern anarchists can be seen as falling into two broad camps: individualistic and communal anarchists. While sharing some views about what is wrong with the state, these different camps base their alternative visions of life without a state on different conceptions of human flourishing. They also have different resources available to them when it comes to trying to meet the objections that come their way. For example, what are we going to do about that ‘anti-social’ individual who doesn’t want to play by our anarchist ‘rules’ …?
This fits with The American Conservative‘s description Obama as a Nixon Republican.
President Obama is what might be called a “closet realist” who often pounds his fists upon the table while shaking hands under the table. He has to pull off this trick because of America’s ugly partisan realities, says ex-CIA analyst Paul R. Pillar.
Edward Luce in the Financial Times has a take on Barack Obama’s foreign policy that is accurate and should be evident to all. But given the state of foreign policy discourse within American politics, perhaps it is not surprising that it falls to a longtime foreign observer of American policy and politics to make this particular observation.
Luce states that as Mr. Obama’s presidency “matures,” he “is showing qualities one would normally associate with Henry Kissinger—the arch-realist of U.S. diplomacy.” Luce points to Obama’s handling of relations with both Iran and Cuba as evidence that he “is grasping the essence of diplomacy — when adversaries come to terms, neither achieves everything they want,” and that he realizes that “the perfect should not be the enemy of the good.”
In this edition of the BoilingFrogsPost.com Roundtable, James Corbett, Sibel Edmonds and Peter B. Collins welcome Andrew Gavin Marshall for a discussion of his recent podcast on “Anarchy, Socialism and Free Markets.” We talk about anarchism as a philosophy and what it really entails, as well as how it links to socialism, libertarianism and other political philosophies. We also delve into some of the questions and critiques that many raise to the idea of anarchism.
This is an interesting critique of the neo-reactionary movement by social scientist Scott Alexander, who also postulates the emergence of a libertarian “Grey Tribe” as a third force beyond the “conservative” Red Tribe and the “liberal” Blue Tribe. Alexander is very much in the progressive camp, although not in a rigid or doctrinaire way. For example, he criticizes the excesses of the”social justice” milieu.
While my own views are often polar opposite of those of the neo-reactionaries, I frequently find their no-holds-barred criticism the Left, liberalism, and mainstream conservatism contains interesting and sometimes important insights.
Slate Star Codex
Neoreaction is a political ideology supporting a return to traditional ideas of government and society, especially traditional monarchy and an ethno-nationalist state. It sees itself opposed to modern ideas like democracy, human rights, multiculturalism, and secularism. I tried to give a more complete summary of its beliefs in Reactionary Philosophy In An Enormous, Planet Sized Nutshell.
The New Reaction
by Rachel Haywire
Arktos Media, 66 pages
Available for purchase from Amazon here
Reviewed by Keith Preston
Rachel Haywire’s The New Reaction is a collection of fifteen relatively short writings offering amusingly iconoclastic bits of cultural criticism from the perspective of someone with a well-developed taste for pushing the limits.
A great deal of much deserved bile is directed towards the politically correct “progressives” who have achieved the remarkable feat of engaging in mindless conformity, while considering themselves to be some kind of avante-garde elite. Indeed, this is the central theme that runs through most of the book. More…
An interesting new work by Carson.
Center for a Stateless Society
The Cult of Mass, Lionization of Protest Culture & Other Industrial Age Holdovers
Protest Culture. The so-called “cargo cults” of New Guinea, Micronesia and Melanesia evolved in response to the influx of American manufactured goods during World War II. Native islanders identified the goods – at least in the received version of the story – not with any material process of production in the countries it came from, but with the proliferation of air bases and air fields in their own countries. The cargo cults, accordingly, operated on the principle of sympathetic magic to stimulate the further delivery of Western manufactured goods by building airplanes and air control centers out of woven bamboo.
Richard Feynman later applied this phenomenon, by analogy, to what he called “cargo cult science.” Cargo cult science equates “science” to incidental features of science like test tubes and lab coats, with no understanding of what constitutes real science: the experimental method.
More generally, a “cargo cult” in any field of human endeavor is an attempt to generate a social phenomenon by replicating all the incidents and stage props commonly identified with it in the public mind.
There’s a danger, in a period of upheavals like the Arab Spring, Occupy, M15, Syntagma, and subsequent networked movements, of our being led astray by a revolutionary cargo cult. The danger is that we will identify “revolution” with incidental things like demonstrations, barricades, slogans and posters.
And we’ll never ditch foreign intervention as long as we have this government.
Why should advocates of limited government support a non-interventionist foreign policy?
This web site was founded some 20 years ago by libertarians perplexed and disturbed at the sight of ever-expanding government power over every aspect of our lives. Why, when government expansion has been proved again and again to be detrimental to society, has its growth continued and even escalated? Indeed, I asked this question in the first sentence of my 1991 book, Reclaiming the American Right: The Lost Legacy of the Conservative Movement [second edition 2008]: “After a decade in power,” I wrote, as the Reagan era ended, “why has the conservative movement failed to make a dent in the growth of big government?” The revered Reagan, whose sacred memory is ritually invoked by Republicans – even by libertarians such as Sen. Rand Paul – actually increased the size and scope of the federal government, and expenditures went through the roof. There was little consolation to be found in the fact that the rate of increase merely slowed.
Another “ally” that needs to go.
While the Israel lobby is blanketing the US media with propaganda to the effect that Iran cannot be trusted to adhere to the terms of any agreement limiting its nuclear research and development, back in Tel Aviv Bibi and his government know better. Ha’aretz has the story:
“Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said at a recent meeting of the security cabinet that if a comprehensive nuclear agreement between Iran and the six world powers is indeed signed by the June 30 deadline, the greatest concern is that Tehran will fully implement it without violations, two senior Israeli officials said.”
The problem for the Israelis isn’t that the Iranians can’t be trusted to keep the agreement. Quite the opposite:
“According to the two senior officials, Netanyahu said during the meeting that he feared that the ‘Iranians will keep to every letter in the agreement if indeed one is signed at the end of June.’
“One official said: ‘Netanyahu said at the meeting that it would be impossible to catch the Iranians cheating simply because they will not break the agreement.’”
Hey, wait a minute – so what about the much touted Second Holocaust that’s supposed to happen if our Secret Muslim of a President succeeds in getting the agreement past a hostile Congress? What about all the kvetching and gnashing of teeth over the “existential threat” supposedly looming over Israel?