Is America exceptional? Liberals, conservatives agree — and disagree Reply

From CNN.

A bird's-eye view of Washington, in an 1871 illustration.

A bird’s-eye view of Washington, in an 1871 illustration.

  • Belief that America is an exceptional country is widely shared in the U.S.
  • David Lake says it’s become a flashpoint, as conservatives dispute Obama’s belief in it
  • He says liberals believe U.S. is exceptional because of its constitutional safeguards
  • Lake: Conservatives are more likely to believe U.S. is culturally superior to rest of world

Editor’s note: David A. Lake is the Jerri-Ann and Gary E. Jacobs professor of social sciences, distinguished professor of political science and acting dean of social sciences at the University of California, San Diego. He is the author of “Hierarchy in International Relations.”

(CNN) — The United States is an exceptional country. On this, almost all U.S. politicians agree. And millions of Americans, do too, according to recent polls.

More than three centuries after John Winthrop first preached that the new Massachusetts Bay colony would be a “city upon a hill,” Presidents John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan both reiterated his admonition that “the eyes of all people are upon us.” For President Barack Obama, the United States is “not just a place on a map, but the light to the world.”

This broad agreement on American exceptionalism is often overlooked. This is especially so for conservatives, who now demand allegiance to the idea and chastise Obama, despite all evidence to the contrary, for not believing sufficiently in the exceptional nature of the country he leads.

Exceptionalism is a flashpoint in American politics today not because the claim is contested, but because conservatives and liberals hold differing views of what makes the United States exceptional. These differences are at the core of our current fights over foreign policy.


Occupied America: Senate bill 1867 would allow U.S. military to detain and murder anti-government protesters in American cities Reply

Article by Mike Adams.


I don’t know if you’re all getting this through your heads yet, but Senate Bill 1867 —the National Defense Authorization Act— would openly “legalize” the U.S. government’s detainment and murder of OWS protesters and the assassination of talk show hosts, bloggers, journalists and anyone who holds a so-called “anti-government” point of view. This is the open and blatant declaration of war against any who do not going along with TSA thugs reaching down your pants, the Goldman Sachs economic takeover of nations, the secret arrest and torture of American citizens, and other acts of outright tyranny waged by an out-of-control government.

Those who have been burying their heads in the sand over the coming police state need to wake up and face the music. That U.S. Senators would knowingly and willfully attempt to pass a bill thatlegalizesthe indefinite detainment, torture and killing of American citizenswith no due process whatsoever— and on American soil! — is nothing less than a traitorous betrayal of the once-free American people. These are, our founding fathers would have said,acts of waragainst the People. They reveal the insidious plan to put in placea legal frameworkto end the Bill of Rights, murder protesters, and overrun America with total police state brutality.


Nothing but a Northern Lynching: The Death of Fred Hampton Revisited Reply

Article by Susan Rutberg.


Forty years ago, on December 4, 1969, 21-year-old Fred Hampton, a charismatic leader of the Illinois Black Panther Party, was murdered as he slept in his home on Chicago’s West Side. Shortly before dawn, fourteen armed police officers, ostensibly serving a search warrant, shot nearly one hundred rounds of ammunition into his apartment, killing Hampton and twenty-two year old Mark Clark and wounding several other young members of the Black Panther Party. The Assassination of Fred Hampton: How the FBI and the Chicago Police Murdered a Black Panther, by Jeffrey Haas, tells the story of the 13 year legal battle that eventually uncovered a conspiracy between the FBI, the Illinois State’s Attorney’s office, and the police, to kill Fred Hampton and destroy the Black Panther Party.

2009-11-13-cover.jpgJeffrey Haas was one of the lead lawyers representing the Hampton and Clark families and those who survived. In a riveting memoir that reads like a docudrama, Haas introduces the reader to the politics of the late 1960s and to young Fred Hampton, a magnetic public speaker and community organizer. Haas then provides a play by play history of the tensions between the Black Panther Party and the police, and a guide through the labyrinthine twists and turns of the legal struggle waged to avenge Hampton’s death.


The Polis: Was the Ancient Greek City-State the Greatest Political System Ever? Reply

From Heritage Key.


The Greek City-state, or Polis, is arguably the greatest political system ever created – remarkable given its appearance some 2800 years ago. The Greeks successfully built a system to foster those most elusive of human desires – freedom and equality, and their efforts have had an influence on western thinking since the Hellenic culture was re-discovered during the Middle Ages.

But the Polis was much more than a governmental system. It was a culture built around expansion of the human intellect – through philosophy, architecture, drama, and mathematics. The Polis was the engine of these accomplishments because it valued and encouraged their advancement. Here I chart the development of the Polis as a political system and consider its influence in modern western society, art and culture.

From Bands to Tribes, and Back Again

The story of the Greek Polis begins in the Paleolithic Era, when man began to expand his capability to live in groups. As groups became larger over the centuries, “urban” living became possible along with the need for complex political systems. Those early bands of perhaps one hundred human beings would over time become the city-state: the culmination of man’s ability to create a culture of mutual interests.
In the Paleolithic Period, man learned to communicate and expand the size of his groups from single bands to connected bands of several hundred. This new structure became possible when women were traded between bands for the purpose of marriage, creating the strongest of social linkages.
The Neolithic Period saw the development of agriculture. Once man learned to grow plants he gave up his nomadic ways, because there was an ample predictable food supply to sustain him. With agriculture came a larger organization of human beings – the tribe. Tribes were physically collections of bands, but their inter-relationships were too complex for intermarriage to sustain them. They often had charismatic leaders, but no identifiable government. Tribes functioned as an fragile egalitarian society – stable because of the need to protect members from threats from the outside.
A Mycenaean Tomb. Mycenae of Greece followed in the Minoan footsteps to became the next great Bronze Age civilization. Image Credit - Franz St.

Paul Craig Roberts: We have a republican party that is a Gestapo party Reply

Great interview with Roberts on Russia Today.


There is a bill in the Senate that is attempting to keep torture alive as an interrogation technique. The National Defense Authorization Act is being debated in Congress and if passed, American citizens could be detained without a court hearing anywhere in the world. President Obama stated he will veto the bill if it should pass. Is Senate Bill 1867 threatening the US constitution? Paul Craig Roberts, former Reagan administration official and columnist, gives us his take on the proposed bill.

Obama unwise to ignore marijuana petition Reply

Article by Ian Huyett.


In September 2011, the Obama administration launched “We the People” – a program that allows anyone to submit a petition directly to the White House. The project was ostensibly intended to “make government more open and accountable to its citizens.”

A petition is displayed on when it garners 150 signatures, according to a Sept. 1 Fedscoop article. When a petition accumulates 5,000 signatures, the White House issues an official reply.

The petition “Legalize and Regulate Marijuana in a Manner Similar to Alcohol” was signed by 75,000 people. It rapidly eclipsed all its competitors and earned the highest slot on the White House website, according to an Oct. 31 article in the Wall Street Journal by Laura Meckler. Four other petitions calling for an end to marijuana prohibition also rocketed into the top 10.

Rather than acknowledge the petition’s legitimate concerns, the White House effectively ignored it. A dismissive and condescending reply from Obama drug czar Gil Kerlikowske trivialized the petition and turned a deaf ear to the tens of thousands of Americans who signed it. Talking about accountability, it seems, is easier than actually practicing it.


Too many students in college – axe student aid Reply

Article by Ian Huyett.


In 2001, dictator Robert Mugabe had just run Zimbabwe’s economy into the ground and was desperate for a way to revive it. Observing that those with money tend to be more prosperous than those without, Mugabe decided to simply print enormous sums of cash. What Mugabe failed to realize, of course, is that introducing new currency devalues existing notes. Zimbabwe soon became a nation of trillionaires who couldn’t afford to buy bread.

America’s looming higher education bubble is roughly akin to hyperinflation in Zimbabwe. Observing that those with college degrees tend to be more prosperous than those without, our government decided to institute enormous student aid programs and otherwise encourage college attendance for all. The results have been eerily similar.

Higher education for everyone sounds about as appealing as printing money. Yet, not unlike an envelope of money, a college degree would lose its symbolic value if everyone received one.


Neocon Endorses Repeal of Drug Prohibition 2

A broken clock is still right twice a day.


Where Ron Paul Is Right
The drug war works about as well as prohibition of alcohol did.

Five years ago last month, Milton Friedman died at age 94. To the very end, the Nobel Prize–winning economist was astute, tireless, and wonderfully avuncular. Thanks to the Internet, his commentaries on subjects ranging from greed, to slavery, to the Great Depression myth, and many other topics, can be enjoyed forever.

Great thinkers have been recording their thoughts in books for millennia, of course. And Friedman was no exception. But there’s no denying the immediacy and intimacy of video. Wouldn’t we have loved to click on Edmund Burke or Alexander Hamilton or Cicero and watch them talk about their ideas? If you do dip into the Friedman oeuvre, start with his exchange with Phil Donahue.

Nothing would be easier than to invoke the great Friedman as the sage of limited government. He was certainly that. And if he were commenting on America’s current predicament he would doubtless prescribe a radically smaller public sector.But Friedman poses challenges to conservatives as well as liberals. He opposed, for example, the war on drugs. That’s right. Friedman was for legalization of all drugs, not just marijuana.


International NGOs serve imperialism; Africa needs own independent development organizations Reply

Article by Nosakhare Boadi.


International non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are global contractors, hired to execute the foreign policies of imperialism. They largely work without questioning the existing social system.

Surely they complain about poverty and the suffering of the world’s poor, but most blindly only look to solutions within the confines of the system of imperialism and global capitalism. This is impossible.

As Jamaicans say, they “too follow fashion.” NGOs fashion themselves in the cloak of the “left” and put on a show of resistance. But most have no vision to finance this resistance nor to accomplish their goals beyond the free surplus “milk” of the system that sustains their very existence. This is the dialectic of “poverty reduction.” Their enterprise is a contradiction in terms.

International NGOs believe wishfully that imperialism will finance them to orchestrate its own demise. They fail to understand that the system derives its wealth and surplus exactly because it imposes poverty on the people of the world.


Stop The Violence Documentary Reply

Watch the trailer. Hat tip to Miles Joyner.


ZONE 15 PRODUKKIONZ & MR. STEELE PRODUCTIONS LLC have joined forces to produce a documentary titled “Stop The Violence: After The Casket Closes” that finally tells the story from the communities accounts and perspective in an effort to find a solution to Stop The Violence. This documentary features family members and friends of murder victims as well as family members and friends of the convicted murderers and others who are courageously speaking out against VIOLENCE. Many of us would rather not deal with this subject due to the magnitude of emotion but this has now, unfortunately become a part of reality. It must be addressed accordingly so hopefully no other families will have to endure those types of tragedies. We must unite NOW before the violence reaches YOUR door step as violence has no barriers.

The End of Americanism Reply

Thank Lucifer.

Alex Kurtagic reviews Pat Buchanan’s new work.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————-Pat Buchanan’s Suicide of a Superpower is an apt follow-up to his 2002 volume, The Death of the West. Although the new book focuses on the United States, it restates and updates the narrative of the older book. It is no coincidence, therefore, that the former refers briefly to the latter early on.

Buchanan’s main thesis is this:

When the faith dies, the culture dies, the civilization dies, the people die. That is the progression. And as the faith that gave birth to the West is dying in the West, peoples of European descent from the steppes of Russia to the coast of California have begun to die out, as the Third World treks north to claim the estate. The last decade provided corroborating if not conclusive proof that we are in the Indian summer of our civilization.

Buchanan_Pat_-_Suicide_of_a_SuperpowerSuicide has stirred some controversy in the mainstream media for stating what for many is, or should be, known and obvious, but which for the majority is either not so or taboo: the negative consequences of immigration, diversity, and multiculturalism.


Not So Epic, Really… Reply

Article by Andy Nowicki.


Like Anders Behring Breivik with a side order of gratiutious profanity, but without the mass murder or the effete Nordic beauty and literary pretensions, Emma West, the “epic tram lady,” has become an instant folk hero to many on the Right.

I do understand the appeal, in a way. Whenever anyone shows nerve, guts, and fortitude, putting himself in possible danger in order to express a deeply-held conviction, whether with words or with guns and bombs, there is something to admire. It becomes even more tempting to champion such a person if he fiercely espouses a cause that one favors, a cause that constantly gets defamed and ridiculed by smarmy elites. Immigration restrictionists and multicult-skeptics are naturally tired of the abuse, the ad hominem character assaults, the patently illiberal threats to our livelihood and freedom that continually issue forth from our supposedly “liberal” betters, who for all their talk of highfalutin talk of “tolerance” really want nothing more than to shut us up, imprison us, take away our jobs, and brand us with a scarlet “R” to cast us from polite society, into the outer darkness of perpetual sensitivity training, where there is great wailing and gnashing of teeth.


A Boob Named Bibi Reply

Jim Goad is obviously the author of this unsigned editorial.


After soul-shredding millennia of bloodshed and insane sectarian conflict, a small candle of hope finally flickers in the Middle East. That candle’s name is Binyamin Netanyahu, a man who may finally bring the world together. Across every latitude and spanning every longitude, hopping from continent to continent while straddling the equator as if riding a giant invisible mechanical bull, the peoples of this planet are united in disliking him. We may not agree about religion or politics, but we can all hold hands and agree that he’s more than a bit of a jerkoff.

Perhaps that’s overstating things by a wee morsel. To be fair, there are still hardcore Zionists who think he’s the bee’s knees. There are also hordes of blinkered American Christian Goyim who’ve been mind-tooled into venerating a religion/ethnicity/political system that places zero value on Christians and all other Goyim—but beyond that, the world has closed ranks and simply can’t standthis arrogant, obstinate, belligerent, charmless, sweaty, green-skinned, liver-spotted creep.

Oh, wait—there’s Congress, too. Anyone who witnessed the Nuremberg Rally-level tongue bath Netanyahu received from the eager pink tongues of both Republicans and Democrats as His Holy Schmuckiness graced them with his presence earlier this year—they kept leaping to their feat and roaring their approval almost as if he owned them—would know that Congress thinks he’s sweeter than apples dipped in honey on Rosh Hashanah.

“We may not agree about religion or politics, but we can all hold hands and agree that he’s more than a bit of a jerkoff.”

How The U.S. Will Become A 3rd World Country Reply

From Dancing Czars.


How The U.S. Will Become A 3rd World Country

The United States is increasingly similar to a 3rd world county in several ways and is accelerating towards 3rd world status. Economic data indicate a harsh reality that obviates mainstream political debate. The evidence suggests that, without fundamental reforms, the U.S. will become a post industrial neo-3rd-world country by 2032.
Fundamental characteristics that define a 3rd world country include high unemployment, lack of economic opportunity, low wages, widespread poverty, extreme concentration of wealth, unsustainable government debt, control of the government by international banks and multinational corporations, weak rule of law and counterproductive government policies. All of these characteristics are evident in the U.S. today.
Other factors include poor public health, nutrition and education, as well as lack of infrastructure. Public health and nutrition in the U.S., while below European standards, stand well above those of 3rd world countries. American public education now ranks behind poorer countries, like Estonia, but remains superior to that of 3rd world countries.
While crumbling infrastructure can be seen in cities across America, the vast infrastructure of the United States cannot be compared to a 3rd world country. However, all of these factors will rapidly deteriorate in a declining economy.
Unemployment and Lack of Economic Opportunity
Unemployment, which is a deep, structural problem in the U.S., is a fundamental challenge to economic opportunity. The U.S. labor market is in a long-term downward trend linked to globalization, i.e., offshoring of manufacturing, outsourcing of jobs and deindustrialization.
The U.S. workforce has declined by approximately 6.5% since its year 2000 peak to roughly 58.2% of working age adults and the U.S. now suffers chronic unemployment of 9.1%. Although the workforce grew in the 1980s and 1990s, as dual income families became the norm, the size of the workforce is shrinking due to a lack of economic opportunity.

Senate Approves Bill that Legalizes Sodomy and Bestiality in U.S. Military Reply

Excellent. Maybe “the troops” will now have a distraction from raping local women in U.S.-occupied lands.

It doesn’t get any better than this:

Former Army Col. Bob Maginnis said some military lawyers have indicated that bestiality may be prosecutable under another section of the military code of justice – the “catch-all” Article 134 for offenses against “good military order and discipline.”

But don’t count on that, he said.

“If we have a soldier who engages in sodomy with an animal – whether a government animal or a non-government animal – is it, in fact, a chargeable offense under the Uniform Code? I think that’s in question,” Maginnis told

“When the reader stops laughing, the reader needs to ask the question whether or not this is in the best interests of the government, in the best interests of the military and the best interests of the country? I think not.”

He added: “Soldiers, unfortunately, like it or not, have engaged in this type of behavior in the past. Will they in the future, if they remove this statute? I don’t know.”

And could members of the religious right possibly be a bigger bunch of retards?

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins said the effort to remove sodomy from military law stems from liberal Senate Democrats’ and President Obama’s support for removing the military’s Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy.

“It’s all about using the military to advance this administration’s radical social agenda,” Perkins told “Not only did they overturn Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, but they had another problem, and that is, under military law sodomy is illegal, just as adultery is illegal, so they had to remove that prohibition against sodomy.”

Perkins said removing the bestiality provision may have been intentional–or just “collateral damage”

What kind of person would waste a second of mental energy worrying about whether the empire’s mercenary forces are fucking dogs during the course of performing their grisly duties?


The Senate on Thursday evening voted 93-7 to approve a defense authorization bill that includes a provision which not only repeals the military law on sodomy, it also repeals the military ban on sex with animals–or bestiality.

On Nov. 15, the Senate Armed Services Committee had unanimously approved S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act, which includes a provision to repeal Article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).

Article 125 of the UCMJ makes it illegal to engage in both sodomy with humans and sex with animals.

It states: “(a) Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete the offense. (b) Any person found guilty of sodomy shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins said the effort to remove sodomy from military law stems from liberal Senate Democrats’ and President Obama’s support for removing the military’s Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy.

“It’s all about using the military to advance this administration’s radical social agenda,” Perkins told “Not only did they overturn Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, but they had another problem, and that is, under military law sodomy is illegal, just as adultery is illegal, so they had to remove that prohibition against sodomy.”

Perkins said removing the bestiality provision may have been intentional–or just “collateral damage”

“Well, whether it was inadvertent or not, they have also taken out the provision against bestiality,” he said. “So now, under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), there’s nothing there to prosecute bestiality.”

Former Army Col. Bob Maginnis said some military lawyers have indicated that bestiality may be prosecutable under another section of the military code of justice – the “catch-all” Article 134 for offenses against “good military order and discipline.”

But don’t count on that, he said.

“If we have a soldier who engages in sodomy with an animal – whether a government animal or a non-government animal – is it, in fact, a chargeable offense under the Uniform Code? I think that’s in question,” Maginnis told

“When the reader stops laughing, the reader needs to ask the question whether or not this is in the best interests of the government, in the best interests of the military and the best interests of the country? I think not.”

He added: “Soldiers, unfortunately, like it or not, have engaged in this type of behavior in the past. Will they in the future, if they remove this statute? I don’t know.”

Perkins said there was no attempt to remove the UCMJ repeal provision from the bill, which Perkins had expected the Senate to approve.

Now that it has passed, however, the Senate version will have to go to a conference committee, and Perkins predicts there will be several sticking points with the House.

“The House in their version of the defense authorization, reinforced the Defense of Marriage Act, saying that there is a military DOMA as well, prohibiting same-sex marriage on military bases – something the Department of Defense is pushing for,” he said.

“And now this is an added concern, that sodomy has been removed, and as we have discovered, that bestiality–the prohibition against it–has been removed from the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So yes, the House will have problems with this bill.”

Jerusalem cops make first arrest in ultra-Orthodox wars 1

Gang warfare Israeli-style.


An indictment was filed Thursday against a key member of an extremist ultra-Orthodox faction following a “reign of terror” in Jerusalem’s Mea She’arim neighborhood.

The indictment of Yosef Meir Hazan was a victory for police in their ongoing war against the Sikarikim, an extremist ultra-Orthodox faction. Hazan, 21, is thought to be one of three leaders of the group’s young guard. He was arrested early last week after a five-month manhunt.

Mea She’arim residents said Hazan’s followers have imposed a reign of terror on the neighborhood that has included repeatedly vandalizing the Or Hachaim Center bookstore, partly in protest of the Zionist books on sale there. But their chief targets were the Gur Hasidim living in Beit Warsaw, a section of the neighborhood whose ownership is disputed among various sects.

Ron Paul: Only a 15% Reduction in Military Spending? Hmm…. Reply

This article is an excellent illustration of why reformist politics fails.

If Paul plans to cut military spending by only 15% then by the time all of the usual political wrangling and negotiations are done the figure would be much smaller than 15%. A reduction in the U.S. military budget of, say, 8% would be largely meaningless. A 50% reduction might be substantive, while an 80-90% reduction might be more appropriate. (Interestingly, Rand Paul, never quite the match for his father, endorses only a 6.5% reduction in the military budget.)

Paul is a good man with good intentions, and I continue to endorse him as someone who is opening the door for a much, much more radical anti-state movement in the future. But this token reduction in military spending proposed by Paul, who is no doubt a sincere man who wants to see imperialist war ended, clearly indicates the impossibility of meaningful reform by working within the system, at least not on a monumental issue like this.

The standard modus operandi of the U.S. state throughout its history has been to repress real opposition to itself through lethal violence while coopting those opposition forces that are cooptable. Mass democracy is the tool through which the state pursues this strategy. That’s what happened in the 1960. Real revolutionary movements like the Black Panthers and AIM were essentially defeated by military means, while reformist movements like civil rights, women’s lib, gay rights, environmentalism, etc. were coopted by the state by means of cultivating these as constituencies for the state.

That’s one reason why pan-secessionism is a strategic necessity. Pan-secessionism cannot be coopted as it means the death of the state’s authority. No state that is capable of putting up resistance ever allows any of its territories to walk away without a fight. The British crown didn’t allow it in 1776. The Lincoln regime didn’t allow it in 1861. The regimes of LBJ and Richard M. Nixon did not allow it in the 1960s and 1970s.

Interestingly, the U.S. Civil War is a classic illustration of the anarchist principle that the state is a specially privileged class unto itself, over and above mere economic elites like aristocrats, plutocrats, or capitalists. The Civil War can be interpreted either as an intra-mural war among the U.S. capitalist class pitting southern agrarian capitalism against northern industrial capitalism (the standard Marxist interpretation) or as a class war between northern industrial capitalism and what was essentially a form of remnant feudalism in the South akin to the French Revolution (I lean towards the latter view). Either way, the U.S. state acted without mercy when its sovereignty was challenged. To achieve victory, the anarchist movement must achieve what Hezbollah (and I of course recognize that Hezbollah is in no way an anarchist movement) has accomplished in Lebanon, i.e. replacement of the state as the guardian of the nation and the principal armed force in the society.

Why is Anglo Feminism so Virulent? Reply

Article by W. F. Price.


There’s been some controversy over what exactly is going on with Swedish/Scandinavian feminism, with some claiming that it’s worse than the Anglo version and others claiming that, actually, men have it better over there than in Anglo countries. I tend to favor the latter position, possibly because I’m a father and I know that Scandinavian countries are not nearly so punitive toward fathers as the legal regimes in the Anglosphere. However, due to the extremely broad definition of rape in Sweden, some claim that it is akin to fundamentalist Muslim regimes.

I’m not sure the rape hysteria in Sweden is entirely a feminist creation, however. It’s more likely that it’s a reaction to a trend that has been ongoing since the Swedes, in their infinite wisdom, imported a very large Muslim community, which has, to put it mildly, very different sexual norms from the native Swedes. In Islamic countries, a woman who sleeps around, bares her skin, dances at clubs, etc., is a whore. According to Islamic (and earlier Christian) custom, rape does not apply to whores, ergo Swedish women are free for the taking. When one combines this attitude with extreme cultural relativism as practiced by Swedish “enlightened” liberals, there are bound to be some misunderstandings.

My take on it is that Swedes have attempted to legislate Swedish cultural norms surrounding sex as a response to this problem. For example, a typical Swedish man would not assume that because a woman shows some skin and acts in a sexually provocative manner she is consenting to sex. In Muslim countries, men assume exactly that. Therefore, the rape laws are instructive in nature, designed to “civilize” the Muslims into the norms of a sexually libertine society. Feminists may have supported these laws, but the impetus for their passage likely derived from outrage native Swedes felt about their women being used by foreigners. This is an entirely normal feeling, but naturally Swedes don’t want to seem xenophobic or restrictive, so they dress the laws up in feminist language and thereby retain their progressive aura.


Twenty Examples of the Obama Administration Assault on Domestic Civil Liberties Reply

Article by Bill Quigley.


The Obama administration has affirmed, continued and expanded almost all of the draconian domestic civil liberties intrusions pioneered under the Bush administration.  Here are twenty examples of serious assaults on the domestic rights to freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of association, the right to privacy, the right to a fair trial, freedom of religion, and freedom of conscience that have occurred since the Obama administration has assumed power.  Consider these and then decide if there is any fundamental difference between the Bush presidency and the Obama presidency in the area of domestic civil liberties.


Classic Murray Bookchin Interview Reply

Watch the video.

This is interesting as Bookchin describes how he moved past the classical socialist theory of class exploitation when he realized that the working class had become a middle class, that unions had become status quo institutions, and Marxism simply a new form of statist oppression. Here, he’s endorsing the revision of anarchist class theory into an attack on “hierarchy and domination” of the kind that dominates the thinking of the left-anarchist milieu today. Eventually, he became discouraged with that as well, realizing that it leads to nothing other than the kind of non-threatening lifestyle politics that characterizes the modern Left. His classic “Social Anarchism or Lifestyle Anarchism” essay is available from LibCom. (It’s also interesting how the workerists at LibCom seem to misconstrue Bookchin’s critique of lifestyle anarchism as an endorsement of their own even more archaic views.)

In some ways, I have long considered ARV/ATS to be a continuation of where Bookchin left off. If we regard proletarian socialist-anarchism as an anachronism and cultural/lifestyle leftist-anarchism as having becoming status quo and non-revolutionary, where do we go from here? It seems the logical place would be to concentrate our attacks on the state itself. Hence, our revision of anarchist theory from “bosses vs workers” or “WASPs vs traditional outgroups” to “those aligned with the state vs those under attack by the state.” Hence, our orientation towards lumpenproletarianism, the ten core demographics, and liberty and populism.



The Origins of Political Correctness Reply

Bill Lind’s classic.

Doesn’t this sound just like the anti-ATS chorus?

The most deadly aspect of Cultural Marxism/Totalitarian Humanism is that it identifies broad categories of human beings that are undefined as evil by virtue of their mere existence as the principal enemy, as opposed to attacking specific individual actions or institutional policies and structures that are dysfunctional or undesirable. Instead, it creates a dualism where some arbitrary categories of people are considered good and virtuous, but oppressed and deserving of sympathy no matter what their individual circumstances or what they personally do (unless they exhibit ideological non-conformity).  Out of this dualism emerges an apocalyptic outlook where the success of the virtuous is predicated on the complete elimination of the evil.

Modern totalitarian ideologies like Communism, National Socialism, or Totalitarian Humanism are simply secularized versions of the ideas found in classical monotheist religions where the virtuous chosen inherit some reconstructed utopian new world after the flawed old world has been destroyed and the sinners cast into the lake of fire. Concentration camps and gulags are merely a secularized version of eternal damnation with the only exception being that human beings take it upon themselves to create Heaven and Hell on earth rather than sitting around praying and waiting for it to happen in some fantasy netherworld.


Where does all this stuff that you’ve heard about this morning – the victim feminism, the gay rights movement, the invented statistics, the rewritten history, the lies, the demands, all the rest of it – where does it come from? For the first time in our history, Americans have to be fearful of what they say, of what they write, and of what they think. They have to be afraid of using the wrong word, a word denounced as offensive or insensitive, or racist, sexist, or homophobic.

We have seen other countries, particularly in this century, where this has been the case. And we have always regarded them with a mixture of pity, and to be truthful, some amusement, because it has struck us as so strange that people would allow a situation to develop where they would be afraid of what words they used. But we now have this situation in this country. We have it primarily on college campuses, but it is spreading throughout the whole society. Were does it come from? What is it?

We call it “Political Correctness.” The name originated as something of a joke, literally in a comic strip, and we tend still to think of it as only half-serious. In fact, it’s deadly serious. It is the great disease of our century, the disease that has left tens of millions of people dead in Europe, in Russia, in China, indeed around the world. It is the disease of ideology. PC is not funny. PC is deadly serious.