Lindsay Shepherd LIVE: Free Speech Battle with Laurier University Reply

I challenge any politically correct type among our readers to explain how this situation differs from the kind of inquisition one might expect to take place under a communist, fascist, or theocratic regime.

Lindsay Shepherd (Grad Student at Wilfrid Laurier University) joins Dave to discuss her free speech battle after coming under attack by University officials for presenting her class with a video of a Jordan Peterson lecture. *Subscribe to The Rubin Report: http://www.youtube.com/subscription_c… Hear Lindsay’s audio recording of her meeting with university officials in this video.

The 21st Century is Becoming the 19th Century: Repeating Tragedy as a Farce 2

History repeatsfirst as tragedy, then as farce” … -Karl Marx, The 18th Brumaire of Louis Napoleon

By Keith Preston

The present era of globalization in the early 21st century is very similar to the era of industrialization in the early 19th century, in the sense of both the way that it is transforming the world, as well as the conflicts that it is generating.

The primary political conflict in the early to middle 19th century was the battle between the rising bourgeoisie and the Ancient Regime. The present day equivalent of that conflict is the emerging conflict between the “national bourgeoisie” (represented by, for example, the declining WASP elite in the United States), who are the contemporary equivalent of the throne and altar traditionalists of earlier times. This declining ruling class sector is pitted against the globalist techno-oligarchs, financiers, and information/managerial class professionals that comprise the New Elites (the present equivalent of the 19th century bourgeoisie). The populist-nationalist movements of the West who serve as the ground level constituency for the national bourgeoisie are comparable to the 19th century European peasants and petite bourgeoisie who supported the royalists against the rise of the classical bourgeoisie (and whose opposition to the global economy is somewhat comparable to the Luddites who opposed the advent of industrialization). For instance, to understand the presidency of Donald Trump, and the rise of the Trumpians, one needs only to read Marx’s The 18th Brumaire of Louis Napoleon, which describes how “how the class struggle..created circumstances and relationships that made it possible for a grotesque mediocrity to play a hero’s part.

Louis Napoleon Bonaparte

Image result for louis napoleon bonaparte

Donald Trump

Image result for trump

The rise of the bourgeoisie in the 19th century, the subsequent institutionalization of the bourgeoisie as the new ruling class (replacing the monarchs, aristocrats, and clerics), the parallel growth of industrial capitalism, and the related class polarization, generated the rise of opposition to the bourgeoisie from the Left. This opposition took the form of the socialist, communist, anarchist, and labor movements of the 19th and early 20th century.

More…

The Puritan Hypothesis and Charlie Elphicke 3

A great article from Sean Gabb. 

The debate over whether PC has its roots in Marxism or in Christian puritanism/pietism is an interesting one. Bill Lind is a staunch proponent of the former position, and Sean and Paul Gotffried take the latter position. I tend to think its both in the sense that Marxism itself is a kind of secularized Christian messianism/millenarianism (as Stirner and Nietzsche observed in the 19th century). Paul has pointed out that while the Frankfurt School originated in Germany, it was in American universities that it really took root because the Puritan and (later) Progressive Christian cultural foundations of American intellectual culture provided fertile ground for this kind of secular fundamentalism, which was the re-exported to Europe. I tend to regard the Cromwellians as pre-Marxist Marxists, or the Marxists as neo-Cromwellians. Having been a fundamentalist Calvinist when I was a kid,  as an adult I noticed PC was very similar to the climate of my upbringing. PC seems to me to be a hybrid of Calvinist moralism, pietism, zealotry and determinism with the Marxist emphasis on social conflict between the downtrodden suffering just and their supposed hegemonic oppressors.

My own anti-PC stance is merely a contemporary version of Bakunin’s anti-Marxist and anti-clericalism. If Bakunin were here today, he would be railing against the cultural Marxists just as fervently as he railed against the classical Marxists, and instead of writing a book title “God and the State,” he would have to write a book called “Social Justice and the State.”

 

The Puritan Hypothesis and  Charlie Elphicke
Sean Gabb
5th November 2017

Charlie Elphicke is the Conservative Member of Parliament for Dover and Deal. This makes him my Member of Parliament. On Friday the 3rd November 2017, he discovered – via the media, he says, not from any official notification – that he was suspended from the Conservative Party, and that the Police had been asked to investigate him. No reason for this was given. However, Mr Elphicke’s name was on a confidential list, compiled by Central Office, and immediately leaked on social media, of politicians said to be unable to keep their hands to themselves.

Nothing more has been said about him in the news. Speaking for myself, I know him hardly at all, but find it unlikely that he has committed anything that would once have been thought a criminal offence. It is conceivable – and I have no private information on this point – that he has cast the occasional lewd glance at a member of the opposite sex. He may even have issued an invitation to more intimate contact. But I do not find it conceivable that he has taken part in any sexual act without the consent, as reasonably understood, of the other party. Assaults of any kind require a lack of forethought I have never detected in Mr Elphicke. I do not hold him in high political regard. On the other hand, he is the best representative my constituency has had in the past twenty years, and I look forward to his continuation in this role at least until 2022.

READ MORE

Subversive: Interviews with Radicals Reply

There is an interview with me in this book. Available from Amazon.Com.

Subversive is a book of interviews with fifty-two of the most radical people in the world. From all walks of life, some are famous, while others are almost completely unknown.

These are people different to the rest of us. They want the world to change, and they are doing things to change it. Some are activists, some live in such a way that society has to take notice.

Subversive doesn’t adopt a sensationalist tone. It approaches its subjects with a curiosity about what they believe in and how they lead their lives.

Black Panthers, white nationalists, eco terrorists, unrepentant heroin users, The Cannibal Cop, meth makers, fetish pornographers, war protestors, 9-11 truthers, occultists, political agitators, sungazers, literary imposters, time travellers, flat earthers, anarcho-primitivists, murderers, and beyond.

“Motivated ignorance” is ruining our political discourse Reply

Listening to a political opponent is almost as bad as getting a tooth pulled

Frimer and his colleagues demonstrated this same effect with several different methodologies in their paper. In another test, they (essentially) asked participants to rate how interested they were in learning about alternative political viewpoints compared to activities like: “watching paint dry,” “sitting quietly,” “going for a walk on a sunny day,” and “having a tooth pulled.”

By Brian Resnick

Vox

Ikon Images / Getty Images

If you ever thought, “You couldn’t pay me to listen to Sean Hannity / Rachael Maddow / insert any television pundit you violently disagree with here” — you are not alone.

A study, recently published in the Journal of Experimental and Social Psychology, essentially tested this very question.

Two hundred participants were presented with two options. They could either read and answer questions about an opinion they agreed with — the topic was same-sex marriage — or read the opposing viewpoint.

Here’s the catch: If the participants chose to read the opinion they agreed with, they were entered into a raffle pool to earn $7. If they selected to read opposing opinion, they had a chance to win $10.

You’d think everyone would want to win more money, right?

No.

A majority — 63 percent — of the participants chose to stick with what they already knew, forgoing the chance to win $10. Both people with pro same-sex marriage beliefs and those against it avoided the opinion hostile to their worldview at similar rates.

“They don’t know what’s going on the other side, and they don’t want to know,” Jeremy Frimer, the University of Winnipeg psychologist who led the study, says.

This is a key point that many people miss when discussing the “fake news” or “filter bubble” problem in our online media ecosystems. Avoiding facts inconvenient to our worldview isn’t just some passive, unconscious habit we engage in. We do it because we find these facts to be genuinely unpleasant. And as long as this experience remains unpleasant, and easy to avoid, we’re just going to drift further and further apart.

Listening to a political opponent is almost as bad as getting a tooth pulled

Frimer and his colleagues demonstrated this same effect with several different methodologies in their paper. In another test, they (essentially) asked participants to rate how interested they were in learning about alternative political viewpoints compared to activities like: “watching paint dry,” “sitting quietly,” “going for a walk on a sunny day,” and “having a tooth pulled.”

READ MORE

Keith Preston: Trump has well-developed capacity for insulting people Reply

Press TV. Listen here.

US President Donald Trump’s use of the name “Pocahontas” during a White House ceremony honoring Native American World War II veterans highlights his inclination to insult and abuse people, according to an American analyst.

“Donald Trump has a very well-developed capacity for insulting people; it’s almost what he specializes in,” said Keith Preston, chief editor of AttacktheSystem.com.

Donald Trump is prone to making comments that are vey inflammatory from a racial and ethnic perspective,” Preston told Press TV on Tuesday.

“This reflects the wider divisions in our society,” he added. “We have a very polarized society.”

Trump made a remark on Monday some called racist at a White House event honoring Native American World War II veterans by referring to Senator Elizabeth Warren as “Pocahontas.”

“We have a representative in Congress who they say was here a long time ago,” Trump said. “They call her Pocahontas. But you know what, I like you.”

Warren, a noted legal scholar who taught at Harvard Law School, denounced Trump for stopping to a “disgusting low” by attacking her with a derisive nickname.

“President Trump couldn’t even make it through a ceremony to honor these men without throwing in a racial slur,” Warren told CNN.

Trump started accusing Warren of lying about her heritage and called her “Pocahontas” at a campaign rally in June, 2016, according to the Washington Post, when Warren was campaigning for Trump’s Democratic rival Hilary Clinton.

Warren has been accused of using her Native American Heritage to get ahead in her political career, particularly in the 2012 Massachusetts race for senator, according to the Boston Globe.

Genealogists have found a document stating that she has a great-great-great-grandmother who is Native American, which would make her 1/32 Cherokee, but they say it would take more research to confirm that finding.

Keith Preston: US war on drugs led to opioid epidemic Reply

Press TV. Listen here.

The US has been waging a war against drugs for half a century, viewing drug addiction as a criminal phenomenon instead of a health issue, therefore no headway has been made in curbing the US opioid crisis, an American analyst says.

The so-called ‘War on Drugs’ refers to a US government campaign launched during the administration of former President Richard Nixon, which included the prohibition of drugs and military intervention, with the stated aim being to reduce the illegal drug trade.

The United States leads the world in both recreational drug usage and incarceration rates. Many experts believe that the War on Drugs has been costly and ineffective largely because inadequate emphasis is placed on treatment of addiction.

The current opioid epidemic in the United States has multiple reasons, among them the excess prescription of pain killers, which in turn contribute to an increase in pharmaceutical financial gains, said Keith Preston, chief editor of AttacktheSystem.com.

“People become addicted to pharmaceutical drugs when undergoing medical treatment, and then because of the addiction, they develop they can’t stop the habit, so when their medical treatment is over with, and they are cut off their drug supply then they start buying prescription drugs off the street that are sold on the illegal market and often they will switch to heroin because heroin is actually cheaper than prescription opiods,” Preston said in an interview with Press TV on Wednesday

“So we have now this wave of heroin addicts as well as people who are addicted to prescription opioids as well,” he added.

Preston said the Trump administration’s approach to the drug crisis is encouraging in the sense that it has not recommended the escalation of the war on drugs and instead has taken a non-criminal approach to the crisis recognizing the crisis is more of a health issue.

“There may be some signs of a turning of the tides there,” he said.

The White House Council of Economic Advisers said Monday that the true cost of the opioid epidemic in 2015 was $504 billion, more than six times the most recent estimate.

The council said a 2016 private study estimated that prescription opioid overdose, abuse and dependence cost $78.5 billion in the US in 2013.

Most of that expense was attributed to health care and criminal justice spending, along with lost productivity.

US President Donald Trump said Monday at a cabinet meeting in the White House that the “opioid epidemic that is ravaging so many American families and communities” would be among topics for discussion.

Last month, Trump declared the US drug crisis a “public health emergency.” He also announced an advertising campaign to combat the epidemic, but did not direct any new federal funding toward the effort.

Opioids are drugs formulated to replicate the pain reducing properties of opium. They include both legal painkillers like morphine, oxycodone, or hydrocodone prescribed by doctors for acute or chronic pain, as well as illegal drugs like heroin or illicitly made fentanyl.

The word “opioid” is derived from the word “opium.”

US government and healthcare officials have been struggling to stem the epidemic of overdoses, which killed more than 64,000 Americans last year alone, up from 52,000 the previous year. More than half were related to opioids.

Making sense of the culture war over transgender identity Reply

The Economist

As more people change gender, they are sparking a debate that enrages some and confuses many

A BEAUTIFUL man with high cheekbones, fluttering eyelashes and a galaxy of silver glitter in his hair strides into the room. He is wearing a wedding dress and dirty trainers. The gender-bending at this club night in east London is not new: Shakespeare’s comedies are filled with cross-dressers; Gladys Bentley stomped the boards of 1920s Harlem in a tuxedo; Ziggy Stardust, David Bowie’s ambiguous interstellar alias, landed in the 1970s. What is new, though, is that convention-defying statements of gender identity are moving from stage and dance floor to everyday life.
The word “gender” is used by prudes to avoid saying “sex”, and restricted by purists (and, until recently, The Economist’s style guide) to speaking about grammar. In the 1970s feminists described the restricted behaviour regarded as proper to men and women as “gender roles”. But in recent years “gender identity” has come to mean how people feel or present themselves, as distinct from biological sex or sexual orientation. Growing numbers of young people describe themselves as “non-binary”. Others say gender is a spectrum, or that they have no gender at all. Facebook offers users a list of over 70 gender identities, from “agender” to “two-spirit”, as well as the option to write in their own.

President Trump’s Fateful Choice 1

The Trump administration is Republican business as usual, as virtually all serious observers predicted it would be. The great thing about the Trump presidency is not only is Trump generally unpopular outside of his dying right-wing of the WASP middle class “base,” but he is demonstrating that Presidents are simply CEOs of America, Inc., and the state-capitalist oligarchs who serve as the de facto Board of Directors.

By William S. Lind

Traditional Right

President Trump ran as a Republican, but he did not win as a Republican.  He won as a populist.  If he is to be a successful president and win re-election, he needs to make a fateful choice: will he govern as a populist or as a Republican?  If he chooses the latter, he will fail.

Unfortunately, the president seems to be leaning more and more towards governing as a Republican.  The tax reform proposal he recently offered is classic Republican:  it may benefit the middle class indirectly by creating more jobs, but its direct beneficiaries are high-income people.  One simple change would transform it into a populist measure: a high tax rate, say 75%, on earned incomes over $1,000,000 annually (indexed for inflation).  The people who elected Mr. Trump would cheer.

On the vexing problem of health insurance, the president’s latest action, cutting government subsidies to insurance companies to subsidize low income people, may hurt Trump voters.  Many of his supporters have modest incomes. They are not Republicans with money to burn.  The populist answer to health care is Medicare for all, with Medicare’s ability to control prices.  The origin of the health care affordability problem is grossly excessive prices for anything labelled “medical”. Any policy that does not deal with those prices is a band-aid.

In foreign and defense policy, Trump voters do not want more unnecessary wars halfway around the world that kill our kids and waste our money.  That is the populist position: America first.  If we are attacked, we fight, but why should young Americans die in the centuries-old war between Sunni and Shiite Islamics?  Here again, President Trump seems to be governing as a Republican, not a populist.  Continuing the futile war in Afghanistan, re-involving ourselves on the ground in Iraq, putting “advisors” in Syria, spooling up the long-standing and strategically meaningless war of words with North Korea—none of this is populist.  It all comes from the playbook of Republicans such as Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham, who cannot stand the thought that there is a quarrel somewhere in the world in which the U.S. is not involved.

I suspect President Trump knows the Republicans have taken over his administration and pushed the populism that elected him to the side.  Unfortunately, he seems not to know what to do about it.  There are sources of ideas and people from which he could assemble a different, populist-conservative agenda and set of advisors.  I write for one of them, The American Conservative magazine.

What the Republicans in and around the White House do not understand, in addition to the bankruptcy of the Republican “we serve the rich” agenda, is that populism is the wave of the future, both here and in Europe and on the Left as well as the Right.  Establishment Republicans and Democrats alike fear populism.  But to a president elected because he was seen as a populist, the populist wave of the future is one he should seek to ride.  If not President Trump then someone else will combine the Trump and Sanders voters into a new, enduring political majority that will shape America’s future agenda.  In the end, it is not President Trump or Senator Sanders who is important.  It is the people who voted for both.

 

Keith Preston: Status and power shields US elites from sexual allegations Reply

Press TV. Listen here.

Acts of sexual harassment in positions of power are commonplace in the institutional settings, and in the case of US President Donald Trump, given his background and “lifestyle proclivities” it is “reasonable to assume that these allegations are probably true,” an American analyst and media figure says.

“Of course Trump is going to deny all of this, and of course the White House press is going to deny all of this as well, or at least its press representatives like Mrs. Sanders [will deny]. That does not mean this did not happen, it just means of course the White House will issue the obligatory denial,” Keith Preston, the chief editor of AttacktheSystem.com, told Press TV on Sunday.

Such offensive conduct is common in “elite circles” and there is nothing “unique” in what Trump or others in positions of power have done, he added.

The multiple allegations against former US President Bill Clinton is not lighter than Trump’s allegations, he said, emphasizing that Clinton “probably has at least as bad a track record as far as engaging in sexual harassment and arguably sexual assault. Bill Clinton has been accused of actual rape by a number of women.”

“Those allegations have never been proven in the sense that he has never been charged of a crime. However, they have never been disproven as well, and a lot of that obviously has to do with the fact that they are of status and power and privilege and it shields them in that way.”

Women have recently been coming forward to share encounters of sexual harassment and assault in the workplace, including in the US media and entertainment industries and the realm of politics.

An avalanche of sexual misconduct allegations have been made in recent weeks against Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein. The scandal has rippled in a wide range of industries, encouraging victims of sexual assault to share their stories on social media under the hashtag #MeToo.

The latest accusations of sexual assault came against journalist Mark Halperin. Halperin, who until recently worked for NBC and MSNBC as an analyst, has been accused by several women of sexual assault. Some of the allegations against him say that, while working at ABC News, he touched women without consent and pressed himself against three of his co-workers.

Amid the series of sexual harassment scandals against elite political and media figures, the issue of sexual allegations against Trump was once again raised by reporters during a briefing with White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders on Friday.

“Is the official White House position that all of these women are lying?” a CBS News reporter asked Sanders.

Sanders responded: “Yeah, we’ve been clear on that from the beginning, and the president has spoken on it.” She did not comment further and quickly moved on to another question.

Laci Green interviewed by Dave Rubin: Red Pilling, Sex, and Constructive Dialogue Reply

Laci Green (YouTube Creator) joins Dave Rubin live in studio to discuss social justice warriors, politics and her recent awakening, gender, sex, and more. Subscribe: http://www.youtube.com/subscription_c…

Keith Preston: US mass shooters predominantly white males Reply

Press TV. Listen here.

Terror attacks in the US are not confined to certain demographics or religions, but mass shootings are usually carried out by white males, according to an American analyst.

“It’s certainly true that white males have committed plenty of terrorism in the United States, particularly terrorism motivated by racism and to a lesser degree by religion,” said Keith Preston, chief editor of AttacktheSystem.com.

“The overwhelming majority of terrorists are [white] males,” Preston told Press TV on Wednesday.

The mass shooting in Las Vegas, Nevada, on Sunday night that left at least 59 people dead and over 500 wounded was the deadliest mass shooting in modern US history and once again highlighted America’s extreme rate of gun violence.

The perpetrator, 64-year-old Stephen Paddock, rained down a barrage of bullets from the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay Hotel towards an open-air concert Sunday night, police said.

In a televised address on Monday, President Donald Trump offered his “warmest condolences” for the victims of the mass shooting, but did not address the scourge of gun violence that has become a common occurrence in the country.

Paddock, like the majority of mass shooters in the US, was a white American male. Critics say whiteness, somehow, protects men from being labeled terrorists.

 

More…

How Ron Paul Gets the NFL ‘Take the Knee’ Controversy Wrong 2

Apparently, there has been a predictable left/right split in the libertarian milieu over the NFL players’ protests. Ron Paul says nay, but Reason magazine says yay! Read all about it here.

I disagree with Ron Paul that the NFL is merely a private association. The idea that NFL franchises are private businesses is a joke. These are state-capitalist semi-manorial systems that are heavily intertwined with government at every level. With certain notable exceptions, most threats to free speech in the US today come not from the political class directly but from the new feudalism comprised of mass institutions like corporations and universities, with both leftists and rightists alike being the victims of political repression being carried out by these institutions. A possible solution might be to extend the Constitution to cover corporations and universities in the same way it was previously extended to include state and local governments. http://dailysignal.com/…/heres-much-money-nfl-rakes…/

The “cultural Marxists” that Ron Paul refers to are the “Religious Right of the Left” and I share his disdain for them. But his criticism of the NFL players along these lines is misplaced. I generally dislike professional jocks as overpaid neanderthals. But the players are simply trying to protest what they regard as a violent state attack on their people. They’re not just another case of overprivileged undergraduates whining about microagressions in order to show how enlightened they are. I dislike cops a great deal as well, but I disagree that there’s a mass of cops out there running around just looking to murder black folks. I don’t think that perception is borne out by the evidence. But that’s how the players perceive it, rightfully or wrongfully, and they’re just trying to voice their objection. The police state is a serious problem in the US, but not in the way that the narrative is typically framed by the Left. Trump is just a huckster plutocrat trying to maintain his position with his “base” of flag-waving cretins, and the team owners are just modern robber barons leeching off the taxpayers.

Murders, Assaults, and Shootings of Police Are Rarer than Ever Reply

There is no war on cops.

By Daniel Bier

Foundation for Economic Education

ollowing the tragic and horrible events in Dallas last week, it is important to grieve and to take stock of what led to that fateful evening that ended with five police officers killed. But it’s also worth taking a step back and putting the problems and threats the police face today into perspective.

The sniper attack on Dallas police on July 7 was unquestionably one of the worst days for American police since 9/11. More officers were killed in one city that day than are typically killed across the whole country in a month. But as terrible as this event was, it also shows just how rare deliberate killings of police are.

Police Are Safer than Ever

Attacks on police have been in a long and steep decline for decades, and policing in general has never been safer. Data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund (NLEOMF), and the Officer Down Memorial Page (ODMP) confirm a large and significant drop in fatal injuries, from all causes, as well as shooting deaths and felony murders of police officers.

READ MORE

How Long Can Americans Go on Hating the President and Each Other? Reply

The money quote, and the main reason why most US political factions are worthless:

“Unfortunately, most Americans do not bat an eye at the worst offenses committed by the presidency, namely the killing of millions in undeclared wars of choice with nations who have never attacked the United States.”

By Tom Mullen

Foundation for Economic Education

Trump Derangement Syndrome rages on, the latest symptoms flaring equally based on causes both legitimate and ridiculous. A key characteristic of the syndrome is its ability to evoke the same outrage over the president retweeting a harmless (and let’s admit it, funny) meme as threatening to destroy an entire nation. The breathless apoplexy over absolutely everything Trump-related, down to the shoes his wife wears while traveling, has desensitized Trump’s supporters to behavior even they should be concerned about.

It is true Trump has inspired new levels of hostility — even for politics — but Americans have been hating the president for this entire century, which is no longer in its infancy. Bush may not have been “literally Hitler,” but he was Hitler nonetheless to the Democrats, just as Obama was “literally Mao” to conservatives. But the proud American tradition of hurling invectives at the president isn’t nearly as ominous as the trend towards violence. Both the right and the left have mobilized armed groups, not just carrying signs but ready for violence. In fact, violent resistance is the far-left Antifa’s stated raison d’etre.

READ MORE

Why the Left Must Confront the Cult of Identity Politics Reply

The money quote: “The bourgeois hijacking of the left is apparently complete.”

By Andrew Doyle

Spiked

od is dead and identity fills the vacuum.’ So says Riya Zachariassen, a character in Salman Rushdie’s new novel The Golden House, who holds a senior position at the ‘Museum of Identity’. For Riya, this new movement represents a ‘mighty new force in the world, already as powerful as any theology or ideology’. But when later in the novel she grows disillusioned and resigns her post, her former allies turn nasty. ‘So how’d you feel now about white women dressing up as Pocahontas on Halloween?’ they demand. ‘What’s your position on blackface? Are you a SWERF now as well as a TERF? Maybe you aren’t even an RF any more. What are you? Are you anyone?’ Riya has learnt the hard way that for the guardians of identity politics, apostasy is the unpardonable sin.

This may be fiction, but the scenario that Rushdie describes is all too familiar. Like all cults, contemporary identity politics is hostile to any form of dissent. Over the past few years we have seen reputations trashed, distinguished careers unravelled, and often for the slightest of transgressions. The upside of all this is that opposition to identity politics is much more widespread among left-wingers than first it might appear; it is simply that many feel unable openly to criticise the trend for fear of damaging repercussions.

More…

The Juggalos’ Fight for Freedom Reply

One of our natural allies.

By Lucy Steigerwald

Spiked

The Juggalos’ fight for freedom

he right’s young straw men and women – those whining, rioting college students – do exist. But current self-proclaimed champions of free speech and expression are just as much of an embarrassment.

Just look at Milo Yiannopoulos, and his now-cancelled Free Speech Week at Berkeley, which became ‘the most expensive photo-op ever’. These people care more about attention than principle.

So what’s a true advocate for the marketplace of ideas to do? Where are the principled protesters? Whoop, whoop. Look to the Juggalos.

The Juggalos are the devoted fans of the Insane Clown Posse, a hip-hop duo founded in Detroit in 1989. Violent J and Shaggy 2 Dope were childhood friends who loved wrestling and hip-hop. They decided to change their half-assed crew name from the Inner City Posse, and gave birth to a movement.

They did themselves up as clowns in black-and-white grease paint, and made rap songs about everything from rednecks to the 1966 University of Texas shooting to their love of all the ‘Miracles’ in the world, including ‘fucking magnets’.

READ MORE