Politics

Details

It's inevitable that when you're in the process of pointing out that the state is stealing something or someone for the "greater good," for social purposes, that some soiboi leftist cog will bleat, "That isn't socialism."

I like how "real socialism" is whatever they want it to mean at a given moment, so they can tell you you "Don't know what socialism is."

Venezuela--it was real socialism, until it failed, which was somehow capitalism sneaking in there.

Sweden--is real socialism, despite having multibillion dollar corporations. But wait, we'll come back to that.
 
The American welfare state--Someone actually told me that, "It's not socialism. It's just taking resources from those who have them and distributing them to those who need them."  Which is LITERALLY THE FUCKING DEFINITION of socialism. But it's not real socialism. Except they want it to be universal for everyone.  

Roads--socialism, even though they date from the Palace Economy of the Bronze Age and had as their primary purpose (when government built), enabling taxation to bring assets TO THE PALACE. There were also privately built roads in Celtic nations, thus disproving the myth that only governments can build roads. And this is 4000 years ago. But that's not convenient to the narrative that only governments can build roads, roads are socialist, but somehow "right wing" governments are also socialist in this regard, despite not being socialist.
 
National Socialism--actually capitalism, even though the government nationalized half the corporations, set up socialized medicine and transport, and fixed most prices. Oh, and outright confiscated land, and outlawed "Speculation." It was "Right wing socialism." That's sort of like "male pregnancy" or "libertarian socialism" or "Fictional reality." All of which are things leftards believe are real. After all, these are people who still believe legions of Russians are monitoring Fecesbook and blogs to downvote their comments, and that somewhere Donald Trump really has a Russian birth certificate, because Russia magically has something he needs or wants.
 
Fun Fact:  99% of liberals have zero fucking clue what a "right wing" actually is, and even think America is "right wing," to the point that "The democrats would be center-right in Europe, not left wing."  This is based on the mutiple mistaken notions that: anyone should give a shit what Europe or anywhere else in the Third World thinks about politics--remember that we told them to fuck off a couple of hundred years ago, and my family personally told them to fuck off in 1978 when we moved here. And that: The Euro peon baseline is relevant and unbiased. HINT: it's not. Almost all of those nations have Marx's cock 12" down their throat and up their ass, you'd have to be Howard Zinn or Joseph Stalin to actually cross their line to the left.  Also, that's one hell of an accomplishment given that Marx had a 2" dick on a good day.

But wait!  Let's go back to Sweden, a western democracy with a large capitalist sector--it's "real socialism" when the "liberal" thinks they've accomplished something the US hasn't (They actually haven't), but switches to "not real socialism" when they claim "Real socialism has never been tried." It's Schroedinger's Socialism!
 
I could parody this with, "You don't know what drugs are," and "pot isn't a real drug," and "everyone uses drugs, so drugs are good" (including meth and carfentanyl). Except I've actually heard that bullshit from leftists.
 
What was my point here?  Oh, right--most leftists are hypocritical shitheads, and you should always throw them from the helicopter.

Ironically, the ACTUAL hardcore socialists (Trotskyites and such) actually have a grasp of capitalism and see it as a useful tool. Which is why most of the left hates them, too.
 
So whenever one of them opens their facial anus, pre-empt the debate by first informing them that THEY don't know what real socialism is, and then the undisputable fact (they'll try anyway) that real capitalism has never been tried.

Oh, yes--and get them a helicopter ride. Because whatever Pinochet was, he wasn't really right wing. Though you could use an autogyro, since it's not a real helicopter.

Details

You know, the one accused of planting drugs on over 1000 black men, that's been going viral again four years later.

Well, it turns out that wasn't exactly the case. And by "not exactly," I mean "complete bullshit."

https://www.dothaneagle.com/news/crime_court/fbi-no-evidence-of-systematic-drug-planting-by-dothan-pd/article_8d1e3796-ab18-11e9-a36f-67a971db69de.html 

 
So I contacted the below newsgroups to see how they respond:
 
Debunked before the below publication date. The FBI found nothing of "1000" cases, and all of about 5 complaints, all fraudulent. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Even the professional race-baiters at SPLC couldn't corroborate it.
 
(The SPLC was early to post Carroll’s article on Twitter and was partly responsible for it spreading it as far as it did; this afternoon, however, the organization formally retracted the tweet after determining that they could not vouch for the truth of the article. “We shouldn’t have given it a platform,” SPLC digital media director Alex Amend told me.) 
 
 
As was Reason, as often but not always:
 
As you are all no doubt utterly honest reporters, you will obviously update your articles and note the correction on your sites, yes?
 
Or am I going to uncover evidence that the media has published thousands of fake stories about police?
 
Because what we have here seems to be one of the rare, completely above board, earnest about the regs and propriety, police departments, being slimed as one of the worst, with what looks like fabricated evidence, or as we technically call it in the biz, "bullshit."
 

Details

Partly because they've created a society where they have most of it by their flawed definition.

Privilege comes from the Latin meaning "Private Law." So in a literal sense, unless there are laws to some effect, favoring or harming others, there is no privilege. For example, if there was a dedicated driving lane for those of a certain class, that would be privilege. I'd also be part of it and sneer at you inferior drivers, because honestly, that really should be a thing.

Actor, Action, Patient, Agent:

The ACTOR acts out.  The ACTION affects the PATIENT, for positive or negative. An AGENT is anyone capable of acting.  In a hypothetical extreme privilege society, the PATIENT has no AGENCY and cannot fight the ACTION.  Slavery in the antebellum South is a good example of this. Slaves had very little agency whatsoever, and when they did, it was usually through their owner by proxy with no personal say in the matter.

But that's not the world we live in now.  The law officially applies to everyone equally. Now, enforcement varies, and it usually works to the advantage of the wealthy and celebrities of ANY DEMOGRAPHIC.

But if, let's say, a cop and a judge decide to charge and sentence two people differently, based on race, religion, political affiliation.  The PATIENTS of these ACTIONS don't have much AGENCY to change the ACTORS' intentions. Possibly a better lawyer or publicity can change things, but there's no official strata, no, "Hey, you can't do that to me, I have this card that says ___" (Well, sometimes politicians and cops have such a card. Foreign diplomats do to an extent.  But it's exceptionally rare for anyone else.)

"They treated you better, YOU HAVE PRIVILEGE!"

No, I fucking don't. And by claiming so, YOU have just diverted the ACT from the ACTOR to me, one of the PATIENTS.  "You got treated better! You are evil!" Wrong. The ACTORS did the wrongdoing. You and I are both PATIENTS.  You are literally arguing that if you get punched in the face and I don't, that it's because I'm the bad guy, not the asshole who's punching people.

Stop with the bullshit claims of PRIVILEGE for the patients of the action, and go after the fucking ACTORS. Because every time you accuse someone else of "privilege" for actions totally beyond their control, you piss them off and make it even harder to go after the ACTORS who cause the problems.

Details

Well, both.

God, what a dumpster fire.

Greta is home-schooled, so the BS claim that "she turned her parents around on the climate" is BS.  They had to allow it, feed it, and encourage it. Though of course, they taught her a lot of propaganda. No actual science like the chemistry of carbon sequestration, thermodynamics, electromagnetic frequency absorption, etc.

They claim she's Asperger's, but apparently that's her younger sister. Greta looks more like a victim of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome.  Just how many wild parties did her "opera singer" mother go to?

Then, she's vegan, which in children is provably damaging to brain development and drops your IQ. Add that to the above, and this teenager is credibly an idiot studying to be a moron.

And what is her message?

"You have to do something."

Sure, kid. This is important to you. You're smart, right? So I assume you've studied something useful and have a proposal on how to reduce consumption? Or increase efficiency? Or reduce waste? Even a fraction of a percent will matter. So, whatchya got?  Nothing?  Well, then shut the fuck up, the adults are talking.

You see, lots of teenagers HAVE done credible research, into decay processes, efficiencies, even curves and trends. All you've done is whine.  And as far as your "stolen childhood," you can go back to it any time you choose.  Unlike children who are sex slaves in the third world, forced to fight in tribal conflicts, or work grueling hours in sweatshops to help feed their family. You're just about the single most white-privileged little bitch on the planet. Shut the fuck up, and go to your room. You're not getting dinner.

Of course, that would be a vegan dinner, so there's not much to miss.

I'll point out here that that attitude is TEXTBOOK "liberal."  "X is a problem, do something!" "We're doing Y." "Y is all wrong! YOU RUINED MY LIFE!" "Okay, we're doing Z." "CAN'T YOU EVER GET IT RIGHT? DO SOMETHING ELSE!"

And the predictable response is:

"Shame on you for attacking a child."

Well, were people attacking a child, it is true that would be wrong.   But that's not what is happening here.

First, if you stick yourself into an adult conversation, as a young adult, you should be expected to be treated like an adult. This means you should have education, presentation, a description of a problem, and a proposed solution. Otherwise, yes, you may get treated like a child.

If a child kicks my leg, they get disciplined. This is not an "attack." It is a response.

The things subhuman "liberal" shitbags did to comedian Mini-AOC, complete to death threats, is shameful.  Fabricating an attack on a teenage boy at an abortion protest (And I'm on the opposite side from him), and trying to claim he was the aggressor, and to destroy his future is shameful. 

Pointing and laughing at an ignorant, underage troll, who was so carefully imported, scripted, and propped in front of cameras is just normal politics.

Now, Greta and her whole presentation are carefully crafted. I want you to consider this parallel:

There is a short video that shows an Israeli man revving his engine through a group of presumably Palestinian teenagers. What a monster!

Of course, if you view the five seconds before the "Attack," it turns out they were throwing really big rocks at his car and trying to jam the undercarriage with a bigger rock.

If you find the two minutes of video before THAT, you see where they're being coached by an adult, provided with a pile of rocks, and cameras set up to capture this "hate crime."

You can find the same in the former Irish Troubles, in Iraq, Afghanistan, other places.  Behind the "hate crime," you find manipulated terrorism, using children as the actors because they're more easily manipulated, and you get to play victim cards for them.

Greta's parents, her handlers, indeed the entire liberal apparatus are terrorists. They are willing to use a child to do their dirty work, attack you for responding to the child, and insist you're the bad guy for not giving them what they want. (And in that latter way, liberals are pretty much like children themselves. "But I waaaaant it! It's not faaiiir! Give it to meeee!")

A smart polity does not deal with terrorists. It exterminates them. It is far past time that civilized society stops tolerating liberal terrorism and ends it.

And it starts by telling Greta Goebbels to shut her face, and her abusive parents to be the ones who are ashamed, and then take her away for her own safety. She deserves better than to be the puppet of terrorists.

And we're going to need a bigger helicopter.

width=

  1. Rhetorical Question At The End
  2. The Hard Racism of The American Liberal vis a vis "Privilege."
  • You are here:  
  • Home
  • Politics