Editorials Front Page Blog (Full Desktop Version)

Click here for free speech discussion community

“Nazi” as Manipulative Smear

: June 14, 2018

The tactic of the sycophant pro-Israel lobby and its bandwagonner followers.

1) Accuse political dissidents of being neo-nazis.
2) Use measured and reasoned criticisms of the lobby as “evidence” for point 1.
3) Deny people employment and smear them. Think that people targeted will cower because they do not want the whole thing to “come out” and because even more employment can be denied in the future, through market monopolization and a buddy system of “reference calls.”

Market monopolization plays a big role in making this possible.

The Domino

: June 14, 2018

What many have trouble wrapping their minds around is that as narrow as extreme racialism is, the people who target them are worse because they are just targeting low hanging fruit so they can get the ball rolling. After they target the extreme racialists, next they will come for more accepting dissidents like you and me. Crucial to their strategy is that the more accepting people do not realize this and think we are secure.  If we believe this, we may tolerate the adverse actions against people who are being targeted, with a false sense that particularist racialist ideology is the only concern here and not realizing that non-conformity is as much as a concern from the perspective of the monopolists who abuse corporate, political and military power.

It will go like this:

  1. The racialists will be targeted.
  2. Critics of Israel will be targeted.  (they thought they were safe during phase 1)
  3. Critics of Imperialist Foreign Policy will be targeted (they they they were safe during phase 1 and 2)
  4. Anyone who criticizes corporate behavior will be targeted (they thought they were safe during phases 1, 2 and 3)

Think of yourself as a chess player who needs to see more than one move ahead. There is a domino planned and you are part of that domino (regardless of your ethnic background).

Outmanuevering the Herd

: June 14, 2018

Compared to other people who touch hot button political issues and blog I:
1) Focus more on abstract concepts, theories. ideologies etc. This enables new angles and twists.
2) Take more shots at the audience, almost playing heel. For instance if the platform is facebook, then jabs will be made at “cliques’ of friends.
3) Make more effort to detach from the group and blaze my own path, almost like a band performing on stage more than a populist movement.
4) Focus more on the technical side of things and less on again, the populist feeling.

These characteristics contribute to the ability to spin and differentiate. To show an example, I am making blog articles viewing corporate monopolies as “the big problem” and the actual Government as “the little problem.” The clear trend is to defend the free market and attack the Government as an oppressor, but my “disruption” goes against the grain and gets people thinking that maybe these corporations are at the center of the erosion of our free speech and “Hessianization” of our military. This was possible only because I drew ideological conclusions and knew how to disrupt instead of follow the crowd and didn’t enter into a bandwagon popularity contest.

The summary is that I shake up the group instead of follow the leader. Those are some “technical” reasons. If you wanted to be my friend but didn’t realize I was a clever shaker, I guess I gotta say you picked the wrong person. Or maybe you did, and you’re shaking me back (I doubt that).

Now keep in mind that even though I experiment and shake I also stand up for the really important things. For instance when it’s popular to laugh at dead Iraqis, I’ll be the person to stand up and call propaganda instead of jumping on the bandwagon. This is just one example.

Somewhat due to this “style” I make no effort to advertise or promote my content because I do not want to be a slave to the herd. However, eventually promotion will have go occur, whether by me or by others.

American Flag

: May 30, 2018

In 1776 the American flag might have stood for independence, self-determination and rebellion as far as White people are concerned. It did not mean those things to Indians or Slaves.

Today the American flag stands for corporate greed, the Israel lobby, imperialistic foreign policy, degeneracy, hypocrisy and opposition to free speech.

I do not fly or salute the flag.  In 1776 I would likely have been moved by the flag, but at the same time I would have expressed my understanding and sympathy for Blacks and Indians.

Corporate Tyrants

: May 29, 2018

What is true about America is that corporations have amassed so much power that essentially the constitution is irrelevant.  You have “free speech” but you’ll get fired (and excellent performance won’t balance this).  Essentially, the constitution and sovereignty of America has been invalidated by corporations, who take away your speech and support a military industrial complex.  Essentially tyrants have used corporations instead of elections to take power, but this is possible because of basic class divisions.

On top of that, there is also an Israel lobby, but step away from that for a second.  Even if the Israel lobby was eliminated this problem would still exist.

The Rehabilitation of George W Bush

: April 8, 2018

Some people, perhaps with good intentions, point out that Trump has many flaws.   However many Democrats tend to hold up George W Bush as an example of when things were better …
Huffington Post

The Trump era has offered no shortage of unusual partisan shifts. Trump voters now hate the NFL. Evangelical Christians no longer find personal immorality to be a deal breaker in their politicians.

And, as a new survey finds, former president George W. Bush is no longer persona non grata among Democrats.

A 51 percent majority of the party now holds at least a somewhat favorable view of Bush, according to a new YouGov/Economist survey, with just 42 percent still viewing him unfavorably. The share of Democrats who give him the most negative rating possible, “very unfavorable,” isn’t much higher than the percentage of Trump voters who say the same.

<…. to be continued at a later time ……………………………………………

Flow Diagram

: March 3, 2018

Flat Earth?

: February 5, 2018

There are people who today believe that the Sun rotates around the Earth.   The flat earth society today has about the same relevance as Trotskyism, but it does exist.   However, science was not always accepted and Galileo fought a battle with the Catholic Church over this concept.  To most right wingers and also “liberals” who do not critique capitalism internally (they critique greed more than capitalism), various ideologies like liberalism, conservatism and nationalism project their influence on the world which then revolves around the consciousness.  These people do not seem to realize that the gravitational core of the world is capitalism while the various  ideologies metaphorically orbit around it.  They all have various pain points that are being hit by the real world, but few of them connect the pain points to the economic engine which they believe is more or less like a fireplace that just runs.  In reality it is not just running, it is rotating the entire world with it and the pain points are felt without the consciousness of the rotation.

It should not be disputed that the world can be influenced and changed.  However, a person who is conscious that the world revolves around materialism (and presently capitalism) realizes that these ideologies are attempts to create order and reason in a world that continues in motion.  A conservative reacts to capitalism by holding tighter to free markets while a liberal thinks the government should do more.  A nationalist tries to replace the alienation of capitalism with a feeling of being in a group. To these people the ideology is the center of the universe while the world revolves around their ideologies. The truth is that capitalism is the center of the universe and the people who have firm ideologies are actually the ones in orbit. Their ideologies are their rationalizations for the fact that they are orbiting. Likewise the earth is rotating around the sun but we do not feel it.  The ability to command influence is actually greater when one becomes more realistic about the world’s inner motion.  It allows for more precise planning instead of lofty idealism.

Freedom, Liberalism and Democracy

: January 8, 2018

Based off of Mao’s interpretation of Dialectical Materialism (Friedrich Engels originally promoted the concept), one could say that when a certain amount of force is applied to a peddle the bicycle moves forward if there is no force in the opposite direction.   The bicycle then moves backwards if force is applied in the opposite direction (for example sliding down a hill if there it no peddling).   The movement of the bicycle is like society.  Society moves with the force of people who push it.

In order to promote their positions and “move the bicycle,” people promote various ideologies.   Marx pointed out that people promote various ideologies as universal truths when they are actually shells for their own interests.  Hitler made the same observation with an abnormal focus on Jews in Mein Kampf, accusing Jews of promoting various ideologies as a means to an end.

Mao differed from a contemporary populist when he argued that society as a whole engages in this back and forth action-reaction, while populists seem to think only the elites of society have influence.   Thus the critique applies not only to “neo-cons” and powerful American leaders but also to what is known as the “patriotard” or the person who takes the idea of “god, country and family” as a slogan to stand behind those powerful people.


Market Socialism

: January 8, 2018

A planned economy is not the definition of socialism, because there is planning under capitalism; the market economy happens under socialism, too. Planning and market forces are both ways of controlling economic activity – Deng Xiaoping

Socialism is defined by its class nature – the rule of the proletariat (or peasantry in Maoism) over the bourgeoisie.  Socialism is not necessarily a command economy.   Socialist regimes have been known to use market forces and capitalist regimes have been known to use planning and commands.  The essential difference between socialism and capitalism is not the command economy / market economy dichotomy.

Lenin’s New Economic Policy utilized market economics and currently China does. What makes these economies still socialist is that the line between the Government and business is blurred or erased.  Mussolini defined fascism as the merging of corporate and state power.  The difference between market socialism and fascism is that under market socialism the Government and business blur into one for the purpose of protecting workers.   In American market socialism, there may still be a McDonalds and a Burger King, but both McDonalds and Burger King would have progressive policies implemented from the inside and progressive institutions would play a role in management as opposed to investors having full property rights.   Under fascism these forces are merged but instead of protecting workers, the combined entity now solidifies the interests of the economic insiders (who may be ethnic minorities or may not).  If McDonalds and Burger King controlled the EPA and stopped all regulation, as well as invaded countries to get potatoes, that would be fascism.  However, looking out for workers under a market economy is not fascism.  Fascism certainly uses planning and fascism is not socialism.   Even American “liberal Democracy” at times uses planned economics.

Socialism can, however, be command oriented as Stalin supported more of a command economy than Lenin.   He grew impatient with the slow progress of industrialization and for technocratic reasons wanted to speed it up.  Mao had similar motivations – China was an undeveloped and primitive country and Mao used centralized planning to  “leap forward.”  Neither of these examples make command economics the definition of socialism.  If it was Mussolini and Hitler would be socialists and Lenin would be a capitalist.