Sedition and Moving Far Right

K: you say: “their is no more reasoning or logic against
your kind” but the problem is you haven’t used any sort of reason or
logic in your arguments… you have simply huffed and puffed your way though
some not connected arguments… you haven’t linked your arguments into
a coherent whole…you say I am insane and yet fail to provide evidence for
such a claim… you seem to think I somehow support pedophiles… and yet,
I haven’t made any such claim… I lightly defended Clinton from circumstantial
evidence…and that somehow connects me to defending pedophiles…

linkage… please somehow link your distinct and separate arguments…

it would make it easier to discern…

Kropotkin

Being soft and moderate about such deeply traumatic issues as abortion and sex change is in itself evil.
To be aggressively pushing these traumatic practices is a greater power of evil.
And to be attacking those who resist that push is totalitarian evil.

That’s where the line was crossed with me. They attack the ones who are “offended” or have suspicion about all this, and viciously too. I can’t believe the audacity of how degenerated things have become. I’m in it to win it now.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lfwkTsJGYA[/youtube]

I must admit I find both fix and urwrong righteous indignation to
be rather……. silly…

I am finding both of their indignation to be so over the top as to lead me
to wonder why, why they are so over the top with these specious claims…

does it have to do with the fact you live with absolute moralities that define
acts as being right and wrong, absolutely? there is no such thing as absolute
right or wrong… morality doesn’t work that way… Morality is a sliding scale
where what seems to be right or wrong on any given day, changes and becomes
less so as time goes on… an example of this is Homosexual marriage… it was
considered as an egregious crime as being a pedophile and yet, here we are
with homosexual marriage being the law of the land in the U.S…

does that mean I support pedophiles? No, it doesn’t… I have a basic
rule which is this… relationships must be 18 and consensual…
that is kinda my rule… that is my basic rule… for any relationship…
any sexual activity…18 and consensual…for an adult to engage in
a relationship with anyone under 18 is wrong and inappropriate

this is basic stuff…… does this kind of relationship signify the end of
the world? ah, no… does it mean the end of western civilization as we know it,
ah, no… but a relationship by an adult with an minor is wrong and inappropriate…

I would think that would end your little tirade but you clearly have
some issues which you really should deal with…so, I would hope
you will end here…but probably because you are incapable of being
honest about your sexual issues, you won’t …

the truth shall set you free my friend… the truth shall set you free…

Kropotkin

For the last 30 years, most of my life, and probably beyond, the Liberal-Left and “Secularists” throughout the US have attacked, destabilized, and attempted to overthrow society on bases of cultural injustices. These attacks have been made against “Homophobia, Transphobia, Anti-Semitism,” and the like. Thus, if you don’t support Abortion, Homosexuality, Transexuality, and Zionist policies, then you are liable and open to be attacked. The expected attacks are: “Racist, Sexist, Misogynist, Anti-Semitic, Nazi”.

Now, the thing is, there has been an invisible boogey-man and fear of “Neo-Nazi-Hitler-Fascism” rising in the US. This has been completely false and delusional, insuchthat the atmosphere, people, climate, and history of USA and the Western Hemisphere, has almost no likeness to Germany or Central Europe of the past two centuries. If there is any “Fascist” likeness, then it might be, maybe the forced removal and relocation of Native American Indians by the original British Colonialists and Settlers. This is a stretch of debate, though. So, to the point, there is no real ‘Fascist’ threat in US history, never has been, not is now, and probably not will be.

The Liberal-Left like to believe they are on the ‘Right’ side of history (ironically), and their foe is a Neo-Nazi skinhead “racist”. However, this has been a phantom for the most part, with exception to some Civil Rights Strife, long ago, and before this (Millennial) generation. Simply put, there is no boogey-man. There is no manifestation. The Secularist, Democrat, Liberal, Leftist establishment has been fighting demons. And most of US and American society, didn’t really care nor take notice. But it is until recently, where these “demons” are quickly being conjured into reality.

Why are the radical-left so incessant in their need to “Summon the Devil himself”? Here is my reasoning: When your entire mentality revolves around Victimhood, and being a Victim, yet you can find no Oppressor in sight, cannot conjure an Oppressor, then it becomes even more deeply troubling and unsettling for those who have been dependent on this ideology. The “Victims” become exasperated and desperate. They Need an Oppressor, even if “He” doesn’t exist, and especially if “He” doesn’t exist. So the ideology is pushed further and further to the extreme, until now, where the “Center”, the “Moderate”, the reasonable and average majority, become “The Enemy”.

If you have no oppressor, but you desperately want to cling to the Victim-status, then you must Create your Oppressor. You must make, out of the moderate and center, a New Nazi, a New Hitler.

You must bring your own demons, into reality. You must make them, where they would not exist otherwise, without your own making.

Because unless this demon is Created, Conjured, then there is never recourse or release of those who are “Eternally Victims”. There is no justification, peace, or rest, until the Victim can make his/her Oppressor. So even though there is no ‘Real’ oppression, no ‘Real’ challenge, there will be one made. Furthermore, this becomes an injustice to actual Victims of history, who have legitimate and reasonable grievances. So this attack, on the ‘Center’ of USA and American culture, will produce two injustices. First it will harm actual victims of history, who are rare, and who deserve justice. Second it will make of those who essentially have been moderate, peaceable, tolerant, into the “Satanic Oppressor”, who then has no choice but to fight in what “used to be normal”. It is an attack on normalcy, and so, an attack on almost all core-values shared by almost all people. It is from the radicalization, of the radicals.

K: and you call me delusional! oh the irony of it all…

Kropotkin

Yes, KP, you murderers have nothing to say in your own defence except that it is “silly” to oppose your heinous practices. That is precisely why you are considered to be heartless, rotten.

Excellent.

Yes, I am “delusional” for wanting to bring back gender-norms, boys are boys, girls are girls, marriage is between man and woman, transexual mentally-ill people should not self-castrate and then try to compete in female sports.

Great argument PK! Anything else? I am the delusional one. What does that make you? Boys are girls and girls are boys??

Good video.
Of course the democratic and republican parties were always corrupt, but they’ve gotten worse over time, perhaps the democrats a little more so.
They got worse for the people got soft and let themselves be taken advantage of by parasites.
These things wax and wane.
They also got worse for America became more diverse and divided over time, and its institutions were infiltrated and subverted by Jews, other minorities and traitorous whites.

A little immigration and diversity can be a good thing, especially if a nation needs to grow.
Moderate immigration of whites and the odd non-white here and there was fine, which’s how it was up until 1965, but mass immigration of nonwhites, illegal immigration and refugees wasn’t, at least not for the white working and middle classes who’d be most adversely affected by it, while the upperclass live in their gated communities and grew richer off the cheap labor, which’s how its been since.

Interestingly the democratic party wasn’t always economically socialist and socially progressive, it became that way over time.
Before the 20th century it was capitalist and socially conservative and libertarian.
In the early-mid 20th century it became more socialist, but remained socially conservative and libertarian.
There was a shift in the mid-late 20th century where it became socially progressive.
At first it was just anti-xenophobia, but by the early 21st century it became xenophilic and misandrist.

At any rate, the republicrats are liberal fascists now.
Their objective is to transfer wealth and power from the white working and middle classes to the elite on the one hand, and minorities on the other.
Either way the Jew wins, because he’s both the elite, and a minority.
The Jew pretends to be socialist, but he’s its antithesis, he’s the least proletariat/most bourgeois race.
He and his allies infiltrated and subverted populist movements, converting them into liberal fascist entities.

It’s very ironic to me that the “Democratic Party” are the ones trying to impeach the democratically elected President on …trumped-up charges.

It’s a contradiction. Either you are Pro-Democracy or you’re not. Democrats are not acting Democratically. If the majority of USA were to want a child for president, psycho for president, or transgender-thing for president, then Democracy dictates and justifies the majority. Democracy is essentially “mob-rule”. And USA is seeing the limits. It’s become a problem.

Traditionally and historically, USA has been dominated by mostly a Protestant-Christian White-Male mindset and ethics. And this has been fine, up to now, when minorities and females, radicalized by subversion, want to “overthrow the system” with Socialism and/or Anarchic types of sedition.

Moderns don’t get it. You can’t have it both ways. Republicans are the new Democrats and Democrats are the new Republicans.

The more things become radicalized, the more inevitable and closer a breaking-point comes. When reason and rationality break-down, and conversation and debate cannot be had, then violence begins. Signs of this are already occurring. The Liberal-Left are unwilling to have conversations and debates (because they lose), and so want to push their perversions and hedonism through violent protests. They claim to fight tyranny; but they are being led by tyranny themselves.

I am observing quite the opposite.

You are perhaps “wondering” because you misdesignated them as “specious”.

I think that you would find it a hard case to defend that claim.

The truth will bind you to the facts and free you from false accusations. So let’s look at an accusation and some fact.

The accusation seems to be that UrWrong has made claims concerning LLLs that he cannot substantiate (link evidence of).

Case 1:
One of his claims was that the LLL has pressed the issue of sexuality being merely an emotional choice rather than a biological fact.

In response UrWrong posted the following (in part):

If we examine the first evidentiary link, we can see that it is exculpatory.

The article is substantially about how women have become disadvantaged in sports due to argumentation and US federal laws supporting arbitrary definitions of the word “sex”. This problem arose only because of the recent demand from the LLL concerning sexual identity being, not a fact of physiology, but instead merely the choice of a person, “Ze’s sex is female if ze claims ze is female.”

The link does, in truth, support UrWrong’s claim. Already the facts have freed UrWrong from the false accusation that he could not link “even one” evidentiary support for his accusation.

Unlike PKs claim, I didn’t bother to read the entire list of what seems to be similar links because the truth has already freed the accused.

PK has lost his bet and whatever credit was associated with it.

Right, from patriarchy (feminists are confused about patriarchy, we always had equal rights for men and women, we just had different roles, if men had more negative rights, they had less positive ones, now women have more positive and negative rights) and majoritarianism to matriarchy (or rather misandry) and minoritarianism.

A people that puts itself first, values itself more than, or at least about as much as others, has a future, but a people that puts itself last, values others more than itself, does not.
There’s no way around it, we’re becoming a subjugated minority, and progressives think that’s a good thing.
They think it’ll be enough at some point, like once Englishmen, whites and Christians are minorities and don’t have more or less wealth and power than other minorities, it’ll stop, but it’ll probably keep going, until we’re placed in work camps, rounded up and shot.

A people that increasingly props one sex up at the expense of the other, won’t survive for very long.

Right, democrats have become more authoritarian, the establishment and reactionary, at least in rhetoric and when it comes to identity politics, republicans more libertarian, the antiestablishment and revolutionary.
However, in reality the two parties are still nearly indistinguishable.
And when it comes to the economy, we’re still crony capitalist, not capitalist nor socialist.
We had way more socialism before the Reagan, Thatcher and Mulroney era.

Right, democrats have become dogmatic, reactionary and closedminded, republicans undogmatic, responsive and openminded.
These things oscillate.

What it comes down to is, a people that either puts itself first, or on equal terms with others, has a future, but when you put yourself last, you don’t, you’re committing suicide.
I’m not into the left/right/center dynamic so much as the populist/pluralist/elitist/centrist dynamic.
Populism and libertarian/communitarian centrism are healthy, elitism/pluralism aren’t.
This is the prism through which I tend to see things.
It’s a different way of seeing them.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iruf0Qc7saw[/youtube]

okay that was weird. i don’t know if that was on purpose or what. either the right is aware of americans learning about the ‘ruling class’ through classic socialist literature and is trying to trick them into believing it (the ruling class) isn’t completely of conservative origin… or… whoever wrote that (if he’s reading a screen) and/or the dork himself (if he’s improvising), actually believes that the ‘ruling class’ constitutes politicians and not industrialists, corporatists and the capitalist class in general.

it’s probably the former. some conservative there at fox was like ‘holy shit, have you guys read marx? dude he’s saying all this shit about capitalism and the ruling class… and you know people are reading that shit… so we better try to put a spin on it and make people believe conservatism has nothing to do with it. here, i’ll write something up real quick. and we’re going live in five… four… three…two…’

send that dude an email, ur, and tell him ‘ruling class incompetence’ is a misnomer. they know exactly what they’re doing… and trying to steer people away from believing conservatism is the very source of the problem is proof that they know what they’re doing.

basically that tucker guy told a lie he couldn’t have told accidentally. and if that’s the case, the ruling class conservatives are being quite competent, because that’s a very clever move on their part.

No, I agree with Tucker. The “ruling class” is incompetent and don’t know what they’re doing really. They generally operate from self-interest. This move toward Anti-Establishment Trump, and now Socialist-Commie Sanders, is an attempt to undermine and destroy much power that the social/industrial elites have gathered for decades and centuries. That’s why the Democrats especially, fear “Socialism” as much if-not-more-so than Republicans. Tucker is correct to point-out it’s not a “left-right, liberal-conservative” divide.

It’s a fundamental threat to the system.

Tucker Carlson is one of the few, or only, ‘maintstream’ journalists reporting worthwhile news anymore. He’s Conservative-Right biased, but fair and accurate.

:laughing: The Russians :open_mouth:, yea, every website, every candidate, left or right, whether they’re conservative, libertarian or socialist, Trump, Rand Paul, Bernie or Tulsi, who promise to do a hell of a lot more for the people as opposed to the special interests, is a Russian bot.
At this point that’s just a conspiracy theory, and not a very good one at that.
Nothing has been proven in court.
You see the establishment peddles conspiracy theories too, not just alt and social media.

Does conservatism = elitism?
I’m not so sure.

For example, in the west, monogamy is a conservative institution.
Monogamy, or 1 woman for 1 man isn’t elitist, polygamy, or multiple women for 1 man is.
And chivalry, or men behaving courteously to women, is hardly elitist.
Another example, traditionally conservatives preached against covetousness, greed and envy, to be charitable and generous with one’s surpluses.
Conservatism is about being virtuous, moderate in one’s appetites, not too much food, fornication, materialism, egoism.

Actually individual market capitalism arguably doesn’t have a lot to do with conservatism, and collective state capitalism has nothing to do with it, unless they’re tempered with individual market socialism (abolish intellectual property, turn businesses into cooperatives) and/or collective state socialism (nationalize and socialize intellectual property and businesses).

Conservatism is really about temperance, not too much or too little (in)equality.
The opposite of conservatism, progressivism, is excess or maximization.
Progressivism, excess and maximization tend to be more common than regressivism, deficiency and minimization.

I agree. It should be common-sense, but it’s not.

It becomes “elitist” when most people have low morals, or no morals.

Russian-Conspiracy-Theory is “McCarthyism” of the 21st Century. It’s the same phenomenon, pinning all evils and wrongs on a third-party that has nothing to do with it.

The Leftist-Democratic political base uses Russians as a patsy, as-if they ever cared about Military force and defense in Eastern Europe, when they voted against it for decades.

Agreed, generally progressivism; inverted, reverse ethics; corporatism, egoism, hedonism, materialism and unsustainable growth are good.
Conservatism; socialism, reciprocal altruism, moderation and sustainability are good.
Regressivism; communism, altruism, asceticism, minimalism and degrowth are good.
Left and right libertarianism; low ethics; anything goes between consenting adults.

Yea, the establishment always plays the Russian card whenever someone proposes doing more for ordinary Americans.
It’s convenient.