Obviously. The Atlanticist-Zionist-Wahhabi axis is strengthened.
Obviously. The Atlanticist-Zionist-Wahhabi axis is strengthened.
It’s quite obvious what Montel “respects” about Kamala.
Imagine that. Donald’s love for these Middle Eastern scumbags is his worst weakness. Netanyahu, the butcher of Gaza who wants to push the US into a war with Iran, and Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, who literally keeps his own family members, including his daughter as prisoners.
One thing that I actually with Mikey the Empty Suit Toady on is that the Biden-Harris ticket does symbolize the transition of the US economy to the present “California model”(neofeudalism ruled by tech-oligarchs and the new clerisy). The problem is that Mikey still clings to the failed supply-side Reaganite paradigm that made the California model possible in the first place. Mikey is like some 19th-century throne and altar type saying, “Wow. This capitalist industrial revolution think sucks. Let’s go back to royalist mercantilism!”
This article provides a decent overview of what left-anarchism is along with its history. I certainly consider the array of traditions that are described in this article to be legitimate forms of anarchism, although I would argue that there is no one singular anarchist tradition. Instead, there is a multiplicity of anarchisms, which include many leftist variations, along with centrist, rightist, religious, and “neither fish nor fowl” versions of anarchism, many historical proto-anarchism, many sister or cousin ideologies to anarchism, and many “anonymous anarchists” or “people of the anarchist book” who are anarchist in everything but name.
Of course, it’s 90% of the mainstream anarchist movement are merely anarcho-liberals, anarcho-progressives, anarcho-social democrats, anarcho-Democrats, and anarcho-Maoists who have no viable plan for the overthrow of neo-feudalism, the new clerisy, or the global capitalist empire, and certainly, none that would not result in the erection of a new tyranny, a civil war, or mere mass death through disease and starvation. Viable prototypes do exist, of course, on a world-historical level, even if most anarchists have no interest in them. This only points to the limitations and failures of anarchists, not anarchism.
However, what is troubling is that an article like this would appear in a publication like Teen Vogue. It may be true that “there ain’t no such thing as bad publicity.” But this is obviously a case of “woke” professional class journalists seizing control of an otherwise apolitical mainstream magazine and turning it into an anarchist publication by default. Ordinarily, I would be inclined to say “good job.” But is this really an advancement for the anarchist position or merely the co-optation of anarchism by woke capitalism and the reinvention of anarchism as just another faddish youth culture?
By Kim Kelly
In a pop-cultural sense, at least, the idea of anarchy has been characterized by either a middle-fingers-up, no-parents-no-rules punk attitude, or a panicky, more conservative outlook used by national and state sources to represent violent chaos and disorder. Today, we can see an extremely serious, radical leftist political philosophy on T-shirts at Hot Topic.
Anarchism is a radical, revolutionary leftist political philosophy that advocates for the abolition of government, hierarchy, and all other unequal systems of power. It seeks to replace what its proponents view as inherently oppressive institutions — like a capitalist society or the prison industrial complex — with nonhierarchical, horizontal structures powered by voluntary associations between people. Anarchists organize around a key set of principles, including horizontalism, mutual aid, autonomy, solidarity, direct action, and direct democracy, a form of democracy in which the people make decisions themselves via consensus (as opposed to representative democracy, of which the United States government is an example).
Kamala Harris largely symbolizes the transformation that is presently taking place in the entire Western world. The managerial revolution of the middle 20th century still functioned within the wider framework of the industrial capitalist mode of production and the bourgeois nation-state system.
However, the present transformation involves a transition away from a model of capitalism that is rooted in the industrial revolution to one that is rooted in the tech revolution, which is being accompanied by a shift away from the 19th century model of liberal-bourgeois nationalism toward a globalized technocratic multicultural statism.
The last vestiges of traditional religion are disappearing as well (at least among the power elite and managerial classes) with the new clerisy taking its place. Religious conservatives like Rod Dreher are absolutely correct in their assessment of this process, as are critics of the “new feudalism” like Joel Kotkin.
By Rod Dreher
The American Conservative
Let’s stipulate that nobody Joe Biden could have picked for his running mate would have pleased conservatives in any way. Of all the people he could have picked, I think Kamala Harris is the most dangerous, from a social conservative point of view. I’ll get to that in a second. But first, let me explain why I think she was probably the best pick for Biden.
Biden said he was going to pick a female running mate. In any other year, Elizabeth Warren would have been a stronger choice, given the role she’s carved out for herself as a scourge of Wall Street. But in this George Floyd year, Biden needed to choose a black woman — especially because the support of black voters is what saved his presidential candidacy.
Harris is very aggressive in her speeches — and that’s what Biden needs. Traditionally presidential candidates need their veep picks to be bulldogs. Trump doesn’t, but Biden really does. He gets to keep his avuncular Uncle Joe affect for one, and for another, she can throw sharp elbows that elderly Joe Biden cannot manage.
Harris is woke on all the social issues, but some progressives don’t like her because of the years she spent as a prosecutor in California. You might recall how Tulsi Gabbard rattled Harris in a Democratic candidates’ debate by grilling her on her prosecution of marijuana offenders. Overall, though, this reputation will help Biden, I believe. No progressive with a lick of sense is going to sit out the election because Officer Kamala is on the ticket. Given all the rioting this year, it is likely an advantage for Biden to be able to say he has a law-and-order progressive on his ticket — however phony that claim might be. Remember, Biden doesn’t need the pothead vote; he needs the wine-mom vote.
Finally, Biden surely knows that given his age, he is likely to be a one-term president, meaning that win or lose this fall, his VP choice will probably head the Democratic ticket in 2024 — and is a favorite to lead the party after he passes from the scene. The Harris choice is a solid bet on the future of the party.
So what’s wrong with her?
SJWs, meet your counterparts. The best possible outcome to the present political conflicts would before for the Red Tribe, Blue Tribe, far-left, and far-right to have the collective effect of neutralizing each so that none of them are able to achieve very much. Let’s see some MS-13s or lizard people conspiracy theorists running for Congress. By all means, let’s lower the voting age to ten (which may still be too high as we desperate need the emerge of Free Ice Cream Party). And when are we going to see some hashtags for otherkin, transracial, and transable equality?
By Kevin Roose
New York Times
Recently, an acquaintance posted a photo on her Instagram story showing a map of the United States, filled with bright red dots.
“This is not a map of Covid,” the caption read. “It is a map of human trafficking.”
Under the photo was a hashtag: #SaveTheChildren.
It figures that a full-blown commie like Christian Parenti, son of US Marxist-Leninist godfather Mike Parenti, would be an admirer of Hamilton, and favor Hamilton over Jefferson. However, what Parenti is saying in this interview is what a genuine Marxist would say about economic history and the development of industrial capitalism. Notice that he recognizes that, contra many right-libertarians, capitalist development was the product of statism, not “laissez-faire.” Btw, Christian Parenti’s writings on the prison-industrial complex and his father’s writings on US imperialism and state propaganda techniques are quite good.
The problem is not so much Kamala Harris, Joe Biden, or the Democratic Party as much as the tens of millions of dumbasses who keep voting for these cretins over and over again for no apparent purpose like a hamster trapped in a spinning wheel. Just as Trump’s enthusiastic “base” is mostly just a collection of morons who take a game show host and professional wrestling figure seriously, so are these “Vote Blue No Matter Who” dullards simply fools who might as well be worshiping at the temple of the emperor sun-god.
By Lara Bazelon
New York Times
SAN FRANCISCO — With the growing recognition that prosecutors hold the keys to a fairer criminal justice system, the term “progressive prosecutor” has almost become trendy. This is how Senator Kamala Harris of California, a likely presidential candidate and a former prosecutor, describes herself.
But she’s not.
Time after time, when progressives urged her to embrace criminal justice reforms as a district attorney and then the state’s attorney general, Ms. Harris opposed them or stayed silent. Most troubling, Ms. Harris fought tooth and nail to uphold wrongful convictions that had been secured through official misconduct that included evidence tampering, false testimony and the suppression of crucial information by prosecutors.
Notice that “cancel culture” has impacted people on the left, right, and who are apolitical. In a society that has both the Internet and polarization driven by various teams of fanatics, what needs to happen is for the First Amendment to be extended to include corporations, social media, public sector agencies, and universities as well as the actual political government.
By Taylor Mooney, Justin Sherman
In this politically divided and social-media-driven age, “cancel culture” has touched nearly every part of American public life. Politicians, celebrities, CEOs, athletes, media executives — even knitting influencers have experienced getting “canceled.” Here are the stories of three everyday people who ended up on one side or the other of a “cancel” controversy.
It was 2012. Chick-fil-A’s president at the time, Dan Cathy, spoke out against gay marriage and a fierce backlash ensued. Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee called for a Chick fil-A Appreciation Day because he was “incensed at the vitriolic assaults” against the fast-food chain after Cathy’s remarks. As supporters lined up to order from Chick-fil-A in a show of solidarity with Cathy, protesters decided to do the opposite — order nothing but free cups of water and voice their disagreement to the employees.
These cases illustrate why Republicans are worthless even on 2nd Amendment issues. The laws under which all of these people were charged were made by Florida Republicans during the anti-crime hysteria of the 1990s. Over and over again, Republicans show that they are more interested in sucking off cops than in defending the “right to bear arms” whether for self-defense, resistance to government tyranny, or any other purpose.
Florida Times Union
In the wake of Trayvon Martin’s death and the subsequent charge of George Zimmerman, the nation has turned its focus to Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law.
Far too little attention, unfortunately, has been paid to Florida’s mandatory sentencing laws, which often lead to gross injustices and waste of tax dollars.
Consider the case of Marissa Danielle Alexander, a 31-year-old mother of three who had been repeatedly abused by her husband who threatened several times to kill her. On Aug. 1, 2010, Alexander’s husband choked her and refused to let her leave the house.
After breaking free and making her way to the garage, Alexander realized she did not have her car keys. Fearing for her safety, she grabbed her legally registered handgun and re-entered her home to retrieve her keys. Her husband, screaming and threatening her, moved toward her. Alexander fired one shot into her ceiling, and her husband left.
Angela Corey prosecuted
State Attorney Angela Corey charged Alexander with aggravated assault. The jurors were not told that, if convicted, Alexander would have to serve a 20-year mandatory minimum prison sentence.
Here is why “conservatives” are ultimately self-defeating on the gun control issue. Conservatives will infinitely claim fidelity to the 2nd Amendment, but they will turn around and favor mandatory minimums for any “unlawful” use of a firearm. So someone actually uses a firearm in self-defense, gets criminal charges, and faces a lengthy mandatory minimum. So right-wing support for gun rights is ultimately canceled out by their “law and order” fanaticism.
By John Howting
Just after 1 a.m. on July 22, 2019, Tyler Wingate, a 24-year-old white male, was driving on Livernois in Detroit when Lawrence Davis, a 24-year-old black male, bumped into him. The two pulled into a gas station to resolve the minor fender bender. Both got out of their cars. Wingate took one step when Davis allegedly charged at him, knocked him to the ground with a hard punch, and kicked him in the head repeatedly until the 24-year-old white kid from the suburbs was dead. Davis’s trial is ongoing. Before his death, Wingate had worked hard and saved up his money for his plan to buy a house in Detroit and become a part of Detroit’s big comeback.
There are many such instances across the country which illustrate the importance of owning a firearm for self-defense. However, the idea of a white person defending himself by even brandishing a gun in such a situation is detestable to polite opinion. If Wingate had drawn a gun in reaction to threatening behavior by Davis, he may have been destroyed afterwards by the legal system. In the current, racially charged political environment, whites have only two bad options when faced with violence: submit to their aggressors or risk jail after defending themselves.
Consider just two among many recent episodes: the McCloskey’s and the Wuestenberg’s.
One thing that many of my critics on the Left have failed to recognize is that the day will eventually come when the entire spectrum of “right-wing” opinion eventually realizes that there is no hope for using the conventional political system to “reclaim America” for “real Americans,” the working to middle classes, white people, Christians, fiscal conservatives, social conservatives, etc. When that happens, they will start to shed their conventional patriotism and start thinking in revolutionary terms. That could go in different ways. The Right could develop a perspective that favors secession, decentralization, localism, regionalism, and mutual self-separation between contending groups. They could come to favor a full-blown civil war. Or they could come to prefer the seizure of power by a Saddam Hussein-like strongman that ostensibly represents their interests. Which of these scenarios do lefties think would actually be most compatible with their own interests?
President Trump has taken significant criticism for his recent comments on low-income government housing from a speech in Texas late last month:
You know the suburbs, people fight all of their lives to get into the suburbs and have a beautiful home… There will be no more low-income housing forced into the suburbs.… It’s been going on for years. I’ve seen conflict for years. It’s been hell for suburbia.
These comments speak to the current state and local dynamic. Americans, in the past, would move to rural or suburban areas in order to separate from hostile persons, be near those more like themselves, and protect their rights. However, this time-honored American tradition is now threatened by the anti-America forces. For a glimpse into America’s post-2020 future, look no further than the Old Dominion.
This is an article by the same guy who wrote the “Flight 93” article endorsing Trump in 2016. He is arguing for a Republican Party that combines social conservatism, economic populism-nationalism, and semi-isolationism, while engaging in outreach to minorities. Yeah, that will really fly with the Likudniks, plutocrats, and war profiteers who run the party, and the know-nothings who constitute their base. Anyone who sees Trump as anything other than a huckster and charlatan has their head up their ass. Trump’s actual political instincts are well to the left of his party. That’s obvious in the rare moments when he breaks kayfabe and actually expresses serious opinions. It’s obvious that Trump knows perfectly well that US wars of the last 20 years are a disaster, that neoliberal globalization has destroyed the US working class, that Republican deficit hawks are con men (Trump actually favors MMT), that the war on drugs is a disaster (Trump once endorsed full drug legalization in a candid moment). He’s also a pro-choice, pro-gay rights, pro-trans liberal in his private opinions. But he cares more about his own ego and self-promotion so he mostly lets the normal Republicans run his administration while doing his impersonation of Spiro Agnew (another faux reactionary huckster).
By Michael Anton
Claremont Review of Books
Americans who want to remain citizens of a united country that at least makes some desultory attempt to protect them and further their interests have no choice but to stay the course. As the saying goes, the only way out is through.
I know that some readers will lament that the Trump Administration has been a disappointment. “Where’s our wall?” I’d like to have seen more progress by now, too. “Why wasn’t he tougher during the riots and their aftermath?” I don’t know.
Whether or not people are actually oppressed may not be as important politically as whether they think they are oppressed. Some on the right have insisted that many of those involved in the recent uprising “aren’t really oppressed.” Maybe so, maybe not. But they have certainly acted as though they are, which is what has real-world impact. The left may say that those on the right who claim to be oppressed really aren’t. Maybe so, maybe not. But if they act as though they are, consequences will result.
By William S. Lind
The cultural Marxists prate endlessly about “oppressed minorities”. A cynic might reply that it is in the nature of minorities to be oppressed. In reality, this country’s “oppressed” minorities profit mightily from their “victim” status. They get preferential treatment in hiring, boatloads of free money, and rules that allow them to behave badly while paying no penalty. It’s a pretty good racket.
One of the strangest things about early-21st century America is that not minorities, but the White, Christian majority is oppressed–and puts up with it. “Affirmative action” gives places in high-prestige universities, as well as cushy jobs, to blacks and women instead of better-qualified White males. Bakers, florists, and photographers are sued out of business by gays for refusing to violate their religious beliefs and help celebrate gay “weddings”, which are an impossibility. The entertainment industry portrays White Christians in ways that, were blacks so type-cast, would bring howls of outrage. Yet the oppressed White majority just sits there and takes it. Why?
My conflicts with the “politically correct” crowd began over 30 years ago when I was involved with a left-anarchist group that was in the process of drafting its manifesto. I noticed that their statement included little about anarchism or abolishing the state, but quite a bit about the laundry list of “isms, archies, and phobias” (at least the ones that were recognized back then, many more have since been added). I suggested that perhaps a statement should be added about the oppression of left-handed people, much of the consternation of my associates who felt I wasn’t taking “concerns about oppression” seriously enough. Left-handers finally get the recognition they deserve. I’m right-handed, btw.
By Michael Person
It’s National Left-Hander’s Day, a celebration founded by the Left-Handers Club to honor leftie style.
An advantage to an eventual Kamala Harris presidency might be that both the Left and the Right hate her, which will have the effect of delegitimizing the system.
Kim nails it.
Once again, the Babylon Bee remains one of the few serious journalistic outlets around today.
U.S.—The party that claims to represent minorities, the poor, the oppressed, and the marginalized has nominated an old, rich, white man and a cop, sources confirmed Tuesday.
“If you want to fight for oppressed minority groups, you must vote for this rich, old, white man who authored the 1994 crime bill and this corrupt police officer who has made a career out of throwing minorities in jail for non-violent drug crimes,” said a DNC spokesperson. “It’s the only way to fight the establishment.”
According to sources at the DNC, the old white guy you’re supposed to vote for, in order to show that you love and respect women, has been accused of inappropriate sexual behavior by several women.
“Several photos circulating on the internet demonstrate proof-positive that Joe Biden loves women and children very much,” wrote Snopes, the internet’s premiere fact-checkers.
Campaign analysts believe that the cop bolsters the old, rich, white man’s bid to become President by bringing some much-needed group identity politics, along with her newfound stances on decriminalizing many crimes she formerly prosecuted and defunding much of the police, in a year in which being an old, white man and anti-crime is seen as a hindrance.
“Look, he has even nominated a woman of color to be his Vice President like a true champion for the poor and oppressed would,” reported Brian Stelter of CNN. “Just use your eyes and see: there is only one party in this country for people who care about the downtrodden.”
“Now I can go back on Charlamagne tha God’s program and show him Kamala,” mused Biden to some suddenly panicked staffers.
At publishing time, the DNC was airing ads in flyover country about how the cop they’ve nominated once called herself the “top cop” of California, threatened to arrest parents of truant students, and tried to keep prisoners in jail as long as possible in order to use them for cheap labor, while simultaneously airing ads on the coasts and big cities featuring clips from her interview in which she bragged about how much pot she smoked because she is part Jamaican.
This article provides a pretty good overview of the actual role of ideology in higher education. Noam Chomsky created a minor stir sometime back when he argued that universities are actually “far-right” in reply to the usual complaints about universities being dominated by liberal and left ideologues. However, in the context that Chomsky was speaking, he wasn’t entirely wrong. Universities function basically like this: Science and technology departments conduct the research that is necessary for the maintenance of the military-industrial-complex and the high-tech economy. That is particularly true of schools like MIT where Noam spent most of his career.
Business schools and economics departments generally teach from a neoliberal perspective, which reflects the dominant ruling class ideology, the occasional token libertarians, Marxists, or unreconstructed Keynesians notwithstanding. Technical and professional schools are mostly about churning out skilled workers and technocratic managers. It is only in the humanities and liberal arts departments that liberal and left opinion flourishes. Political science and international relations professors tend to be mostly technocratic centrists, mainstream liberals, left-of-center progressives, with a minority of neocons and occasional libertarians. Traditional humanities fields like history tend to be dominated by left-of-center types (the kinds of folks who would be enthusiastic Obama voters). Education, social work, and social sciences departments tend to be further left, often functioning as seminaries for “progressive activists.”
The craziest SJW types tend to be in “fringe” departments that didn’t exist a few decades ago like gender studies, cultural studies, ethnic studies, etc. Some English departments, mass communications programs, and art schools have a large number of these types (mostly because many creative types often have far-left political and social views). “Diversity mania” is found in a wide range of fields, including seeming non-ideological ones like healthcare, although this is more about technocratic management than an ideology per se.
By Jon A. Shields
When concerns over the homogeneity of university faculty are raised, conservatives and liberals tend to hunker down into a battle of grievances. Conservatives point to instances of political bias and the need for “real” diversity in higher education, while liberals remind their conservative opponents of the still-low number of minority professors and the importance of their perspectives. It should be possible to overcome this impasse. Both the right and left tend to define diversity too narrowly and inconsistently, and both would benefit from broadening their appreciation for the value of diversity in higher education.
The DHS is actually an umbrella organization for dozens of federal police state alphabet soup agencies, many of which existed in various forms prior to the creation of the DHS in 2002. The DHS was originally created to better coordinate the relationship between these agencies, and between the feds, states, localities, tribal governments, the private sector, and NGOs. Researching the police and how it functions is kind of like researching “corporate welfare” in the sense of coming to recognize that just as the state has its hands deep in every aspect of the economy, so does the police state pervade virtually all institutions.
By Zack Budryk
The American Civil Liberties Union on Monday called for the dissolution of the Department of Homeland Security, calling it a “fail[ed] experiment” that has become a “badge of shame” under President Trump.
This is a pretty good discussion of what real “police reform” would look like: end drug prohibition, end random traffic stops, end patrolling, end qualified immunity, allow communities to opt-out of relying on state security forces, etc. Unlike most right-libertarians, they also point out what is wrong with “private police” and “private prisons” along with the class and race dimensions of the police state. The main limitation of this discussion is that even if everything they are talking about was put into practice it would only address problems with local police. What about the federal alphabet soup agencies? The war against the police state has to be fought on all fronts and at every level: federal, state, local, tribal, private, and university. We don’t want Scandinavian social worker cops. We don’t want Latin American private mercenary police.